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.

Yugo Engine In My JK.

Thread Tools
 
Old 12-06-2007, 03:15 PM
  #41  
JK Super Freak
 
CIJeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Oxnard, CA
Posts: 1,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JackMacOKC
If you want power, get a car. Jeeps are made to go hard and slow - we're not trying to beat someone off the line. the 3.8 is plenty for what we need it for.
Not true. Torque is power. Power gets you up the hill and over the dale.

If they were all made to go slow we'd all have low gearing, we would have 4 cylinder engines, etc.

I believe what you meant to say is that it is not a sports car.

We need speed on occasion to get up a lenthy hill when we don't have enough traction or torque.

AND.....lol, yes I do try to beat someone off the line street or dirt same as I try to beat someone up a hill or through a timed obstacle course. Hmmm, handing is very important too, eh?

To each his own, I do like slow and gentle, precise driving, but to do that we need an engine with far different computer programming than we currently have. This current prgramming shows all the inadequacies of poor algorythyms of loop logic which is why sometimes it is poor off the line or overshoots the rpms when you back off the throttle. It is not consistent and with a 6 speed it is difficult at best. 4speed auto's can be smoother and slightly less noticeable more due to the design of auto's than the engine computer logic.

Loop logic is always trying to find a "sweet spot" which is fine if you have more or less consitent speeds like on a highway/freeway. It sucks in the city and especially on trails where gear changes are frequent and rpms highly fluid. It tries to learn and remember and reset/adj its own logic.

I have noticed from the reports I've read from jeepers that the lower the gears 4:10. 3:73 5:13 5:88 etc the less noticeable the lag on acceleration. Part of this can be attributed to the tire size mixes as well. However, a consistent speed may sometimes be impossible. To test this for yourself try running your jeep in neutral and maintain a consistent RPM, any rpm of your choosing.

I have a lot more to learn on this subject but my experience in automation logic and programming has given me some insight into what is going on and why '07's and up are having these complaints. I would love to get my hands on the software and make some changes, plus make some over rides possible in certain situations like off road rock crawling.

I have a feeling that some roll overs are caused by the drive by wire currently used. Insurance stats would bear that out if true.
Old 12-06-2007, 06:42 PM
  #42  
JK Enthusiast
Thread Starter
 
fishit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UT
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JackMacOKC
Well I read enough to know you're complaining because of its low MPG, but I don't see what you're complaining about - you put a box as big as ours on a mini van engine and what do you expect? I read the specs on my JK before I bought it and knew it wouldn't have the getup my WJ with a Hemi has but it's not supposed to. So tell me again, what's the problem?

Regearing and bigger tires will only make it worse. I just don't see why expectations are high for the MPG on the 3.8 - as I gathered that was the major complaint here, without reading 5 pages.
This is what I wrote on one of the pages you didn't read:

"I dont care about mileage, I dont pay for gas anyway, company does, I care about the lack of power and I only said that its a double bone job to have no power and bad mileage. Its the power I want and it sounds like regearing should shut me up, so it is in all of our best interests to help me."

Some good points have been made about the torque making up for the on road zip, thats all fine, I just couldn't beleive that after driving a tired old cherokee for the last few years that It would be such a step backwards in onroad power. I didnt come from a porsche to a JK, it was a cherokee, a big heavy brickish jeep but with plenty of pep.

P.S. I also mentioned earlier in the thread that half of my motivation for bitching about power was to up my post count.
Old 12-07-2007, 01:52 AM
  #43  
JK Jedi
 
pearl-drum-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm thrilled with the fuel economy of the 3.8L...compared to my TJ. Guess it's all relative.
Old 12-07-2007, 02:17 AM
  #44  
JK Junkie
 
fish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Apple Valley, California Good ole Mojave Desert.
Posts: 3,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

i'm happy!!!!
Old 12-07-2007, 07:37 AM
  #45  
JK Enthusiast
Thread Starter
 
fishit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UT
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 2k2wranglerx
did you not test drive yours before you bought it?
I did test drive it, I knew that it was gutless, in fact if it were even more gutless I still would have bought it, I love jeeps, I love the jk.

Again, MGP means nothing to me, I dont pay for gas, its power that I am concerned with.

Buying a jeep is always a trade off. Great off road capabilities but not as much power as some suvs. My beef is, i thought it would at least have as much power as my old cherokee. Quit pretending that you guys are thrilled with the 3.8. Admitting that it leaves much to be desired (compared to previous jeep engines) does not mean you have blasphemed or forsaken mother jeep.

Finally, I am bored of this thread, I keep tying not to respond to it but I cant stop myself, even if I have nothing to say, its like a sick compulsion. I have resolved all of the concerns I have been bitching about yet here I am bitching more.

Please feel free to let this thread die a quiet death. Thanks for all the imput.

Damn, I'm even anoying myself.

Last edited by fishit; 12-07-2007 at 07:42 AM.
Old 12-07-2007, 07:39 AM
  #46  
Zee
JK Freak
 
Zee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Mine used to be gutless, then it passed 800KM and somethign changed.

It gets better mileage than my ZJ, and the power is adequate fopr what I use it for. I'm happy.

When I want to go 0-60 in 5.9, I take the Acura.
Old 12-07-2007, 06:58 PM
  #47  
JK Freak
 
sgmrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by fishit
I did test drive it, I knew that it was gutless, in fact if it were even more gutless I still would have bought it, I love jeeps, I love the jk.

Again, MGP means nothing to me, I dont pay for gas, its power that I am concerned with.

Buying a jeep is always a trade off. Great off road capabilities but not as much power as some suvs. My beef is, i thought it would at least have as much power as my old cherokee. Quit pretending that you guys are thrilled with the 3.8. Admitting that it leaves much to be desired (compared to previous jeep engines) does not mean you have blasphemed or forsaken mother jeep.

Finally, I am bored of this thread, I keep tying not to respond to it but I cant stop myself, even if I have nothing to say, its like a sick compulsion. I have resolved all of the concerns I have been bitching about yet here I am bitching more.

Please feel free to let this thread die a quiet death. Thanks for all the imput.

Damn, I'm even anoying myself.

Too late, Just one more post. The Computer restricts the power until after 1k miles. It also learns how you drive. This is all in JP magazine and from informed Chrysler dealers. CAI and exhaust help even more for low end acceleration after 1k....

Can I have your gas card....



Quick Reply: Yugo Engine In My JK.



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:40 PM.