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?
Opinions?
Tell Me About That 4 banger turbo in the Wranglers.
- Thread starter Murphy Slaw
- Start date
Advocate I
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.
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.
Off-Road Ranger III
- 13,288
- 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.
I've been digging around YouTube and different forums, and it looks like some people love 'em.
But the Pentastar is still pretty popular.
But the Pentastar is still pretty popular.
I read somewhere that there have been over 15 million Pentastar engines built, and they've been used in over 20 different vehicles.
That's a helluva accomplishment.
Advocate I
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.
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.
Opinions are like arseholes. Some people just can't help it.
I thought this forum would be full of people who had REAL experience with that little powerplant. There's a lot of love for it elsewhere.
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)
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:
Member III
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.
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.
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.......
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:
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
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.
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:
Man, ain't that the truth. Even the Taco.
At least that little Hurricane has a few years under it's belt.
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.
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:
Member III
That's highly debatable, or you'd never see the mileage you see in older diesel engines. Adding forced induction to an NA engine will reduce the usable life, but an engine built to be a turbo package can easily last as long if not longer than a typical NA engine.
In my experience, the only downside to a turbo is the lack of instant power and the complexity of the design (i.e. more shit to break). Most of these engines have little turbos that largely mitigate the early power concern and with an automatic, you get enough RPM slip through the converter that it's generally not an issue if you are more a touring-focused rig and not rock bashing. The 4:1 transfer case is essential if you like things slow in the 2.0L but once you're moving, I found the 2.0L much better at pushing a heavy rig comparing a JLU to my Gladiator at similar weights.
Advocate I
Agree completely. Every big rig rolling down our highways has a turbo (okay, other than the Tesla semis) and have several hundred thousand mile intervals on top and refreshes and often a million+ for a complete overhaul. Yes, completely apples to oranges vs. the Stellantis 2.0T, but an engine being turbo in and of itself is not a detriment to longevity.
To the OP, I think your best bet is to get on the Jeep forums for this question. The 2.0Ts do have some known issues and do seem to be less reliable than the good-ole 3.6, but the extra torque might be worth it for some. And yes, the 3.6 has its known issues too but they're relatively cheap/easy fixes in general (HLA/rocker issues and resulting cam damage are a more involved fix, but seem entirely avoidable with good oil change intervals and quality oil).
-TJ
