Notices
JK Talk General discussion forum regarding thoughts, opinions and rumors about the Jeep JK Wrangler or related subjects that don't quite fit in the Modified, Stock or Electronics forums.
View Poll Results: How is the 3.8L for you?
I like the 3.8 V6 and the power it has.
35
22.44%
I would like a more powerful gasoline engine.
60
38.46%
I would like a diesel engine. (Either V6 Cummins or 3.0 Benz)
60
38.46%
I would like 4 cylinder for increased gas mileage.
1
0.64%
Voters: 156. You may not vote on this poll

Wrangler Engine Opinions

Thread Tools
 
Old Jan 24, 2008 | 04:43 PM
  #1  
brently54's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Newbie
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
From: Mandan, ND
Default Wrangler Engine Opinions

There is a lot of talk about engines for the JK, and I would like to see what the "survey says". 2.8L Diesel owners need not apply.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2008 | 05:23 PM
  #2  
Omega Man's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
From: The Woodlands Texas
Default

I chose the diesel option but a 4cyl diesel would be great but was not an option in the poll. A 4cyl would easily move the jk as well as the 3.8 and would get better fuel mileage as well.

BTW, I love my JK.

I worked with the Brittish army for a while and the little diesel Rovers were great.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2008 | 06:55 PM
  #3  
u-joint's Avatar
JK Junkie
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,911
Likes: 0
From: Broken Arrow, OK
Default

I am probably the one person who thinks it, but I have no grips about the 3.8 v6.
She has always felt very responsive for me, especially compared to my old '87 YJ's 4.2 I6.

But the again, thats just me
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2008 | 07:15 PM
  #4  
tgrt's Avatar
Former Vendor
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,621
Likes: 1
From: nowhere
Default

I can live with the engine I have, but I wouldn't mind a slightly more powerful engine. I don't need anything that powerful though.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2008 | 08:14 PM
  #5  
spencenaz's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
From: Show Low, AZ
Default

Originally Posted by jwhitehorn
I am probably the one person who thinks it, but I have no grips about the 3.8 v6.
She has always felt very responsive for me, especially compared to my old '87 YJ's 4.2 I6.

But the again, thats just me
You aren't the only one. I like the 3.8, but I'd really like to see the Diesel option in the US. That way I can brew my own biodiesel at home.

I wish I still had my little 1978 Diesel VW Rabbit. 50+ mpg
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2008 | 02:44 AM
  #6  
FlightTester's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
From: Space Coast, FL
Default

The 3.8 is a reliable and flexible engine for me. Does what I need it to do and has been endurance tested by abusive soccer moms. Rev it up, shift at/near redline and it gives more than respectable performance. Go easy on the fast pedal, shift at 2,000 rpm and I get 20 mpg. Ah, the beauty of a manual transmission.

A diesel option is interesting, but I suspect the breakeven point to account for higher initial cost, the additional costs for fuel and maintenance would be very far down the road. But I'll still consider it -- I like the smell of diesel.

Last edited by FlightTester; Jan 25, 2008 at 02:51 AM.
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2008 | 03:29 AM
  #7  
awdspider's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
From: dallas texas
Default

Originally Posted by FlightTester
The 3.8 is a reliable and flexible engine for me. Does what I need it to do and has been endurance tested by abusive soccer moms. Rev it up, shift at/near redline and it gives more than respectable performance. Go easy on the fast pedal, shift at 2,000 rpm and I get 20 mpg. Ah, the beauty of a manual transmission.

A diesel option is interesting, but I suspect the breakeven point to account for higher initial cost, the additional costs for fuel and maintenance would be very far down the road. But I'll still consider it -- I like the smell of diesel.
+1 except the fact i wouldnt really care about the cost of diesel so much because i would be gaining an assload of torque.


-shaun h
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2008 | 03:53 AM
  #8  
red rcok's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
From: Hamilton, ON
Default

I can't say I completely mind the 3.8l but a diesel option would have had my vote if it was available mainly because of the longevity of a diesel
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2008 | 04:41 AM
  #9  
Gunslinger's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
From: So Cal
Default

I chose a more powerful engine. I'm not dissatisfied at all with the 3.8 though. It actually has enough power for me and the way I drive it. I'm all for more power though, who wouldn't be. Especially since when I'm driving my other car, it's a 425HP 6.1 Hemi Charger SRT-8. Then I get in my JK and feel the difference.........
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2008 | 04:58 AM
  #10  
tgrt's Avatar
Former Vendor
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,621
Likes: 1
From: nowhere
Default

Originally Posted by tgrt
I can live with the engine I have, but I wouldn't mind a slightly more powerful engine. I don't need anything that powerful though.
I was thinking about this and I think what I'd want more than anything for performance is a different automatic transmission with better gearing.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:07 PM.