How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee? - Page 6 - 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
 
  #61  
Old 09-24-2015, 10:39 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 314
Thanks: 2
Thanked 16 Times in 14 Posts
Rep Power: 2162
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

HP / CI ?? Who cares?

for example, this argument is had against pushrods in general, like the 4L BMW V8 pushing 430hp versus the 505hp LS7 7L. Which is a better engine? Well, the LS7 sits lower in the car and is lighter in wt. So who cares how big the pistons are???

Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #62  
Old 09-27-2015, 09:44 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 59
Thanks: 1
Thanked 14 Times in 9 Posts
Rep Power: 1215
ramblinman 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

Gas turbos are trouble. They add complexity and heat management problems for the engine and the turbo. It's not that they can't make the turbo and the engine durable. They just don't. Both BMW and Ford have had a lot of problems with their turbo engines. You can expect the same from FCA. Eventually they will get it right, but you can be sure it won't be right for the first several years. With all the experience these companies have with turbo diesels, you would think they would know what to do with gas turbos. But the technology transfer isn't easy.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ramblinman For This Useful Post:
  #63  
Old 09-28-2015, 06:18 AM
Keysplayr's Avatar
Member
My Jeep: 2015 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 115
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 840
Keysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond repute
Garage
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramblinman View Post
Gas turbos are trouble. They add complexity and heat management problems for the engine and the turbo. It's not that they can't make the turbo and the engine durable. They just don't. Both BMW and Ford have had a lot of problems with their turbo engines. You can expect the same from FCA. Eventually they will get it right, but you can be sure it won't be right for the first several years. With all the experience these companies have with turbo diesels, you would think they would know what to do with gas turbos. But the technology transfer isn't easy.
But why though?

Take a naturally aspirated 4cyl. Change to lower compression pistons and maybe an extra piston ring. Larger fuel injectors. Higher volume fuel pump. Turbocharger and intercooler. Waste gate/blow off. Computer programming.

There have been gasoline turbo cars forever. I don't see the difficulty especially for multi billion dollar companies, to come up with a viable gasoline turbo solution.

Now if you are talking reliability, well that is in the hands of the number crunchers at these industries. "Should we make these bearings out of Tungsten, or plastic?" "Well, if we go plastic, well save 430,000 dollars over the production life of this model AND we will have the built in obsolescense needed to create repair work for our dealerships and sell more bearings to auto part resellers".

Yeah. The world we live in is special.
__________________
-Anthony
'15 Laredo Custom
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Keysplayr For This Useful Post:
  #64  
Old 09-28-2015, 05:09 PM
scooterha's Avatar
Senior Member
My Jeep: 2012 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: WV
Posts: 1,791
Thanks: 4
Thanked 47 Times in 38 Posts
Rep Power: 221051
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 they don't f' up the looks of the new GEN I could care less if it has a mouse running on a wheel as the engine!
__________________
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
  #65  
Old 09-28-2015, 05:49 PM
Premium Member
My Jeep: 2014 5.7L WK2
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Colorado
Posts: 4,006
Thanks: 73
Thanked 277 Times in 244 Posts
Rep Power: 46307
lstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell 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 skunkd View Post
You aren't thinking long term... Turbos are maintenance items themselves...
With modern automatic cool down bearing lubrication, yes the turbo does become yet another maintenance item, but it isn't anything like the early-mid-60's turbos that would eat their bearings unless you were very careful to cool them down after a hard run.
They also tended to eat pistons on hot summer days from Barstow to Vegas.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 09-28-2015, 05:54 PM
Premium Member
My Jeep: 2014 5.7L WK2
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Colorado
Posts: 4,006
Thanks: 73
Thanked 277 Times in 244 Posts
Rep Power: 46307
lstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell has a reputation beyond reputelstowell 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
Stupidity like this would not surprise me these days.

Turbos require premium gas and have higher maintenance needs. And while they may do okay with lighter weight vehicles, it is TORQUE that moves all vehicles, especially heavier ones. And tiny engines with a turbo bolted are lacking in that area.

