Fun Fact- both the 2.0L turbo inline 4 and the 3.0L twin turbo inline 6 are called Hurricane engines, its a family of engines similar to Ecoboost from Ford. According to Stellantis, the inline 6 is based on the inline 4, they just added 2 cylinders.
@hochhaul
Жыл бұрын
Ford missed a massive opportunity by not reviving their 300 Inline-6, turbocharging it and calling it the Ecoboost. Yeah they wanted a more compact v6 that could go in sedans and SUV's but they could have have both an I6 and V6. Very stupid.
@paladin11C40
Жыл бұрын
@@hochhaul It seems like the Europeans are going more inline 6 motors now. Mercedes and BMW, and now Stallantis. That is a huge chunk of the Euro market. I like the inline better, more torque and more reliable in my opinion
@davidkanalos6710
5 ай бұрын
I like the 3.6 non turbo plenty of power and will go over 300000 miles
@go_cats0735
Жыл бұрын
I love the 6.4L Hemi in my Grand Wagoneer. I don't have an issue with the fuel economy, I understand high horsepower and high weight = poor fuel economy. That doesn't change whether it's naturally aspirated or turbo charged. The painful part of the equation is premium fuel. If the Hurricane engine still requires premium fuel, what's the point? The sound of the 6.4 is worth the difference in fuel economy if that's the case.
@Qugie
Жыл бұрын
Amen brother....amen. That little savings is not worth giving up the V8. If you ask me they could of just made a new V8 that did 2 miles per gallon better on fuel, I mean that's all the I6 turbo did.
@MrT-jv6rf
Жыл бұрын
Well said I Completely Agree!
@blackice7408
2 ай бұрын
Especially when the hurricane engine only gets 1 mpg better than the v8. They invested millions just to get 1 mpg better?🤦🏿 not to mention how you'll get worse gas mileage than the v8 when you tow or try to accelerate quickly
@risby1930
Жыл бұрын
A Fiat engine, made in Mexico, in a French car company, what could possibly go wrong?
@hilljackzack7284
Жыл бұрын
Wait I thought Mitsubishi made it…
@DH-mf2lv
Жыл бұрын
My biggest concern is longevity. Only time will tell. Great review! Thanks for sharing.
@ScarletKnightmare
Жыл бұрын
Yeah that's the key variable
@ramrider1453
Жыл бұрын
Well if it’s like the old slant six then it will be indestructible. But yes time will tell
@jeffforbes70
Жыл бұрын
@@ramrider1453 nothing like the old slant 6 or jeep 4.0.two things i don't like is coated cylinder walls vs cast iron block or steal sleeved. direct injection but no port injected.
@icare7151
Жыл бұрын
With over 45 years of testing, evaluation and standards setting engineering experience, there are huge smoke and mirrors going on here: I anticipate the fuel economy and reliability of the new Hurricane engines will be huge issues in high altitude applications. They are using premium fuel and sea level fuel economy for their fuel economy ratings. They must go with a 10sp transmission and enlarge the oil and coolant systems and give fuel economy ratings in high altitude with regular octane gasoline. Reality of their dysfunctional Woke agenda: There are no gains in emissions or fuel economy dropping the eco diesel, 5.7 Hemi v8 and v6. The Hurricane engine is all smoke and mirrors!
@hellkitty1014
Жыл бұрын
It was developed for 6 years. 20M miles of testing. Forged internals. Parallel turbos(not sequential which are more failure prone). Plus inline 6s have less complexity and better balance. I think it will be just fine.
@ericfaley9019
Жыл бұрын
We finally received a Grand Wagoner with the Hurricane engine for our dealership inventory. I was impressed strong mid range. Great pulling power. My worry is longevity of the small engine.
@Polack-ml9fh
Жыл бұрын
A lot of people said the same thing about the 3.5 v6 ford started using in their f150’s…. 13 years ago!
@67wildwolf
Жыл бұрын
You do realize that European cars and trucks have used turbos longer than we have. The people that say they don't last long to me any way seem to be lacking in knowable facts and tend to show there ignorance. Fords been running turbos in the US longer than most companies.
@Polack-ml9fh
Жыл бұрын
@@67wildwolf exactly, 3.5 ecoboost has been a thing since 2009. There’s plenty of them running around with 300,000+ miles.
@Alan-tr5uj
Жыл бұрын
This is an inline 6, all-forged internals; boosted or no- these will easily outlast the V8 engines they're replacing. Why do you think Semi tractors use inline 6 engines?? They're naturally balanced, don't have any of the weaknesses introduced by the V configuration, and by design last much longer. One only need look back at the Jeep 4.0, Ford 4.9, Toyota 2JZ; any one of those shames the longevity of the 5.7 & 6.4 Chrysler V8's. This new 3.0 was built from the ground up to handle large amounts of boost, and with long-term reliability in mind. Hey at least there will be no more failed lifters and destroyed camshafts, and associated dreaded tick.
@panthermartin7784
Жыл бұрын
@@67wildwolf It blows my mind how uneducated and stunned some people are, I mean , they are basically stuck in the 70's. Welcome to the age where a 6 banger or even a 4 cyl can out torque a V8 big block .
