No, The Wrangler's Turbo-Four Will Not Produce 368 Horsepower

268 is more likely. 

4 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

268 is more likely. 

Agreed.  Although if it makes 268 hp and 280 lb-ft, what is the point of the Pentastar that is like 290 hp, 260 lb-ft?  Now you have 2 powertrains with the same power output.

6 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Agreed.  Although if it makes 268 hp and 280 lb-ft, what is the point of the Pentastar that is like 290 hp, 260 lb-ft?  Now you have 2 powertrains with the same power output.

One has much less plumbing.  

24 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Agreed.  Although if it makes 268 hp and 280 lb-ft, what is the point of the Pentastar that is like 290 hp, 260 lb-ft?  Now you have 2 powertrains with the same power output.

One had much less lag. If your rock crawling, you don't want to be into the turbo all the time just to get your torque.

It's the Ecodiesel that will be the torque of the town.

20 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

One had much less lag. If your rock crawling, you don't want to be into the turbo all the time just to get your torque.

Any car maker that isn't 100% turbo by 2020 is way behind the times.  The Pentastar V6 should be turbo only.  

The one place the turbo 4 makes most sense is over seas where the Pentastar will get hit with displacement tax.

18 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Any car maker that isn't 100% turbo by....is way behind the times

Ive heard that one before...must have been around 1993..

The song is from the 1970s...I heard it for the first time in 1993?

38 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

It's the Ecodiesel that will be the torque of the town.

Only because diesels are so so scan-da-lous

If your v6 larks torque, you built your engine wrong.  If your 4cyl lacks torque, you built a Honda engine.  A Jeep turbo 4 is silly when they can use the Pentastar v6 and add some more torque.  How do you haul and tow and climb rocks with a turbocharged 4cyl?

47 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

If your v6 larks torque, you built your engine wrong.  If your 4cyl lacks torque, you built a Honda engine.  A Jeep turbo 4 is silly when they can use the Pentastar v6 and add some more torque.  How do you haul and tow and climb rocks with a turbocharged 4cyl?

Ya Don't!  

Always said these high HP low torque engines with dual overhead cam crap are just marketing fluff for idiots that cannot understand real torque is the answer, not butt loads of HP.

Will take a properly built pushrod V6 or V8 over turbo everything in today's driving of needing torque to move along.

I am guessing 268 HP and higher torque and tuned for the torque to hit early and hard.  Jeep understands their audience.  The Pentastar was redone in 16 in the GC and Durango and provides a much better torque curve and is much torquier lower in the rev range.  Of course the ecodiesel will be the torque monster, but am sure the other engines will work just fine off road. 

12 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Any car maker that isn't 100% turbo by 2020 is way behind the times.  The Pentastar V6 should be turbo only.  

The one place the turbo 4 makes most sense is over seas where the Pentastar will get hit with displacement tax.

Wrong. 

13 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Any car maker that isn't 100% turbo by 2020 is way behind the times.  The Pentastar V6 should be turbo only.   

Why? Nothing wrong with the Pentastar as it is...no point in a turbo version.

1 hour ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Why? Nothing wrong with the Pentastar as it is...no point in a turbo version.

Alfa Romeo makes a smaller displacement V6 than the Pentastar with 213 more horsepower.  Ford makes a two 3-liter or less V6's with more horsepower and torque than the Pentastar.   

17 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Any car maker that isn't 100% turbo by 2020 is way behind the times.  The Pentastar V6 should be turbo only.  

The one place the turbo 4 makes most sense is over seas where the Pentastar will get hit with displacement tax.

You really need to stop looking a peak output that only happens under full throttle situations.  The coming Benz electric turbo might change things, but for now, the only time you'll be getting that huge torque is when the turbo is fully cooking. Absolutely the wrong situation for driving a Wrangler.

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Alfa Romeo makes a smaller displacement V6 than the Pentastar with 213 more horsepower.  Ford makes a two 3-liter or less V6's with more horsepower and torque than the Pentastar.   

So?  For more horsepower and torque, Jeep has the Hemi option. 

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Alfa Romeo makes a smaller displacement V6 than the Pentastar with 213 more horsepower.  Ford makes a two 3-liter or less V6's with more horsepower and torque than the Pentastar.   

Stop this.... horsepower / displacement is a dumb metric.

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Stop this.... horsepower / displacement is a dumb metric.

At the Air Force Museum in Dayton there is a rocket that made 30, 000 horsepower and was the size of a Ford 289.  I thought about smuggling it out and dumping it in the Fastback back in the day, but figured military security might frown on that...

...in that sense Horsepower/displacement might have made my life really exciting in one way or another.

1 minute ago, A Horse With No Name said:

At the Air Force Museum in Dayton there is a rocket that made 30, 000 horsepower and was the size of a Ford 289.  I thought about smuggling it out and dumping it in the Fastback back in the day, but figured military security might frown on that...

