2014+ Jeep Cherokee Forums banner

41 - 57 of 57 Posts

Registered
Joined
946 Posts
Discussion Starter · #41 ·
I should do mine as well. Curious to see how mine is since I have an early build press vehicle. Won't be back in town for a while though due to work.

Glad I was able to facilitate some useful threads recently.
 

Registered
2019 Trailhawk Elite 2.0T Olive Green Metallic Pearlcoat
Joined
3,345 Posts
So a few things I noticed, yes the turbo makes more power than the V6 no question, but did you notice how the peak values are just that very peaky and the huge drop in torque during the shifts? That's costing a lot of performance right there, it also seems to be limiting torque down low or maybe it's just the turbo lag, as an example my Tuned 3.2 is making 320nm right at 2550rpm peaks at 4000rpm and stays relatively consistent with a slight trailing off to around 320nm after 6500rpm (shifting at 7000)

Where as on the Turbo you are around 263mn around 2400rpm then 362nm around 3500rpm but then really starts to build at 4400rpm or so going from 389-416nm but then by 5000rpm it's time to shift and then its cutting power again.

This is super awesome info thank you very much, just reinforces like i've said all along the turbo has lots of potential its just not being given a chance.

As for AlfaOBD yes you will need a security module bypass in order to make any changes, and i'm shocked the readings worked without the module but for the changes you will need it
What you just explained Tyler, and what Mikes data is showing is pretty much spot on by my low tech, "seat of the pants performance observation learned from driving the thing for year and a half now. It's awesome to finally see what you guys are getting with your real time data. There's definitely some little tweaks here and there that would really bring out the full potential, even with the stock hp and torque specs. Keep working on it guys!!! This is awesome...馃槑
 

Registered
2019 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk Elite 2.0L, w/factory tow, sunroof, technology group,
Joined
177 Posts
So a few things I noticed, yes the turbo makes more power than the V6 no question, but did you notice how the peak values are just that very peaky and the huge drop in torque during the shifts? That's costing a lot of performance right there, it also seems to be limiting torque down low or maybe it's just the turbo lag, as an example my Tuned 3.2 is making 320nm right at 2550rpm peaks at 4000rpm and stays relatively consistent with a slight trailing off to around 320nm after 6500rpm (shifting at 7000)

Where as on the Turbo you are around 263mn around 2400rpm then 362nm around 3500rpm but then really starts to build at 4400rpm or so going from 389-416nm but then by 5000rpm it's time to shift and then its cutting power again.

This is super awesome info thank you very much, just reinforces like i've said all along the turbo has lots of potential its just not being given a chance.

As for AlfaOBD yes you will need a security module bypass in order to make any changes, and i'm shocked the readings worked without the module but for the changes you will need it
Its definitely something with the way its tuned. It's hard to explain, but you can do two pulls back to back, and neither will feel the same (though both seem just as fast speed wise). On one you can feel it really press you into your seat, while the other barely at all. I'm wondering if they pull some of the torque on the low end to reduce wear on the drive train. Overall though, the engine was probably more designed for use with the etorque system, which would cover the delay in tuning. When you get on it, the transmission seems to know exactly which gear to go into; however, it sure takes its time to get there. I can go from normal driving to flooring it, and it will take at least a full second, or two seconds at times, before it upshifts and pulls. I know back in the day, transmission would do two upshift to find the right gear, while it doesn't do that, it does feel like it takes that much time to decide before it shifts.

Putting it in sport mode does help a good bit, but I hate how it hangs on to the gear so long before dropping the rpms back down. For normal cruising, the torque feels like it comes on much lower. The delay in shifts is not really as noticeable as it doesn't shift all that often under normal scenarios, and plenty of power left on tap before it needs to upshift for more. Cruising RPM is around 1,500 to 1,800. It generally shifts around 1,800 to 2,500 under normal driving conditions. I'm not sure how that lines up with the 3.2. It could be similar.

Also, as a side note, 3,500 is were you really start to feel it pull. Too much higher than that and you can feel the torque starting to drop off. Probably due to the turbo running out of air. I think a lot of the feel depends on if it holds the higher gear and adds the torque, or drops to the lower gear and revs it out. Time wise they are both feel equally fast, and its really hard to make it do one or the other by choice.
 

Registered
2019 Trailhawk Elite 2.0T Olive Green Metallic Pearlcoat
Joined
3,345 Posts
@MikeR. I would like to see the difference between auto shift, and full manual. I do feel a slight difference, though I still feel the weird power loss during shifts. Through my observation, with the current programming, Sport Mode, full manual, shifts around 4800-5000 seems to be the best acceleration performance FEEL, and if I were trying to pull a quick et and speed on the 1/4 mile, that's going to get it right now with what we currently have to work with. Like I said, I'd like to see those numbers...There's just some quirky "Communication Breakdown" going on between the engine and the transmission that needs adjusting I think...LOL!!!馃槑
 

Registered
2019 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk Elite 2.0L, w/factory tow, sunroof, technology group,
Joined
177 Posts
I might do a manual shift recording to see what the torque looks like down low (where it would normally upshift), but I'm not a big fan of manual shifting with the KL when trying to go fast. It just feels like its so slow to shift, I have to start the shift about 1K rpm beforehand or I'll hit the rev limiter before the shift takes place.
 

Registered
2019 Trailhawk Elite 2.0T Olive Green Metallic Pearlcoat
Joined
3,345 Posts
I might do a manual shift recording to see what the torque looks like down low (where it would normally upshift), but I'm not a big fan of manual shifting with the KL when trying to go fast. It just feels like its so slow to shift, I have to start the shift about 1K rpm beforehand or I'll hit the rev limiter before the shift takes place.
Exactly!!! If you can get it to shift, and keep it in the sweet spot, and just keep it spooled up, it would be amazing!!! You're right though, you have to bang the shifter 1500 rpm before you actually want your shift point to be...LOL
 

Registered
Joined
601 Posts
BTW, have you ever seen a post about engine related failure on a 2.0T??? LOL!!!馃槑
How many posts did you read about engine related failures when the Pentastar engines were only 2 or 3 years into production? Get my point? Only until the 2.0 engine has been in use for an equivalent amount of time as a Pentastar currently has, will you be able to make a valid comparison.

That said, for you 2.0 owners I truly hope the engine does prove to be solid as a rock!

I will now bow out of this thread and let the engine guys continue their discussion and analysis. And I think we may be witnessing the creation of two new BFFs. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: UN4GTBL

Premium Member
Joined
3,502 Posts
The manual shifting is a no go,


I thought maybe autostick would make it better but I guess that's not the case.

It sucks that there is such a narrow window with the factory programming of good torque, being 3500-5000.

I don't even think modification to make the engine more power would really even be necessary more so just in the torque management side of both the PCM and TCM. If someone worked with HP tuners to get a working HPT file I would be more than happy to modify some of the values and work on getting the full performance out of the vehicle all while using the "stock power"
 

Premium Member
Joined
3,502 Posts
So I posted earlier the engine torque of my tuned 3.2 not an entirely fair comparison to the stock vehicles we are talking about.
Here is my 2014 which isn't tuned in this video (obviously not making as much torque as my modified one) but the interesting part is that it only drops engine power during the 1-2 shift and the torque does stay more consistent vs the turbo.

 

Registered
2019 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk Elite 2.0L, w/factory tow, sunroof, technology group,
Joined
177 Posts
I tried to get a 3rd gear pull from around 2K, to redline during lunch, but I had trouble with the alfa disconnecting. I have torque app and abd2aa set to auto turn on each time, so it sometimes give me trouble. I'll get it up this evening, but it should show the torque curve. You can really feel the torque start coming on around 2500 to 3000, but really starts to build just after 3500 and then drops off at, or just around redline. I'd have to go back and look, but maybe its dropping just a tad out of the larger powerband. It could even have something to do with the slow shifts, where it takes just a second to spool the little bit it lost during the shift.
 

Premium Member
Joined
3,502 Posts
Manual shifting doesn't work the best another option you could try is instead of full throttle going 3/4 throttle or so, you would then have the vehicle upshift at a lower RPM however then you can't use sport mode because it holds gears longer at lower throttle input. I think i've got it figured out. Let's just assume the worst and that you can't tune the PCM but the TCM is supported and you can make changes (granted its expensive)

Refer to this picture below showing the shift patterns for auto and sport mode



The column on the left is accelerator pedal position pretty self explanatory, I drew a line at 50% throttle on the sport mode table you can see that even below 100% throttle it's nearly shifting at the maximum (6500rpm) so letting off a bit in sport mode isn't going to work.

Now if you look at the top table even though in auto mode the transmission shifts at the same RPM at WOT it will shift a bit lower if you get it less than full throttle.

So the easy and free solution is to find just the right amount of throttle to get the vehicle to shift at around 4800rpm and not start to run out of steam as RPM's rise.

If you were to tune the TCM you would just lower the values for WOT throttle shifts and then you would be able to keep the engine in it's narrow power band longer. Its sort of a band aid fix but it would work.

I don't really want to elaborate too much further (we could go to PM's) since there is a jackass posting in another thread and I don't really want to give him any info for "tuning" his vehicle, but this is good progress so far.
 

Registered
2019 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk Elite 2.0L, w/factory tow, sunroof, technology group,
Joined
177 Posts
I'm not really trying to get any more power or speed out of it. Its got plenty for me. I'm more or less just trying to understand the torque curve, and figure where the sweet spot is to get the most feel of the torque. I think the slow shifts from the transmission are holding it back more than anything, and not sure there is anything software related that would significantly change that.
 

Registered
2019 Trailhawk Elite 2.0T Olive Green Metallic Pearlcoat
Joined
3,345 Posts
How many posts did you read about engine related failures when the Pentastar engines were only 2 or 3 years into production? Get my point? Only until the 2.0 engine has been in use for an equivalent amount of time as a Pentastar currently has, will you be able to make a valid comparison.

That said, for you 2.0 owners I truly hope the engine does prove to be solid as a rock!

I will now bow out of this thread and let the engine guys continue their discussion and analysis. And I think we may be witnessing the creation of two new BFFs. ;)
Well, actually when our KL's came out in 2014, the Pentastars in your version were in the fourth year of production. That's 12 years now, and yet those handful of pesky redundant little issues continue to persist. The 3.2 is a great little engine for those of you that have a good run with them, but I think it's time for a complete redesign, closer to what other manufacturers are doing with their V6 designs. A modern 2021 redesigned V6 could be huge for FCA, just not for Jeep, but across the line. Just imagine an updated 3.2 Turbo, now that would be cool. Hell, we know that the 2.0T is capable right now of much more, but they won't let us in to see. I want to see FCA engine specs compare and compete much better with the other manufacturers. I mean really, if a Ford 2.0T EcoBoost can very easily, and dependably be tuned to 400hp, what's the deal??? The deal is FCA is far behind in the powerplant department, and kinda always has been since the 426 Hemi...The only engine that holds its own right now is the mighty Hellcat, and even those are are starting to show some little redundat things too...馃槑
 

Registered
Joined
601 Posts
Well, actually when our KL's came out in 2014, the Pentastars in your version were in the fourth year of production. That's 12 years now, and yet those handful of pesky redundant little issues continue to persist. The 3.2 is a great little engine for those of you that have a good run with them, but I think it's time for a complete redesign, closer to what other manufacturers are doing with their V6 designs. A modern 2021 redesigned V6 could be huge for FCA, just not for Jeep, but across the line. Just imagine an updated 3.2 Turbo, now that would be cool. Hell, we know that the 2.0T is capable right now of much more, but they won't let us in to see. I want to see FCA engine specs compare and compete much better with the other manufacturers. I mean really, if a Ford 2.0T EcoBoost can very easily, and dependably be tuned to 400hp, what's the deal??? The deal is FCA is far behind in the powerplant department, and kinda always has been since the 426 Hemi...The only engine that holds its own right now is the mighty Hellcat, and even those are are starting to show some little redundat things too...馃槑
I agree. I guess what I'm ultimately thinking is that since the Pentastars....at least too many of them....have issues, I'm just not getting a warm fuzzy that the 2.0 will not have them as well sometime down the line. I hope that is not the case because I would like to think that FCA finally gets their sheet together and makes an engine without issues like the Pentastars have. I mean really, it's inexcusable.

After getting my Jeep and joining this forum, I was was a little shocked about the problems I read about the Pentastars. I'm one of those guys who, from experience, just expect an engine to easily last for 150,000 plus miles without any issues. My only other FCA vehicle was a 1995 Dodge Avenger which had a Mitsubishi-developed 2.5-liter V6. When I got rid of it...because everything else was falling apart, the engine had 175.000 on it and didn't burn a drop of oil.

So yeah, very disappointed to learn that if I keep my current Jeep that I may not even make 100k without some internal engine problem!
 

Registered
2019 Trailhawk Elite 2.0T Olive Green Metallic Pearlcoat
Joined
3,345 Posts
I agree. I guess what I'm ultimately thinking is that since the Pentastars....at least too many of them....have issues, I'm just not getting a warm fuzzy that the 2.0 will not have them as well sometime down the line. I hope that is not the case because I would like to think that FCA finally gets their sheet together and makes an engine without issues like the Pentastars have. I mean really, it's inexcusable.

After getting my Jeep and joining this forum, I was was a little shocked about the problems I read about the Pentastars. I'm one of those guys who, from experience, just expect an engine to easily last for 150,000 plus miles without any issues. My only other FCA vehicle was a 1995 Dodge Avenger which had a Mitsubishi-developed 2.5-liter V6. When I got rid of it...because everything else was falling apart, the engine had 175.000 on it and didn't burn a drop of oil.

So yeah, very disappointed to learn that if I keep my current Jeep that I may not even make 100k without some internal engine problem!
We Jeep owners have always had to be a resourceful bunch LOL!!!
 

Registered
2019 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk Elite 2.0L, w/factory tow, sunroof, technology group,
Joined
177 Posts
@Tyler-98-W68 I finally got around to the 3rd gear pull. Started down below boost curve to see where it starts to come in. You can see a lot more detail running it at .25 speed. Also did another 0-75ish mph run with graphs turned off to see if it would help refresh rate.

3rd Gear Pull

0-75ish
 
41 - 57 of 57 Posts
Top