New Turbo 4 to start displacing the Pentastar

Starting with the Jeep Grand Cherokee:

Stellantis Wants You To Forget The V6 With Its New Turbo Four | Carscoops

The new Hurricane 4 Turbo engine debuts in the 2026 Jeep Grand Cherokee and will eventually spread to other models

www.carscoops.com

• Stellantis unveils the all-new Hurricane 4 Turbo engine.
• It produces 324 hp, 54 hp more than the current V6.
• Supports hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and standard setups.

Jeep introduced the 2026 Grand Cherokee earlier today, and it ushers in an all-new turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine. It’s more powerful and fuel-efficient than the 3.6-liter Pentastar V6, and it will eventually show up in other models.

Some interesting features, including a pre-chamber combustion design and both direct and port injection.

Another wait and see if they can make it work from a durability/longevity standpoint motor to me, but hopefully it works out.

 

[turkeybird56]

NO TY

 

[HuskerRam]

GM has a Turbo-4 and it's been pretty successful. Could be interesting.

 

[star_deceiver]

Put in a proper clutch, light flywheel, and some row your own. They might have a winner.



That being said, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work on a pentastar and it isn’t overly complicated. Parts are plentiful and if taken care of, they’ll last forever.

 

[BenchTest]

No. Just, no. Stellantis can't be trusted to make a turbo 4. It'll take 342 revisions to get to where a single unit will achieve 50K miles without a major component failure.

 

[BenchTest]

GM has a Turbo-4 and it's been pretty successful. Could be interesting.

It's had a lot of failures too. Don't like the trend of big vehicles and small engines. Turbo'd engines turning high RPM's aren't good for longevity, especially in big vehicles.

 

[Docwagon1776]

It's had a lot of failures too. Don't like the trend of big vehicles and small engines. Turbo'd engines turning high RPM's aren't good for longevity, especially in big vehicles.

To be fair, GM is having failures, period. Doesn't matter if it's a big engine in big vehicles. 6.2L recently had a massive recall and stop sale:

GM Recalls 721K Trucks and Full-Size SUVs Due to Defective 6.2L V-8s

The voluntary recall and stop-sale involve popular models like the Chevy Silverado, Cadillac Escalade, and GMC Yukon with engines that can lose power or fail.

www.caranddriver.com

Which is incredibly sad when you recall how robust the 6.2L was previously.

 

[turkeybird56]

GM has a Turbo-4 and it's been pretty successful. Could be interesting.

IF that works for you, hey, yer wallet. GM Turbo 4 in 6,000 lb truck, hee hee. Nobody buying them around here, this is a more rural area, those flyweight trucks not gonna pull jack outta a field, just saying. They trying to about give them Chevy 4 bangers away around here.

I would not have a truck with a 4 in it. 6 maybe, like the old Ford 6/300 with a 4 speed manual, no frills but ran forever. That's where they need to go back to, not all these nanny nanny boo boo electronic stuff, but me thinks those days long gone.

EDIT: I had a Ford with the 300, went to a V8, but that 6 ran well, just had too many miles, was destined for the rebuild shop. I did have an ED, but at 10K, that puppy was big time gone. Just my personal experience.

 

[DILLIGAF]

Dodge can't even build a Jeep properly

The last thing I will buy from Dodge is a piece of s*** turbo engine.

 

[Yardbird]

Maybe Stellantis needs to work on camshafts and lifters before going to turbos and more direct injection.

More Ensheetification.

The following applies to almost everything today.

"Enshettification" describes a process where online platforms, after initially being useful, degrade over time as companies prioritize profit over user experience. Coined by Cory Doctorow, this decay happens in stages: first, the platform attracts users by offering a good experience, then it attracts business customers (like advertisers) by giving them access to those users, and finally, it starts to degrade the user experience for everyone to squeeze more value from both groups. Examples include adding more ads to streaming services, increasing subscription prices, or changing rules to benefit the platform over its users.