...in that sense Horsepower/displacement might have made my life really exciting in one way or another.

The last 10 seconds of it anyway.... 

Okay then...a better form of vintage aircraft and car together...

2 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

So?  For more horsepower and torque, Jeep has the Hemi option. 

The Alfa 2.9 liter V6 makes more horsepower than a 6.4 liter Hemi V8 also.  Hemi is even more dated than the Pentastar with barely any power increase since 2005.

1 minute ago, smk4565 said:

The Alfa 2.9 liter V6 makes more horsepower than a 6.4 liter Hemi V8 also.  Hemi is even more dated than the Pentastar with barely any power increase since 2005.

So what?

10 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The Alfa 2.9 liter V6 makes more horsepower than a 6.4 liter Hemi V8 also.  Hemi is even more dated than the Pentastar with barely any power increase since 2005.

Alfa's sales are so low the 2.9 doesn't matter. 

33 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The Alfa 2.9 liter V6 makes more horsepower than a 6.4 liter Hemi V8 also.  Hemi is even more dated than the Pentastar with barely any power increase since 2005.

Stop the trolling. The Pentastar and Hemi both have gotten regular updates. The Pentastar was updated again just last year. They didn't add power, they added fuel economy.

3 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Stop the trolling. The Pentastar and Hemi both have gotten regular updates. The Pentastar was updated again just last year. They didn't add power, they added fuel economy.

And...about the power part...Dodge even added some sort of forced induction...JUST like SMK wishes..

But this is about a Wrangler...

I dont think a turbo 4 should be the answer...but a regular non-turbo 4 cylinder should not normally cause controversy...

1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Okay then...a better form of vintage aircraft and car together...

Both are Sexy MF.!  

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

The Alfa 2.9 liter V6 makes more horsepower than a 6.4 liter Hemi V8 also.  Hemi is even more dated than the Pentastar with barely any power increase since 2005.

Reliability I put on the Hemi over the Alfa crap.

I have no problem with a turbo 4 in a Wrangler as a base option for suburban warriors who only buy it for looks. It is not a V6 replacement.

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I have no problem with a turbo 4 in a Wrangler as a base option for suburban warriors who only buy it for looks. It is not a V6 replacement.

The turbo 4 replaced the V6 in almost every sedan, from Sonata to Malibu to CTS to E-class.  And the turbo V6 replaced the V8 in the F150, replaced it on the Audi RS4, E43, etc.  

The Wrangler has 285 hp and gets 17/21 mpg, a Turbo 4 can get near that power and beat that MPG.  A turbo V6 can be the upgrade.  GM has the same problem with their 3.6 V6 in a lot of vehicles, mainly Cadillacs.  It doesn't offer much difference in acceleration or fuel economy of the 2.0T and it is way outgunned by German V6s.

For fun:

2005 Chrysler 300C  340 hp, 390 lb-ft  17/25mpg  (5-speed)

2017 Chrysler 300C Hemi 363 hp, 396 lb-ft  16/25 mpg (8-speed)

That is what 12 yeas of advancement got? 

By comparison, progress being made in Stuttgart:

2005 Mercedes S500 4Matic  302 hp, 339 lb-ft,   16/22 mpg  (5.0 liter V8)

2018 Mercedes S450 4Matic  362 hp, 369 lb-ft,  18/28 mpg  (3.0 liter V6)

2018 Mercedes S560 4Matic  463 hp, 516 lb-ft,  17/27 mpg  (4.0 liter V8)

1. Having to use a lot of turbo in the type of slow speed rock crawling the Wrangler does is a BAD IDEA.

2. The Chrysler and GM V6es are not being out gunned by the Euros. You don't get a euro turbo V6 until you pay GM turbo V6 prices. GM is out gunning the blown 4 pots the Germans will sell you using V6es. If your only choice in a car is a turbo 4 or a naturally aspirated v6, you'll get the V6. 

The EPA numbers for the LX cars are always under rated.

'05 5.7L Hemi : 350HP / 375 TRQ

'17 5.7L Hemi : 375/410
'17 6.4L Hemi : 485/475
'17 6.2L Hemi : 707/650

Yep; "barely any" power increases.

52 minutes ago, balthazar said:

'05 5.7L Hemi : 350HP / 375 TRQ

'17 5.7L Hemi : 375/410
'17 6.4L Hemi : 485/475
'17 6.2L Hemi : 707/650

Yep; "barely any" power increases.

With displacement increases.  Chrysler should have a 3 liter V6 making more power than the 2005 5.7 liter Hemi V8.  Alfa does, so it is doable.  The Pentastar should be turbo to 370 hp as the upgrade from the myster horsepower turbo 4.

CAFE also goes up like 10% per year in the 2020-2025 time frame.  They are paying fines now, they need massive gains.  And all this stuff should be electrified in some way post 2020.

