Bill Kearney

> my point
> is that the guy who was supposed to be the expert did not.

Clerk at a show? Expert? Surely you MUST be joking...

Bill Kearney

> my point
> is that the guy who was supposed to be the expert did not.

Clerk at a show? Expert? Surely you MUST be joking...

Matt Macchiarolo

Yep, too bad there isn't a chart showing torque net for the Wrangler V6 at
3250 rpm, I'd wager it's within 15 lb-ft of the I-6 at the same rpm.

"Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
news:MveDf.54710$V.35586@fed1read04...
> And we all know that "240 lbs./ft. of torque at 4,000 rpm" is about as
> useful to the typical offroader as ---- on a bull are. ;)
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>> Apparently the V6 in the Wrangler is not the same one as in the Liberty:
>> http://www.4wdandsportutility.com/fe...wd_07wrangler/
>>
>> "Though many expected the venerable 4.0L inline-six to be replaced with
>> the 3.7 SOHC 90-degree V-6 widely used in the Dakota and Liberty, the new
>> Wrangler will have a version of the 60-degree, 3.8L pushrod V-6 out of
>> the minivans. In the Jeep application, the engine produces 205 horsepower
>> at 5,200 rpm, and 240 lbs./ft. of torque at 4,000 rpm, an increase of 15
>> horsepower and 5 lbs./ft., respectively."
>>
>> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>> news:Aq2dnR8-2pdewUDeRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
>>
>>>Yes I know what the torque values they are 235 ft.lbs at 3250 rpms and
>>>190 hp at 4600 rpms your link chartis incorrect for newer I-6 engines, my
>>>point is that the guy who was supposed to be the expert did not. There
>>>were a bunch of other Jeep people there that had far more knowledge than
>>>I did and they were really busting the guys hump.
>>>Coasty
>>>
>>>"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
>>>news:tJSdnW5vKbdyikDeRVn-ow@comcast.com...
>>>
>>>>At their introductions, there similar complaints about the YJ as well,
>>>>styling, urbanizing the marque, etc, and theTJ with its tossing away
>>>>leaf springs and car-like interior.
>>>>
>>>>Won't be the first short wheelbase Jeep with a V-6...
>>>>http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/en...ntless225.html
>>>>
>>>>You might also review the peak torque specs of the 4.0L:
>>>>http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc242.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>>>>news:ENOdnXS6-J2LNUHeRVn-hA@comcast.com...
>>>>
>>>>>I was at the Washington DC auto show this past week saw the new 2007
>>>>>Wrangler. I was impressed with the overall design but when I
>>>>>confronted the representative with some question about the V-6 he
>>>>>skirted the issue. I asked why the change to the V-6? Well he stated
>>>>>that it is a cleaner engine and provides better gas mileage with more
>>>>>HP and a better overall engine for off roading. I ask, ok but the I-6
>>>>>develops max torque at 1200 rpm and the v-6 at around 3200 rpm. So how
>>>>>is it better for off roading you need the torque at the low end not the
>>>>>high end. He said it is all in the gearing of the transmission and the
>>>>>front and rear differentials. I pointed out the new specifications as
>>>>>far as gearing were almost identical on the 2007 as to it's
>>>>>predecessors. A few others were also giving the guy a hard time too. I
>>>>>am just glad I have my 2004 TJ only tome will tell if the hardcore off
>>>>>roaders acept the new 2007.
>>>>>
>>>>>Hey BIll, they had a 1944 Dodge WC-56 Command Car there it looks like
>>>>>it would be a fun toy, maybe DC should bring it back in the Jeep form.
>>>>>
>>>>>Coasty
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/

Matt Macchiarolo

Yep, too bad there isn't a chart showing torque net for the Wrangler V6 at
3250 rpm, I'd wager it's within 15 lb-ft of the I-6 at the same rpm.

"Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
news:MveDf.54710$V.35586@fed1read04...
> And we all know that "240 lbs./ft. of torque at 4,000 rpm" is about as
> useful to the typical offroader as ---- on a bull are. ;)
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>> Apparently the V6 in the Wrangler is not the same one as in the Liberty:
>> http://www.4wdandsportutility.com/fe...wd_07wrangler/
>>
>> "Though many expected the venerable 4.0L inline-six to be replaced with
>> the 3.7 SOHC 90-degree V-6 widely used in the Dakota and Liberty, the new
>> Wrangler will have a version of the 60-degree, 3.8L pushrod V-6 out of
>> the minivans. In the Jeep application, the engine produces 205 horsepower
>> at 5,200 rpm, and 240 lbs./ft. of torque at 4,000 rpm, an increase of 15
>> horsepower and 5 lbs./ft., respectively."
>>
>> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>> news:Aq2dnR8-2pdewUDeRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
>>
>>>Yes I know what the torque values they are 235 ft.lbs at 3250 rpms and
>>>190 hp at 4600 rpms your link chartis incorrect for newer I-6 engines, my
>>>point is that the guy who was supposed to be the expert did not. There
>>>were a bunch of other Jeep people there that had far more knowledge than
>>>I did and they were really busting the guys hump.
>>>Coasty
>>>
>>>"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
>>>news:tJSdnW5vKbdyikDeRVn-ow@comcast.com...
>>>
>>>>At their introductions, there similar complaints about the YJ as well,
>>>>styling, urbanizing the marque, etc, and theTJ with its tossing away
>>>>leaf springs and car-like interior.
>>>>
>>>>Won't be the first short wheelbase Jeep with a V-6...
>>>>http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/en...ntless225.html
>>>>
>>>>You might also review the peak torque specs of the 4.0L:
>>>>http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc242.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>>>>news:ENOdnXS6-J2LNUHeRVn-hA@comcast.com...
>>>>
>>>>>I was at the Washington DC auto show this past week saw the new 2007
>>>>>Wrangler. I was impressed with the overall design but when I
>>>>>confronted the representative with some question about the V-6 he
>>>>>skirted the issue. I asked why the change to the V-6? Well he stated
>>>>>that it is a cleaner engine and provides better gas mileage with more
>>>>>HP and a better overall engine for off roading. I ask, ok but the I-6
>>>>>develops max torque at 1200 rpm and the v-6 at around 3200 rpm. So how
>>>>>is it better for off roading you need the torque at the low end not the
>>>>>high end. He said it is all in the gearing of the transmission and the
>>>>>front and rear differentials. I pointed out the new specifications as
>>>>>far as gearing were almost identical on the 2007 as to it's
>>>>>predecessors. A few others were also giving the guy a hard time too. I
>>>>>am just glad I have my 2004 TJ only tome will tell if the hardcore off
>>>>>roaders acept the new 2007.
>>>>>
>>>>>Hey BIll, they had a 1944 Dodge WC-56 Command Car there it looks like
>>>>>it would be a fun toy, maybe DC should bring it back in the Jeep form.
>>>>>
>>>>>Coasty
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/

Matt Macchiarolo

Yep, too bad there isn't a chart showing torque net for the Wrangler V6 at
3250 rpm, I'd wager it's within 15 lb-ft of the I-6 at the same rpm.

"Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
news:MveDf.54710$V.35586@fed1read04...
> And we all know that "240 lbs./ft. of torque at 4,000 rpm" is about as
> useful to the typical offroader as ---- on a bull are. ;)
>
> Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>> Apparently the V6 in the Wrangler is not the same one as in the Liberty:
>> http://www.4wdandsportutility.com/fe...wd_07wrangler/
>>
>> "Though many expected the venerable 4.0L inline-six to be replaced with
>> the 3.7 SOHC 90-degree V-6 widely used in the Dakota and Liberty, the new
>> Wrangler will have a version of the 60-degree, 3.8L pushrod V-6 out of
>> the minivans. In the Jeep application, the engine produces 205 horsepower
>> at 5,200 rpm, and 240 lbs./ft. of torque at 4,000 rpm, an increase of 15
>> horsepower and 5 lbs./ft., respectively."
>>
>> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>> news:Aq2dnR8-2pdewUDeRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
>>
>>>Yes I know what the torque values they are 235 ft.lbs at 3250 rpms and
>>>190 hp at 4600 rpms your link chartis incorrect for newer I-6 engines, my
>>>point is that the guy who was supposed to be the expert did not. There
>>>were a bunch of other Jeep people there that had far more knowledge than
>>>I did and they were really busting the guys hump.
>>>Coasty
>>>
>>>"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
>>>news:tJSdnW5vKbdyikDeRVn-ow@comcast.com...
>>>
>>>>At their introductions, there similar complaints about the YJ as well,
>>>>styling, urbanizing the marque, etc, and theTJ with its tossing away
>>>>leaf springs and car-like interior.
>>>>
>>>>Won't be the first short wheelbase Jeep with a V-6...
>>>>http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/en...ntless225.html
>>>>
>>>>You might also review the peak torque specs of the 4.0L:
>>>>http://www.off-road.com/jeep/tech/engine/amc242.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>>>>news:ENOdnXS6-J2LNUHeRVn-hA@comcast.com...
>>>>
>>>>>I was at the Washington DC auto show this past week saw the new 2007
>>>>>Wrangler. I was impressed with the overall design but when I
>>>>>confronted the representative with some question about the V-6 he
>>>>>skirted the issue. I asked why the change to the V-6? Well he stated
>>>>>that it is a cleaner engine and provides better gas mileage with more
>>>>>HP and a better overall engine for off roading. I ask, ok but the I-6
>>>>>develops max torque at 1200 rpm and the v-6 at around 3200 rpm. So how
>>>>>is it better for off roading you need the torque at the low end not the
>>>>>high end. He said it is all in the gearing of the transmission and the
>>>>>front and rear differentials. I pointed out the new specifications as
>>>>>far as gearing were almost identical on the 2007 as to it's
>>>>>predecessors. A few others were also giving the guy a hard time too. I
>>>>>am just glad I have my 2004 TJ only tome will tell if the hardcore off
>>>>>roaders acept the new 2007.
>>>>>
>>>>>Hey BIll, they had a 1944 Dodge WC-56 Command Car there it looks like
>>>>>it would be a fun toy, maybe DC should bring it back in the Jeep form.
>>>>>
>>>>>Coasty
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/

mabar

I would sure like to see a torque curve comparison chart comparing the I-6
to the 2007 3.8L V-6. I think the fact that Jeep has not published a torque
curve chart means that the new 3.8 probably does not come close to the I-6
torque output at lower rpms.

Tom

"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:sZCdnSWUWPaciEPeRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> Yep, too bad there isn't a chart showing torque net for the Wrangler V6 at
> 3250 rpm, I'd wager it's within 15 lb-ft of the I-6 at the same rpm.
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:MveDf.54710$V.35586@fed1read04...
> > And we all know that "240 lbs./ft. of torque at 4,000 rpm" is about as
> > useful to the typical offroader as ---- on a bull are. ;)
> >

mabar

I would sure like to see a torque curve comparison chart comparing the I-6
to the 2007 3.8L V-6. I think the fact that Jeep has not published a torque
curve chart means that the new 3.8 probably does not come close to the I-6
torque output at lower rpms.

Tom

"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:sZCdnSWUWPaciEPeRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> Yep, too bad there isn't a chart showing torque net for the Wrangler V6 at
> 3250 rpm, I'd wager it's within 15 lb-ft of the I-6 at the same rpm.
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:MveDf.54710$V.35586@fed1read04...
> > And we all know that "240 lbs./ft. of torque at 4,000 rpm" is about as
> > useful to the typical offroader as ---- on a bull are. ;)
> >

mabar

I would sure like to see a torque curve comparison chart comparing the I-6
to the 2007 3.8L V-6. I think the fact that Jeep has not published a torque
curve chart means that the new 3.8 probably does not come close to the I-6
torque output at lower rpms.

Tom

"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:sZCdnSWUWPaciEPeRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> Yep, too bad there isn't a chart showing torque net for the Wrangler V6 at
> 3250 rpm, I'd wager it's within 15 lb-ft of the I-6 at the same rpm.
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:MveDf.54710$V.35586@fed1read04...
> > And we all know that "240 lbs./ft. of torque at 4,000 rpm" is about as
> > useful to the typical offroader as ---- on a bull are. ;)
> >