This could be resolved by reprogramming the computers to run the engine up to transmission stall with a bit of braking added to really get the turbos wound up.
Add a Porsche "bang bang" wastegate to drop pressure to maintain turbine speed, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 09-28-2015, 07:08 PM
Keysplayr's Avatar
Member
My Jeep: 2015 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 115
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 840
Keysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond repute
Garage
Re: How do you feel about a 2.0L TT as the base engine for the 2019 WL Grand Cherokee

Quote:
Originally Posted by lstowell View Post
This could be resolved by reprogramming the computers to run the engine up to transmission stall with a bit of braking added to really get the turbos wound up.
Add a Porsche "bang bang" wastegate to drop pressure to maintain turbine speed, etc.
Actually Turbo gasoline engines produce heaps of torque. It's been a long time but something about a 1:1 ratio increase of air:torque. The more air you ram into a cylinder, the more torque it produces more so than HP.

1987 Buick Regal Grand National
3.8L 231 c.i. V6, Turbocharged -w- intercooler
245HP and 355 lb ft. torque. Turbo engines produce gobs of torque.
A naturally aspirated engine probably wouldn't produce anywhere near that torque at 245 HP.

For comparison, my 87 Z28 had the 5.7L 350 V8 producing 225HP and 330 lb ft. torque.
__________________
-Anthony
'15 Laredo Custom
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 09-28-2015, 10:00 PM
f1anatic's Avatar
Premium Member
My Jeep: 2014 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,729
Thanks: 77
Thanked 209 Times in 151 Posts
Rep Power: 160028
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 Keysplayr View Post
Actually Turbo gasoline engines produce heaps of torque. It's been a long time but something about a 1:1 ratio increase of air:torque. The more air you ram into a cylinder, the more torque it produces more so than HP.

1987 Buick Regal Grand National
3.8L 231 c.i. V6, Turbocharged -w- intercooler
245HP and 355 lb ft. torque. Turbo engines produce gobs of torque.
A naturally aspirated engine probably wouldn't produce anywhere near that torque at 245 HP.

For comparison, my 87 Z28 had the 5.7L 350 V8 producing 225HP and 330 lb ft. torque.
Let's keep it even simpler:

Subaru WRX: 268 HP @ 5600 rpm and 258 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm from 2 L H4
Subaru STI : 305 HP @ 6000 rpm; 290 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm; 2.5 L H4
Audi A4: 220 HP @ 4450 rpm; 258 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm; 2L I-4
Audi S3 / VW Golf R: 292 HP @ 5400 rpm; 280 lb-ft @ 1900 rpm; 2L I-4
Mitsubishi EVO X: 290 HP @ 6500 rpm; 300 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm; 2L I-4
BMW: 240 HP @ 5000 rpm; 255 lb-ft @ 1250 rpm; 2 L I-4
Cadillac: 272 HP @ @ 5500 rpm
Mercedes CLA AMG: 355 HP; 332 lb-ft; 2L I-4


Pentastar 3.6 L V6 290 HP @ 6400 rpm; 260 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm

Hmmm...almost every turbo car out there outperforms the Pentastar...
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 09-28-2015, 11:04 PM
Keysplayr's Avatar
Member
My Jeep: 2015 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 115
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 840
Keysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond repute
Garage
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
Let's keep it even simpler:

Subaru WRX: 268 HP @ 5600 rpm and 258 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm from 2 L H4
Subaru STI : 305 HP @ 6000 rpm; 290 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm; 2.5 L H4
Audi A4: 220 HP @ 4450 rpm; 258 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm; 2L I-4
Audi S3 / VW Golf R: 292 HP @ 5400 rpm; 280 lb-ft @ 1900 rpm; 2L I-4
Mitsubishi EVO X: 290 HP @ 6500 rpm; 300 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm; 2L I-4
BMW: 240 HP @ 5000 rpm; 255 lb-ft @ 1250 rpm; 2 L I-4
Cadillac: 272 HP @ @ 5500 rpm
Mercedes CLA AMG: 355 HP; 332 lb-ft; 2L I-4


Pentastar 3.6 L V6 290 HP @ 6400 rpm; 260 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm

Hmmm...almost every turbo car out there outperforms the Pentastar...

This is true, but they have to work a TON harder in order to acheive that.

