ronjenx

People were expecting a game changer.
Now, the 3.8 isn't looking all that bad.

jcs07jk

I really won't complain about mine. I got it for the love of owning a jeep. I have no plans to get rid of mine and I wasn't expecting this new engine to be a huge milestone with the jk. I just like to check stuff out and I know that this engine venture was to increase the power output but lean more toward meeting fuel economy. Using a. Single engine across a wider range of vehicles makes it cost effective to produce. Really the new motor means nothing to me as I'm going to drive mine into the ground and replace it with big block when that time comes anyway saving now for the hemi. I should be able to afford it down the road.... Way down the road

homer

Not so sure.

Last monday I took a 2011 grand cherokee with the 3.6 and trailer package out for a test drive. Had plenty of go and felt much more smooth than my 3.8.

Like all the CGs, it had an automatic ( I believe it is still the 5 speed). Very tractable off the line with 3 of us in it. Saledude said to expect this mill in most Chryco product rolling off the line in the coming years.

I just hope they rotate a couple of the engineers over to the Wrangler team to work on the front end. The GC was half way in feel between a Wrangler and a MB e-350 fourmatic (yeah, I know, quite a range there..). Very confident ride at speed.

ronjenx

The 5 speed automatic would probably make a big difference with the Wrangler 3.8, too.

cbcwrangler

Since I started this thread, I wanted to be fair about the Pentastar. Just this morning, USAToday released their review of the Durango with Pentastar, and it is much more positive:

"Its standard Pentastar 3.6-liter V-6 seemed powerful enough to make the optional Hemi 5.7-liter V-8, and its greater fuel thirst, unnecessary for most people, most of the time."

"What else was impressive:

•Performance. The V-6 was more than sufficient with three aboard and a few bags. If you tow or haul a lot, especially where it's hilly, you still might prefer the optional Hemi V-8, though."


I'm still giving Jeep credit for thinking this through and tuning for torque - or even surprising us with direct injection!

Full article:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...terstitialskip

porters

Interesting article. Thanks for sharing. I would think it's the 5 speed tranny that makes the biggest difference rather than the Pentastar alone. I am still hopeing for a similar 5 speed tranny in the 2012 JKs.

JPop

While I'll reserve my opinion until I start seeing where the hp actually falls, the 3.6l Pentastar will be delivering more than an additional 15% torque than the 3.8l at 1600rpm. The Durango was also boasting a 3.08 rear end gear, which isn't even close to how you want to roll on 35s or larger. They are also running tires that are 30.5" tall on the Durango which is still going to push a stock JK to want the 3.73s or better off the production line.

Anyway, I wouldn't get too twisted about this one way or another and when we get some real dyno charts to take a peak at we'll be able to figure out how to make it work. At the end of the day, that will be way better than what we are getting from the 3.8L but far from everything we dreamed of.

payne171

Wow, interesting that this devolved into pushrod versus ohc. Let's pretend you have two engines that are equal except for the valvetrain design. Bore, stroke, number of cylinders, compression, intake and exhaust are all the same. Valve size and number are the same, lift and duration are the same. Guess what? There power curves would be virtually identical. The reason OHC gets the RPM rep is because they can run four valves easily. This allows for more airflow. They can also typically rev higher because the valvetrain is lighter due to a more direct connection between the valves and the camshaft. OHV engines get their rep for torque because they are significantly smaller given equal displacement due to having the pre-valve parts of the valvetrain within the block instead of on top of the engine. As an example, the Nissan 350z had about the same size and weight engine as the C5 Corvette despite having two less cylinders and about 130 less cubic inches (not to mention about 100lb/ft of torque). For a given engine bay, the OHC engine that fits does probably rev more easily, but is down a lot of displacement. If you're the engineer worried about shoehorning the biggest engine possible into the engine bay, you choose the pushrod. If you are the engineer worried about passing emissions or a super smooth engine, the OHC wins. I'll take the extra displacement for my Jeep.

Zilon X

Wrangler deserves the HEMI and the DIESEL.

Only Chrysler do not saw it. Or do not want...

SWRUBI

The 3.7's in the Liberty have the same type of set up for the sparkplugs. Actually very easy to work on with the right tools.