Jeep: give us a new power plant!

[OldButStillJeeping]

I don't know, but to compare a 1980's vintage Jeep to today's offering is kinda silly.
These modern engines produce more power and get better mpg than the old stuff. It's technology.
Today, Jeep offers the turbo 4 cylinder, the naturally aspirated 3.6, the diesel, the 4Xe, the 392, and soon a full electric.
Back in the 70's, 80's and even into the 90's Jeep basically thru whatever engine they could, backed by whatever transmission they could get for cheap. (Peugeot).
Jeep was a side stage bob with no money, but dedicated buyers.
Barely stayed alive.

The straight 4.0 six was excellent. In general, straight 6 powerplants are excellent. In gas or diesel.
But compared to today's tech, a V6 is a better and cheaper way.

Ever drive or own a 60's, 70's or 80's CJ? They're street legal tractors with little ground clearance and pathetic ergonomics.

I say all this respectfully. Jeep helped us win WWII. I'm old school, but not blind to advancements in technology.

I'd love a modern tech straight 6 in my JT. Keep it naturally aspirated.
V8's are cool too but I'd prefer torque over HP.

Tomorrow is going electric. Get your big bore gas while you can. It's almost over

Sponsored

 

[Jonny A]

Makes one wonder how TT drivers can even stand to drive with a fully loaded truck. Imagine only 650 HP and 1,500 lbs torque, with a light 40,000 lb empty TT up to 80,000 lbs loaded. Think about mountain passes. Weight to HP and torque are not even on my radar with my Pentastar JTR. Never recognized a problem. My JTR feels as confident as any vehicle I've owned. Damned... it tows better than our fleet 6.2 L F250s at work. Don't understand the detune in those engines!

 

[Alligatorgun]

I think the Pentastar is fine. I do wish you could get different factory gearing. I’d like 4.56 in my manual Mojave. 4.10 should be standard for every trim

 

[danielspivey]

I still can't get over the fact that my 1978 CJ-7 had much better power to weight than the current Pentastar Gladiator, and that power came on so much earlier in the power band - where it is usable. The 3.5 NA V6 in the 3rd Gen Tacoma gets the same critique as the Pentastar, as do most other engines in the mid-size truck segment

2021 Gladiator with 3.6 NA V6 Pentastar: 285 hp at 6400 rpms, 260 lb/ft at 4400 rpms (Source: Jeep).
Curb weight for Rubicon: 5,050 pounds (Source: Jeep).

1978 CJ-7 with 4.2 NA I6: 200 hp at 4400 rpms, 280 lb/ft at 2200 rpms (Source: Wikipedia).
Curb weight: 2,770 pounds (Source: Automobile Catalogue).

Yeah, all the current mid-size truck engines have more hp than Jeep's 1978 I6, but that CJ-7 was a much lighter vehicle, so the power to weight was actually much better in the CJ:

2021 Gladiator Rubicon: 17.7 pounds of vehicle weight per horse power.
1978 CJ-7: 13.9 pounds of vehicle weight per horse power.

2021 Gladiator Rubicon: 19.4 pounds of vehicle weight per unit of torque.
1978 CJ-7: 9.9 pounds of vehicle weight per unit of torque.

In order to get the same power to weight ratio we had in 1978 in the CJ-7, Jeep needs to put an engine in the Gladiator Rubicon that makes 363 hp, and 510 lb/ft of torque!

Conclusion: We need a better power plant in the Gladiator, but one that is relatively affordable (let's say $3,000 over the price of the Pentastar).

maybe you should compare apples to apples. The gladiator is a 4 door “truck” that in some cases tows more than twice than a 4 door JL. How long was your CJ7? How much could it tow? How safe was it? How were the electronics in that thing? You should be Really comparing to the two door JL wrangler.

2 door JL turbo 4 cylinder:
Hp ratio: 14.7

Torque ratio: 13.45

and oh wait we forgot about the 392 wrangler which is a far bigger vehicle than the CJ7 and look at its stats: you
4 door JL 392:
hp/torque ratio: 10.85

And on wait the diesel 2 door JL:
Hp ratio: 17.05
Torque ratio: 9.63

I wonder if your CJ7 would perform better than the 392 or the 2 door JL diesel?

plus I highly doubt that was a lateral 200 hp back then (as others have stating things are more accurate now) would your CJ make it up to 65 without beating you to death and struggling?

