How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee? - Page 13 - Jeep Garage - Jeep Forum

Go Back   Jeep Garage - Jeep Forum > Jeep Platform Discussion > Grand Cherokee - WK2 -

Join Jeep Garage Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
  #145  
Old 11-13-2015, 08:16 AM
scooterha's Avatar
Senior Member
My Jeep: 2012 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: WV
Posts: 1,785
Thanks: 4
Thanked 47 Times in 38 Posts
Rep Power: 220994
scooterha has a reputation beyond reputescooterha has a reputation beyond reputescooterha has a reputation beyond reputescooterha has a reputation beyond reputescooterha has a reputation beyond reputescooterha has a reputation beyond reputescooterha has a reputation beyond reputescooterha has a reputation beyond reputescooterha has a reputation beyond reputescooterha has a reputation beyond reputescooterha has a reputation beyond repute
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

As long as the new engine choices don't make the GC feel sluggish (take the 5spd paired with the 3.6 on the MY11-13 for example) then I don't care what engine is under the hood. As long as an extended warranty is available to purchase I'm good.

__________________
Current Vehicle: 2015 Chrysler 200 S 2.4 Tigershark.
Granite Crystal Metallic. May not have the Jeep, but I'll still drop in and keep up with the news.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #146  
Old 11-16-2015, 11:40 PM
Member
My Jeep: 2014 5.7L WK2
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Arvada, CO
Posts: 106
Thanks: 0
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
Rep Power: 1231
Qmulus is on a distinguished road
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

I assume this will be the 2.0 liter GME "Global Medium Engine" that is said to have outputs of 200, 250 and 280hp. My guess is that the new Grand Cherokee that I heard will share its platform with the new Challenger will be significantly lighter (let's hope 500+lbs less) than the current Mercedes based chassis. I would also guess it would use the 250 hp (or more) version of the engine. Given modern turbos with incredibly flat torque curves, I would bet it would move the GC quite impressively. Would it appeal to the traditional Jeep customer? Hmmm.... Maybe for a base engine for people that just want it for economy. Some just gotta have a Hemi.

Personally, I love turbo engines, especially at altitude here in Colorado. I have had six German turbo cars (Audis and now a VW) over the last 25 years, and each generation is a significant improvement over the last. I have also put hundreds of thousands of miles on those cars, most of which were chipped, and I never had an engine or turbo failure. Unlike the old turbos, now lag is pretty much non existent and torque curves are amazing, giving amazing low end while still offering impressive all out horsepower.

I just bought my daughter a VW Tiguan with a 2.0l 200hp direct injected turbocharged engine. It moves the 3500lb surprisingly well and gets 30mpg on the highway with an old six speed automatic (not DSG) transmission. The low end is what is most impressive. The latest iteration of the that engine makes 300hp and 280ftlbs of torque stock in the Golf R. The torque curve is flat as a table top. I know from direct experience that 375hp and 400 ftlbs of torque is quite easily attainable and surprisingly reliable in those engines.

Now if Jeep could offer a Ferrari derived 2.9 liter direct injected twin turbo V6 with say 475hp and 450 ftlbs of torque, I would consider trading the Hemi.

I am more worried about them messing up the formula that makes the Grand Cherokee successful than the base engine. That formula to me is being a rugged, luxurious and capable vehicle that can haul five people and tow a 5000lb+ trailer at a reasonable price.

Note to FCA and Jeep: DON'T SCREW IT UP!
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 11-17-2015, 11:38 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 307
Thanks: 2
Thanked 15 Times in 13 Posts
Rep Power: 2104
comnjeep is on a distinguished road
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

Quote:
Originally Posted by billt View Post
Here ya' go. Granted that only represents 1,440 miles of driving. (I've never reset it since I brought it home). And it dropped a few tenths since I took it shooting out in the desert the other day. I had several miles of slow, hilly, winding roads. But overall for a HEMI, I'm not complaining. It's something anyone can do if you drive conservatively, and use the paddle shifters.




OK, I get it. I usually don't go by the Car's computer because it is 1-2mpg generous at least. You need to calculate the mpg by miles driven divided by gallons filled. So you're talking 16-17 mixed mpg summer really. Driving slow in a city out west, no question that's reasonable. I stand by my original thought: MDS does NOTHING for mileage. the 8 speed in a hemi does very little in my humble opinion for mpg overall. Hwy with an overdrive and torque converter lockout is as good as it gets. As the EPA ratings from 2012 to 2016 suggest. Your driving does the most. Good job saving gas. I would like that 8 speed, and a diesel, but neither is worth the trade in loss with gas as cheap as ever.

