First Pentastar Acceleration Numbers
JK Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
From: North Texas
I called those number a week ago in the "the 2012 is just an interior upgrade" thread that some douche started. So I'm not really surprised. Maybe some of the silly 2012 vs 07-11 threads will end. Hard to be a hater when it has thank kind of spank. Will a RIPP supercharged 3.8 put down those kind of numbers?
IMHO The 4.0 L was (still is for me) in a class of its' own ... Just loooove the power band of this engine.
JK Enthusiast
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
From: Lugoff, SC
It depends on who you ask...
It won't in a 2011, because we are creeping up on September with a promise of the "the middle of next month" again.
If they release one for the 2011 before I decide to trade on a 2012, I'll let you know.
JK Super Freak
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,457
Likes: 2
From: B.F.E, MI
From Motortrend:
"The new engine offers excellent response and a noticeable improvement in power -- the Pentastar is significantly faster from a stop and when passing. Also, the engine sounds much more upscale than the coarse 3.8-liter, and the exhaust note is throatier. Paired with either transmission, it feels much more refined. Where the 3.8 feels pokey, the 3.6-liter actually makes the JK feel spry. Jeep estimates that the new engine reduces 0-60 times by 2-3 seconds with either transmission, and when we took a Wrangler Sport manual to the track, we confirmed this estimate. The new Jeep hit 60 mph in 6.7 seconds, while all of the 3.8-liter Wranglers took between 9.8 and 10.2 seconds."
"The new engine offers excellent response and a noticeable improvement in power -- the Pentastar is significantly faster from a stop and when passing. Also, the engine sounds much more upscale than the coarse 3.8-liter, and the exhaust note is throatier. Paired with either transmission, it feels much more refined. Where the 3.8 feels pokey, the 3.6-liter actually makes the JK feel spry. Jeep estimates that the new engine reduces 0-60 times by 2-3 seconds with either transmission, and when we took a Wrangler Sport manual to the track, we confirmed this estimate. The new Jeep hit 60 mph in 6.7 seconds, while all of the 3.8-liter Wranglers took between 9.8 and 10.2 seconds."
JK Freak
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 969
Likes: 0
From: N. Prov. , RI
Impressive numbers from the 3.6. If I were buying a Jeep for 0-60 runs I would def buy the penstar. But I like old reliable, fixable engines an the 3.8 fits the bill for me. Never had any real issues with power with my 3.8 2-door, believe me its not perfect but it fits. Now having said that, build me a Jeep that gets 25mpg mixed driving an Ill sell all my Jeeps for that 1!
JK Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
From: Burbs of Chicago
I have the 3.7 in my Libby...that engine isn't very good. If it is anything (mini-van engine) like the Wrangler...it is a dog.
I wanted the CRD...but it was a lemon.
I wanted the CRD...but it was a lemon.
Last edited by panthermark; Aug 21, 2011 at 06:00 PM.
JK Super Freak
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
From: Fonthill,Ontario
JK Freak
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
I just test drove a '12 Rubicon and really didn't see much of a difference in city driving. Typical Califonia, when I went to get on the freeway (the 91) we were sitting in traffic so I didn't get to test it upstairs. I really wanted this motor to be everything is has been hyped up to be and more but I don't see that much of a real world difference.
JK Enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
From: Ft Lauderdale
I just test drove a '12 Rubicon and really didn't see much of a difference in city driving. Typical Califonia, when I went to get on the freeway (the 91) we were sitting in traffic so I didn't get to test it upstairs. I really wanted this motor to be everything is has been hyped up to be and more but I don't see that much of a real world difference.