 

[redrider]

No replacement for displacement. IMO, electrics are smoke and mirrors. Negatives for me are lithium mining practices, refuel times and range along with the climate BS. The V6 may be adequate but I do prefer some extra grunt in reserve. A modern I6 would make the cut if it responded as well as the YJ did and Cherokee does.

 

[john#21]

I think the Pentastar is fine. I do wish you could get different factory gearing. I’d like 4.56 in my manual Mojave. 4.10 should be standard for every trim

^^??

Don’t fear the gear! If you feel sluggish wake it up with an upgrade.

 

[Oilburner]

Jeep will not be using the 2.0L for the hybrid 1/2ton Ram, Wagoneer, or the JT. Maybe the GME-T6 will make it to production & be a stand-alone option.

 

[andrew8404]

I’m in Albuquerque 5000 feet and drove up to Colorado 12000 feet and back down on 37s and stock gearing. It drove fine and had no issues. Do you loose a little power? Sure but it’s not a terrible experience. Drive a third Gen Tacoma and see how crappy that transmission is. The Gladiators 8 speed is amazing even with the 37 tires. Not perfect and regear would make things better but here’s an example of what I got gas mileage for the total trip.

 

[rr11]

While I have fond memories of my 74 CJ5. I still think it was the most fun vehicle I have ever owned. However I was 22, at 79 I like the creature comforts my JT. Yes the joys of a 3 speed trans, no power steering, AC, ect. But I did have a 8 track.

 

[dfwxjer]

Wait, where was this 200hp 4.2 liter straight 6?

My CJ7 had a ~100hp 4.2 liter that made like 180ft lbs of torque. The upgrade to the 4.0 HO netted a whopping 190hp and like 235ft lbs of torque.

I don't love the pentastar but it's a better engine than the old AMC I6 tractor engine.

 

[anavrinIV]

Horsepower numbers went from SAE Gross to SAE Net in 1972/3, which resulted in a large drop in output figures, even if it was a more realistic number.

Kevin

Also the introduction of emissions controls meant lower compression and neutered timing which also dropped real power output.

 

[piroman683]

Torque is what makes driving fun, and the JT doesn’t have enough, especially when ripping through the desert at high speed. Does it still drive fine - sure, can you still romp in the desert - sure, but having at least another 100 lbs of torque would be better. This is specific to the manual trans which is what I have and prefer to have

 

[MrKnowitall]

I had 4 CJs, and I think y’all are nuts! The 4.2 had 112 horsepower, and did good to hit 70 mph without shaking apart. Forget the fact that most didn’t have AC. If your delusions make you long for the “power” of a CJ engine, go buy one again and see if your memory serves you well. BTW- the 305 is a Chevy motor, so if you want to consider engine swaps, consider that vs a 6.4 Hemi. I had a Scrambler with a 400 small block, and still recognize the refined experience that the JT is.

The CJ7 Wiki page lists the 258 at ..... 98hp! 193 for torque. (I'm sure there are year-year and regional variables)Yes, the HO 4.0 made 200hp at some point, the lightest vehicles it came in XJ/MJ were decently quick, especially compared to a TBI4.3 or Cologne 4l V6. The maligned 3.8 "minivan" engine actually made more HP and more torque than the 4.0 above about 1500rpm. The Pentastar makes more power than that across the entire band (above 1500). The old fairytale that the old engines made more, or even comparable power just needs to die.

 

[dfwxjer]

I had 4 CJs, and I think y’all are nuts! The 4.2 had 112 horsepower, and did good to hit 70 mph without shaking apart. Forget the fact that most didn’t have AC. If your delusions make you long for the “power” of a CJ engine, go buy one again and see if your memory serves you well. BTW- the 305 is a Chevy motor, so if you want to consider engine swaps, consider that vs a 6.4 Hemi. I had a Scrambler with a 400 small block, and still recognize the refined experience that the JT is.

Someone else gets it. My CJ7 did not like anything above 60mph, and it sure took its sweet time even getting there. The later 4.0 was better in every way but still anemic by today's standards.


The idea the 4.2 had 200 hp is laughable

 

[Oilburner]

Current Jeep
2.0L 270HP
3.6L 285HP

BRONCO
2.3L 300HP
2,7L 330HP

Sponsored