Again I'll say the two people I know who have ford ecoboost engines are not impressed with the MPG hwy real word, because they are heavy and need to be in positive manifold pressure so often, I think the turbo does not save gas. Of course that's a six, so an underpowered 4 may indeed save gas!

Just my opinion, man...
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 12-18-2015, 08:15 PM
f1anatic's Avatar
Premium Member
My Jeep: 2014 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,674
Thanks: 68
Thanked 183 Times in 136 Posts
Rep Power: 159921
f1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond repute
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

At 1840 - 1950 kg (4050 - 4300 lbs) it is about the same weight as a Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo. VW Amarok seems to be doing alright on-road and off-road, albeit with a 2 L diesel. A 2 L bi-turbo engine on gasoline can be tuned to 300 lb-ft (which would be the equivalent of 400 N-m torque from the most powerful spec 2.0 L I4 diesel). But then again, with the reliability worries from people afraid of progress, it is pointless, even if we're only talking about the base engine.



Specs
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 12-19-2015, 05:48 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 849
Thanks: 23
Thanked 94 Times in 70 Posts
Rep Power: 2993
Snipe315 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

Quote:
Originally Posted by f1anatic View Post
At 1840 - 1950 kg (4050 - 4300 lbs) it is about the same weight as a Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo. VW Amarok seems to be doing alright on-road and off-road, albeit with a 2 L diesel. A 2 L bi-turbo engine on gasoline can be tuned to 300 lb-ft (which would be the equivalent of 400 N-m torque from the most powerful spec 2.0 L I4 diesel). But then again, with the reliability worries from people afraid of progress, it is pointless, even if we're only talking about the base engine.



Specs

I don't understand why so many people just don't GET IT.

A Smaller Engine has to Work Harder then a Larger Engine to move a vehicle weighing the same. And when that smaller engine has to work harder, it will use more fuel. So while a smaller engine might use less fuel when lightly loaded, added weight (people, luggage, stuff) causes more degradation then adding the same weight to a larger (stronger) engine.

So as long as you don't put stuff in your 2.0L engine powered vehicle, and drive like a little old lady... you'll be just fine.

__________________
2015 WK2 Overland 4x4 V8, Granite Exterior/Black Interior, ORA II, Advance Tech Package, Rear Seat DVD/Blu-ray
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Snipe315 For This Useful Post:
  #150  
Old 12-19-2015, 10:01 PM
f1anatic's Avatar
Premium Member
My Jeep: 2014 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,674
Thanks: 68
Thanked 183 Times in 136 Posts
Rep Power: 159921
f1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond repute
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snipe315 View Post
So while a smaller engine might use less fuel when lightly loaded, added weight (people, luggage, stuff) causes more degradation then adding the same weight to a larger (stronger) engine.

So as long as you don't put stuff in your 2.0L engine powered vehicle, and drive like a little old lady... you'll be just fine.

So you are saying that when controlling for the same weight and speed (and temperature and wind and tires, etc), a 4 cylinder inline engine will burn more fuel then a larger engine ? While I agree with the statement,which is certainly rooted in the laws of physics and thermodynamics, I don't think the answer is that simple. Engine downsizing allows for overall fuel economy and there's strategies to deal with that, within reason. (a) (b)

Nay sayers are still committing the fallacy of comparing the proposed 2.0 L turbo engine with the V8 and using that as a basis for comparison. As a base engine, the four cylinder turbo would compete with the current Pentastar 3.6 L V6 not against the Hemi. Ford surely thinks the 2.3 L Ecoboost is comparable to the normally aspirated 3.5 L V6 and will even save some fuel. In fact it charges a $995 premium for it.
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 12-20-2015, 07:26 AM
billt's Avatar
Senior Member
My Jeep: 2015 5.7L WK2
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 1,295
Thanks: 305
Thanked 221 Times in 164 Posts
Rep Power: 1928
billt is on a distinguished road
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

Quote:
Originally Posted by f1anatic View Post
So..... Using Ford's statistics that you have posted. You're going to spend $1,000.00 more for a smaller, less powerful, far more mechanically complex engine. That delivers 10 horsepower less. And in the process only gives 2 MPG more across the board on more expensive fuel. Where is the upside?
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 12-20-2015, 10:13 AM
f1anatic's Avatar
Premium Member
My Jeep: 2014 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,674
Thanks: 68
Thanked 183 Times in 136 Posts
Rep Power: 159921
f1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond reputef1anatic has a reputation beyond repute
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

Quote:
Originally Posted by billt View Post
So..... Using Ford's statistics that you have posted. You're going to spend $1,000.00 more for a smaller, less powerful, far more mechanically complex engine. That delivers 10 horsepower less. And in the process only gives 2 MPG more across the board on more expensive fuel. Where is the upside?
Why is horsepower more important than torque, to you, in an SUV ? By this measure, all diesel JGC owners are fools who mistakenly chose the measly 245 hp engine. Do you consistently drive your gasoline-powered Jeep between 5200 rpm and 6500 rpm red line?

Fact Check: The Ecoboost 2.3 runs on 87 octane, albeit with some 11% reduction in horsepower and a 6% decline in torque, which is expected. Even then, the torque output is greater than the current Pentastar.

You cannot have your argument both ways.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 12-20-2015, 11:01 AM
billt's Avatar
Senior Member
My Jeep: 2015 5.7L WK2
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 1,295
Thanks: 305
Thanked 221 Times in 164 Posts
Rep Power: 1928
billt is on a distinguished road
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

Quote:
Originally Posted by f1anatic View Post
Why is horsepower more important than torque, to you, in an SUV ? By this measure, all diesel JGC owners are fools who mistakenly chose the measly 245 hp engine. Do you consistently drive your gasoline-powered Jeep between 5200 rpm and 6500 rpm red line?

Fact Check: The Ecoboost 2.3 runs on 87 octane, albeit with some 11% reduction in horsepower and a 6% decline in torque, which is expected. Even then, the torque output is greater than the current Pentastar.

You cannot have your argument both ways.
I'm not arguing. Look, you like turbo's. We get that. You would turbocharge your refrigerator if it was possible, and that's fine. But what you don't want to accept is the fact that not everyone jumps up and down at the thought of them. They are very expensive and complex for what little fuel savings they deliver, if any. Also, NONE of them are available with the same unlimited time and distance warranties that normally aspirated engines have going for them.

Add that to the fact they are extremely expensive to repair out of warranty, and most anyone who keeps their vehicles for long periods of time isn't going to want them. One of the biggest features the Jeep Grand Cherokee has going for it, is the reputation and reliability of the Chrysler HEMI engine. It's been the backbone for Chrysler vehicles for the last 12 years. Chrysler sells the hell out of this engine. That isn't because most people find them "outdated". They are powerful, reliable, and economical to produce, purchase, and operate. In short, the marketplace can't seem to get enough of this engine. As I said, for Jeep to replace either the Penstar V-6, or the HEMI V-8 with some little 4-cylinder buzz bomb as the base engine for the Grand Cherokee, would be the absolute dumbest marketing decision ever made since the introduction of "New Coke".
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to billt For This Useful Post:
  #154  
Old 12-20-2015, 12:33 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 293
Thanks: 11
Thanked 24 Times in 21 Posts
Rep Power: 2399
rszwestko is on a distinguished road
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

It's not a marketing decision it's what all manufactures are doing in the next few years, just look at all makers some of them don't even offer V8's anymore in their lineup.


Sent from my iPhone using JeepGarage
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 12-20-2015, 01:17 PM
billt's Avatar
Senior Member
My Jeep: 2015 5.7L WK2
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 1,295
Thanks: 305
Thanked 221 Times in 164 Posts
Rep Power: 1928
billt is on a distinguished road
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

Quote:
Originally Posted by rszwestko View Post
It's not a marketing decision it's what all manufactures are doing in the next few years, just look at all makers some of them don't even offer V8's anymore in their lineup.
I've been hearing that for the last 25 years. It's no more of a fact now than it was then.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 12-20-2015, 01:38 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 293
Thanks: 11
Thanked 24 Times in 21 Posts
Rep Power: 2399
rszwestko is on a distinguished road
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

Car manufactures are not interested in longevity beyond 6-7 years or past 100k miles, they want you to buy a new car every few years. You may be right that a turbo engine won't last longer than a V8 but it will last during the warranty period and then some. Most people don't keep their cars forever and even though the engine may last a long time other components start failing before that.


Sent from my iPhone using JeepGarage
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
grand cherokee

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2019 Grand Wagoneer mattagrella 2019+ Grand Wagoneer-WS 50 11-14-2016 10:40 AM
JGC redesign moved possibly to 2019 dsi jeep Grand Cherokee - WK2 - 34 08-27-2015 11:04 AM
What grade of gas are you usin(g and do you feel the diff? OutlanderTT Engine Performance/Intakes/Exhausts 20 01-02-2013 01:08 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2012 - JeepGarage.Org
The Jeep Grand Cherokee Owners Community

JeepGarage.org is in no way associated with or endorsed by FCA US LLC. Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Ram, Mopar and SRT are registered trademarks of FCA US LLC.