Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    VWVortex


    The Car Lounge
    Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
    Results 36 to 54 of 54

    Thread: First Look at the 3.6L Pentastar 2012 Jeep Wrangler

    1. Member
      Join Date
      Oct 8th, 2006
      Location
      Western Mass
      Posts
      1,396
      Vehicles
      Fiesta ST, Jeep 4.0, BMW e12
      07-01-2011 12:58 AM #36
      Quote Originally Posted by morecarsthanbrains View Post
      or, a Chyco one comparing the 4.0 to the 3.8
      Uhh, I think you are reading these graphs incorrectly. Those torque curves shown for the 3.8 and 4.0 are nearly exactly the same.

    2. Member
      Join Date
      Jan 31st, 2001
      Location
      Chambersburg, PA
      Posts
      1,257
      Vehicles
      09 CC (gf's)
      07-14-2011 01:05 PM #37
      I love how a certain someone when quiet after everyone pointed out how he/she was reading the dyno wrong and arguing his/her point.

      IMO this should be the best engine in a wrangler yet. The 4.0 I6 was great for it's time and was basically bulletproof. The 3.8 V6 was ok but geared totally wrong and had/have major problems with oil consumption in the early years, not to mention the auto tranny sucks (overheats easily). As long as there isn't a problem with reliability and it preforms as advertised, I'm sold.
      "Have you guys SEEN my old lady's pu$$?" --> friend
      "Six"---> Ben G's Build-Up Thread

      Previous VW's: 10 GTI, 81 Caddy 1.6D, 06 GLI (gf's), 98 Jetta TDI, 92 Jetta 1.6TD, 08 R32, 05 GLI, 68 Bug, 02 Jetta TDI, 86 Jetta 1.6TD, 01 GTI

    3. Member Knock Sensor's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 29th, 2009
      Location
      MA
      Posts
      6,678
      Vehicles
      2005 Accord LX, 1980 Yamaha XS850(sold), 2002 Honda VTR1000, 2011 Triumph Speed Triple
      07-14-2011 01:27 PM #38
      Quote Originally Posted by Lawrider View Post
      Nice, the new motor at least makes it competitive to what Toyota and Nissan have been using for the last 5+ years.

      The linked article says the engine is teamed with a 5 speed auto...i hope a manual is going to be available?!
      x2

      Hopefully the 6 speed stays.
      Quote Originally Posted by winstonsmith84 View Post
      It ain't easy being an overweight, uneducated, Sunfire driving whoop whooping clown.

    4. 07-14-2011 01:28 PM #39
      The wrangler is finally getting a competitive engine. Now lets pray they give us one of the diesels offered in the Grand Cherokee over seas. Personally I feel the base 3.0 turbo diesel V6 with 190 hp and 330 lb/ft of torque would be a home run, a match made in heaven for a vehicle like the wrangler.

    5. Member Sledge's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 15th, 2005
      Location
      South Beloit, IL
      Posts
      14,184
      Vehicles
      XW30, NA, V227
      07-14-2011 01:48 PM #40
      Quote Originally Posted by Turbiodiesel! View Post
      Seriously, if this cracks 20mpg highway.....
      ...you won't buy one like every other Wrangler you wanted?
      "The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views...which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering."
      - Doctor Who (Fourth Doctor) "Face of Evil"

    6. Member MCTB's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 30th, 2005
      Location
      The Northern of Virginia
      Posts
      9,063
      Vehicles
      '12 Focus SE, '72 MGB GT, '58 MGA, '15 Outback Limited
      07-14-2011 02:04 PM #41
      Quote Originally Posted by Bengti View Post
      I love how a certain someone when quiet after everyone pointed out how he/she was reading the dyno wrong and arguing his/her point.
      Sorry, I forgot about it. So, if the dyno plots show that the 3.8 is actually better than the 4.0, why was it universally trashed? Why is this being seen as a savior then?

    7. Senior Member Air and water do mix's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 5th, 2004
      Location
      Southern Indiana
      Posts
      23,259
      Vehicles
      '66 Beetle (X2) '08 Fit
      07-14-2011 02:08 PM #42
      Quote Originally Posted by Sledge View Post
      ...you won't buy one like every other Wrangler you wanted?
      Hey, he bought one. He must've had it for weeks, maybe months!
      Quote Originally Posted by Boyz in da Park
      Proletariat, Bourgeoise - Everybody smellin' my potpourri...

    8. Geriatric Member ByronLLN's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 29th, 2004
      Location
      Annapolis, MD
      Posts
      37,209
      Vehicles
      '13 Focus, '08.5 MS3, '97 Wrangler, '90 Miata
      07-14-2011 02:32 PM #43
      Quote Originally Posted by morecarsthanbrains View Post
      Sorry, I forgot about it. So, if the dyno plots show that the 3.8 is actually better than the 4.0, why was it universally trashed? Why is this being seen as a savior then?
      The 3.8 was trashed because it wasn't a 4.0. The 3.6 is being praised because it's not the engine that replaced the 4.0.

