Pentastar power increase

[Flyin6]

Security algorithms and ciphers are treated as munitions; meaning that if someone generates a new one in the US, they must ensure that it isn’t sent out of the US ( w/out registering possibly, with the NSA ). Cracking and hacking something that you own might be treated differently. Cracking and hacking for a foreign entity would be bad. As far as the manufacturer, it’s more than just IP ( intellectual property ), but also about the security of their customers.

Edit: as a special reminder, think back to headlines where remote hackers were able to control a vehicles’ driving experience, armed with nothing more than an IP address.

I'm well familiar with the safeguarding of any information that the DOD uses, and that it can in no way be shared with foreign countries. But as for the encoding of the algorithms used in these computers, all have successfully been "cracked" and then used to develop better-performing vehicles. This has been the case since the first "Chip" showed up decades ago. I think Stellantis may be upset that another code is compromised, but there is nothing they can do about us using it other than pitch a fit. No, if this encryption can be broken then we can get back to getting Livernois and others tunes which have given users north of 50HP.

Sponsored

 

[Flyin6]

Just my 2 cents....I like the Pentastar for exactly what it is...an extremely reliable and dependable engine that puts out power that is just fine for this application. I like that when I go out off the beaten path out into the middle of nowhere, I know this engine is bulletproof and will get me back.

One thing I'm particularly thrilled about is that it is not direct injected. That lone makes it a better engine than the GM 3.6 and some others.

I've seen many of these things well past 200k miles running like new, and some even at over 300k.

I do like the engine for what it is, however, I need mine to make more power to cure the up/down-shifting issue on these long trips I take it on, period. My call, my need, nuff said.

I also own a 3.6 GM V6 in my wife's XT6 Cadillac. It is way more powerful, I mean a very noticeable difference. And that thing is not a lightweight SUV. Has seating for 5 or 7 and has AWD, so not light. But will take off like a jackrabbit and we cruise it at 80-85 on trips out to visit friends and family. THe Jeep feels like a steam locomotive by comparison.

 

[Flyin6]

I'm shocked that nobody has suggested that you convert your JT to EV. Shocked, I say !!

Naw. I owned a fast Tesla...for less than 6 months, then sold it. No electric cars for me...

 

[Flyin6]

In my opinion, you are at the intersection point of where money and sense cross into negative territory for both. I agree with @Mr._Bill that if the market was there and viable, it would be available.

I am trying to find (create??) a solution that makes fiscal sense. You see, I already have new house option of bolting in a Hemi. I choose instead to buy a new house. I know that if tuning is made available for these Pentastar then that little bit will push me into the endzone. I figure that 50 ft lbs should solve the highway cruise lack of power issue, and that will make the cost of doing so very valuable. My only fault with the little Jeep truck is that highway cruise power thing. It does everything else so much better than everything else that it is a keeper. Even if I never can increase power.

And it is not only we who will benefit from a tune. Challengers, Chrysler 300's and vans and everything else will too. And that right there is a HUGE market.

 

[sharpsicle]

I also own a 3.6 GM V6 in my wife's XT6 Cadillac. It is way more powerful, I mean a very noticeable difference. And that thing is not a lightweight SUV. Has seating for 5 or 7 and has AWD, so not light. But will take off like a jackrabbit and we cruise it at 80-85 on trips out to visit friends and family. THe Jeep feels like a steam locomotive by comparison.

I think this might be where you're losing people. Your reference points are kinda all over the place and not exactly considering the myriad of differences. Your Jeep is heavy with AEV's stuff, and each thing AEV added reduced your Jeep's performance. I guarantee a true 'factory' Gladiator would act significantly differently than yours for that reason alone. Add on to that the aerodynamic differences which are substantial and the completely different transmissions used by Jeep and GM (8 vs 9 speed does make a big difference), and you're starting to see the picture. And this is just a few things. This is not an XT6, not even in the same category.

Yes it would be great if they eventually crack these things for programming. But I'm willing to bet that even if that happened, you'd be back asking why it doesn't do more. You're looking to boost HP by 20% with just a tune but will likely only see 10% without adding something else to the equation.

I think we get that you want something else from your Gladiator, but you really are talking like you don't want the Gladiator. My honest read is that you were doing Jeep things with your other trucks and bought the Gladiator to fill that gap, but now that you have it you're trying to use the Gladiator as a replacement for your other vehicles. That's a recipe for consistent disappointment.

 

[DanW]

I do like the engine for what it is, however, I need mine to make more power to cure the up/down-shifting issue on these long trips I take it on, period. My call, my need, nuff said.

I also own a 3.6 GM V6 in my wife's XT6 Cadillac. It is way more powerful, I mean a very noticeable difference. And that thing is not a lightweight SUV. Has seating for 5 or 7 and has AWD, so not light. But will take off like a jackrabbit and we cruise it at 80-85 on trips out to visit friends and family. THe Jeep feels like a steam locomotive by comparison.

The GM 3.6 has had some issues in the Colorado and I had one in a Buick SUV. Powerful, yes. But not in the same league on longevity. I'm not a fan of direct injection.

 

[NOTJeepBeerSleep]

Jeep gave you the answer… came in a 3.0 variation… ??‍

Seriously this. It's perfect in a gladiator

 

[Flyin6]

I think this might be where you're losing people. Your reference points are kinda all over the place and not exactly considering the myriad of differences.
Noted
Your Jeep is heavy with AEV's stuff, and each thing AEV added reduced your Jeep's performance.
You probably didn't see my build thread not reference my signature, but I have actually removed almost all of the heavy AEV stuff and replaced those parts with better and lighter alternatives. I make great efforts to minimize the weight. no back seat, shorty bumper, lithium battery and things like that.
I guarantee a true 'factory' Gladiator would act significantly differently than yours for that reason alone.
Ya know, I am betting you are 100% correct on this point. Light weight 33" tires, lower profile and so forth would mean less power required at higher speeds and less parasitic drag at those higher speeds
Add on to that the aerodynamic differences which are substantial
Absolutely concur with that point.
and the completely different transmissions used by Jeep and GM (8 vs 9 speed does make a big difference),
Again a very valid point, although not really revelant to my intended discussion. the GMM 10 speed makes a world of difference. With a 10 speed in this JT, we would want for nothing.

and you're starting to see the picture. And this is just a few things. This is not an XT6, not even in the same category.
The XTS is in the same weight range as the JT, so a comparision is valid when considering overall performance. And the engine in the XTS is, I believe 306HP so that is clowe as well.
Yes it would be great if they eventually crack these things for programming. But I'm willing to bet that even if that happened, you'd be back asking why it doesn't do more. You're looking to boost HP by 20% with just a tune but will likely only see 10% without adding something else to the equation.
I believe Livernois has added just north of 50HP to this motor. that would be an increase of 17.5%, right? That is a bunch and very likely just enough to fix my "problem."

I think we get that you want something else from your Gladiator, but you really are talking like you don't want the Gladiator.
No, I definitely want the Gladiator. I have had jeeps since my first one in 1979. My last JK was junk IMO. Because of it, I built the Suburban for HD trail use and that thing really performs and can tow. But it's big and thirsty. The first time I took the JT out the day after I picked it up I knew I had the perfectly sized vehicle and back then with just stock AEV stuff it was a great performer. No sir, I love this thing!
My honest read is that you were doing Jeep things with your other trucks and bought the Gladiator to fill that gap, but now that you have it you're trying to use the Gladiator as a replacement for your other vehicles.
No not at all. The big truck tows things. The Suburban hauls me and the dogs around and I use it as a driver and down at my farm. The Jeep is really only to get us to great adventure areas and then to prosecute those trails. We have wheeled in many states so far, and always have a great time. With my RTT and camping system it is about as perfect as it can get.
That's a recipe for consistent disappointment.

Try not to read into this too much and stay on point. That is a discussion about getting the aftermarket to get more power out of this. The discussion is not about me or my needs or requirements, it is about trying to get someone interested in giving us some tuning.
So in closing...we are talking about (or trying to) tuning for the -5 computer. Everything else is irrelevant and mostly opinion.

My answer in italics above ^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Flyin6]

Seriously this. It's perfect in a gladiator

In retrospect, ya, you are right.
Funny too, because the day I went to the Jeep dealership, I went to drive a 3.0 green Rubicon. When I got there, another fella was driving it...and he bought it. Well right beside it was my cool-looking blue AEV JT. I drove it and man did I like it. I purchased it on the spot without knowing how poorly it would perform at highway speeds.
Now I own it. I paid a ton for it, and I have invested another metric ton in it. So you might say, I am "happily stuck" with it.
I have confidence that at some point Livernois or another will come up with a tune that will satisfy my needs.

 

[Badunit]

A long stroke straight six would be perfect for me. I would happily do with less peak hp for a lot more low end torque. Peak hp doesn't impress me if it happens far above where I typically run my engine. We cruise around at 1500-2200 rpm, give or take. That is where I want more torque and power. Diesel would fit the bill except for the emission controls, added maintenance, slow warm up (I assuming it is slow to warm up, like most diesels are), not being able to fuel up at a lot of filling stations because they don't sell diesel, slim chance of finding a competent mechanic to work on it, and other things. I have a diesel Ram truck. As much as I love that engine and the gobs of torque it has, I did not want a diesel Jeep.

 

[Volt0]

Reduce your rolling resistance? Here’s the weight measurement from a JTM and from a JTHA ( half used on both; 33” AT vs 31” HT, r17 vs r20 ), with about 17lbs difference. Maybe you can get below 50lbs per corner, but I don’t think you would like the ride nor the function.

fwiw, the EPA estimates were the same for both vehicles, which is a complete lie. The one that’s a fuel efficient highway tread, that’s 17lbs lighter, will average about 2mpg better. The HA has held true, but the JTM doesn’t meet those estimates.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

The Pentastar 3.6 is running on the bleeding edge in some ways. It's pretty high compression and it's an open deck engine (which also matters)
You'd need forged internals and do work on many pieces to make it do better without self-destruction.

As a person who has built some mild performance-increase V8s and I6s, I don't see "simple" things that could be done short of taking away the VVL and moving to a single profile cam for the intake, and use custom grinds on both intake and exhaust. You'd have to tune accordingly.
You'll likely get into a premium fuel engine due to the high compression and the fact you'd no longer have the valve lift and timing to bleed off compression pressure at lower RPM.
Port match intake to heads............ I can see a list of things you could do but it won't be a simple bolt-on solution.
Unless you move away from NA, it's going to take some work and some tuning which will have to match the parts you use to build the engine.

Specifically, I cannot say. But in principle, you could but would not want to. Old-school cams are two-dimensional, per se. You get what is ground into the lobe, then you can install it where the manufacturer recommends or choose to advance it (Power comes on a bit earlier, or retard it, delivering power later on in the RPM band.
So why would you want to grind a cam strictly for torque down low, and throw away the top-end power this engine can make?
What you want are some lobe profiles that are more aggressive and would give you a lot more passing power, then work with the cam phasing units to be able to advance that cam enough to get things happening early.
But wait, there's more!
We have not one, but FOUR camshafts. We now have the ability to skip a three-dimensional cam and go to the fourth dimension in cam dynamics. We might advance the exhaust lobes but keep the intake portion the same which could net a bit more power at mid-range, or advance both, retard one and advance the other, and so forth.
A smart person could make a lot more happen with this Pentastar if he chose to simply because there are more tools in the kit for him to use.

You are talking a lot of development work, R&D work, prototypes and more.
I know a guy in that area of Edelbrock and he's talked of all of the work involved to come up with heads, intakes, cams and so on - it takes a company these days, and a lot of time and money. And today there's the tune that has to match the parts.

I have on my shelf a head that was being developed for the 4.0 years ago. It's one of 3 prototypes. Clifford Research spearheaded it, BMI cast it, and in the end things didn't turn out where they wanted them to turn out. Power ended up in the wrong place. It was scrapped and plans were sold to Edelbrock........ who later revised and released their own version. Clifford wanted the power band down low as the target audience was Jeep - but it ended up higher than they wanted and finally decided there just wasn't enough money in it.
I bought a brand new, never installed Jeep engine from Edelbrock years ago. It was originally obtained to develop a performance intake for the engine. They scrapped the product and shoved the engine under a bench for years until the friend who worked there was cleaning up and put the engine up for sale (highest offer). I got it for $200 - another case of not enough audience to offset the R&D and manufacturing costs.
It's pretty expensive to modify the engines in these things - like already said, 4 cams, all of the controls involved, open deck, parts made for mpg and not high HP, so all I can say is - I'm sure it's doable, but good luck finding someone to back such plans. It won't be a simple bolt-on thing because you can't change one part without changing the whole chain of parts. Modify the cam profiles, move more air and you now have exhaust and intake restrictions (throttle body and so on) and the tune to control the cam timing unless you make it static.
These aren't open to using high-flow exhaust, no possibility of a true header.
Change cam profile, bleed off less pressure and suddenly you are pumping at over 110% pumping efficiency and now have very high chamber pressures.

Meh, I see a spider's web there -
(not to mention the unreliability of so many who have gone down this route before - a few came out fine, but look at all of the failures and those who backed off and went other routes)

Diesel
Hemi
those seem like the cheaper, much more reliable options. anything involving the 3.6 would be purely experimental and individual

 

[Flyin6]

I hear you but all I am talking about is simple stuff. Get the thing to where we can tune it. Then port the intake, larger TB, and some decent air intake. The exhaust is really not a candidate since it is that headerless design. Livernois got +50 on the -2 computer so that is easy enough if we can tune it. Nothing else and I, at least am home.
Beyond that, I would supercharge it. Personally, I would put better-forged pistons, rings gapped for the SC, and the best rod I could find. Maybe a stroker crank if anyone could build one. I took my Buick Grand National from 231 cu in up to 282" with a boring and a stroker crank and made 1027HP with it on insane boost and race gas.
Naw, 350-400 hp on this motor is doable and less than 400 should last forever. I believe you are underestimating what Nopar already engineered into this motor. If I am correct it already has forged pistons and rods, and a good steel crank, right? So it is pretty stout already. That would have been race stuff 30 years ago.
I like the motto of the 2-2 SAS, "Who Dares, Wins"

 

[Camaroboi13]

I'm on the other end of the spectrum. I did NOT want anything other than a diesel Jeep. After driving several V6 Jeeps, my wife owning a JLU for the last 5 years, there was no other option for me besides the diesel. On a 4.5" lift on 37s, I cruise all day long at 75mph in 8th gear while still getting 22+ miles per gallon. Top that off with 440 plus torque nearly off idle, and there's no better solution. The "added maintenance" will be negated once you drop all that money on performance goodies to match the diesel's performance.

And for those who say turbos fail go get a diesel.... yeah, those have turbos too.

My guess is at 400 horsepower the factory transmission would be your weak link. Buy a supercharger, have it tuned and enjoy it.

 

[dos0711]

It's not more horsepower but torque I'd like. I know diesels have more torque but don't want one. This was never the right engine for a 4x4 as it develops its hp high in the rpm band and doesn't really have a lot of available torque down low.

Sponsored