Jeep JL Wrangler 2.0L Hurricane Engine?

wayoflife

Administrator
Staff member
So, I just read an article on AllPar written by David Zats and in it, he explains that a reliable source he has revealed what very will could be the third engine option that will be available for the Jeep JL Wrangler. In addition to the 3.6L Pentastar for gas engines, the VM 3.0 V6 diesel engine (used in the Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500), the third engine will most likely be the 2.0L, 4-cylinder Hurricane. Check it out...

The hitherto unexpected third engine is a 2.0 liter Chrysler four-cylinder. Given the date (2019), it will likely be the turbocharged “Hurricane” engine — that is, incidentally, an old Jeep engine name.

Jeep CJs were sold with low-power four-cylinders for decades, with six-cylinder engines being a very late arrival. The Jeeps were lightweight, though, at roughly half the poundage of current Wranglers. That said, the turbo four should be suitable for road use when connected with the efficient, high-range second generation eight-speed automatics.

http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/2015/10/2018-wrangler-engines-revealed-30266

So, would this be something you'd want as an option on your Jeep JL Wrangler?
 

Hot94Z28

New member
I would think for a DD might not be bad, but on the trail turbo lag along with the heat it generates I would think might not be the best option.
 

JK_Dave

Caught the Bug
I would think for a DD might not be bad, but on the trail turbo lag along with the heat it generates I would think might not be the best option.

No offense intended, but I think this misconception about modern turbos is still fairly common among people unfamiliar with them. The technology put into turbos in the last 15 years has been incredible. What was once a piece of equipment found on the smallest selection of consumer vehicles has now trickled down to nearly every car manufacturer out there because of how efficient and reliable they are as well as what effect they have on mpg. When the right size turbo is paired with an engine, the spool up is virtually instantaneous. You can also pair a turbo that is aimed to give you more low end torque or high end horsepower. There is fine balance there and a turbo is not the magic bullet for all problems, but I wouldn't be too quick to judge this combination as a failure. Now whether it becomes a sales success is something totally different!
 

MR.Ty

Token East Coast Guy
Sounds like it could be a good choice for those who want a fuel efficient JL without the price tag that will accompany the diesel option. Though, I think it will only be a good seller if it is the least expensive option.
 

Hobolobo

New member
No offense intended, but I think this misconception about modern turbos is still fairly common among people unfamiliar with them. The technology put into turbos in the last 15 years has been incredible. What was once a piece of equipment found on the smallest selection of consumer vehicles has now trickled down to nearly every car manufacturer out there because of how efficient and reliable they are as well as what effect they have on mpg. When the right size turbo is paired with an engine, the spool up is virtually instantaneous. You can also pair a turbo that is aimed to give you more low end torque or high end horsepower. There is fine balance there and a turbo is not the magic bullet for all problems, but I wouldn't be too quick to judge this combination as a failure. Now whether it becomes a sales success is something totally different!

While I do agree with you about the correct size turbo for the right engine. You will always have turbo lag. Nature of the beast. I don't think he was judging it as a failure, just not the best option.
 

aldaman

Member
Inspite of having the 8 speed trans, curious to see what TQ & HP #s the 2.0 engine puts out. If it's not all that I would get the 3.6 engine and 8 speed trans combo....
 

wayoflife

Administrator
Staff member
Sounds like it could be a good choice for those who want a fuel efficient JL without the price tag that will accompany the diesel option. Though, I think it will only be a good seller if it is the least expensive option.

Yeah, if I could guess, it'll probably be something they just offer in the Sport model kind of like how the old TJ came with a 2.5L in the SE model.

I know that FCA has been working hard to lighten up the JL but being that it's still going to be a tub on frame with mostly steel components, I can't imagine how much lighter it will be than a JK and the JK is a pig!
 

Linebacker

Caught the Bug
Drive an Audi A3 with a 2.0L turbo or a Hyundai Sonata 2.0L turbo. If the Hurricane has that type of on road power most folks won't find reason to complain. And what if it delivers power and 25+ MPG? The other side of the coin is on the trail. It's hard to have it both ways. Who knows?
 

wayoflife

Administrator
Staff member
Drive an Audi A3 with a 2.0L turbo or a Hyundai Sonata 2.0L turbo. If the Hurricane has that type of on road power most folks won't find reason to complain. And what if it delivers power and 25+ MPG? The other side of the coin is on the trail. It's hard to have it both ways. Who knows?

I'll bet on a stock JL Wrangler, the 2.0L Hurricane will perform surprisingly well. I think where you'll see it's shortcomings is if you lift the Jeep, run bigger tires and load it up with heavy bumpers and a ton of gear. Sure, new gears can help but only so much.
 

JakeJK

New member
If the numbers are anywhere near the 2.0 ecoboost that you can get in fords I wouldn't be surprised if that hurricane costs more than the 3.6l

The 2.0 will get better gas mileage as well as produce, if equivalent to an ecoboost, more torque than the current 3.6-- yes more HP in the 3.6 but torque is generally more important to us jeep guys.

Edit: ecoboost has a max torque of 270 at 2500 rpm, which isn't a terrible unreasonable rpm for getting up a steep obstacle
 
Last edited:

hinrichs

Caught the Bug
I think it would be a good motor option in a base 4 door and 2 door. Well not sure how much lighter a 2 door really is but still. For 95% of the mall crawlers out there and soccer moms that drive rubicons, I feel it would sell well if the power is there.
 

JK_Dave

Caught the Bug
If the numbers are anywhere near the 2.0 ecoboost that you can get in fords I wouldn't be surprised if that hurricane costs more than the 3.6l

The 2.0 will get better gas mileage as well as produce, if equivalent to an ecoboost, more torque than the current 3.6-- yes more HP in the 3.6 but torque is generally more important to us jeep guys.

Edit: ecoboost has a max torque of 270 at 2500 rpm, which isn't a terrible unreasonable rpm for getting up a very speed obstacle

Exactly. A 2.0L turbo in the JL will not perform like the 2.0L turbo in a VW Jetta. It's all about the tune, shape of the turbo map and a properly mated transmission.

For people who have no intention of building up their Jeep, this would be the perfect choice. However for most of us here on this forum, I'd doubt it would be the preferred option. I know I'd pay extra for the diesel myself.
 

JakeJK

New member
Exactly. A 2.0L turbo in the JL will not perform like the 2.0L turbo in a VW Jetta. It's all about the tune, shape of the turbo map and a properly mated transmission.

For people who have no intention of building up their Jeep, this would be the perfect choice. However for most of us here on this forum, I'd doubt it would be the preferred option. I know I'd pay extra for the diesel myself.

Me too I'd definitely want the diesel :D

Considering it puts out a glorious 420 ft/lbs at 2k RPM I'd have a ton of fun in that bad boy
 

JakeJK

New member
Will the diesel eliminate the need for re gearing with bigger tires?

With 420 ft lbs of torque I'd imagine 3.73s or 4.10s would be fine with 35-37

3.73 for 35 4.10 for 37

And if not mistaken, 3.73s are stock on JKRs and 4.10s stock on JKURs
 
Last edited:

TFD

New member
With 420 ft lbs of torque I'd imagine 3.73s or 4.10s would be fine with 35-37

3.73 for 35 4.10 for 37

Looks like I'll be in the market for a new jeep when the diesel is released.

I wonder how long it will take the aftermarket world to start pumping out lift kits.
 

croge17

New member
Will the diesel eliminate the need for re gearing with bigger tires?

No... if you want bigger tires and stock like drive then gears will be necessary. Why would you want to pay the premium for more torque and driveability and then ruin what youpaid for by cheaping out on gears?
 

Pyro1415

New member
I can see the 2.0 being an option for all wranglers with them making the diesel an option in rubicons and maybe the road queens. I would prefer a diesel but I'm still shocked they won't shove a hemi in it, I think a v8 or charged v6 should be the base engine in an unlimited.
 

ScoobyCarolanNC

Active Member
If I had a bet on this it would be Sports get the 4 banger only. Sahara's have it standard with a V6 option. Then Rubies get the 6 or a diesel at a premium. Mass produce the cheap version of the line with the highest MPG then work your way up to a premium priced diesel. Look at every SUV or full size truck line out there....

Turbos have come a long way. Variable vanes that adjust boost based on rpm virtually eliminate "turbo lag". Cooling isn't an issue now that oil cooling is the norm. You get V6 performance and drop a couple of hundred pounds of engine weight with better efficiency. The people who would buy a wrangler if it suddenly got 22mpg highway aren't worried about low end torque.
 
Top Bottom