So you're saying a turbo motor of hp to the 3.6 would be cleaner ?
They have the same 4/10 rating with the .gov
Essentially, yes. There's calcs behind the scenes for this and makes no sense to the customer because there's zero transparency.
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
Detroit wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:01 pmEssentially, yes. There's calcs behind the scenes for this and makes no sense to the customer because there's zero transparency.
It's a big issue because OEMs are being forced to push more expensive/complex but "cleaner" on .gov paper to consumers when the less "clean" engines perform exactly the same.
No consumers care about teragrams of carbon emissions.
max225 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:05 pmDetroit wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:01 pm
Essentially, yes. There's calcs behind the scenes for this and makes no sense to the customer because there's zero transparency.
It's a big issue because OEMs are being forced to push more expensive/complex but "cleaner" on .gov paper to consumers when the less "clean" engines perform exactly the same.
No consumers care about teragrams of carbon emissions.
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
SHE doesn't, but the people who support her must. How the hell do you make carbon fiber sailing yacht money as a 14 year old about ruining the planet?
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
The reason the 2.0T exists is two fold to my understanding...
I don't social media.
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
More so it's green house gas emissions, measured most commonly in teragrams of carbon emission. It's a bigger deal in Europe than here, but instituted some pretty tight regs around this too. Trump's trying to undo that, sure...but when a new powertrain pricetag starts with a number with 9 zeros behind it, future planning is pretty critical.Johnny_P wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:37 pmThe reason the 2.0T exists is two fold to my understanding...
1) Marginally better fuel economy for CAFE reasons. 1-2 MPG improvement, 10%, on your biggest selling vehicle can have a large impact.
2) Taxes abroad. Other countries get taxed or pay yearly on engine displacement, so there's a heavy incentive to have a motor that's under 2.0L for places like China and Europe, and the Jeep fits that at 1995cc.
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
Ah. Interesting.Detroit wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:44 pmMore so it's green house gas emissions, measured most commonly in teragrams of carbon emission. It's a bigger deal in Europe than here, but instituted some pretty tight regs around this too. Trump's trying to undo that, sure...but when a new powertrain pricetag starts with a number with 9 zeros behind it, future planning is pretty critical.Johnny_P wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:37 pm
The reason the 2.0T exists is two fold to my understanding...
1) Marginally better fuel economy for CAFE reasons. 1-2 MPG improvement, 10%, on your biggest selling vehicle can have a large impact.
2) Taxes abroad. Other countries get taxed or pay yearly on engine displacement, so there's a heavy incentive to have a motor that's under 2.0L for places like China and Europe, and the Jeep fits that at 1995cc.
It is listed as slightly lower 10% for the 2.slow. Is that big enough to justify the capex ? The euro thing makes perfect sense though. The 2.slow powered jeep is quite stout actually based on everything I can find. Even in rubi trim its still around 7ish to 60 which is at allDetroit wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:44 pmMore so it's green house gas emissions, measured most commonly in teragrams of carbon emission. It's a bigger deal in Europe than here, but instituted some pretty tight regs around this too. Trump's trying to undo that, sure...but when a new powertrain pricetag starts with a number with 9 zeros behind it, future planning is pretty critical.Johnny_P wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:37 pm
The reason the 2.0T exists is two fold to my understanding...
1) Marginally better fuel economy for CAFE reasons. 1-2 MPG improvement, 10%, on your biggest selling vehicle can have a large impact.
2) Taxes abroad. Other countries get taxed or pay yearly on engine displacement, so there's a heavy incentive to have a motor that's under 2.0L for places like China and Europe, and the Jeep fits that at 1995cc.
10% is HUGE in this world. Especially when non compliance means huge fines or worse...not able to sell vehicles.max225 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 3:16 pmIt is listed as slightly lower 10% for the 2.slow. Is that big enough to justify the capex ? The euro thing makes perfect sense though. The 2.slow powered jeep is quite stout actually based on everything I can find. Even in rubi trim its still around 7ish to 60 which is at allDetroit wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:44 pm
More so it's green house gas emissions, measured most commonly in teragrams of carbon emission. It's a bigger deal in Europe than here, but instituted some pretty tight regs around this too. Trump's trying to undo that, sure...but when a new powertrain pricetag starts with a number with 9 zeros behind it, future planning is pretty critical.
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
It doesn't suck. It's not really any different speed or power wise than the V6 just doesn't down shift as much on the highway, sounds worse, and has a whiff of turbo lag before it gets going.max225 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 3:16 pmIt is listed as slightly lower 10% for the 2.slow. Is that big enough to justify the capex ? The euro thing makes perfect sense though. The 2.slow powered jeep is quite stout actually based on everything I can find. Even in rubi trim its still around 7ish to 60 which is at allDetroit wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:44 pm
More so it's green house gas emissions, measured most commonly in teragrams of carbon emission. It's a bigger deal in Europe than here, but instituted some pretty tight regs around this too. Trump's trying to undo that, sure...but when a new powertrain pricetag starts with a number with 9 zeros behind it, future planning is pretty critical.
The BSG really hides any turbo lag. I find the 2.0 BSG to actually be a tad bit more fun around town. It's noticeably torquier, but agreed that it sounds worse by a wide margin. Somehow, the 3.6 exhaust note is tuned to be remarkably sporty. The JT sounds different from the JL, a bit less sporty but with a more powerful truck-like sound. Hard to describe. In contrast, I felt like the 3.6 in my Colorado sounded like the V6's in my mom's GM minivans when I was growing up. Overall very meh.Johnny_P wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:52 pmIt doesn't suck. It's not really any different speed or power wise than the V6 just doesn't down shift as much on the highway, sounds worse, and has a whiff of turbo lag before it gets going.max225 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 3:16 pm
It is listed as slightly lower 10% for the 2.slow. Is that big enough to justify the capex ? The euro thing makes perfect sense though. The 2.slow powered jeep is quite stout actually based on everything I can find. Even in rubi trim its still around 7ish to 60 which is at all
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
Especially the widebody. So much
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
Hard parked
Desertbreh wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.