• • Stage 1: Attract users:
    A platform starts with a good, user-friendly experience to build a large user base.
  • Stage 2: Attract business customers:
    The platform starts to offer new products or services to businesses (like advertisers) by promising them access to the large user base.
  • Stage 3: Devalue the user experience:
    The platform begins to degrade the experience for its original users to maximize profits, often by serving more ads, increasing costs, or changing policies that benefit the company over the user.
  • Examples:
    • • Streaming services that were once ad-free now include commercials and charge more to remove them.
      • Social media platforms that start showing more ads or posts from pages users don't follow.
      • Software companies switching to a mandatory subscription model for tools that were previously sold outright.
      • Companies like Amazon raising prices while adding more advertisements to its Prime Video service.

 

[BenchTest]

To be fair, GM is having failures, period. Doesn't matter if it's a big engine in big vehicles. 6.2L recently had a massive recall and stop sale:

GM Recalls 721K Trucks and Full-Size SUVs Due to Defective 6.2L V-8s

The voluntary recall and stop-sale involve popular models like the Chevy Silverado, Cadillac Escalade, and GMC Yukon with engines that can lose power or fail.

www.caranddriver.com

Which is incredibly sad when you recall how robust the 6.2L was previously.

Having been screwed by GM on a brand new Silverado purchase in 2021, I can confirm they are in fact failing at a high rate. GM should have gone bankrupt in 2009 instead of becoming Government Motors and putting out hot garbage.

I say that coming from a long-time family tradition of GM. Grandpa was a GM dealer, grew up in a GM house. You could drive anything you wanted as long as GM's label was on it. GM, GM, and only GM. I was GM loyal for a lot of years. Then they started making hog dog $hit vehicles. They're dead to me now (modern/current builds).

 

[BenchTest]

IF that works for you, hey, yer wallet. GM Turbo 4 in 6,000 lb truck, hee hee. Nobody buying them around here, this is a more rural area, those flyweight trucks not gonna pull jack outta a field, just saying. They trying to about give them Chevy 4 bangers away around here.

I would not have a truck with a 4 in it. 6 maybe, like the old Ford 6/300 with a 4 speed manual, no frills but ran forever. That's where they need to go back to, not all these nanny nanny boo boo electronic stuff, but me thinks those days long gone.

EDIT: I had a Ford with the 300, went to a V8, but that 6 ran well, just had too many miles, was destined for the rebuild shop. I did have an ED, but at 10K, that puppy was big time gone. Just my personal experience.

To me, 4 cylinder trucks are "drop kids off at soccer, get groceries, and pick up an occasional sheet of plywood from the local home improvement center", then sell them by 50K miles before you have to replace the engine 3 times (this happened to a friend of mine, he was issued a "work truck" by his company with a turbo 4 in a 1500 series pickup, 3 engines and 2 transmissions later it was rotated out of service). A mid-sized truck, maybe a turbo 4, but wouldn't be first or second choice. I agree. Simple rules. Get rid of all the plasticy, junky electronics, 92 speed transmissions that are always shifting forever and ever, Gucci tracking devices and navigation and blah blah. Simple, reliable 6 cylinder, and a 4 or 5 speed trans (and an option for manual for those who work their trucks), or the same combo with a basic V-8. Hell, give me the roll up windows and manual locks, manual hubs edition, I'd be thrilled to have that option to buy. All the push-button, do it on my cell phone pansy a$$es have ruined that. Blame the EPA too. Toyota has some great options that they can't/won't bring to the U.S. for the EPA reasons and due to the lazy Americans who want to control everything through their cell. They still build basic, reliable vehicles, but the market won't support it here. Oh well. In closing, screw Stellantis and a turbo 4

 

[Tom Davis]

Jeep has had the 2.0L Turbo 4 for quite a few years now, and I haven't read anything where folks are overly complaining about it. In fact on the Wrangler forums is it normally favored over the Pentastar.

With that said the Hurricane 4 is a completely different motor.

 

[MrBonez]

Bear in mind the following is just my personal take on it:

If they were to start making smaller pickups again and used them in those, this woudn't be such a bad thing but everyone knows gasoline turbo engines don't like being under a sustained heavy load/strain for too long.
This same basic effect applies to all turbo engines, gas or diesel:
More air & fuel burned means more power and heat generated.
Or in other words:
The bigger the fire, the more heat you get.

