Jeep Garage  - Jeep Forum banner

Who has driven both V6 & V8 WK2's

30K views 188 replies 46 participants last post by  ChrisOC 
#1 ·
Hey Guys -

Yesterday I was dumbfounded at the power of the V6 WK2 motor! My close friends decided to purchase a WK2 after we all got in and drove to dinner and movie. Last night they showed me there True Blue Laredo 4x2 V6.

Long story short, I was blocked in my driveway and took the Laredo to buy some wine. WOW! That V6 feels alive and amplified! I touched the accl. pedal and it just took off, no hesitations, rough shifts, nada!

Mine feels like a dog, it's slow, guzzles gas (I am averaging 11mpg), the trans has rough shifts and delays between gears.

Sorry for the rant, im not a happy camper right now.
 
#114 ·
The Hemi is faster, stronger, quieter, more refined and makes the GC more versatile>>>>


This is not a MIX of fact and opinion. It's PURE fact.

The Hemi is FASTER, significantly so!
The Hemi is STRONG, much stronger!
The Hemi is quieter! Especially under any kind of loading!
The Hemi is more refined, or at least it certainly feels that way as it does not strain!
The Hemi makes the GC more versatile...of course it does. More power means more ability, more options for towing and so on. You may not need it all the time, but it's there.

Facts. The V6 does just one thing better...MPG. If that's at the top of your list then get it! But stop trying to sell the idea that less is more in a 2.5 ton SUV. We RAN from the Audi Q7 because it's sub 300 HP V6 was struggling as badly as the GC V6. That and the fact that it wouldn't fit in our garage!




Robert
 
#117 ·
You are not quoting what I said. Read my post again a little slower this time. I will underline the opinion portion for you.

Examples of mixed fact and opinion:

The Hemi is faster, stronger, quieter, more refined and makes the GC more versatile ( I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on QUIETER)

But the Hemi is still superior in every way in respect to performance, driving enjoyment, safety, flexibility and comfort.

Again, these are your opinion.


Good to see you didn't dispute the other 10 opinions I listed that were originally passed on as fact.​
 
#115 ·
Actually it does several things better...
Pentastars - advanced V6 engines from Chrysler (and Mercedes) A short read.

The Pentastar V6 puts out 80.55 hp per liter. The 5.7 liter only puts out 63.15 hp per liter. The V6 also puts out 72.22 feet pound per liter and the Hemi only puts out 68.42 feet pound per liter. So the V6 is better at effeciency.

The Pentastar is the new platform for all the upcoming designs, so the Pentastar has a better future coming. Sorry to say, but you should read line 5 under the overview....The Chrysler Five Year Plan
Fiat intends to drop the Hemi line altogether in favor of the single and twin turbo V6's along with diesel and electric options. The V8 will get much smaller as well. I believe they are looking at a 4.7 liter in the future.
The Pentastar is also better engineered than the 5.7.

: Chrysler needed to drastically improve their fuel economy, and they certainly did with the Pentastar, which returns a 15-20% improvement in efficiency and 30-40% in power. Even more impressive is that it has made that leap without some of the tricks that other engines need, like Direct Injection and Exhaust Gas Recirculation. The Pentastar is good enough on its own merit to achieve impressive figures, but that just means we can be more excited for…

5. The Future: The Pentastar doesn’t have Direct Injection, Cylinder Deactivation or a turbo, but it is set up to potentially handle all three. If Fiat and Chrysler continue to develop the Pentastar V6 with these and other technologies, it could see whole new levels of performance and efficiency. They may be waiting for the price to go down, and since the Pentastar already helps them meet 2015 CAFE standards there’s no rush. But the sky is the limit for the already impressive Pentastar, and we can’t wait to see what else is in store. Maybe an appearance in the new Alfa Romeo Spider?
So just think of us V6 owners as investing in the future.........
 
#116 ·
Actually it does several things better...
Pentastars - advanced V6 engines from Chrysler (and Mercedes) A short read.

The Pentastar V6 puts out 80.55 hp per liter. The 5.7 liter only puts out 63.15 hp per liter. The V6 also puts out 72.22 feet pound per liter and the Hemi only puts out 68.42 feet pound per liter. So the V6 is better at effeciency.

The Pentastar is the new platform for all the upcoming designs, so the Pentastar has a better future coming. Sorry to say, but you should read line 5 under the overview....The Chrysler Five Year Plan
Fiat intends to drop the Hemi line altogether in favor of the single and twin turbo V6's along with diesel and electric options. The V8 will get much smaller as well. I believe they are looking at a 4.7 liter in the future.
The Pentastar is also better engineered than the 5.7.


So just think of us V6 owners as investing in the future.........


That efficiency translates into not-enough power and is meaningless. There are other engines that are more efficient, but that does not make them the better choice for a heavy SUV.
The V6 may be a great platform in the future, but I'm driving today and that engine is not ready for prime time in the GC and suits the Overland even less.


Robert
 
#118 ·
My issue w/ CaptRB's position is not that he claims one engine is better then the other, it's more-so the statements surrounding the V6 being under powered and inadequate. This engine is neither of those things. Perhaps we don't have the same expectations of our 4x4 vehicles, but acceleration and quickness are not very high on my priority list for this type of vehicle. If you want to drive an underpowered 4x4 go drive a V6 WK1 -- the performance comparatively to this vehicle is a substantial improvement.
 
#119 ·
CaptRB,

It's obvious your not getting through to a select few V6 owners. Let it go. Deep down these guys know they'd have the Hemi if they weren't concerned with MPG's. They're just too stubborn to admit it. It's a no-brainer. It's common sense ..... right???
 
#123 ·
Buy what you want, but a maxed out Hemi powered Overland or Overland Summit isn't just a frilled out version of the GC, it's a more evolved and capable off-road/on-road machine. It competes directly with the Landrover LR4 for example with it's power and QL suspension.

The whole point of Jeep is a vehicle that can go where others can't. 2WD makes no sense. I'd just buy a nice AWD Subaru or Toyota and be done.


Robert
 
#128 ·
I think the real argument here is torque, the 260lbs with 290 hp, and the 390lbs with 360hp. The hp is only a 70 hp difference not much going on there. I myself as a V6 owner wish the torque was slightly higher for more acceleration, but I do more city driving so I had to pick my battle. The V6 is an excellent engine as well as the HEMI is one. I do however disagree that saying a Grand Cherokee "without the Hemi" isn't a Jeep is just an egotistical slam. I feel like a peace keeper haha. If the HEMI was the superior off road engine, wouldn't the Wranglers have the V8 instead of the V6? (I know the Wranglers are slightly lighter) I'm just saying the V8 is good for its capabilities, (towing,acceleration and safety) as the V6 is for its capabilities (light towing, slightly higher mpg and safety) all it really boils down to is which engine suits a persons needs. One engine is not more superior then the other.
 
#129 ·
I wish I would have gone with HEMI knowing it will be worth much, much more once it's deleted from the jeep line and replaced with a V6 (as rumored) :rolleyes:

seriously, I think this thread can now die as every single opinion/ argument has been made. ;)
 
#134 · (Edited)
This post has been deleted
#138 ·
Here's another fact:

Some V6 owners are suffering from a Napoleon complex.
 
#146 ·
Haha you guys think the V6 people have envy, but reading this thread it is the v8 people that are screaming the loudest.

V8 is faster, but not by much. According to Edmunds for the V6 Overland and the V8 Overland, their 0-60 times were 9.0 seconds and 8.2 seconds, respectively. Yes, the Hemi is faster - but not by very much.

We've already determined that the Hemi is less efficient (based on HP and FT/LBS per Liter).

The Hemi is heavier by around 300lbs.

The Hemi requires 89 Octane fuel. Not only does the V6 get better mpg, but both have the same sized fuel tank so the V6 should go further per tank.

Although not that big of a deal, it seems the maintenance of the Hemi will be a little bit more than with the V6.
- 16 spark plugs that need to be changed every 30k miles
vs 6 spark plugs that need to be changed every 96k miles
- More oil per oil change (6 qts vs. 7 qts)


All in all, I considered the Hemi a luxury item compared to the V6. There really isn't anything the Hemi can do that the V6 can't do, except for pull over 5000lbs. Yes, it could have been nice to pass a vehicle on the road half a second faster than I can with the v6 - but the extra cost for the engine, the lower mpg, and the higher maintenance costs swayed me to the V6.
 
#148 · (Edited)
You aint seen noth'n till you drive the V6 turbo diesel like we have own here in Oz. You'll be getting it next year.
 
#153 ·
No, I would not....IF the torque was better or at least equal to that of the Hemi. I'm a big fan of torque!
 
#152 ·
We are supposed to be part of the Jeep brotherhood! I am not saying what motor is better, than what trim level is better. We are all Jeep Wk2 owners, and the manual shows the Jeep wave! I am afraid to use the wave if I am opposite to a Hemi owner giving me the finger :eek:
 
#159 · (Edited)
There you go, just as the SRT isn't practical and cost much more, granted the cost between an Overland V6 and V8 aren't that significant at first glance (maintenance is more expensive for the V8) , to some people a V8 is not practical. It doesn't make the V8 a superior engine, it just means it's not a practical engine for everyone.
 
#163 ·
LOL. Who are you to tell me, or even assume, what my needs are??? Does the SRT have Quadra drive? No. Does it have the Quadra lift suspension? No. Are you going to gift me the extra $20k over the Overland cost? No. I would never be stupid enough to take a $60k vehicle off road or on snow and ice covered roads. Sounds like you may be. My logic is just fine. Good day sir! I said, good day!
 
#164 ·
I should clarify that I wouldn't take a $60k + vehicle NOT MEANT for those conditions, into those conditions. I don't spend foolishly and try not to do foolish things.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top