@glennstiller7616
Жыл бұрын
I6 will always be better than V6 in my opinion. Won't give up my Hemi Durango though. Would be a great engine in the (supposedly) upcoming Dakota. Good honest review Tim.
@RickNethery
Жыл бұрын
I disagree, inline six cylinder engines are very long and that limits which vehicles they can be mounted into. A v6 can fit into an engine bay designed for a four cylinder. 👍
@noniespam
Жыл бұрын
LOVE V8’s but I’ll take,a,straight 6 over a V6 anytime. Remembering the Ford 300cu straight 6. The thing was bullet proof.
@ohaggdah
Жыл бұрын
The thing is, since a combustion engine is basically just an air pump, if you want a certain number HP, you can go with either displacement or forced induction. Applied to an identical vehicle (in this case), it won't change fuel economy numbers by much, because the same energy is still required to move the same mass. Once those turbos spool up to make the power, you'll be chugging gas for sure... So it comes down to drivability and what characteristics you prefer. Personally, for a heavy vehicle like this, I think a slow turning V8 makes more sense, and might actually get better real world mpg, let alone be more relaxing to drive, and be less stressed. That being said, at altitude the turbo will always win. Vehicles this heavy should all have diesels in my opinion. And if you're gonna go with an inline six with turbos, you might as well make it a diesel and get 30 mpg :) That is, until an EV version comes along...
@jmjm3543
Жыл бұрын
When It comes to lower rpms. My Hemi would drive me crazy with how often it like to tow at 3 to 4 thousand rpms. I switched to the 3.5 ecoboost which I did get to drive 1st. It tows the same trailer up the same hills at 2-2.5 thousand rpm. The old rules of v8s turning less rpm is just not true anymore
@DJ2226
Жыл бұрын
Another thing that makes me skeptical of the fuel economy is enrichment to counter knock. From what I understand (noob here), the extra pressure from the turbos combined with the high compression ratio and higher temps makes the likelihood of the air-fuel mix self-igniting. In high-load scenarios, turbo engines typically enrich the fuel and use it like a refrigerant to cool the air-fuel mixture with evaporative cooling. With something like that, the Hurricane 3.0 might end up being less efficient than the 5.7 and 6.4 Hemi and burning more fuel in a towing application in a Ram. Obviously, the Hemis won't be able to put out the same power in their NA forms as the Hurricane 3.0. Still, they won't be anywhere near as strained, which makes me wonder about the longevity of such an engine in a Ram 1500 or 2500 that is being used to tow for most of its life. With the industry's direction, I wouldn't be surprised if FCA decides to tune the 2L I4 version of the Hurricane and try to shove it into larger vehicles to replace the Pentastar. It apparently can put out the same kind of power without much work, but you'd really be putting quite a strain on that engine.
@tartartar7198
Жыл бұрын
@@DJ2226 for fuel economy, modern turbo engines are not running full boost all the time, they instead operate more like a NA engine until you need power so its not running 20PSI of boost all the time unless you are driving everywhere with wide open throttle. Considering reliability, this is not a motor that was designed and built as a NA motor and then had a turbo slapped on, it was made from the start to be FI, reliability will be about what you can expect from a new engine from any manufacturer.
@MikeSmith-ey7ku
Жыл бұрын
@@tartartar7198 not sure about that dude,there is a reason these engines are making tons of torque at 2000 RPM. Because they are being boosted to death. I had an eco boost rental van and I couldn’t believe the low end
@tartartar7198
Жыл бұрын
Right, the torque is available when the demand is issued, it’s not sitting at 20 psi constantly, when I look at the boost in my 540i when just rolling down the road at constant speed, the boost indicated something like 1-2 psi till I hit the gas and then it bumped up to 15ish.
@johnnysepulvedatv
9 ай бұрын
You nailed the Ram prediction!
@bantizzle79
Жыл бұрын
That engine is going to sell so well in the Ram. Can't wait for it!
@Za3aB
Жыл бұрын
Need 6.4 hemi in the Ram much better then this one
@ReveredDead
Жыл бұрын
Assuming it’s built with quality in mind and longevity. I can easily see the first generation ram with the in-line six being a fucking nightmare.
@bantizzle79
Жыл бұрын
@@ReveredDead yeah I wouldn't buy the first model year of any new vehicle. Can't wait to see though what kind of HP/torque these engines will put out with a tune.
@sanj5026
Жыл бұрын
@@bantizzle79 they locked their ECUs. .. Tuning will be very hard
@sanj5026
Жыл бұрын
@truongtu0191 they will
@michaelmurphy5221
Жыл бұрын
The last straight 6 Jeep had was bulletproof.
@pauldiesel4582
Жыл бұрын
Great early news scoop Tim! Can’t wait for more driving impressions. I think the fuel economy and power improvements are a big win over their current V8s.
@doublebackagain4311
Жыл бұрын
Jeep has been advertising the new 3.0L standard output will replace the 3.6L, the HO will replace the Hemi. Not news :shrug:
@pauldiesel4582
Жыл бұрын
@@doublebackagain4311 Tim was a early test driver of the new I6. That was the news scoop. The I6 has been known for some time before it was mentioned for the Jeep, although the I4 in the Jeep is related to the I6. Most of the talk was it replacing the Hemi engines.
@MikeSmith-ey7ku
Жыл бұрын
Till you figure out you need to run high test fuel with turbos. And the premature wear turbos will create
@rogerspalding5673
Жыл бұрын
Tim, Great review. Remember, Dude, that engine is a straight 6 which is inherently smooth. Plus, it's twin-turbo. This accounts for the tremendous HP and torque from a 3.0 liter engine. BMW has been using straight 6 engines since before WWII. They have been turbocharging car engines since the original BMW 2002 Turbo 50 years ago.
@MIZUNOMP60
Жыл бұрын
Agree, but the issue here with similar application for the Wagoneer or Grand Wagoneer is huge weight and poor aerodynamics. With its truck-based platform and big mass even with the impressive new Hurricane's performance, fuel economy is still going to suffer.
@sanj5026
Жыл бұрын
Can't wait for this engine to trickle into other vehicles!! (Grand Cherokee 🤞)
@nabatron21
Жыл бұрын
The numbers aren’t really eye popping….I would just stick with the v8 less can go wrong compared to high boosted engines
@bpearr8266
Жыл бұрын
Bruh this is replacing the pentastar.. that’s a 120ish to 200 hp increase. That’s what matters
@MikeSmith-ey7ku
Жыл бұрын
@@bpearr8266 this is replacing the hemi dude. This Jeep came with the 6.4. Now it’s got the 6, pay attention
@bpearr8266
Жыл бұрын
@@MikeSmith-ey7ku I’m just going based off what was said in the video
@Qugie
Жыл бұрын
@@bpearr8266 well the Pentastar V6 don't come in the Wagoneer or Grand Wagoneer at all.......
@cruzmascorro9277
Жыл бұрын
Hemi V8 have cam issues and lifter problems.
@MickPsyphon
Жыл бұрын
Inline 6 cylinder engines have always been _"capable"_ producing a better power to fuel economy ratio than big 8's. As a HEMI owner, I can definitely say that they're great engines; and I'll miss them when they're gone. Unfortunately, Stellantis has really screwed the pooch with the Hurricane I-6! The ONLY ways that it would ever be successful, are: a) If the offered far superior fuel economy than a similarly powered HEMI; or, b) If they mated it with an amazing hybrid system, which resulted in manually selectable drive modes that ranged from incredible fuel economy to ludicrous power, depending on either the driver's mood that day, the environment, or the local traffic laws & speed limits. Instead, what Stellantis seems to be doing is to _"technically"_ give us something that's better on paper, but in real world usage, it's only marginally better... if even that much. It's probably because they want to make their Italian brands better, so that they can sell them in North America for a premium... as Imported European vehicles. We're about to be asked to bend over and smile, without so much as a peck on the lips... much less the courtesy of a reach-around! 😝
@mbrbb77
Жыл бұрын
Still NA V8 is king
@Gdesign959
Жыл бұрын
Real world gas mileage probably won’t be much better than the Hemi. You have to drive turbos like there’s an egg between your foot and the pedal to get good mileage.
@711slimshawny
Жыл бұрын
Every factory turbo engine should run premium fuel, even if they say 87 is ok. Running boost without premium fuel is living on the edge. Also the 5.7 in the Ram is recommended 89 if you read the owners manual. The main reason for the 3.0 is less emissions, less cylinder less emissions.
@heh2k
7 ай бұрын
Turbo is similar to displacement on demand.
@dwood2010
Жыл бұрын
I love that modern I6s are being made. GMs duramax, this, and Mazda's 3.3 I6 got me excited!
@albertatundra
Жыл бұрын
Longevity is going to be the key here.
@Kaiser333333
Жыл бұрын
i didnt buy the Ford ecoboost when it was new. Glad i didn't because they have made numerous changes/improvements to the newer ecoboost enginges to fix issues. I assume same will be true for the Ram Hurricane.
@gmrtg1414
Жыл бұрын
Remember when Ford came out with the 3.5 EB in 2011 and people said it wouldn’t work………I can’t wait for this option to come out.
@Kaiser333333
Жыл бұрын
there were numerous issues with the first ecoboost engines. Ford has had a lot of time to fix those issues in the new ecoboost engines which are now pretty good. Personally i woudlnt buy v1.0 of this new engine. Better to let others be the beta testers IMOP.
@gmrtg1414
Жыл бұрын
@@Kaiser333333 I had a 2012 and 14 3.5 I F150s and didn’t have any issues. I don’t drive a ton of miles but pull a bunch but both were perfect. There’s is usually problems with the first ones but hoping when they get in the Ram they’ll be worked out.
@Kaiser333333
Жыл бұрын
@@gmrtg1414 Yea i don't want to imply they were terrible, but like any new technology a lot of stuff has been improved on the v1.0 design. Personally i skip Gen 1.0 on any new and expensive products. The biggiest issues with the first ecoboost engines were 1) Timing chain problems, 2) Carbon Build-Up, 3)Spark plugs and ignition coils longevity issues. All things considered those aren't the worst probelms to have. GM cam phasers are a worse problems imop.
@hellkitty1014
Жыл бұрын
So a couple of things about the Hurricane. That engine has been in development since 2017. From Ralph Gilles own mouth, they torture tested for over 20M miles. On top of the already inherit-smoothness of an I-6, Jeep went a step further and made the turbos parallel as opposed to sequential. The turbos handle 3 pots a piece and have 26lbs of boost.(and Jeep learned a thing from from SRT and gave it forged internals for added strength).That all explains why C&D and MT got the truck 0-60 in 4.7-5.0 secs...a 6500lb, 226" brick! It is only a 0.5sec slower than the Escalade V, despite it having 172 more hp. The Hurricane 510 actually does not require premium, but does if you want all of those ponies present and if you're towing. Plus I'm not sure of any 510hp+ turbo engine that doesn't at least suggest premium fuel for top performance. Why would the GW be exempt? It is still a worthy addition and I can't wait for Ram to finally offer it.
@RedSizzler
Жыл бұрын
I honestly think people who love the 3.5 twin turbo ecoboost in F150s might be considering a ram with that motor as a comparison when buying a truck especially for towing capability but also wanting power and having a more fuel efficient option. I wonder if they will etorque down the line to this because that would be a game changer as well.
@adamwebster9784
Жыл бұрын
@@RedSizzler until ford brings back an Inline 6, I refuse any 6 cylinder they put out
@RedSizzler
Жыл бұрын
@@adamwebster9784 I don’t think it will happen because engines are going to be gone soon with the push of EVs sadly. I live in NYs and everything as to zero emissions by 2035 for new car sales and with epa stuff I think engines will only be getitng smaller with hybrid power trains before completely EV. V8s I think are hanging on by a thread here especially since we have some high gas prices as well
@adamwebster9784
Жыл бұрын
@@RedSizzler until a new battery technology is discovered, gas cars are going nowhere!
@ReConGrpTx
Жыл бұрын
Should be a great engine for the Wrangler platform. I can't wait for the HurriCrate offerings! I'm looking at putting one in my JK coupled w/ the 8 speed trans. Should be a fantastic upgrade overall. V8 type power, awesome torque curve, butter smooth shifting and far lees weight than doing a Hemi swap.
@scottriley9398
Жыл бұрын
I was about to have my jku’s motor rebuilt with a supercharger added until I seen this. Hopefully it’ll match up easily to a manual transmission
@jayethompson3414
Жыл бұрын
I didn’t know it was an in-line 6. I think the wrangler needs this. Inline 6 is a great config for an engine, naturally balanced unlike a V6.
@yodawg3469
Жыл бұрын
It's putting out more hp and tq than than both the v6,5.7 and 6.4,not a bad thing and wait till the aftermarket companies such as Banks,it'll be an inline monster.I'd be happy with that engine in my lifted '16 jku and '06 1500 rcsb 4wd.
@blackericdenice
Жыл бұрын
People said Ford was stupid for putting a v6 turbo into their trucks. I bought a new 2016 F165 and 6 years later. It has 87k miles and still run great.
@ryotaryuu
Жыл бұрын
Dodge could have developed the Hemi platform, with cooled egr, new heads with direct injection, lighter aluminum blocks, newer more efficient intake manifolds etc. It would have made more power and been more fuel efficient.
@Holden-McGroin
Жыл бұрын
Nice to see an I6 in a Jeep again. Now put it in a Wrangler with a manual, and I’d actually buy one!
@riccochet704
Жыл бұрын
I was excited to see the high output 3.0 in the 2500. Diesel in the 2500 kills the payload, and the 6.4 is lethargic at on 410/430. I use my 6.4 2500 for towing heavy. So I don't expect to get good fuel mileage regardless of what engine is in it. But having to run premium fuel is no bueno. I thought I read somewhere that you can run 87 or 89 in the high output 3.0, but it will pull a little timing reducing power to keep it from knocking. How much power is pulled would be good to know. Can't wait till someone puts one of these on a dyno and gets some numbers behind all of this.
@playstation5427
Жыл бұрын
I have been waiting to see this engine. Im a V8 person but I am very curious to see what this new engine is like.
@christiandiemond9595
Жыл бұрын
It will be interesting to see how it goes as time progresses..although I would still like to see a TRX version..just for fun.
@R3vokenDallout1on
9 ай бұрын
There's a 1k hp variant of the hurricane that they put in the dragpack, so I'm sure they can slightly detune it
@isaacjohnson7184
5 ай бұрын
I am looking forward to getting one of these.
@exothermal.sprocket
Жыл бұрын
Scientifically, there's no way a 3L 6 cylinder makes more "average" power than the 6.4L 8 cylinder, unless that 3L has it's turbochargers spooled constantly. So in light throttle application, tip-in on the pedal when you ask it for 25% to 40% response, it's not going to deliver as much average power. They never do. And turbocharged engines are THIRSTY when under boost. The world is gone mad, when billions of dollars have to be spent to make 2 mpg better. Obviously financial efficiency is down the toilet, when governments obsess over a few particles of soot.
