Tell Me About That 4 banger turbo in the Wranglers.

  • HTML tutorial

Murphy Slaw

Rank V
Launch Member

Member II

2,741
Southern Illinois
Member #

0838

Looks like they've been around a while. I guess it's the 4 cyl. Hurricane. I see positive views on YouTube, but not a lot of long term/high miles stories.

Opinions?
 

socal66

Rank V
Launch Member

Advocate I

1,421
Covina, CA, USA
First Name
Carl
Last Name
Sampson
Member #

24109

I have the plain 3.6L in my Wrangler but from my research and observations of others’ 2.0L rigs:

1. The 2.0L turbo will have more get up and go and is faster off the line than the 3.6L. More HP and torque.
2. The 2.0L is more “high strung” and “whiney” to some when you’re pushing it up a steep hill trail or at upper highway speeds.
3. The 2.0L gets slightly better gas mileage than the 3.6L however it requires 91 octane vs 87 so your fuel costs end up being the same or maybe a little higher in the 2.0L.
4. The 2.0L does better at higher altitudes vs. the 3.6L due to having the turbos maintaining more normal air pressure. Someone that lived in Denver or similar would notice a day to day advantage because of this.
5. The 2.0L is more complicated and therefore more costly when things need fixing however it has been out for a number of years and there doesn’t seem to be a rash of problems reported on that configuration given Jeep sells many of their Wranglers (including the E) using that engine.
6. Most aftermarket Jeep mods or accessories are first released or designed for the 3.6L so in some cases there may not be a 2.0L compatible skid plate or other such item from a manufacturer however this is becoming less common.
 

El-Dracho

Ambassador, Europe
Moderator
Member
Supporter
Investor

Off-Road Ranger III

13,288
Lampertheim, Germany
First Name
Bjoern
Last Name
Eldracher
Member #

20111

Ham/GMRS Callsign
DO3BE
Our Local Expert @Wranglervirus drove a 4-cylinder 2L Wrangler for quite some time, heavily modified and used a lot on tours and off-road. I guess he can tell you a lot about his experiences. @MazeVX is also very familiar with the Wranglers, but I assume more with the 4 cylinder CRD.
 

MidOH

Rank IV

Off-Road Ranger I

1,298
Mid Ohio
First Name
John
Last Name
Clark
Ham/GMRS Callsign
YourHighness
Luv, until the head gasket landrovers.

Hopefully nobody is stuck with the hybrid version.
 

MidOH

Rank IV

Off-Road Ranger I

1,298
Mid Ohio
First Name
John
Last Name
Clark
Ham/GMRS Callsign
YourHighness
Make a Wrangler more reliable than a 94 YJ, and I'll gladly sing it's praises.

Stelantis is overpriced garbage.

They have a good product, if they'd just buckle down and build it right. Make the Wrangler aluminum, at the same time.
 

MidOH

Rank IV

Off-Road Ranger I

1,298
Mid Ohio
First Name
John
Last Name
Clark
Ham/GMRS Callsign
YourHighness
Is there?

Have you tried the many jeep forums?


It's a favored vehicle here, in the rural snow belt. But it's hard to not notice, all of my neighbors Jeeps, are a different color than they were, when I moved in.

I wonder if that dealership, mentions their "special trade in program for blown engines", when they sell new Wranglers?

Favorite comment: My neighbor showed his garage service writer a cold start vid. Response was: "yeah, the diesels sound like that". (Gas v6)
 
Last edited:

smritte

Rank V
Launch Member

Member III

2,827
Ontario California
First Name
Scott
Last Name
SMR
Member #

8846

Ham/GMRS Callsign
KO6BI
I'll chime in here.
Any forced induction will remove life span. Right now its trendy to produce small turbo engines. Their great for highway as long as you don't mod the vehicle. That mean's bigger tires, more weight. If you do, you kill the power band.

I've worked this industry since the late 70's. The only forced induction (gas) vehicles I will own are one's I build (I've owned six and built four of them). I've seen side by side high milage engines from many diffrent manufactures and delt with customer complaints. The only difference between the manufactures small turbo engines is their quality. Some are worse than others but you cant get around that fact its still a small engine.

Don't forget, most people in forums will give uneducated opinions. Do a ton of research and try to filter out the people who post just to see their post count go up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThundahBeagle

MidOH

Rank IV

Off-Road Ranger I

1,298
Mid Ohio
First Name
John
Last Name
Clark
Ham/GMRS Callsign
YourHighness
Of the choices Stalantis offers right now, I'd pick the 2.0l. No e torque, no 4xe.

I almost bought one last year. But there is no option combinations that I want, available.

The 2.0l is not offered with a manual or 4.88 gears. Which favors the v6 Ruby.

You could always just LS swap later on. Or rebuild the 6 correctly.

The v8 model is $98,000. That's insane.

Hopefully they'll offer a larger turbo 4cyl, or smaller turbo 6, with a manual in the future. I'd even suggest, just using the Broncos engine and trans.......
 
Last edited:

ThundahBeagle

Rank V

Advocate I

1,548
Massachusetts
First Name
Andrew
Last Name
Beagle
Member #

0

Make a Wrangler more reliable than a 94 YJ, and I'll gladly sing it's praises.

Stelantis is overpriced garbage.

They have a good product, if they'd just buckle down and build it right. Make the Wrangler aluminum, at the same time.
Doors are ready aluminum. Not sure about the hood.

I happen to love the YJ, even though its lower than the CJ, and has square headlights. The 4.0L (after about 1990), unassuming interior are highlights. Drove a Rubicon a couple years ago, and the interior felt cramped, while the YJ was horizontally laid out and practically spacious by comparison
 

MidOH

Rank IV

Off-Road Ranger I

1,298
Mid Ohio
First Name
John
Last Name
Clark
Ham/GMRS Callsign
YourHighness
Yeah, the YJ's were comfy, and absurdly cheap to run.

We put TJ grills and lights on them. So, round lights.

Miss mine. But every single part on it, was scrap, when I gave it away for free.
 
Last edited:

MidOH

Rank IV

Off-Road Ranger I

1,298
Mid Ohio
First Name
John
Last Name
Clark
Ham/GMRS Callsign
YourHighness
Flip side of that coin, it's silly to produce a big naturally aspirated engine, for a vehicle that's slow.

Normal cars and suv's, with mileage and power issues, should all be turbocharged by now.

Obviously, I don't mean a Honda Accord. Put the cheapest NA I4 you have in one, and it runs fine.

But big slow gas guzzlers, can all benefit from modern 1950's engines. There's nothing special, or complex, about a turbocharged engine. Build them right, and they work fine.

Lighter, torque-ier, possibly more reliable (since they can't be cheaply made from pot metal like a 3.6l v6), and more efficient.
 
Last edited: