IMFletch

x2 on the factory HEMI. I have been waiting for years for a factory diesel or V8 option in a Jeep.

OoPEZoO

+1

I'd be first in line at the dealer to get one.......and I tell them that everytime I stop by.

Yankee

It must be because of all the fuel and crash standards (note how much room is in front of the stock 3.8 under the hood).

Otherwise, I find it really surprising they are putting this engine in something that needs more low end torque. The 3.8 works, and so will this new engine. But they could be so much better.

The little high revving V-6's they put in the Wrangler would be fine as long as someone buying one never owned anything that had any decent power to compare it to. Like anything other than a bicycle.

There are many more practical and efficient vehicles out there for simple transportation than the Wrangler. While many of us drive Jeeps to work, most did not buy them primarily for that purpose.

If your like me, you bought the Wrangler for the fun factor first, transportation second. However, I think Chrysler forgets most of us do not trailer our Jeeps and we have to still drive on the highway to where the fun is. This is where, to me, the Jeep is (was) a big dissapointment. I also did not like the 3.8 in any kind of deep snow, mud, or sand where I often want to stay in high range.

We can only hope they add more transmission, transfer case, and gearing options to offset the (once again) low end torque limitations this new engine will have. A ten speed transmission might do the trick!

Oh well, at least they will make the aftermarket happy (AEV, Ripp, Superchips, etc).

Glad I did not wait on Chrysler to put a real engine in a 2 ton brick that I will only keep adding more weight to with mods.

JKChad

just curious, but what the torque cuvre of a 6.1 hemi. Last time I checked it wasn't anything usable in the offroad environment. I'm not sure of the 5.7 hemi, but I'm sure it's setup for a little better low-end for towing and such.. I just don't get the rave of HEMI this and HEMI that. I've read a few people on here with the 6.1's say that they're not that impressed with the bottom-end power. Which is very understandable considering it's a street performance engine. Not an engine that will be ran and low-mid rpm range.

I'm just not sold on the hole hemi bandwagon. I'm sure anything is an improvement of the mini-van engine, but for the added cost? I'll be the first one on the lot the day the sale one with a diesel engine. Especial if it's a turbo diesel. They make killer power and can be made more efficient then most any engine type out there.


Seein the new v6 is a DOHC is kinda nice, but generally speaking most are setup for mid-upper rpm power. Just wish Chrysler would get with the program and offer us something with some low end grunt.

-Chad-

99%Stock

I don't see why every thinks the Pentastar engine will have bad torque. "The engine’s torque exceeds 90 percent of its peak value from 1,600 to 6,400 rpm" from Allpar.com. That sounds like a reasonably flat torque curve to me and 90% of 260 ft/lb is just a few ft/lb lower than the best the 3.8L can do.

If you really want torque nothing beats electric motors... max torque at 0 RPM. I'll take one per wheel

RedneckJeep

Don't know where you're gettin all that from. The New HEMI's claim to fame has always been it's low end torque. Stone stock they have a touch over 300 LB FT of torque at 1100 RPM. That's just right for a Jeep.

Yankee

The purpose of this thread was the new v-6 engine, I was just expressing my dissapointment with those specs going into a 2 ton square vehicle that will be driven on the road. Was not trying to argue the merits of a hemi, sorry.. The 6.1 was just my solution to the problem of the Wrangler being underpowered on the road, the subject of many complaints. I just think its a shame that rice burners can have superchargers from the factory, and trucks weighing less than our Jeeps can have factory V-8's or diesels.

I do not know what the 6.1 torque curve is. The primary complaints from some are low RPM shift points causing a "bog" in the engine. The 6.1 will not realize full potential in the Wrangler using RFE 545 tranny instead of the A580 or using the 5.7 exhaust manifolds instead of headers. The 5.7 is probably more practical for low end torque, but I got a hella deal on 6.1 with 1000 miles on it and could not pass it up. A 3.8 it sure ain't!

With my stock 4:10 gears and 32" tires, low end "usable" torque is relative I guess. If I turn off the traction control, from a dead stop I could shred my rear tires if I wanted. Maybe not usable low end torque to some, but it gets me through sand, mud, and snow in hi range with a bunch less effort than the 3.8 did.

And no one needs a hemi or a supercharger for crawling around in 4 lo. The 3.8 does fine, especially in a Rubicon. That is not where the complaints come from.

75% of my time is spent on road. I got what was, for me, the best of both worlds. I can go out and play in a blizzard in the winter with confidence and in the summer have a Jeep that can downshift and still take some weight off the front springs at 80 mph. It makes me look forward to starting my Jeep in the morning to go to work. A major feat at my age.

If you can go for a ride in a hemi Jeep like I did once and not crave one, it would not be the right choice for sure, nor worth the expense. But then I spent 20 years on sports bikes and have all V-8's, so I am kinda crazy. I wanted a capable off road vehicle that did not feel underpowered (to me) on the road.

My point was that it is too bad we have to go to any after market expense to get on road performance on par with what comes factory in most vehicles that weigh what a Wrangler does. I am not talking screaming power, but something you do not have to downshift going up a reasonable highway grade. Unless the torque curve is down low in this new engine (in a smaller displacement V-6?), there will be many more complaints when it comes out.

Jeep81

Do I buy 2010 or wait until 2011? confuse

tpm152

At the low end where I spend all my time (under 1500 RPM) they will more than likely be very similar to each other. Only difference is if you want decent power right out of the box but less ability to modify your engine go for the pentastar. If you do your own oil changes and enjoy building your own engine up I would say go for the 3.8.

Plus I would say it will greatly depend on whether the JKs with the pentastar will be more expensive than what they are currently. If so that's another thing to take into account.

Either way it all comes down to personal preference. If I was in the market for a new wrangler I would wait for the 11s to come out. That way you can test drive both the 10s and 11s, look at the price difference and weigh that against the performance after driving both.

beaquel

Wouldn't the higher peak torque of the new engine help drive the added mass and increased diameter of a set of 35's? It's my impression is that while a 3.8L V6 is OK for a stock Jeep with stock tires, it's not strong enough to handle accelerating the larger diameter tires. Seems to me a stronger peak torque rating would help you overcome the increased wheel/tire gearing disadvantage. Am I wrong here?