@ALMX5DP
Жыл бұрын
Definitely a good idea. Will love to see when they slot this powertrain into the Ram.
@icare7151
Жыл бұрын
Here are the facts: With over 45 years of testing, evaluation and standards setting engineering experience, there are huge smoke and mirrors going on here: I anticipate the fuel economy and reliability of the new Hurricane engines will be huge issues in high altitude applications. They are using premium fuel and sea level fuel economy for their fuel economy ratings. They must go with a 10sp transmission and enlarge the oil and coolant systems and give fuel economy ratings in high altitude with regular octane gasoline. Reality of their dysfunctional Woke agenda: There are no gains in emissions or fuel economy dropping the eco diesel, 5.7 Hemi v8 and v6. The Hurricane engine is all smoke and mirrors!
@ALMX5DP
Жыл бұрын
@@icare7151 Here are the facts: You're a troll.
@danmontie6367
Жыл бұрын
@@icare7151- keep using slang terms like ‘woke’ in your screeds to let the rest of us know that you have an agenda your trying to sell.
@wns808
Жыл бұрын
Not bad, imagine this engine in the Pacifica
@mpresto15
Жыл бұрын
You think they will put this in a charger? Im excited for this coming from a scatpack not for fuel economy but for the potential just from a tune. I love my scatpack but the upgrades needed to go faster cost too much and didnt feel worth it.
@bryanstaten5585
8 ай бұрын
Guaranteed this twin turbo i6 wont have the longevity of the old school inline ford motor.
@adamwebster9784
Жыл бұрын
Been waiting a LONG time for a test drive video of the hurricane
@Olds_Pwr
10 ай бұрын
I remember when the Plymouth Volare and Reliant came out. They were praised as well when they were introduced.
@AxleGil
Жыл бұрын
Same with gm 2.7 turbo. I had one. Fuel economy was no better that a v8. Still only got 21mpg highway. I now have a 5.7 hemi that gets 21mpg highway
@1gr8oil
Жыл бұрын
AWTreblig.......What year is your vehicle with the 5.7 getting 21 mpg? I have a 2020 Ram Rebel, that only gets around 16.5 to 17.0 mpg on the highway, and around 14.5 to 15.0 running around! I do love the truck!!
@Qugie
Жыл бұрын
@@1gr8oil well the Rebel will get worst fuel than like a Bighorn because of the off road goodies and tires on the Rebel
@biz4twobiz463
Жыл бұрын
When Jeep talks in generalities about the Hurricane engine platform, I'm sure they are talking about the regular hurricane and also the HO hurricane. So, the HIGH OUTPUT, requires the premium fuel and lower emissions. But, if you were to look at the regular hurricane engine, I'm sure you'd see what Jeep is bragging on. OBTW: The regular hurricane in the RAM 1500 would be more than enough engine.
@jasonthompson2392
Жыл бұрын
Is it true it's direct injection only, or will it be dual injected like other manufacturers are doing to combat the carbon build-up on the valves?
@razbuznik
Жыл бұрын
This is my concern. Ford started without port injection on the ecoboost and then learned the hard way that they needed to add it to keep the intake valves cleaner. Will Stellantis have to learn the hard way too and v2 they add port injection?
@davem.539
Жыл бұрын
The hurricane motor I am sure will work out well, could be a few bugs. But this is where it's going and then electric. They always have to improve from the previous model.
@bradhodgkinson7996
Жыл бұрын
Inline 6 engines are the best ever. How come rearend gear ratios are never talked about, as they have a profound impact on fuel economy as well?
@Pickuptrucktalk
Жыл бұрын
Because rear-end ratios don't really matter like they used to. With new multi-speed transmissions, there are no MPG gains with a shorter axle ratio.
@dannybryant6873
3 ай бұрын
No excuse for no dip stick. This will cost you sales. Pickup drivers want to take care of their vehicles. Dipstick helps check for contamination (coolant?) in the oil
@treborheminway3814
Жыл бұрын
Direct injection only. No port injection to keep valves clean?
@TheHortond
10 ай бұрын
The Hemi was a home run. They need to keep it around.
@sketchshinaver2137
Жыл бұрын
The hurricane is not a new name concept for Jeep. I’ve had the old military hurricane four-cylinder’s and if I can remember correctly, I believe there’s also a hurricane, 6 Cylinder inline 6 cyl
@IamGroot786
Жыл бұрын
Everyone's concerned about longevity but most folks I see switch vehicles within 3-4 years (Which to me is kinda nuts). Cars are entirely too expensive to be having a never ending monthly payment nowadays.
@none-sb8lt
Жыл бұрын
If they gave me one to run in my AWD 300c I'd give it a long term test but I love my hemi and that exhaust note.
@vr4787
Жыл бұрын
Glad I got my Ram 1500 5.7 Hemi when I did. Just simple naturally aspirated goodness that’s simple to work on, modify, and gets good mpg. I do hope the Hurricane works out but I have my doubts. Not happy about premium fuel though.
@SuperSnakePlissken
Жыл бұрын
You definitely made the right choice. Now granted, the hemi requires midgrade gasoline but that’s still better than paying the premium price were here in Texas it’s about a dollar more gallon.