      Also, because it's more powerful, more refined, more efficient, and more competitive. All of those were also true of the 3.8, but it was still "just a minivan engine."
      Last edited by ByronLLN; 07-14-2011 at 02:35 PM.
      www.leftlanenews.com
      @SSLByron, @leftlanenews

    9. 07-14-2011 02:33 PM #44
      Quote Originally Posted by morecarsthanbrains View Post
      So, if the dyno plots show that the 3.8 is actually better than the 4.0, why was it universally trashed?
      I think one key reason is vehicle weight. Most people drive a 3.8L Wrangler 4dr and complain how it isn't as peppy as a 4.0L TJ. Well no sh!t, Sherlock--the 4dr weighs almost one thousand pounds more than a SWB TJ! Try strapping a 1000-lb chunk of lead to your back and see if you don't move a bit slower.

      Quote Originally Posted by morecarsthanbrains View Post
      Why is [the PentaStar] being seen as a savior then?
      Because you are apparently the only person on the planet who hasn't recognized that, when compared to the 3.8L V6 and/or the 4.0L I6, the PentaStar offers equal torque from idle to 1600 RPM, better torque from there all the way to redline, gobs more horsepower and better fuel economy to boot. It's a win-win-win. Seriously, what's not to love?
      Dempsey Bowling
      Sales Consultant at Doug Smith Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep/Ram/Subaru/Kia/used
      My fleet: 91 Miata, 98 Wrangler Sport, 01 Suburban 2500 8.1L, 14 Impreza Limited, 03 Protege LX

    10. 07-14-2011 02:35 PM #45
      Quote Originally Posted by PassSedanGLX View Post
      Also, because it's more powerful, more refined, more efficient, and more competitive. All of those were also true of the 3.8, but it was still "just a minivan engine."
      That's another thing--the fact that a 3.8L 4dr gets equal fuel economy as a SWB 4.0L TJ despite the four-door's added bulk speaks well of the efficiency of the 3.8L engine.
      Dempsey Bowling
      Sales Consultant at Doug Smith Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep/Ram/Subaru/Kia/used
      My fleet: 91 Miata, 98 Wrangler Sport, 01 Suburban 2500 8.1L, 14 Impreza Limited, 03 Protege LX

    11. Geriatric Member ByronLLN's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 29th, 2004
      Location
      Annapolis, MD
      Posts
      37,209
      Vehicles
      '13 Focus, '08.5 MS3, '97 Wrangler, '90 Miata
      07-14-2011 02:36 PM #46
      Quote Originally Posted by TurboMinivan View Post
      That's another thing--the fact that a 3.8L 4dr gets equal fuel economy as a SWB 4.0L TJ despite the four-door's added bulk speaks well of the efficiency of the 3.8L engine.
      My dad DDed his 3.8 up 'til he retired and actually managed a lot of tanks north of 20 mpg with a good chunk of highway driving. Far cry from the 16-17 combined I normally get our of our old 2.5.
      www.leftlanenews.com
      @SSLByron, @leftlanenews

    12. Senior Member FlashRedGLS1.8T's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 17th, 2001
      Location
      Ohio
      Posts
      21,156
      07-14-2011 02:50 PM #47
      About time.

    13. Member alfafan's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 24th, 2000
      Location
      Menifee Ca
      Posts
      6,784
      Vehicles
      2012 Fiat 500 Sport, 2005 Saab 9-5 Aero,
      07-14-2011 02:51 PM #48
      Quote Originally Posted by TurboMinivan View Post
      Apparently you need to learn the difference between a dyno plot measured at the crankshaft and a dyno plot measured at the rear wheels. When you do that, you'll get an accurate comparison... and you'll see this:



      As you'll see, the Pentastar makes about 180 lb ft at 1000 RPM and hits an even 200 lb ft by 1200 RPM. You'll also notice that the Pentastar makes 240 lb ft at 2000 RPM, which is more than the 4.0L could put out at any RPM.

      So, yeah, it'll do just fine and it makes a fine Jeep engine.
      Ot, what caught my eye is that one of the final assembly locations is Saltillo Mexico where my mom's family came from about 130 years ago.

      Bot, low gas mileage will always keep me away from a new Jeep,. If I'm gonna shell out good money for a new one I'm gonna put a fair amount of mileage on it. If I'm gonna do the weekend warrior thing then I would just get a used one and not worry about it. Again, wake me when the diesel gets here.

    14. Member
      Join Date
      Jan 31st, 2001
      Location
      Chambersburg, PA
      Posts
      1,257
      Vehicles
      09 CC (gf's)
      07-14-2011 02:55 PM #49
      Quote Originally Posted by morecarsthanbrains View Post
      Sorry, I forgot about it. So, if the dyno plots show that the 3.8 is actually better than the 4.0, why was it universally trashed? Why is this being seen as a savior then?
      One reason, I would say, is some of it has to do to the reliability issues with the 3.8 vs the 4.0. Granted the 4.0 was in production for a long time and had all the wrinkles ironed out.

