Pics of the new Hurricane twin-turbo I-6 engine live at Stellpower

[onewhippedpuppy]

The day this mill is available is the day I trade my Gladiator for a new one. That engine will be loads of fun

Amen. The 3.6 is mediocre at best and a terrible match for the Gladiator. Only the corporate bean counters would pair a minivan V6 with no low end torque with an old school off road Jeep truck. It’s my least favorite thing about the JT.

I also agree that most of the wailing and gnashing of teeth is coming from folks who think forced induction is some sort of new technology witchcraft. This sort of stuff has been commonplace since the 1980s. I’ve owned and tuned more turbocharged cars than I can count.

Sponsored

 

[IslandFalconer]

Amen. The 3.6 is mediocre at best and a terrible match for the Gladiator. Only the corporate bean counters would pair a minivan V6 with no low end torque with an old school off road Jeep truck. It’s my least favorite thing about the JT.

I also agree that most of the wailing and gnashing of teeth is coming from folks who think forced induction is some sort of new technology witchcraft. This sort of stuff has been commonplace since the 1980s. I’ve owned and tuned more turbocharged cars than I can count.

I have a 3.0L i6 in my BMW X4M and that thing is insane fun. Forced induction and engine management systems today make turbocharging the way to go.

 

[Hootbro]

Amen. The 3.6 is mediocre at best and a terrible match for the Gladiator. Only the corporate bean counters would pair a minivan V6 with no low end torque with an old school off road Jeep truck. It’s my least favorite thing about the JT.

I also agree that most of the wailing and gnashing of teeth is coming from folks who think forced induction is some sort of new technology witchcraft. This sort of stuff has been commonplace since the 1980s. I’ve owned and tuned more turbocharged cars than I can count.

At either the Wrangler JL or Gladiator JT launch, what other engine did FCA have that could have realistically gone into either in place of the 3.6L Pentastar as a base engine?

 

[The Duck of Earl]

At either the Wrangler JL or Gladiator JT launch, what other engine did FCA have that could have realistically gone into either in place of the 3.6L Pentastar as a base engine?

As a base engine the 3.6 is fine. Once you start optioning up a Rubi, Mojave, or even Max Tow, it is only best described as serviceable, but otherwise a bit of a disappointment particularly when it comes to the power to weight ratio and general overall value. At launch the 5.7 would have made perfect sense as a reasonable upgrade option, even if it was the GC version and not the one from the RAM 1500.

 

[Hootbro]

As a base engine the 3.6 is fine. Once you start optioning up a Rubi, Mojave, or even Max Tow, it is only best described as serviceable, but otherwise a bit of a disappointment particularly when it comes to the power to weight ratio and general overall value. At launch the 5.7 would have made perfect sense as a reasonable upgrade option, even if it was the GC version and not the one from the RAM 1500.

I guess I am old then. Just remember my 1988 Dodge Dakota 4x4 with the 3 Speed Auto, 3.9L V6 and the whopping 125HP it put out and roughly the same weight. 285HP in my Gladiator and the 8 speed in it runs like a rocket ship.

I can see the "there always could be more" belief though.

 

[just_another_guy]

I guess I am old then. Just remember my 1988 Dodge Dakota 4x4 with the 3 Speed Auto, 3.9L V6 and the whopping 125HP it put out and roughly the same weight. 285HP in my Gladiator and the 8 speed in it runs like a rocket ship.

I can see the "there always could be more" belief though.

It's weird that people want a truck to be quick. The 3.6 paired with the 8 speed feels great to me, and if I want to go fast I have a car for that.

 

[The Duck of Earl]

It's weird that people want a truck to be quick. The 3.6 paired with the 8 speed feels great to me, and if I want to go fast I have a car for that.

To me its the stump pulling low end torque off idle and at lower rpms that is missing for the JL and particularly the JT with the Pentastar. I think all BOF trucks/SUVS should have more, and the move to higher rev-ing v6s lost this.

HP is relative to the feel of the vehicle (as the diesel numbers vs performance show). I'd rather have the old 5.2 Magnum that is in my (currently inoperable) 1500 than the Pentastar. That motor 'only' had 230 hp @ 4,400 rpm but Torque was 300 lb-ft @ 3,200 rpm. So, while the 5.2 1500 would likely not win a 0-60 pull against a 3.6 JT, it would certainly feel stronger getting there (and even that is not a great comparison, as I am sure if the 5.2 was paired with the 8 speed it would be a different story even without modernizing the 20+ year old engine design).

 

[just_another_guy]

To me its the stump pulling low end torque off idle and at lower rpms that is missing for the JL and particularly the JT with the Pentastar. I think all BOF trucks/SUVS should have more, and the move to higher rev-ing v6s lost this.

HP is relative to the feel of the vehicle (as the diesel numbers vs performance show). I'd rather have the old 5.2 Magnum that is in my (currently inoperable) 1500 than the Pentastar. That motor 'only' had 230 hp @ 4,400 rpm but Torque was 300 lb-ft @ 3,200 rpm. So, while the 5.2 1500 would likely not win a 0-60 pull against a 3.6 JT, it would certainly feel stronger getting there (and even that is not a great comparison, as I am sure if the 5.2 was paired with the 8 speed it would be a different story even without modernizing the 20+ year old engine design).

I don't mind letting the v6 rev out once in a while when I need the power, but it seems to bother a lot of people. Can't deny that low end torque feels good on big displacement/long stroke motors though.

 

[onewhippedpuppy]

I guess I am old then. Just remember my 1988 Dodge Dakota 4x4 with the 3 Speed Auto, 3.9L V6 and the whopping 125HP it put out and roughly the same weight. 285HP in my Gladiator and the 8 speed in it runs like a rocket ship.

I can see the "there always could be more" belief though.

We live in a world where many economy sedans have over 300 HP. Having under that in a $50k+ truck is laughable. As others have noted, the character of the Pentastar is also terrible for a truck. An engine that makes peak torque in the upper half of the rev range is about the worst choice for hauling, towing, rock crawling, etc. I’ve driven the turbo 4-cylinder JL and even found it preferable to the V6, but you can’t get the 6MT.

Let’s be real, Jeep gives us this rubbish motor because they can. Now that the Bronco exists with better base and engine options, we’ll see if Jeep ups their game with something like this turbo inline six.

 

[Hootbro]

Having under that in a $50k+ truck is laughable. As others have noted, the character of the Pentastar is also terrible for a truck. An engine that makes peak torque in the upper half of the rev range is about the worst choice for hauling, towing, rock crawling, etc.

So why did you buy one if you find it that crippling?

 

[onewhippedpuppy]

So why did you buy one if you find it that crippling?

I’m part of the problem, I like everything else enough to compensate for the crap motor.

 

[Sandevino]

The 3.6 is the result of corporate bean counting in action. I gave it a shot and found it to be a bit too needy with a drinking problem.

I dropped it like an ex-girlfriend and picked up its oil burning sister. No complaints.

 

[onewhippedpuppy]

The diesel with the 6MT would be bad ass.

 

[bd100]

The 3.6 has a wide and flat torque curve. Lots of torque at low RPMs, for its given size. But it could be larger, for more torque. But the government doesn't want it to be larger. So now they have to come up with a very complicated and expensive alternative. Here we are.

 

[rharr]

1000hp, interesting....

https://www.motortrend.com/events/direct-connection-hurricane-i6-twin-turbo-crate-engines

Sponsored