@vr4787
Жыл бұрын
@@SuperSnakePlissken Midgrade is recommended but you can run 87. We have Eco 88 here that’s 10 cents cheaper than regular and the hemi loves it.
@SuperSnakePlissken
Жыл бұрын
@@vr4787 Of course you can run 87 octane if you don't mind long term ping problems, and timing issues. Cheers!
@vr4787
Жыл бұрын
@@SuperSnakePlissken haha it even says in the manual you can run 87. It will even run up to 15% ethanol. It can advance or retard the spark as needed it’s not a carburetor.
@Qugie
Жыл бұрын
all turbos run Premium fuel even the turbo 4's
@larryp4995
Жыл бұрын
Will the 3.0L i6 hurricane twin turbo inline 6 get at least 200,000 miles with NO issues , I guess only time will tell.
@RickNethery
Жыл бұрын
I wish we could get a test drive where we can hear the engine and see what it can do.
@okcmoparguy724
Жыл бұрын
I'm hearing the the actual mpg improvement will be significant over the 5.7/6.4 even though its only 2mpg better on the EPA test cycle. Also there's no Pentastar in the Wagoneer or Grand Wagoneer.
@marlon2k9
Жыл бұрын
Correct. It is also NOT replacing the Pentastar. It is replacing the HEMI.
@djjamesgangemi9294
Жыл бұрын
I want to see the aftermarket crack the ECU and hear one of these spin to 7000 rpm. Tuning potential on these is nuts. Should be fun to see when people get their hands on these.
@blackericdenice
Жыл бұрын
I will need cams with more duration to make hp @ 7,000 rpm.
@Pablo-cp9nc
Жыл бұрын
Automakers are locking down ECU's like never before, not to mention EPA is going after tuners (Diesel Brothers) lately.
@blackericdenice
Жыл бұрын
@@Pablo-cp9nc They need to go after diesel tuners. Companies spent a lot of money making diesel fast and clean. Stupid people are removing egr because they think their engines will last longer.
@alwayslearningthefacts5881
9 ай бұрын
Its seams like they are asking a lot from a 183 cu.in. 6 cylinder. 170 hp per litre. Wow !
@brent0034
Жыл бұрын
Man do I hope to see this thing come as an option for Wranglers and Gladiators
@rikwilkinson1451
Жыл бұрын
Nothing like a hemi, but this is a better option than an ev imo
@TheDutchman1980
Жыл бұрын
I can't wait till the tunes for these start coming out for these. Gunna get wild
@SubmarinersDive
Жыл бұрын
If they are showing their cards the Ram/Jeep Brand is screwed for sure! So sad.
@pdxmoparguy
Жыл бұрын
Great review. I agree with you. I sell these. Does not have the rumble but does have the performance!
@drwooly
Жыл бұрын
My only question : When can I get this I-6 so I can junk the V-6 in my JGC
@Pickuptrucktalk
Жыл бұрын
Not sure they offer it as a crate engine.
@ChargerusPrime
Жыл бұрын
I love inline 6 cylinder engines, but I'd rather go with a cummins. Better fuel economy, more power per gallon of fuel, great torque and less highly toxic emissions than a gas motor.
@dor1tomcswagger69
Жыл бұрын
Premium fuel for the high output? Rather have the 392 V8 over the inline 6 🤷
@MoparAdventure
Жыл бұрын
Yeah boosted engine pushed to maximum capabilities vs 392 hemi. Hardly any effort lugging around still not optimized for max performance. More ways the engine can fail. My jeep SRT will get 20mpg on flat highway.
@dor1tomcswagger69
Жыл бұрын
@@MoparAdventure I'm currently looking at Cherokee SRTs but they are going for 90k used in Canada with really low mileage that's a lot of coin but they don't make them anymore fuel economy is not much worse than my ram hemi
@MoparAdventure
Жыл бұрын
@@dor1tomcswagger69 I bought a 2017 with 93k miles in Branson Missouri for 43k. Im going to have a 426 stroker kit installed and new lifters for good measure! Its quick but scatpacks smoke it. Fun to drive and good for the family! It has as much guts as you would need but nothing more.
@dor1tomcswagger69
Жыл бұрын
@@MoparAdventure did you replace ur brake pads? I found out it's 800$ cdn just for front brembo pads 😂 I'd obviously go aftermarket but that's crazy
@MoparAdventure
Жыл бұрын
@@dor1tomcswagger69 powerstop front and rear
@manitoublack
Жыл бұрын
Remember between 2003 and 2010, the Viper had 510hp. Now you can get that performance in an SUV with better fuel economy.
@markman7
Жыл бұрын
Will be interesting to see how this engine rolls out in production. I personally know a Chrysler chassis engineer who has questioned the validation of this power plant. We'll see.
@JJJ5.7
Жыл бұрын
I wish it was available sooner in the Ram. Not sure I'd buy first year though.
@angelr4429
Жыл бұрын
Tim… I hate to say it but you were drinking a little bit of the cool aid when you were in the suv with 2 other folks. Once you sat down after, and look at the numbers, now you can see the frustration. I wish that frustration was voiced in the car with the 2 other folks.
@Pickuptrucktalk
Жыл бұрын
Sorry, I'm missing your point. What's the frustration?
@angelr4429
Жыл бұрын
@Pickup Truck Plus SUV Talk I'm just saying...in the suv with 2 other folks you had nothing but good things and was very positive , but when you got back and look at the numbers by yourself, it was the complete opposite and was negative on the turbo v6 platform. So I'm a bit confused on your review.
@Pickuptrucktalk
Жыл бұрын
@@angelr4429 Drive impressions then looking at the engine compared to the others. Giving you both sides of the debate on the new engine.
@stevetamas9537
Жыл бұрын
Tim every turbo engein should be running premium gas. When I purchased the 22 tundra the mechanic told me at the dealer it should be premium. He was confused why they telling buyers that it's ok to use regular gas.
@Pickuptrucktalk
Жыл бұрын
Why? Ford, GM, Toyota and others don't recommend premium for a turbo engine unless you are driving in certain conditions. I'd be cautious of a mechanic telling people he knows more about an engine than the people who built it.
@NMTRUCKER
Жыл бұрын
Sounds like the Hurricane fuel economy numbers are much like the Tundra turbo V6 numbers. There’s only so much efficiency that you can pry out of these twin turbo V6s. Not that impressive in my opinion.
@zacharyschopper7084
Жыл бұрын
I'll stick with v8 471hp 6.4
@Mr.Safety.
Жыл бұрын
Bigger motor with less horsepower? I dont know how that one works out but ill leave it to you
@RanLaw_
Жыл бұрын
The Wagonneer's 5.7 is 1.0 second faster than the Grand Wagonneer's 6.4, Hunh ?
@destroytheilluminati770
Жыл бұрын
I'm looking to replace my 98 dakota with almost 400,000 miles on it with the new dakota, i'm waiting for the Hurricane to be in that model
@hugokatz
Жыл бұрын
Stellantis is gutting Mopar. They forgot that luxury is spelled with a V8. A delay in acceleration is unforgivable.
@mortaljorgeguy
Жыл бұрын
I think the regular output should get competitive fuel economy with Toyota and ford in a ram. Those luxury suvs are just too damn heavy. I can’t wait to see a 4xe ram 1500
@MoparAdventure
Жыл бұрын
Love 6.4l
@Tony-hf9mv
Жыл бұрын
Waiting for it to get in other vehicles like the grand Cherokee L, Gladiator, and 1500
@Justin_GFM
Жыл бұрын
I’m hoping it gets in the Challenger and Charger as it was rumored to be in, I know people want the V8 as well but a twin turbo I6 should have great tuning capabilities
@ALMX5DP
Жыл бұрын
I still think a 2mpg improvement is pretty darn good at that level since mpg isn’t a linear scale. I think that’s where they’re getting the 13% improvement maybe? (15 divided by 17 is .88 so maybe their data is a bit more accurate than rounded full mpg numbers).
@hellkitty1014
Жыл бұрын
Definitely is, especially considering those gains were made on a forced-induction engine moving a bigger/heavier box.
@icare7151
Жыл бұрын
Here are the facts: With over 45 years of testing, evaluation and standards setting engineering experience, there are huge smoke and mirrors going on here: I anticipate the fuel economy and reliability of the new Hurricane engines will be huge issues in high altitude applications. They are using premium fuel and sea level fuel economy for their fuel economy ratings. They must go with a 10sp transmission and enlarge the oil and coolant systems and give fuel economy ratings in high altitude with regular octane gasoline. Reality of their dysfunctional Woke agenda: There are no gains in emissions or fuel economy dropping the eco diesel, 5.7 Hemi v8 and v6. The Hurricane engine is all smoke and mirrors!
@ALMX5DP
Жыл бұрын
@@icare7151 not sure where you're getting any of that from. Higher octane has a host of benefits, these vehicles have ZF 8 speed transmissions, and there are definitely potential gains to be had here. Not sure what you mean by "fuel economy ratings in high altitude with regular octane" either. Edit - I see you just copy and pasted the same response elsewhere. I guess it was only a matter of time till the trolls arrived.
@icare7151
Жыл бұрын
@@ALMX5DP with 45 years of testing engineering experience do your homework next time.
@ALMX5DP
Жыл бұрын
@@icare7151 Feel free to respond to any of the points i brought up. ;)
@sgt.grinch3299
Жыл бұрын
Excellent video
@user-le9be6es4t
Жыл бұрын
I wonder if the 'spray in cylinder' liner coatings will cause the same sort of excess oil consumption as that of the 2018-2022 Ford F150 Coyote 5.0 V8........
@denisleblanc4506
Жыл бұрын
I don't know how you did your math but 2 mpg improvement over 15 is 13.3333%. That is using the combined rating. Depending what their test cycle for the combined rating is it could be more or less highway. You see some ratings where the combined is near the middle of highway-city. Then you see some where the combined rating is closer to the highway or closer to the city rating.
@Pickuptrucktalk
Жыл бұрын
I was referring to the C02 emissions for the 15%.
@brendanreary9142
Жыл бұрын
A bit of searching shows the standard output 3.0L I6 Hurricane will run on 87 Octane for full rated power, albeit down about 100hp from the high output into.
@Pickuptrucktalk
Жыл бұрын
Yup. That’s correct for the lower output version.
@lisam4503
Жыл бұрын
@@Pickuptrucktalk My experience is running premium fuel has paid for itself vs using regular fuel. Better running engine and performance plus enough increased mpg to cover the cost difference.
@cliffordmorgan4222
Жыл бұрын
I am actually hoping they combine this new hurricane engine with technology similar to what's in the Jeep 4xe. I6 engine with electric motor. This gives you way more torque from a stop and wind towing. Also because a truck can hold more batteries... Imagine being able to drive for 50 miles without having to start the engine. I actually think this would be an ideal setup for a 3/4 ton truck. Imagine.. 510hp and 500lbtq then include the electric motor... so probably closer to 600hp and 600+ lbtq.. that's more than the 24v 5.9 cummins we all loved. So plenty of power and able to cruse on hwy getting mid 20s easily. And any around town daily driving.. you can complete with just the electric .
@Pickuptrucktalk
Жыл бұрын
I think that’s part of the future engine development plan.
@erichoff7511
Жыл бұрын
Been waiting for news on this.. thanks Tim.. great review
@JustinPennito
Жыл бұрын
It's not replacing the Pentastar. The 510 Hurricane is replacing the 6.4L Hemi & the lower output Hurricane inline-6 is replacing the 5.7L Hemi.
@kenneth6382
Жыл бұрын
Plasma coated aluminum cylinders……. No liners??? Can you sleeve it later? Gimme Hemi or, in a GM, gimme LS, and FOMOCO, PLEASE do a 5.0 Expe/Navigator.(Thanks in advance)!
@lisam4503
Жыл бұрын
That engine would be neat in a regular cab shortbed classic Ram like the one TFL just bought. Just 2 wheel drive verses 4 x4. Have it with a 3.92 traklok rear. It would be fun for some stoplight to stoplight action. Ram could have some fun with them and put out some limited edition stepside bedded little Red Truck versions out. Bet they'd sell like hotcakes. Nothing fancy on the interior just keep the older model instrumentation and make it all about the hauling ass.
@NathanBonsal
Жыл бұрын
I really hope this new I6 can be the spiritual successor to the 4.0L I6 from the Jeep Wrangler. Maybe they could put just one turbocharger in the Wrangler and detune it to 320 HP or so for longevity and fuel mileage for that application. The old inline 6 that they inherited from AMC was a legendary motor and the last 2 generations of Jeep Wrangler engines have been a rank disappointment.
@Hiawatha_Z
Жыл бұрын
It’s quick! Anybody interested in taking a test drive in one you won’t be disappointed? Upstate New York come on down
@e46m54nissansr20937
Жыл бұрын
I got beat by one of these Hurricanes in my 5.7. The thing just pulled away effortlessly
@dankruger2890
Жыл бұрын
The numbers make sense. But i really love my 5.7 Etorque. My Hemi actually has good MPG at 19 to 22 at 60mph on flat ground it gets 24mpg.
@johnblack4915
Жыл бұрын
This is the future of Jeep and other Chrysler products..no more SRT..no more Hellkitties..no more Hemis..no more koolaid to drink..its over..hurricane is here 😄
@MdGuardian1032
Жыл бұрын
I want this engine in a 2 door wrangler.
@Over_Taxed_USA
Жыл бұрын
Thanks for the info - V8 is still king
@TaigaTurf
Жыл бұрын
The numbers are great, but I'm wondering how this will handle being worked hard daily in the ram HD?
@Pickuptrucktalk
Жыл бұрын
Ram HD? This engine isn't for that application.
@TaigaTurf
Жыл бұрын
@@Pickuptrucktalk if it's replacing the 392 hemi, it will do so in the ram HD as well
@Pickuptrucktalk
Жыл бұрын
@@TaigaTurf I just don't see this an HD truck engine. This is an emissions play for Ram. HD trucks don't have the same emissions rules that light-duty trucks have in place.
@TaigaTurf
Жыл бұрын
@@Pickuptrucktalk good to know 👍
@stevennatale4471
Жыл бұрын
13 mpg City to 15 mpg City is a 15%+ increase in fuel economy, not too shabby
@williemaykit7940
Жыл бұрын
The premium fuel thing is a real downer. Is it a must, or is it a recommendation? I currently drive a 2.7 Ecoboost F150 which doesn't require premium and gets around 21-22 mpg on the highway.
@dankruger2890
Жыл бұрын
Premium fuel is a Big Negative
@billkelley2388
Жыл бұрын
the turbo 3 has direct injection and that scares me because with no fuel washing your intake valves they will likely get nasty by the time you reach 100k so emissions will go to hell with dirty intake valves and eventually will lead to a major repair. ford learned a hard lesson with their direct injection engines and eventually created a combo setup that uses both direct and port injectors so the valves could get some fuel wash.
@70DMac
Жыл бұрын
Like the videos but you got to slow down your talking. Hard to understand.
Пікірлер: 477