AMG has 603 hp, 627 lb-ft from a 4.0 liter V8, 485 hp out of a 6.4 liter is a joke, even the 2007 Mercedes 6.3 had 510 hp.  And they replaced that engine twice already.

Chrysler raised displacement 0.5 liters and horsepower over DOUBLED.

how much of a joke is 510 HP out of 6.3L against 707HP out of 6.2L?

And I didn't even mention 840 HP out of 6.2L.

Yeah - that's what I thought.

12 hours ago, balthazar said:

Chrysler raised displacement 0.5 liters and horsepower over DOUBLED.

how much of a joke is 510 HP out of 6.3L against 707HP out of 6.2L?

And I didn't even mention 840 HP out of 6.2L.

Yeah - that's what I thought.

 

They still sell the 5.7 liter as the option in the 300C, which is why I compared an S500 then to an S560 today, same model.  The Mercedes 6.3 is 10 years old and has been out of production for years, no point to compare it to a engine introduced in 2017.  Mercedes can win any HP/liter argument too because they have a 700 hp 1.6 liter V6, but never mind that, not the point.

The Demon and Hellcat make a ton of power, no doubt.  Terrible fuel economy but nonetheless huge power.  Problem is Chrysler's mainstream engines are bad.  And they haven't seen increases in fuel economy and power as others have.

But the 5.7 is no longer the only Hemi- there are 3 distinct displacements in the family but they are all 'Hemi's.
Without question Chrysler has (massively) upgraded Hemi power as opposed to your claim. The tiny adjustments in displacement are irrelevant. The fact that there is still a 5.7 with similar power levels is also irrelevant, beside the fact that  375/410 power numbers are more than enough for most drivers as it is. Name another brand that has increased power in the same engine family to this degree in the same time period.

Ford mod motors? GM LS motors... 

5 hours ago, balthazar said:

But the 5.7 is no longer the only Hemi- there are 3 distinct displacements in the family but they are all 'Hemi's.
Without question Chrysler has (massively) upgraded Hemi power as opposed to your claim. The tiny adjustments in displacement are irrelevant. The fact that there is still a 5.7 with similar power levels is also irrelevant, beside the fact that  375/410 power numbers are more than enough for most drivers as it is. Name another brand that has increased power in the same engine family to this degree in the same time period.

But no gas mileage increase, and CAFE in 2005 was around 27 mpg, in 2025 it is 54 mpg.  In 12 years they went no where, now they have to double the fuel economy in 8 years.  

375 is definitely a lot of horsepower, but a six cylinder can make that.  The Pentastar should replace the 5.7 Hemi with equal power but a 5 mpg advantage.

Nobody going from 350 HP to 485 HP is going to also see a MPG increase. Not the point tho here, is it?

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

But no gas mileage increase, and CAFE in 2005 was around 27 mpg, in 2025 it is 54 mpg.  In 12 years they went no where, now they have to double the fuel economy in 8 years.  

375 is definitely a lot of horsepower, but a six cylinder can make that.  The Pentastar should replace the 5.7 Hemi with equal power but a 5 mpg advantage.

The V6, the vast bulk of the sales, just got it's upgrade last year for a few of the models that got refreshes. They haven't even added Direct injection yet, though the Pentastar is designed for it, and it is still competitive. 

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

Nobody going from 350 HP to 485 HP is going to also see a MPG increase. Not the point tho here, is it?

But they went from 350 hp to 363 hp in the Chrysler 300.  

An 06 S500 4matic got 14/20 mpg out of its 302 hp V8,  the 2018 S560 4Matic gets 17/27 mpg with 463 hp.  Adding 160 hp and 7 mpg highway is pretty good.

The S63 went from ab6.3 V8 with 518 hp, 11/17 mpg in 2008, to 5.5 liter V8 with 577 hp 15/23 mpg in 2013, to 4.0 liter V8 603 hp 17/26 mpg in 2018.   9 mpg highway improvement with adding 85 hp and 160 lb-ft of torque.

So the point is you can raise power and fuel economy at the same time with engine downsizing, turbos, DI, etc.  Use the technology, Chrysler doesn't do that.

5 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

But they went from 350 hp to 363 hp in the Chrysler 300. 

Chrysler 300 SRT8 : 470 HP.

12 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Chrysler 300 SRT8 : 470 HP.

Which in 2005 was 425 hp and 14/20 mpg.   To 14/23 mpg in 2014, and the SRT is out of production since 2014.  45 hp gain in 9 years with 3 mpg gain.  The current Chrysler 300 V8 makes 363 hp.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Which in 2005 was 425 hp and 14/20 mpg.   To 14/23 mpg in 2014, and the SRT is out of production since 2014.  45 hp gain in 9 years with 3 mpg gain.  The current Chrysler 300 V8 makes 363 hp.

Now you're talking about 1 model / MPG, when I responded to your comment about 'the Hemi never gained any power'. Pick a damned point & stick with it, ONCE.