And give props to the Pentastar. It hauls in my near 5000 lb SUV just fine. I can just imagine it with a Turbo set up though. Yeesh.
__________________
-Anthony
'15 Laredo Custom
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Keysplayr For This Useful Post:
  #70  
Old 09-29-2015, 12:22 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 853
Thanks: 23
Thanked 96 Times in 72 Posts
Rep Power: 3048
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
Let's keep it even simpler:

Subaru WRX: 268 HP @ 5600 rpm and 258 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm from 2 L H4
Subaru STI : 305 HP @ 6000 rpm; 290 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm; 2.5 L H4
Audi A4: 220 HP @ 4450 rpm; 258 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm; 2L I-4
Audi S3 / VW Golf R: 292 HP @ 5400 rpm; 280 lb-ft @ 1900 rpm; 2L I-4
Mitsubishi EVO X: 290 HP @ 6500 rpm; 300 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm; 2L I-4
BMW: 240 HP @ 5000 rpm; 255 lb-ft @ 1250 rpm; 2 L I-4
Cadillac: 272 HP @ @ 5500 rpm
Mercedes CLA AMG: 355 HP; 332 lb-ft; 2L I-4


Pentastar 3.6 L V6 290 HP @ 6400 rpm; 260 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm

Hmmm...almost every turbo car out there outperforms the Pentastar...
That is nice.

Except I'm not impressed by the Pentastar in the first place.



Now, I have no problem with a High Performance Turbo! Like this...

Porsche Cayenne Turbo:
Horsepower520 hp at 6000 rpm
0-60 mph - 4.2 sec (4.1 sec w/ Sport Chrono)
Top Track Speed - 173 mph
Fuel Consumption:
City (estimate) 14 mpg
Highway (estimate) 21 mpg

But what this thread is describing is a gutless turbo bolted onto a just as gutless tiny little engine. So unless you drive like a granny, you'll have to push this tiny pathetic engine hard, which will result in pisss poor gas mileage.
__________________
2015 WK2 Overland 4x4 V8, Granite Exterior/Black Interior, ORA II, Advance Tech Package, Rear Seat DVD/Blu-ray
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 09-29-2015, 06:49 AM
Keysplayr's Avatar
Member
My Jeep: 2015 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 115
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 840
Keysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond reputeKeysplayr has a reputation beyond repute
Garage
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
That is nice.

Except I'm not impressed by the Pentastar in the first place.



Now, I have no problem with a High Performance Turbo! Like this...

Porsche Cayenne Turbo:
Horsepower520 hp at 6000 rpm
0-60 mph - 4.2 sec (4.1 sec w/ Sport Chrono)
Top Track Speed - 173 mph
Fuel Consumption:
City (estimate) 14 mpg
Highway (estimate) 21 mpg

But what this thread is describing is a gutless turbo bolted onto a just as gutless tiny little engine. So unless you drive like a granny, you'll have to push this tiny pathetic engine hard, which will result in pisss poor gas mileage.
I feel the Pentastar is a fantastic engine, IMHO.

But I agree with you in that these little engines packed into such heavy vehicles are going to have to work damn hard.
__________________
-Anthony
'15 Laredo Custom
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 09-29-2015, 07:49 AM
f1anatic's Avatar
Premium Member
My Jeep: 2014 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,729
Thanks: 77
Thanked 209 Times in 151 Posts
Rep Power: 160028
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 Keysplayr View Post
This is true, but they have to work a TON harder in order to acheive that.

And give props to the Pentastar. It hauls in my near 5000 lb SUV just fine. I can just imagine it with a Turbo set up though. Yeesh.
Well yes and no. The examples I provided of course are for cars that weigh in the 3300 to 4000 labs category and the Jeep is heavier by another 1000 labs. Then again, this would be the entry engine. And with the magic of tuning, twin turbo and other solutions like direct injection (like it or not) the engine can be made to develop torque (that's what matters in a heavy application) at low rpms.

Look at the BMW engine - not the most powerful out there but develops its 255 lb-ft very low at only 1200 rpm and the range is between 1250 and some 4000 rpm if I recall. Pentastar doesn't achieve that power band or torque range. It is a peaky engine, that has to be revved high to get things moving. It is not a bad engine at all but it would not be better than a modern 2 L turbo

I also disagree with the statements about Turbochargers being wear items. They are no different than a transmission and don't require special servicing. Nobody expects a transmission to fail, but it happens all the time in every model, to some extent. As for no special maintenance, modern turbochargers are oil lubricated and water cooled from the general engine feeds, so as long as drivers keep up with oil changes and coolant changes, that also services the turbocharger.
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+ Wagoneer & 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 07:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, 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.