WTF - 368 HP 2.0L Turbo I4 JL Wrangler??
- Thread starter wayoflife
- Start date
DWiggles
Caught the Bug
While this is true, they also DO NOT have ANY existing powerband below 4k rpm... how is that "low end"? How is any of this comparable to what is needed to wheel a jeep? It isn't. Simple fact is, at LOW rpm, there is no replacement for displacement. Period.
sent from SPACE!
DZZ Build thread
JK_Dave
Caught the Bug
Personally, I'd like to see the turbo variant come with different tuning maps. One for your normal 2wd (street) driving and another for 4wd. There's no reason the engineers couldn't have the computer switch maps based on the transfer case setting, which could alter the timing and fuel/air ratios to shift the power curve down under the 3K rpm mark. Granted you're working within the confines of the physical turbo compressor size, but you might be able to beef up the torque curve down low with just some tuning changes. With a twin scroll turbo, this could be even better.
If anyone gets more info on which turbo is going to be used, then we would know better how the power curve will look.
If anyone gets more info on which turbo is going to be used, then we would know better how the power curve will look.
NevadaZielmeister
Caught the Bug
Or even a variable pitch fin turbo, which can really help also.
Yes, it is interesting and good to see engineers looking at the Jeep. I just hope that the engineers are looking to improve the Jeep and not placate the government/mall crawler crowd.
Killroywashere
New member
My main concerns with a turbo in an off-road vehicle are:
1. Debris in the turbo (I killed my STI turbo with sand) turbos can be fragile when it comes to any sort of debris getting into the unit itself (remember it's forcing air into your engine.. so it can literally suck more than standard air induction.
2. High compression engines need higher octane fuels and when wheeling out in some more desolate areas that could b hard to find or very expensive. Big Bend in Texas is known for outrageous fuel prices (5-6 dollars for regular)
3. Low displacement engines are boggy before that turbo kicks in and most wheeling isn't done at 3000 RPMs and up. This can be fixed with smaller turbos (my 135i BMW had a small turbo which meant it had a pretty linear power band)
4. Torque.. (though my STI and BMW torque was equal to HP rating )
1. Debris in the turbo (I killed my STI turbo with sand) turbos can be fragile when it comes to any sort of debris getting into the unit itself (remember it's forcing air into your engine.. so it can literally suck more than standard air induction.
2. High compression engines need higher octane fuels and when wheeling out in some more desolate areas that could b hard to find or very expensive. Big Bend in Texas is known for outrageous fuel prices (5-6 dollars for regular)
3. Low displacement engines are boggy before that turbo kicks in and most wheeling isn't done at 3000 RPMs and up. This can be fixed with smaller turbos (my 135i BMW had a small turbo which meant it had a pretty linear power band)
4. Torque.. (though my STI and BMW torque was equal to HP rating )
notnalc68
That dude from Mississippi
TrailHunter
Hooked
I fear that’s exactly what’s going to happen...
Another serious problem is what if you are single, or not Secure in a relationship... and you pick up a Hot Chick in a 4 banger Jeep... Getting to first base will be a Huge challenge without some serious skills .... Lol... Just kidding (not really) HaHa.
Sent from my iPhone using WAYALIFE mobile app
notnalc68
That dude from Mississippi
TrailHunter
Hooked
sm31
Active Member
My observations...
1) the 368 value seems too high... 300-ish seems more believable. At 300 hp, 300 ft/lbs of torque before 2500 rpms would not be surprising.
2) When people turbo small displacement motors, they are usually looking for big power at higher revs. If the priority is on low end response then results can be surprising. I've driven turbos with less lag than most of the "throttle by wire" vehicles I've tested. Coupled with a good auto tranny and it could be a strong performer in the trail conditions 99.99% of us will ever see.
1) the 368 value seems too high... 300-ish seems more believable. At 300 hp, 300 ft/lbs of torque before 2500 rpms would not be surprising.
2) When people turbo small displacement motors, they are usually looking for big power at higher revs. If the priority is on low end response then results can be surprising. I've driven turbos with less lag than most of the "throttle by wire" vehicles I've tested. Coupled with a good auto tranny and it could be a strong performer in the trail conditions 99.99% of us will ever see.
BaddestCross
Active Member
Lol. You need to spend some time in the desert here in SoCal. I belong to an off road recovery group on Facebook that sees some people doing some really stupid shit.
--
Build Thread - Adventures of Fiona - https://wayalife.com/showthread.php?t=47407
BaddestCross
Active Member
^^^^ This. A friend of mine had his Mustang with the Ecoboost motor shoot a rod though the block twice in one year. He's looking into trading it in for a Challenger now.
--
Build Thread - Adventures of Fiona - https://wayalife.com/showthread.php?t=47407
I'm guessing this is a typo somewhere down the line as the Hurricane 4 Engine is already in Alfa Romeo's version and it's about 100 less horsepower.
As for the never a 4 banger crowd and why this engine will perform well is around 300 lbs of torque and a flat torque curve from 2250-4500 rpm.
https://www.allpar.com/mopar/fours/hurricane.html
As for the never a 4 banger crowd and why this engine will perform well is around 300 lbs of torque and a flat torque curve from 2250-4500 rpm.
https://www.allpar.com/mopar/fours/hurricane.html
Kilroy
New member
Turbo motors are lower compression the NA motors btw. The bigger issue on turbo is heat none of the above apples to new turbo engines. And we are talking mopar not merc BMW or jap
Sent from my iPhone using WAYALIFE mobile app
sm31
Active Member
Mopar's history with turbo's is not as bad as people seem to think... especially when benchmarked against their own N/A motors.
Hmmm, I guess reading is fundamental, further down in the Allpar article, it indeed lists a 368hp version.
Ddays
Hooked
I don't mean to perpetuate a back and forth because I'm not really a turbo proponent, but if you compare the torque and HP curves - the EB betters the V8. Now no doubt that the engineers could
tune the V8 to blow the doors off the turbo, but that's another subject.
Metalmasher
New member
That will help push all the extra weight!
:beer::beer:
:beer::beer:
BobNH
Member
This makes the most sense. Those would be the perfect vehicles, and could be made more standard which would drive up their usage and make a bigger dent in the fleet goal.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk