If Wrangler and Gladiator are the same from the cab forward ......?

[4-Low]

You guys don't remember this being hashed out back in 2020? From a CNET interview with Jeep:

"While the Jeep Gladiator and Wrangler share more than a few parts, one thing they won't be sharing is the Wrangler's four-cylinder turbocharged gas engine.

Jeep will not offer its 2.0-liter I4 turbo engine in the Gladiator, The Drive reports. A Fiat Chrysler spokesperson told The Drive that "the 3.6-liter [V6] engine can handle the temperatures seen while towing," intimating that the Wrangler's four-pot might not be able to tow and haul with the best of 'em."

So if they couldn't make the 2.0T Hurricane work due to SAE J2807 targets, what makes you think the 3.0T Hurricane would work?? This isn't rocket science.

And another point is the fitment, as is already being discussed in this thread. Even in Ram/Wagoneer full size platforms the 3.0T is so long that you cannot access some parts on the rear of the engine because they are mashed against the firewall. I've already seen some of these engines being dropped out of the vehicle to complete certain repairs because of it. So how is the tiny, cramped engine bay of the Wrangler/Gladiator going to be any better? I don't think it will physically fit and pass crash test standards, let alone repair standards.

You can file the 5.7L, 6.4L, and 3.0T into the "not happening for Gladiator" folder.

Now, what PROBABLY will happen is that the next gen replacements due out in 24-28 months will be designed specifically for the turbo engines and hybrid variants, because they will sell them into the late 2030s and they have to future-proof them. So I'd expect larger engine bays and better cooling packages for the next gen Wrangler and Gladiator.

Sponsored

 

[Mr Miami]

You guys don't remember this being hashed out back in 2020? From a CNET interview with Jeep:

"While the Jeep Gladiator and Wrangler share more than a few parts, one thing they won't be sharing is the Wrangler's four-cylinder turbocharged gas engine.

Jeep will not offer its 2.0-liter I4 turbo engine in the Gladiator, The Drive reports. A Fiat Chrysler spokesperson told The Drive that "the 3.6-liter [V6] engine can handle the temperatures seen while towing," intimating that the Wrangler's four-pot might not be able to tow and haul with the best of 'em."

So if they couldn't make the 2.0T Hurricane work due to SAE J2807 targets, what makes you think the 3.0T Hurricane would work?? This isn't rocket science.

And another point is the fitment, as is already being discussed in this thread. Even in Ram/Wagoneer full size platforms the 3.0T is so long that you cannot access some parts on the rear of the engine because they are mashed against the firewall. I've already seen some of these engines being dropped out of the vehicle to complete certain repairs because of it. So how is the tiny, cramped engine bay of the Wrangler/Gladiator going to be any better? I don't think it will physically fit and pass crash test standards, let alone repair standards.

You can file the 5.7L, 6.4L, and 3.0T into the "not happening for Gladiator" folder.

Now, what PROBABLY will happen is that the next gen replacements due out in 24-28 months will be designed specifically for the turbo engines and hybrid variants, because they will sell them into the late 2030s and they have to future-proof them. So I'd expect larger engine bays and better cooling packages for the next gen Wrangler and Gladiator.

I agree with you about the difficulty of squeezing the V8 into the Gladiator.

I'm not the design engineer here, but my questions/perceptions were when starting this thread and seeing all the earlier debate was what was so difficult about putting a V8 into a Gladiator since the Wrangler has it and even though the much smaller CJ7 used to have a 304 V8 in it (and I drove one a lot), what was so difficult about putting something like that into a much larger vehicle? There have been many responses and now (I think) I understand the issues.

Regarding the future, I cannot believe, as you allude to, that the new platform will not accommodate the 2.0, the straight 6, and whatever else they have planned: both Wrangler and Gladiator. It would only make sense.

The issue regarding the "looks" as I earlier mentioned is moot. Add an inch or two here and there and keep the general integrity of the Jeep look will suffice. Think about what they did to the YJ and later how they bastardized the TJ to make it more "modern" in the next revision. It works and is still a Jeep.

Things will continue to evolve for whatever reason, whether we like it or not.

 

[Gvsukids]

You guys don't remember this being hashed out back in 2020?

Some members weren't around, and others won't search.

 

[MPMB]

Also, you can't really compare old V8 swaps to V8 swaps of today.

Take a look at the engine bay of anything pre-1980 and it's pretty basic. All the "improvements" have filled the engine bay with hoses, wires, sensors, plastic, etc., and made it much more cramped.

 

[Viper501]

…

2. Crash crumple zones & restoration engineering
3. Maintenance
4. Replacement costs; warranty/out of warranty (see: mid 2000's Audi S4 4.2L V8 timing chain replacement cost)
5. Efficient production

2 has been done already so it is not a viable reason.

3 and 4 are not issues since manufacturers do not care about the costs of post warranty repairs (check any Macan to see just *one* example). Warranty work is at book hours controlled by the manufacturer. Hence why most dealers aren’t thrilled by warranty book hours / work.

5. Meh. They mate up a Wrangler no problem so they have that issue resolved.

Cannibalization of Ram and upcoming Dakota sales are more likely reasons In my reading of tea leaves, chicken bones, and crystal ball.

 

[MPMB]

2 has been done already so it is not a viable reason.

3 and 4 are not issues since manufacturers do not care about the costs of post warranty repairs (check any Macan to see just *one* example). Warranty work is at book hours controlled by the manufacturer. Hence why most dealers aren’t thrilled by warranty book hours / work.

5. Meh. They mate up a Wrangler no problem so they have that issue resolved.

Cannibalization of Ram and upcoming Dakota sales are more likely reasons In my reading of tea leaves, chicken bones, and crystal ball.

Please show me where there's a 3.0TT Wrangler or Gladiator. That was what my post was referring to.

 

[Viper501]

@MPMB - I didn’t read it that way. Apologies.

It would be great if they would branch out a bit. There are lots of options out there that Jeep has not / will not consider for whatever reason. TT and S/C V6’s *can* be done well. Though unless they go hot V with the turbos it’s gonna have some width challenges.

 

[daveb]

Thank you Hugh.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

Thank you Hugh.

My pleasure - in agreement with Hurricane 6 thinking.

…waiting for the day Jeep put TT inline 6 power in the Gladiator.

Big demand for a 5.7L hemi V8 option in jeep home NA market, I get it. 100. It’s what ppl want. I hope it happens.

For the international markets, Jeep needs the Hurricane TT6. Gas (we call it petrol) is not cheap.

Gladiator will need a high torque at low revs/ high output/ high efficiency engine to be successful in ie this AU market.

The comp is stiff, w proven high performance diesels. Hurricane TT6 would allow Gladiator to hold its own and or …Outperform.

Sad to watch gladiator double cab platform get knee capped by Jeep!…offering an engine config, ie nat asp small v6, that has not been an accepted mainstream engine here since the late 90’s or very early Y2K’s.

 

[MPMB]

One last blow before we call Elmer's.

With added power come great irresponsibility.

People who tow will be all excited to push that envelope. It's a V8 (or HO 6)! It can tow over 7000# easily! A lot of travel trailers are under 8000# - built for the 1/2-ton full size market - that are 24'-34' long. That's a bad combination for the JT. And people will ignore the frontal area guidance Jeep includes for each model.

Don't run out and get that Solaire trailer quite yet when the "big engine" JT option drops.

Knowing that people are going to ignore towing numbers and guidelines, Jeep might just be considering that negative aspect as well, as more than a few idiots will try to sue Jeep for a "dangerous at any speed" vehicle; which will become a cost center for them, even when it's not Jeep's fault people are preternaturally habituated by today's society to absolve themselves of personal responsibility.

But don't take my word for it, here's an engineer's statement (emphasis mine):

Towing stability is a matter of physics that exists separately from legal limits and weight capacities. The primary danger associated with a disproportionately long trailer is trailer sway, where the trailer’s side-to-side movement can quickly become amplified and uncontrollable. This swaying is a result of the trailer’s length acting as a long lever against the tow vehicle’s rear axle, especially at higher speeds or in crosswinds.

A guideline relates the trailer’s length to the tow vehicle’s wheelbase to predict stability. One guideline suggests that a 110-inch tow vehicle wheelbase can safely manage a 20-foot trailer, with each additional four inches of wheelbase allowing for another foot of trailer length. While this is a guideline, not a law, exceeding the resulting length significantly increases the risk of the “tail wagging the dog” effect.

Proper weight distribution and the use of specialized hitches are employed to mitigate the leverage of a long trailer. Hitches with integrated sway control, such as friction or articulating systems, physically dampen the trailer’s lateral movement, making longer combinations more manageable. However, these devices only manage the symptoms, and they cannot completely overcome the instability caused by a trailer that is excessively long for the tow vehicle’s design.

How Long of a Trailer Can I Tow Legally and Safely? - Engineer Fix

However, since many live in the world of "If' and "They can just..." that's inconsiderate of real-life conditions, Jeep could kill two stones with one bird. Lengthen the front by 4-6", shift the rear axle rearward 4-6". Dump the under-bed full-size spare, and 8-12" of wheelbase that'll give another 2'-3' of trailer length by 'rule-of-thumb' guidelines. The front room would probably allow for the 3.0LTT. The rear axle movement will improve the rear overhang/breakover angle (and look more bobbed), and possibly make available a "long box" JT model... if anyone is looking for a few more inches in the bed.

eTrailer.com guide (JT = 137"):

Remember, a person is smart, people are dumb.

 

[Zachanadandy]

One last blow before we call Elmer's.

With added power come great irresponsibility.

People who tow will be all excited to push that envelope. It's a V8 (or HO 6)! It can tow over 7000# easily! A lot of travel trailers are under 8000# - built for the 1/2-ton full size market - that are 24'-34' long. That's a bad combination for the JT. And people will ignore the frontal area guidance Jeep includes for each model.

Don't run out and get that Solaire trailer quite yet when the "big engine" JT option drops.

Knowing that people are going to ignore towing numbers and guidelines, Jeep might just be considering that negative aspect as well, as more than a few idiots will try to sue Jeep for a "dangerous at any speed" vehicle; which will become a cost center for them, even when it's not Jeep's fault people are preternaturally habituated by today's society to absolve themselves of personal responsibility.

But don't take my word for it, here's an engineer's statement (emphasis mine):


How Long of a Trailer Can I Tow Legally and Safely? - Engineer Fix

However, since many live in the world of "If' and "They can just..." that's inconsiderate of real-life conditions, Jeep could kill two stones with one bird. Lengthen the front by 4-6", shift the rear axle rearward 4-6". Dump the under-bed full-size spare, and 8-12" of wheelbase that'll give another 2'-3' of trailer length by 'rule-of-thumb' guidelines. The front room would probably allow for the 3.0LTT. The rear axle movement will improve the rear overhang/breakover angle (and look more bobbed), and possibly make available a "long box" JT model... if anyone is looking for a few more inches in the bed.

eTrailer.com guide (JT = 137"):

Remember, a person is smart, people are dumb.

Wheelbase stretched to 150", who cares if the departure angle is improved the breakover would be atrocious. At that point the thing is useless off road with a turn radius of a school bus. Just buy a full sized truck as you aren't wheeling anything the Subarus don't in the JT limo.

 

[ChrisNLA]

Wheelbase stretched to 150", who cares if the departure angle is improved the breakover would be atrocious. At that point the thing is useless off road with a turn radius of a school bus. Just buy a full sized truck as you aren't wheeling anything the Subarus don't in the JT limo.

Once my needs turn into needing to drag travel trailers, I have my 'new truck' picked out...

 

[MPMB]

Wheelbase stretched to 150", who cares if the departure angle is improved the breakover would be atrocious. At that point the thing is useless off road with a turn radius of a school bus. Just buy a full sized truck as you aren't wheeling anything the Subarus don't in the JT limo.

Gee, if only one could figure out how to read and not be in such a hurry to prove to everyone their use case wrong and the only approved use case for a utility vehicle is his own. It's breathtaking amazing how fast you get there. Someday your speed won't outmatch your wisdom, but hopefully not.

Thanks for reminding me it's trash day.

 

[MPMB]

Once my needs turn into needing to drag travel trailers, I have my 'new truck' picked out...

That would be the smart ticket. However, idiots live among us.

 

[Zachanadandy]

Gee, if only one could figure out how to read and not be in such a hurry to prove to everyone their use case wrong and the only approved use case for a utility vehicle is his own. It's breathtaking amazing how fast you get there. Someday your speed won't outmatch your wisdom, but hopefully not.

Thanks for reminding me it's trash day.

Reading is fine (including your errant statement that breakover would be improved by lengthening the wheelbase). If it's a road only tow rig why not just buy a full size? You'd end up with the same interior space and solid axle compromises that make the Jeep good off road but the length of a full size making it no better off road. They exist already.

Sponsored