3.6 with Etorque or 3.0 ecodiesel or 392

I recently ordered a 2023 Rubicon and after doing so research I'm debating if I made the right decision for engine. I plan on putting EVO coilovers and 38s or 40s (this is what led me to start looking at upgrades and got me worried) and not sure if I should have gone with the ecodiesel. Does anyone here have experience with both and if you could do it again would you go with the diesel or the 3.6.

my thought process if I go with 40s the 3.6 will suffer and I will more than likely want to do an engine swap. Wondering if the 3.0 would be better because of the torque. I never considered a 392 (I could go that route money wise) because it was all wheel drive and not sure how that would be for trails/rock crawling. Any thoughts would be great appreciated

either way I could always cancel the order and reorder what is better or see if they will allow me to change the order.
 
Last edited:
I have the 3.0l in my JT, 5" lift, 37's, 34k miles and it's been great. Love the torque, it gets up and goes and get's great mpg's ( 27 mpg). I never had a 3.6, I've had a 3.8 and have a 6.2 in my JKU. I can't see myself ever going with a 3.6l after having so much available torque.
 
Last edited:

Disciple Off Road

Active Member
I recently ordered a 2023 Rubicon and after doing so research I'm debating if I made the right decision for engine. I plan on putting EVO coilovers and 38s or 40s (this is what led me to start looking at upgrades and got me worried) and not sure if I should have gone with the ecodiesel. Does anyone here have experience with both and if you could do it again would you go with the diesel or the 3.6.

my thought process if I go with 40s the 3.6 will suffer and I will more than likely want to do an engine swap. Wondering if the 3.0 would be better because of the torque. I never considered a 392 (I could go that route money wise) because it was all wheel drive and not sure how that would be for trails/rock crawling. Any thoughts would be great appreciated

either way I could always cancel the order and reorder what is better or see if they will allow me to change the order.
I’d be buying a JT Diesel right now if the prices weren’t so insane. I’d do the 392 if I was gonna do a JL.
 

jpkjeep

Member
If you are willing to pony up obviously the 392! The 3.6 I drove with 40's and 5.38s had plenty of pep compared to the 4.0 I was used to at the time lol. I'll report back in a couple of weeks when my 3.6 is on 42's with 5.38s.

I didn't go the diesel route because at the time I purchased, PSC had not released a kit yet. Looks like they have now. I am also scared off by the added complexity of the 3.0 and the def system. I am no expert but seeing a few of my friends have issues on several occasions was enough for me. I am sure the torque is nice though!
 
If you are willing to pony up obviously the 392! The 3.6 I drove with 40's and 5.38s had plenty of pep compared to the 4.0 I was used to at the time lol. I'll report back in a couple of weeks when my 3.6 is on 42's with 5.38s.

I didn't go the diesel route because at the time I purchased, PSC had not released a kit yet. Looks like they have now. I am also scared off by the added complexity of the 3.0 and the def system. I am no expert but seeing a few of my friends have issues on several occasions was enough for me. I am sure the torque is nice though!
I could get the 392 but would leave me a little wiggle room for the axel swap and other big upgrades. I will daily drive this for another 2-3 years until I retire and this will be stirctly a toy and was worried about it being super sluggish with 40s if I went with the 3.6. I am not sure if psc makes a kit for the 3.6 with etorque yet. Everything I have seen says NON Etorque. I thought about maybe putting a SC on the 3.6, I know it’s not ideal but a cheaper way to get some power and if it blows then I have an excuse for a swap, but so far there are no options because of the Etorque. I’ve read the eco diesel does great with the torque but I’ve never owned a diesel or even been in one. I guess it’s one of those things people will argue about until the end of time. I appreciate all the feedback.
 

jpkjeep

Member
I could get the 392 but would leave me a little wiggle room for the axel swap and other big upgrades. I will daily drive this for another 2-3 years until I retire and this will be stirctly a toy and was worried about it being super sluggish with 40s if I went with the 3.6. I am not sure if psc makes a kit for the 3.6 with etorque yet. Everything I have seen says NON Etorque. I thought about maybe putting a SC on the 3.6, I know it’s not ideal but a cheaper way to get some power and if it blows then I have an excuse for a swap, but so far there are no options because of the Etorque. I’ve read the eco diesel does great with the torque but I’ve never owned a diesel or even been in one. I guess it’s one of those things people will argue about until the end of time. I appreciate all the feedback.
It is smart of you to bring up the e-torque junk. That's the reason I bought used and a pre e-torque 3.6. No thanks! The 2.0 is definitely not my cup of tea either. My experience with modern diesels and their emissions systems has not bet favorable. That being said I have not owned the 3.0. PSC does show kits for the e-junk on their website now though.

As for acceleration the 3.6 paired with the right gearing and 8 speed is more than acceptable to me. That is all personal preference of course. I'm someone that builds Jeeps primarily as crawlers and has a 450hp track only toy.

Personally, if I was going to do it over again, I would go for a used 3.6 non e-torque sport. I was planning to build my D44's when I bought a rubicon. If t-case ratio is a concern advanced adapters has an atlas conversion too. That would be a hell of an upgrade over the rubi case. If I was willing to push my 100-110k budget even higher, than of course a 392 would be awesome. I'm on a hard-set net worth % for my motorsport hobbies, so I was already at the upper end of that. Otherwise, without that rule I would be totally bankrupt and have no drive to further my career lol.
 

jpkjeep

Member
I could get the 392 but would leave me a little wiggle room for the axel swap and other big upgrades. I will daily drive this for another 2-3 years until I retire and this will be stirctly a toy and was worried about it being super sluggish with 40s if I went with the 3.6. I am not sure if psc makes a kit for the 3.6 with etorque yet. Everything I have seen says NON Etorque. I thought about maybe putting a SC on the 3.6, I know it’s not ideal but a cheaper way to get some power and if it blows then I have an excuse for a swap, but so far there are no options because of the Etorque. I’ve read the eco diesel does great with the torque but I’ve never owned a diesel or even been in one. I guess it’s one of those things people will argue about until the end of time. I appreciate all the feedback.
I personally would not go forced induction on the 3.6 as reliability is my goal. I have heard they do not handle boost well. I'm sure someone more knowledgeable on forced induction specifically on the 3.6 can chime in. My experience with boosting drift and track cars is that you open yourself up to many more headaches. The kind of headaches I would not want in a remote areas or on a mountain top.

If power is a big concern to you, I would just do the 392. If you know anyone with a 3.6 and big tires you might ask if you can give it a drive. You may be surprised. I was!
 
I personally would not go forced induction on the 3.6 as reliability is my goal. I have heard they do not handle boost well. I'm sure someone more knowledgeable on forced induction specifically on the 3.6 can chime in. My experience with boosting drift and track cars is that you open yourself up to many more headaches. The kind of headaches I would not want in a remote areas or on a mountain top.

If power is a big concern to you, I would just do the 392. If you know anyone with a 3.6 and big tires you might ask if you can give it a drive. You may be surprised. I was!
Thanks on both reply’s. Yeah I am not expecting the Jeep to be a racecar… I have one of those if I have the need for speed. I just live at West Point Ny and I was just worried about it having too hard of a time through the mountains. Plus the etorque is just a huge unknown right now. Thanks for the advice on everything.
 

Attachments

  • 449B86FD-53F2-4C9C-AC8C-97B028807B3D.jpeg
    449B86FD-53F2-4C9C-AC8C-97B028807B3D.jpeg
    164.4 KB · Views: 6
  • 3B4E4BF8-D1BB-4638-9160-0B3111491E3D.jpeg
    3B4E4BF8-D1BB-4638-9160-0B3111491E3D.jpeg
    173 KB · Views: 6
  • B3A63F8C-3369-4847-A24F-3B76DB100BD4.jpeg
    B3A63F8C-3369-4847-A24F-3B76DB100BD4.jpeg
    139.4 KB · Views: 6

2013rubirick

Active Member
If money isn’t a problem then it’s a no brainer 392 all the way. I’m picking mine up next week. I ordered it Feb 1st.
 

jpkjeep

Member
Thanks on both reply’s. Yeah I am not expecting the Jeep to be a racecar… I have one of those if I have the need for speed. I just live at West Point Ny and I was just worried about it having too hard of a time through the mountains. Plus the etorque is just a huge unknown right now. Thanks for the advice on everything.
That looks like a ton of fun at the track (y)

I live in Colorado and the 3.6 does great in the mountains. The 8 speed transmission always finds a good gear no matter the grade. I'm not worried about MTN driving in the slightest with 5.38s and 42s. We shall see if I'm right in a few weeks though haha.
 

wayoflife

Administrator
Staff member
I recently ordered a 2023 Rubicon and after doing so research I'm debating if I made the right decision for engine. I plan on putting EVO coilovers and 38s or 40s (this is what led me to start looking at upgrades and got me worried) and not sure if I should have gone with the ecodiesel. Does anyone here have experience with both and if you could do it again would you go with the diesel or the 3.6.

my thought process if I go with 40s the 3.6 will suffer and I will more than likely want to do an engine swap. Wondering if the 3.0 would be better because of the torque. I never considered a 392 (I could go that route money wise) because it was all wheel drive and not sure how that would be for trails/rock crawling. Any thoughts would be great appreciated

either way I could always cancel the order and reorder what is better or see if they will allow me to change the order.
For what you're wanting to do, I'd have to say start over with the diesel. I have driven/wheeled both and on rigs with 42's and there's no question that the diesel is better every which way you look at it. More power, better fuel economy and just better on the trail. I so wish it were available back when we bought our Gladiator as I really hate the performance of our 3.6L on our current setup. At this point, a V8 is definitely in the works - that or starting over with a diesel.

That said, I LOVE my 392 and to the point where I don't even want to mod mine in fear that anything I do will take away from how much fun it is to drive as is.
 

CalSgt

Hooked
I never considered a 392 (I could go that route money wise) because it was all wheel drive and not sure how that would be for trails/rock crawling. Any thoughts would be great appreciated
Converting a 392 to part time 4x4 is pretty inexpensive… pretty sure I saw a Tazer ad showing the tazer can shift the TC into 2wd

Also, after the axles get replaced to handle the 40’s you could just leave the front hubs unlocked while on pavement
 
Top Bottom