      The other reason, I believe, is gearing and weight. The JK (3.8 V6) is heavier, especially the Unlimited, than the TJ was. The JK came in about the same gears as TJs (depending on models) but JK typically has 32" tires vs TJs 31" or smaller, which affect gear ratio to the bad for the JK.

      Another reason for the hype about the new engine is actually not the engine but the transmission. It's a new 5-speed auto out of the Grand Cherokee vs the old 4-speed auto. The 4spd was absolutely terrible in anything lower than 4.10 gears (downshift galore) and overheated easily. I expect the new tranny to be much better overall in driving feel.

      I guess the short answer is the 4.0 worked well with what the TJ had. The JK grew up but the 3.8 didn't grow up fast enough. The 3.6 pentastar appears to be an engine for the next gen Wrangler but they're putting it in the JK. To me it's the best of both worlds.
      "Have you guys SEEN my old lady's pu$$?" --> friend
      "Six"---> Ben G's Build-Up Thread

      Previous VW's: 10 GTI, 81 Caddy 1.6D, 06 GLI (gf's), 98 Jetta TDI, 92 Jetta 1.6TD, 08 R32, 05 GLI, 68 Bug, 02 Jetta TDI, 86 Jetta 1.6TD, 01 GTI

    15. Member
      Join Date
      Jan 31st, 2001
      Location
      Chambersburg, PA
      Posts
      1,257
      Vehicles
      09 CC (gf's)
      07-14-2011 03:02 PM #50
      Quote Originally Posted by PassSedanGLX View Post
      My dad DDed his 3.8 up 'til he retired and actually managed a lot of tanks north of 20 mpg with a good chunk of highway driving. Far cry from the 16-17 combined I normally get our of our old 2.5.
      There's your difference in bold. With the right gearing, tires, and driving you could get 20 mpg with any 2.5, 4.0, 3.8, or I'm sure 3.6.
      "Have you guys SEEN my old lady's pu$$?" --> friend
      "Six"---> Ben G's Build-Up Thread

      Previous VW's: 10 GTI, 81 Caddy 1.6D, 06 GLI (gf's), 98 Jetta TDI, 92 Jetta 1.6TD, 08 R32, 05 GLI, 68 Bug, 02 Jetta TDI, 86 Jetta 1.6TD, 01 GTI

    16. Geriatric Member ByronLLN's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 29th, 2004
      Location
      Annapolis, MD
      Posts
      37,209
      Vehicles
      '13 Focus, '08.5 MS3, '97 Wrangler, '90 Miata
      07-14-2011 03:24 PM #51
      Quote Originally Posted by Bengti View Post
      There's your difference in bold. With the right gearing, tires, and driving you could get 20 mpg with any 2.5, 4.0, 3.8, or I'm sure 3.6.
      His commute was the same distance and same split of highway/surface as mine, just on different roads. His actually had more elevation changes than mine. Driving a 2.5 "right" for fuel economy is a miserable experience. Pretty sure I can feel myself slowly dying as I accelerate up to highway speed.
      www.leftlanenews.com
      @SSLByron, @leftlanenews

    17. Member
      Join Date
      Jan 31st, 2001
      Location
      Chambersburg, PA
      Posts
      1,257
      Vehicles
      09 CC (gf's)
      07-14-2011 05:34 PM #52
      Quote Originally Posted by PassSedanGLX View Post
      Driving a 2.5 "right" for fuel economy is a miserable experience. Pretty sure I can feel myself slowly dying as I accelerate up to highway speed.
      A 3.8 Unlimited auto is about the same way. My theory is you're going to get crappy or crappier milage out of a jeep so why not mod the hell out of it and forget it. If you are worried about milage then you need a different or secondary vehicle.
      "Have you guys SEEN my old lady's pu$$?" --> friend
      "Six"---> Ben G's Build-Up Thread

      Previous VW's: 10 GTI, 81 Caddy 1.6D, 06 GLI (gf's), 98 Jetta TDI, 92 Jetta 1.6TD, 08 R32, 05 GLI, 68 Bug, 02 Jetta TDI, 86 Jetta 1.6TD, 01 GTI

    18. Member Spinnaker's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 12th, 2007
      Location
      SFO
      Posts
      6,165
      Vehicles
      05 1.8T; 04VTek800 (sold); 08Speed3; 2009 TL SHAWDy
      07-14-2011 05:37 PM #53
      Quote Originally Posted by Turbiodiesel! View Post
      Seriously, if this cracks 20mpg highway.....
      you'll make 27 threads about how you will/will not/will buy it?

    19. Member MCTB's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 30th, 2005
      Location
      The Northern of Virginia
      Posts
      9,063
      Vehicles
      '12 Focus SE, '72 MGB GT, '58 MGA, '15 Outback Limited
      07-14-2011 06:19 PM #54
      Quote Originally Posted by Bengti View Post
      A 3.8 Unlimited auto is about the same way. My theory is you're going to get crappy or crappier milage out of a jeep so why not mod the hell out of it and forget it. If you are worried about milage then you need a different or secondary vehicle.
      Not true. Im built for hell and get a constant 18 city. On highway, I can pull 22+. Difference? Diesel.

    Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •