Bummer that the engines still suck - Page 2 - JeepForum.com
 3Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #16 of 28 Old 10-19-2021, 09:37 PM
JonMopar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Moncton
Posts: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdCase View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueCopper View Post
It's a incredibly weak engine to put in a 4,500 - 5,200 lb SUV -- very odd choice.
It may surprising to some how well the V6 performs real world, especially those enamored by engine numbers then overlooking significant things like gearing. The 4.7s were hampered by weak transmissions and poor gearing, the recent 8 speed V6s put them to shame. Its kinda odd that you missed that.

I never thought the 4.7 delivered usable torque, disappointing. Even the much better 5.7 has week knees, but that 8 speed makes up for it.
Although anything is open for debate, the 4.7 HO WJs with the 545RFE (5spd version of the 4spd 45FRE) was pretty decent for the time. They were quick too (0-60 low 7s). Everything seems old fashioned compared to the current transmissions though


98 Laredo ZJ 4L -3.73, 5.9 "ultrastar" rims, slotted brakes, Dynomax turbo, CAI.
JonMopar is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17 of 28 Old 10-20-2021, 10:21 AM
Matt_H
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonMopar View Post
Although anything is open for debate, the 4.7 HO WJs with the 545RFE (5spd version of the 4spd 45FRE) was pretty decent for the time. They were quick too (0-60 low 7s). Everything seems old fashioned compared to the current transmissions though

Yeah. On a tangent itís why I donít see the love affair with old even muscle cars. Todayís tech just outpaces it in regular vehicles. Let alone the comfort, noise, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Matt_H is offline  
post #18 of 28 Old 10-21-2021, 07:20 AM
WK2Overland4X4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 856
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_H View Post
Yeah. On a tangent itís why I donít see the love affair with old even muscle cars. Todayís tech just outpaces it in regular vehicles. Let alone the comfort, noise, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You are missing one sense, smell. Nothing like getting into a 50 year old car, smells like grandma's house. Or, my house, it is 101 years old now.

2021 Summit L 4X4 Bright White/Steel Gray, 3.6 , ProTech IV, Lux Tech V.
WK2Overland4X4 is offline  
 
post #19 of 28 Old 10-21-2021, 01:37 PM
JonMopar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Moncton
Posts: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_H View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonMopar View Post
Although anything is open for debate, the 4.7 HO WJs with the 545RFE (5spd version of the 4spd 45FRE) was pretty decent for the time. They were quick too (0-60 low 7s). Everything seems old fashioned compared to the current transmissions though

Yeah. On a tangent it’s why I don’t see the love affair with old even muscle cars. Today’s tech just outpaces it in regular vehicles. Let alone the comfort, noise, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Everyone has a different idea of fun, And I totally respect that. I know a guy that has a Tesla and thinks it’s the cat’s Pyjamas. On the other hand I think that you haven’t had fun until you’ve had a loud rumbling car that’s so powerful, that you can barely handle it… Or an old jeep that before you started it (especially if you were in the middle of nowhere) you say a little prayer that’ll fire up .

That’s why some people like action movies, while others think they’re too noisy and look for the mute button.

It’s a different kind of thrill. I personally like to watch my action movies cranked up lol

98 Laredo ZJ 4L -3.73, 5.9 "ultrastar" rims, slotted brakes, Dynomax turbo, CAI.
JonMopar is offline  
post #20 of 28 Old 10-21-2021, 01:46 PM
WK2Overland4X4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 856
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonMopar View Post
Everyone has a different idea of fun, And I totally respect that. I know a guy that has a Tesla and thinks itís the catís Pyjamas. On the other hand I think that you havenít had fun until youíve had a loud rumbling car thatís so powerful, that you can barely handle itÖ Or an old jeep that before you started it (especially if you were in the middle of nowhere) you say a little prayer thatíll fire up .

Thatís why some people like action movies, while others think theyíre too noisy and look for the mute button.

Itís a different kind of thrill. I personally like to watch my action movies cranked up lol
My son in law got a Tesla Model 3 Performance, it is by far the quickest thing that anyone I have ever know has owned. YOu just can't compare the power to anything that isn't over 600hp and AWD.
And yeah, I get the basic jeep thing as well, like my buddy using vice grips and a screwdriver as his clutch lever to get home. And I do love old stuff, we had a 1967 El Camino in the family from 1997 until last year. And I just kept wanting to modernize the driving experience. I did leave it looking old school, with 14" wheels and everything, but I finally moved on. The funds from it help to get this Summit L after passing through a 2012 Overland.

2021 Summit L 4X4 Bright White/Steel Gray, 3.6 , ProTech IV, Lux Tech V.
WK2Overland4X4 is offline  
post #21 of 28 Old 10-21-2021, 04:04 PM
JonMopar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Moncton
Posts: 539
It’s true! The guy I know has the same tesla that you’re speaking of. It pulls like a slingshot ride at the carnival. It’s wild. But it’s just weird without all the noise and drama hahaha. I’m a little spoiled though, I’ve been in 800+ hp gas burning monsters. I guess I just associate the sound with the experience. For people that didn’t grow up with that or have an attachment to it, it might not mean much to them though, so I get how it’s all relative.

I get the comfort part of the equation. I’ve always had a comfy / plush daily.

98 Laredo ZJ 4L -3.73, 5.9 "ultrastar" rims, slotted brakes, Dynomax turbo, CAI.
JonMopar is offline  
post #22 of 28 Old 10-21-2021, 10:30 PM Thread Starter
BlueCopper
Registered User
 
BlueCopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Tucson
Posts: 20
That 545RFE transmission was neat wasn't it? I think it had six total speeds or ratios, but it only used five of them for upshifts, and one was just for downshifts. It reminds me of those weird manual shifters that Corvettes had for many years, where you couldn't shift into any arbitrary gear from any arbitrary gear, but had to skip one or two in either up or downshifting – I forget the details.

The Teslas are crazy fast, but some of their decisions are just awful. The rear doors on the Model 3 can't be opened without electricity and computers – there's no mechanical door latch mechanism. Rear passengers cannot get out if power fails (or if a chip or software fails). That's unforgivably bad, rules out the car. Embracing technology does not imply not having simple, reliable implementations of things like door latches. There's also no instrument panel on the Model 3 – drivers have to constantly look to their right at the center tablet screen. Terrible ergonomics. Tactile controls are far better for human hands than harsh touchscreens, and there's no reason to eliminate the instrument panel.

Back to the Jeep, has there been any buzz from Jeep about a turbo six? Like a turbo version of the 3.6L Pentastar, or maybe the 3.2L version that they use on the Cherokee. A turbo version on either would be a big upgrade over the regular 3.6L, and a twin-turbo would be a beast. Jeep has a huge hole in their powertrains, and 260 lb-ft of torque is severely inadequate on a premium SUV, especially one as huge and overweight as the new GC. I'm not even talking about the L – the regular two-row is huge, well over 190 inches long and starting at 4,500 lbs, and getting well over 5,000 lbs. I miss the compact and nimble XJ Cherokee and the first couple of Grand Cherokees. The XJ was incredible for its size being under 170 inches long.
BlueCopper is offline  
post #23 of 28 Old 10-21-2021, 11:44 PM
ColdCase
My Reality Check Bounced
 
ColdCase's Avatar
2011 WK 
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 18,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueCopper View Post
That 545RFE transmission was neat wasn't it? I think it had six total speeds or ratios, but it only used five of them for upshifts, and one was just for downshifts.
The 545RFE was used in the Grand Cherokee through 2013. Then the ZF 8 speed since 2014. I have both. For fun to drive, the 8 speed blows the 545RFE away big time.

I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory;
Current: 2011 Grand Cherokee Overland V8, 2009 Liberty Rocky Mt V6
Previous: 2000 Grand Cherokee Laredo I6, 1979 CJ7 I6 Quadratrac
ColdCase is offline  
post #24 of 28 Old 10-21-2021, 11:52 PM
ColdCase
My Reality Check Bounced
 
ColdCase's Avatar
2011 WK 
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 18,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueCopper View Post
Back to the Jeep, has there been any buzz from Jeep about a turbo six? Like a turbo version of the 3.6L Pentastar, or maybe the 3.2L version that they use on the Cherokee. A turbo version on either would be a big upgrade over the regular 3.6L, and a twin-turbo would be a beast.
You complain about $50k vehicles and you want twin turbos? Seem contradictory. The WK2 buyer wants a solid reliable vehicle. There is no market for a twin turbo when you can get the better performing STR8 for less money than twin turbos, or a supercharged Trackhawk for the ultimate. Why would they waste their development funds on the twin turbo dead horse? Leave the base WK2 alone for the majority of folks that just want a reliable transportation appliance with nasty weather capability. Want the inferior twin turbos, find another brand Twin turbos in a base WK2 is nonsense. And who would want turbos when superior supercharging is available for less money? That supercharged 4 in my SLK was very nice, much better than turbo setups on the street.

Jeep is heading toward electric vehicles, or the hybrid with the excellent turbo 4.

I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory;
Current: 2011 Grand Cherokee Overland V8, 2009 Liberty Rocky Mt V6
Previous: 2000 Grand Cherokee Laredo I6, 1979 CJ7 I6 Quadratrac
ColdCase is offline  
post #25 of 28 Old 10-22-2021, 07:25 AM
WK2Overland4X4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 856
There was rumor that the 4Xe in the larger vehicles would be based off a 3 literish turbo straight 6. Still waiting.
And tech works, my Volvo S90 has it all similar to the 4Xe in power, but not in drivetrain. 2.0L 4cyl Supercharged AND Turbocharged (over 300HP), plus electric motor out back, combined 400hp and 472tq. 4700# car that gets 35-41MPG on long trips, I can go weeks at a time without using gas when driving local. PLUS, it turned 13.29 @ 104MPH in the ľ. Yep, I was the only guy with a Volvo there.
I love how the Jeep setup puts the motor in the torque converters location. So you still have the entire "normal" Jeep drivetrain, with the only difference being the wizardry behind generating the oomph.

2021 Summit L 4X4 Bright White/Steel Gray, 3.6 , ProTech IV, Lux Tech V.
WK2Overland4X4 is offline  
post #26 of 28 Old 10-22-2021, 12:09 PM
Danny Linguini
Registered User
 
Danny Linguini's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by WK2Overland4X4 View Post
After putting about 1,000 miles on my 2021 with 3.6, I do have one slight complaint. It is not as quiet as I feel it should be. I can hear an almost growl, hard to describe sound, anytime you are on the gas. Reminds me of the old exhaust leak sound from the A.I.R. tubes in the 1980s. I assume it is intake sound, but I thought the V6 would be quieter than the HEMIs, and it isn't even close. Otherwise, the driving is exactly like I expected compared to my previous HEMI vehicles, totally normal driving under all normal driving. When you need all it has, you notice there isn't as much there in reserve, and it needs to drop down many gears to get it. But, it is dang close, and overall much nicer than a 5/6 speed behind a HEMI. And running around gas mileage is 16.x and my 2012 Overland HEMI was considerably worse, like 13-14.
I did drive it from Pittsburgh area to Baltimore and back, and I forget the MPGs but I think it was 24+, maybe 26ish?
And the most simple solution to hilly roads (up and down constant accel/brake) is "Sport Mode", holds lower gears for up and down the hills helping both ways, if anything it holds gears too low, and revs are almost always over 3K, but I find it being almost good enough to resist hitting the paddles.
I just picked up a new Laredo X last night, and after just a test drive and the ride home, this is pretty much right in line with my initial thoughts. Engine seemed very quiet, but there was a hint of a growl when you get on it. I didnít think it was excessively noisy, but then weíre coming from a Mini Countryman, which was intentionally noisy. Normally Iíd probably have looked more seriously at the hemi, but this is primarily my wifeís commuter and grocery-getter, so the better economy is more desirable, and it really goes pretty well for what it is. And just to add, I was also pleasantly surprised at its handling. I expected it to be more boat like, but it actually drives like a much lighter vehicle. It isnít even a day old yet, but weíre both very happy with it.
Danny Linguini is offline  
post #27 of 28 Old 10-22-2021, 01:39 PM Thread Starter
BlueCopper
Registered User
 
BlueCopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Tucson
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdCase View Post
You complain about $50k vehicles and you want twin turbos? Seem contradictory. The WK2 buyer wants a solid reliable vehicle. There is no market for a twin turbo when you can get the better performing STR8 for less money than twin turbos, or a supercharged Trackhawk for the ultimate. Why would they waste their development funds on the twin turbo dead horse? Leave the base WK2 alone for the majority of folks that just want a reliable transportation appliance with nasty weather capability. Want the inferior twin turbos, find another brand [IMG class=inlineimg]/forum/images/JeepForum_2016/smilies/tango_face_smile.png[/IMG] Twin turbos in a base WK2 is nonsense. And who would want turbos when superior supercharging is available for less money? That supercharged 4 in my SLK was very nice, much better than turbo setups on the street.

Jeep is heading toward electric vehicles, or the hybrid with the excellent turbo 4.
What's the significance of the WK2 here? That's the old model now.

The big win with turbo sixes over a huge Hemi is fuel economy. The second win is usually low-end torque, when you compare say a Ford 3.5L twin turbo V6 to their modern Coyote 5.0L V8. The V6 hits its max torque much earlier/lower in the rev range (the max torque figure is the same for both, maybe 400 or 500 ft-lbs, but I forget).

The fuel economy gains seemed small or non-existent with the first generation Ecoboost type engines, but I think they improved in later generations.

The bottom line performance of Hemi GCs has always seemed off, for reasons I've never dug into. The 0-60 times have never been great on the regular 5.7L, or any other performance figure. The vehicle seems to be lethargic, where the power and torque ratings of the engine aren't translating to the expected performance. That's partly why the V6 seems okay to people – the Hemi sucks, so a V6 that approaches its bottom line performance looks good in comparison.

Jeep ruined the GC with the WK2, giving it an unusually weak V6 (compared to everyone else's V6es) and an unusually weak 5.7L V8 (compared to everyone else's V8s of comparable displacement). They're missing the sweet spots you can get with modern engines and transmission pairings – there isn't a good or great GC powertrain, no option to check. There's something off about the drivetrain, something that makes GCs slow, and makes the Hemi only slightly faster than the V6, nowhere near its proportionate power and torque advantage. The Ford turbo four-banger with a 10-speed tranny like the Bronco uses would probably make a GC faster – it would have a bit more power and a lot more torque, plus two more gears... But I'm not sure why GCs are so slow to begin with – it's like they're delivering 80% of the performance their engines should deliver, at least with the Hemi
BlueCopper is offline  
post #28 of 28 Old 10-22-2021, 02:06 PM
WK2Overland4X4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 856
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueCopper View Post
What's the significance of the WK2 here? That's the old model now.

The big win with turbo sixes over a huge Hemi is fuel economy. The second win is usually low-end torque, when you compare say a Ford 3.5L twin turbo V6 to their modern Coyote 5.0L V8. The V6 hits its max torque much earlier/lower in the rev range (the max torque figure is the same for both, maybe 400 or 500 ft-lbs, but I forget).

The fuel economy gains seemed small or non-existent with the first generation Ecoboost type engines, but I think they improved in later generations.

The bottom line performance of Hemi GCs has always seemed off, for reasons I've never dug into. The 0-60 times have never been great on the regular 5.7L, or any other performance figure. The vehicle seems to be lethargic, where the power and torque ratings of the engine aren't translating to the expected performance. That's partly why the V6 seems okay to people Ė the Hemi sucks, so a V6 that approaches its bottom line performance looks good in comparison.

Jeep ruined the GC with the WK2, giving it an unusually weak V6 (compared to everyone else's V6es) and an unusually weak 5.7L V8 (compared to everyone else's V8s of comparable displacement). They're missing the sweet spots you can get with modern engines and transmission pairings Ė there isn't a good or great GC powertrain, no option to check. There's something off about the drivetrain, something that makes GCs slow, and makes the Hemi only slightly faster than the V6, nowhere near its proportionate power and torque advantage. The Ford turbo four-banger with a 10-speed tranny like the Bronco uses would probably make a GC faster Ė it would have a bit more power and a lot more torque, plus two more gears... But I'm not sure why GCs are so slow to begin with Ė it's like they're delivering 80% of the performance their engines should deliver, at least with the Hemi
To sum it up, nowadays, people expect everything in a Jeep, not just something that looks like an SUV, it must actually be one as well.
So they are expensive, and to justify that expense, they are loaded with features. It all adds up to something heavier than the average comparably sized vehicle with much less equipment or capability. And while the 5.7 HEMI isn't class leading anymore, it is still a very, very capable engine.
Then the new JGCs are about 200 pounds lighter I think, with the new L weighing about the same as the previous WK2.
Can't compare either Bronco to any Grand Cherokee. The Sport is like a Cherokee, maybe more like a Compass, and the non-sport is like a Wrangler, but even heavier, they can be heavier than a F150 from what I read.

2021 Summit L 4X4 Bright White/Steel Gray, 3.6 , ProTech IV, Lux Tech V.
WK2Overland4X4 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.



Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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 On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome