Dyno Battle | Jeep JL Turbo vs JL V6 | Which JL Makes The Most Horsepower? 

I'm partial to the 3.6L

3.6L feels proven, time will tell on the 2.0L in the years to come.

3.6L, because it has a manual transmission.

hands down it's the 2.0T

I drove JK and JL models with the 3.6 (great motor, btw) then unsuspectingly drove the 2.0L Turbo and enjoyed the noticeable difference in performance at speed. I was at 90 in a flash. Have done some modest wheeling with my ‘19 Sahara with the 2.0 and it’s all Jeep - very comfortable. This is a solid motor and I’m looking forward to seeing tests with upgrades to the 2.0. And if it goes south one day? No worries - great time to go hemi! Best part is after years of averaging 15.3 mpg I see great mileage at 23+ and climbing! Works for me! My first gen Cherokee only gave me 10 mpg with the wind so this is like Christmas every day! 👍🏻

Glad you're loving it, Greg! My JL Sport has the 2.0T in it as well and I'm getting about 25 mpg! -Zach

Right!? I've owned by 2.0L since 2019 and really haven't had an issue! Sometime I do miss the sound and drive of a normal V6 but the extra torque and fuel economy from the turbo really makes up for it. -Zach

hate the way the enggine sounds like a weed wacker but im also switching from a ram 1500 warlock 5.7l v8 lol

I got a ‘21 Cherokee with the 2.0L Turbo and it’s very fun to toss around, plenty of pep! I did want a JL but I ended up with a KL lol. They had better incentives at the time on the KL.

Why? The 3.6 is bulletproof and the 2 liter isn't going to be more efficient when you're in boost.

@@Shakshuka69 it is more efficient though? You aren't driving in boost all the time and for those of us that use it as our daily drivers the gas mileage is a bonus

@@errhka I mean, marginally. The gearing and lack of aerodynamics do a lot more damage to the fuel consumption than two cylinders. For me, it's not worth dealing with the headaches of early-adopting FCA's first mild hybrid. The upcoming 630T diesel is problematic enough from what I hear.

@@Shakshuka69 to each their own

@@errhka the funny part is... if they were to put an engine with actual torque, like the Ecodiesel or a V8, and pair it with an actual overdrive gear that doesn't spin 4000 rpm at 80mph out of necessity, these Jeeps could pull mid 20's MPG no problem. Cause they wouldn't be opening the throttle body completely and sending the injectors into max duty cycle just to pass someone or speed up a little. Or start at anything but snail's pace. These underpowered/small engines can never be efficient in big, heavy, unaerodynamic vehicles no matter how complicated you make them.

It absolutely is! I have 22,000 on my 2019 2.0L right now and have had no issues! Plenty of power, great fuel economy, no complaints so far. -Zach

what size rear is in it that u are running 35`s ?

But if you get on the JL Jeep Forums and read the horror stories of the 2.0 Turbo Hybrid it’s probably not a good idea for longevity 👍

@@sticrzy123 I saw when introduced they had some water issues with the hybrid part. Just rented another one in Denver, NP. The one we rented a year ago, cut out with no power and we had to re start it a couple of times. We did go through some streams and puddles. I put 30k miles on a Stelvio AWD with the 2.0L T, NP. That thing was fantastic.

I don’t know about that where did you see that at?

Exactly! The equipment is already there.... Let's see what a tune does...

I have a 93 octane tune on mine. Superchips shows their dyno numbers. Peak to peak gains of 20whp/25wtq, with max gains at 60hp/95lbs-ft tq across the powerband. My mpg went way down because I race away from annoying city traffic during my daily commute. Night and day noticeable difference (once you power through the turbo lag).

Car and driver did it and said there was hardly any diff, like .2 seconds.

True but if you know what torque and hp curves look like you should be able to instantly tell which one is torque and which one is hp

I owned a 2.0L 2-Door and it was great! No problems whatsoever with the engine, had plenty of power and was a lot faster than you'd expect from a Jeep! -Zach

@extremeterrain Oh yeah, once you get into the powerband to get passed the turbo lag it's a rocket. I have fun with it at the expense of my MPGs. Looking at some other upgrades to compliment the tune, i.e. intake, exhaust, Mishimoto charge pipe. Maybe a BOV as I've heard the factory one doesn't hold pressure well 🤔

Thanks for watching! -Zach

When is it coming out? Or is it coming out? :)

@@user-cj7dv2kc6d it’s out now. Seen them at dealers. $45k for base model before tax fees etc.

Too bad that tune is a one-off.

arturopellerano exactly.. 4 door vs. 4 door..

Maybe not when you have to pay for premium fuel on the turbo!

My manual clearly states 87 octane is sufficient for the 2.0 turbo.

Thereby voiding your warranty.

6 bucks per tank....

Yes

I run 87 no prob 👍.

You should always use the highest conventional octane available with a tubro gas engine if you care about the motor surviving.

My owners manual says 87 minimum required, 91 recommended. We use 91 though because we feel the difference is worth it Our.. Two door sport avg 25 to28 mpg. Our new 3.6 Rubicon 19 to 20 mpg best

@@IowaKLR650 well u have very different axles and gear ratios between a sport and ruicon. So the engine change didnt cause all of the drop in mpg. U should have listed all that. Misleading post.

I’ve ran a few tanks of 87 octane in my 2.0 but mostly use 93 octane only because our SAMs Club sells it for what most stations sell 89 octane. I did see a couple mpgs better (26 mpgs) on 89 or 93 fuel where I saw 22-24 mpg when running 87 octane. When doing the math for the cost difference it’s basically a wash between the two but I prefer the higher octane and mpgs.

USA made including the 2.0L. The 2.0L is a Fiat design though.

2.0 is made in Trenton Michigan and JL is assembled in Toledo Ohio

The 3.6 is also made in Trenton Michigan, but yes the 3.6 is also made in saltillo Mexico as well they are sister plants and identical. However Trenton is about for minutes from Toledo where the jeep is assembled making them the larger supplier of the 3.6

@Captain Caveman wow thanks for the info. Apparently my co workers aren't as knowledgeable as they think they are lol

@Captain Caveman that makes sense I just started working there about a year ago

The eco diesel is decent but they could have made it better. Yeah 420 lb ft of torque is nice on a V6 diesel. But It had emission control software issues. (2014-2016)they significantly re worked that 3.0l V6 and now produces 260 horse and 480 torque is it really that much better then the hurricane 2.0l turbo or V6 Pentastar. Sure you're getting almost 200 more lbs of torque then the V6 and 85 lbs of torque more then the turbo 4 banger. And all roughly get the same mpg. Why would you need that for trail jeep

We can certainly try if we get our hands on both when they hit the dealers! -Zach

Thanks for watching! -Zach

I think people say the 3.6 V6 is more reliable. Only because it has been around. There nothing that says the turbo is unreliable, but there is no data or time behind it. It could be a very reliable engine. Only time will tell. Personally I am going with the V6. One, because its cheaper. Two, because someone brought up the point about the battery and crossing a stream, not sure how well the waterproofing is for the battery that powers the eTorque. Three, because parts should be cheaper for the V6 and maintenance is known for it already. I am not a technician, and will need to outsource any repairs, so I want to get an engine that people already know how to work on.

I really liked my 2.0L honestly! Owned one for almost 4 years and had 0 issues whatsoever. -Zach

James Pettifer yeah. Not sure what people are doing to pull 3k rpms off road. I would say the 2.0 is good for a DD. But off-road you will want that low end torque

@@chgilpin I climb a steep hills on my way home starting at 30 mph around a curve and climb up, cresting at 50-55 mph and the other hill I hit the curve at the bottom at around 55-60 mph and crest at 65 mph. I wonder which one is going to be better?

Jay Town Junkyard Files i do a lot of rock crawling and slower off-road. Don’t think I have ever hit 50 in the dirt. That is why I think the 2.0 would be a better daily driver. But for off-road I would want the torque at lower RPM

Not true .... I've taken my 2L to Moab and did amazing. The gearing of the 8 speed is tuned to make best use of the torque. When in 4 low and drive it defaults 2nd. When hung up on a very gnarly obstacle all I did was shift to first and it takes off like it was nothing. Everyone who was there was very impressed with how it just applies the torque to the ground.

It looks like they didn't dyno these in the lower RPM range. Here's a comparison starting at 1000 RPM: www.jlwranglerforums.com/forum/threads/jeep-jl-wrangler-3-6l-vs-2-0t-hp-tq-curve-comparison-dyno-chart.8742/ At about 1500 RPM, the 2.0 & 3.6 have the same torque.

The 3.6L Pentastar is a great engine, especially when paired with the new 8-speed transmission in these JLs! If you haven't tried driving the new 2.0L though I would highly recommend it. The amount of low-end torque that you get right away is super impressive and the gas mileage is great too! -Zach

Yeah I’m sure once that turbo kicks in it’s like a rocket

I think it will be 2021 before the total EV is out. Tesla sales have sped things up.

Don't hold your breath for torque numbers like Tesla motors. The PEHV Wrangler is most likely to be a powersplit architecture like many other PEHV's, and cap out at 15-25 miles pure electric.

Not true. They have the same towing capacity and everyone with the turbo say it feels great even when towing near max 3500 lbs.

More fake news. Two myths about the 2.0: 1) You must run premium fuel 2) It has reduced towing capacity

Buy a truck if you want to tow!

My 2.0t does not have e-torque system, and the torque difference is noticeably higher than the 3.6. Even more so after I added a 93 octane tune.

Haven't gotten our hands on one yet, sadly! -Zach

They likely didn't dyno the lower RPM range, due to not being able to keep the transmissions from downshifting. Here is an actual comparison from 1000 RPM & up: www.jlwranglerforums.com/forum/threads/jeep-jl-wrangler-3-6l-vs-2-0t-hp-tq-curve-comparison-dyno-chart.8742/ At about 1500 RPM, the 2.0 & 3.6 have the same torque.

Not sure yet! Should be able to handle a Stage 1 tune just fine, but until companies start testing we won't really know. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before tunes start being released. -Zach

No 4 cyl turbo

But 3.6 turbo would be better..... 😁

Our Sahara is an automatic! -Zach

its 8 speed

The 2.0L Wrangler in this video was *not* tuned, totally stock! Tuners have been coming out for them slowly, so make sure to keep an eye out for videos! -Zach

Driving a smaller forced induction engine like the 2.0L compared to the old 4.0L or 3.6L are two totally different animals and it definitely takes a little getting used to. I've been daily driving the 2.0L for the past year or so and really enjoy it! Gets up to 80 mph on the highway *way too fast* considering its a Jeep. 😂 Once you learn how to ease into the throttle and control the power delivery its a hoot to drive, but I definitely understand those who prefer larger displacement NA engines. -Zach

RIPP supercharger. Much cheaper than a 6.4 swap and similar numbers at the wheels to the 6.4L. And that's on the JK 3.6L, which makes less power stock than this new 3.6L. Watch some of RIPP's RU-vid videos. On an otherwise stock 6spd JK Wrangler, they got over 360whp. On the automatics, it's around 317whp or so.

My '21 2.0t isn't a mild hybrid. Straight gas

Anyone know if this is true?

that's a turbo, there are no belts for the forced induction. Perhaps you heard smth about alternatore switch off on high output demands...

Anyone?

@@avolkoff83 the 2.0 has a 48volt hybrid system that runs off a belt drive to help keep the jeep from feeling laggy from the turbo

@@obsessivehobbies5464 thanks

Also cost 10k more and need a really long extension cord.

Tune only adds fuel. Its na...u cant magically get more air with a tune.

For a brick on wheels, 270 is pretty damn nice. 😂 Plenty of people have been doing HEMI or LS swaps on JLs and Gladiators recently, but I *highly* doubt FCA will put out a V8 option from the factory any time soon. -Zach

TC Downhill not really. That turbo motor will pick up an easy 30-50hp once a tuner comes out for it. Way easier to pick up hp on a turbo motor vs a NA

Tim Pack But I can just put a turbo to the non turbo motor to add more power than the 4 cylinder bro. I’m just saying I have more thing to play with with the non turbo than I do with the 4 cylinder turbo.

@@TCENDURO $300 to $500 for a tuner vs $3,000 to $5,000 to add a turbo? Yes it will make more power but I would rather spend that on suspension and tires.

FUHL I agree. I rather do suspension first than motor work. But as we all know I wanna make sure I’m putting out enough power to rotate those tires, gears, and possibly a whole new drive train.

@@TCENDURO torque turns tires...wait for the diesel. Brand new jeeps and u r talking about engine swaps? Shit just go buy an old one then.

We only had a two-door turbo and a four-door V6 at the time, that's why! Honestly the major difference between these two Wranglers that would cause some sort of added variables on the dyno would be driveshaft length. I wouldn't call the test "useless" just because of that. -Zach