Think for a sec - If you blow on a fire, it gets hotter such as a blacksmith using bellows for their forge or the way a torch uses oxygen (Pure Oxygen) so it gets hot enough to do it's work.
In the case of a turbo'ed engine, the extra air by volume makes it have to use more fuel to "Correct" the air/fuel mix or it's runs into a "Running lean" condition, and anytime you add fuel to the engine with extra air too it simply runs hotter due to the extra amount of air/fuel being burned in the first place.

It's a tradeoff of more power (Good) to use with more heat (Bad) to deal with.

In this case turbo's are the new "Thing" to attract buyers with smaller, cheaper engines that also have more power.
I mean available power in a vehicle drives sales and makes dealers happy too - We all know it.

In a weird way it's kinda like we're back in the 60's again except these engines probrably won't last as long and you can't "Do this or that" to them overnight or over the weekend either - And if you have a job at your local fast food joint, you can't afford it anyway like you could back then.

As for my own personal experience with turbo engines:
had one in a 72 Pinto body that was a factory 2.3 turbo engine with a 4-speed out of a 79 Mustang Turbo car and yes, it was strong....
And also showed me how tempermental a gas turbo engine can be.

Even though the body had been lightened it still didn't like being ran too hard too many times before a cool-down period was required before I went again.
I had even stuffed a V8 radiator in the car and while that helped, it didn't fully offset just how hot it could get while doing it's thing (Running hard/Doing burnouts on the line... That kind of thing) but it did cool down faster once it wasn't being pushed than it did before I popped that in.

If it got too hot, it lost power and if it ever stalled out on me it was hard to restart too.

Gas engines are not diesels that just LOVE the heat - Everyone knows the hotter a diesel can run, the happier it getsbut that's not the case for a gas burner.

With the Hurricane being what it is, used the way it's been designated to and now this.... I can't really see myself buying a new truck from the Ram lineup except for a Hemi powered one and even then, that's really a No-Go with Etorque in play.
And no, the others aren't faring any better themselves right now.

I'm saying it now:
These trucks may do well when new/newer (And they should within this timeframe - 7 years maybe?) but I believe after a while things will begin showing us the flip-side to it all and to me, it doesn't look like anything I'd want to have OR deal with.... Including paying for it when that time comes.

 

[Docwagon1776]

Think for a sec - If you blow on a fire, it gets hotter such as a blacksmith using bellows for their forge or the way a torch uses oxygen (Pure Oxygen) so it gets hot enough to do it's work.
In the case of a turbo'ed engine, the extra air by volume makes it have to use more fuel to "Correct" the air/fuel mix or it's runs into a "Running lean" condition, and anytime you add fuel to the engine with extra air too it simply runs hotter due to the extra amount of air/fuel being burned in the first place.

Add in pre-ignition concerns mean pulling timing, which means even more fuel needed to make the same power, which makes more heat, and it spirals. It's why the Hurricane HO has a lower tow rating than the SO, can't shed heat fast enough to maintain that (admittedly insane for the displacement) amount of power while the dumb ol' 6.4L BGE will chug along at high demand without meltdown.

 

[turkeybird56]

Add in pre-ignition concerns mean pulling timing, which means even more fuel needed to make the same power, which makes more heat, and it spirals. It's why the Hurricane HO has a lower tow rating than the SO, can't shed heat fast enough to maintain that (admittedly insane for the displacement) amount of power while the dumb ol' 6.4L BGE will chug along at high demand without meltdown.

Why my early 2019 5th Gen will reside in da BOIRD’s driveway forever. Straight VVT no E junkola.

 

[HuskerRam]

IF that works for you, hey, yer wallet. GM Turbo 4 in 6,000 lb truck, hee hee. Nobody buying them around here, this is a more rural area, those flyweight trucks not gonna pull jack outta a field, just saying. They trying to about give them Chevy 4 bangers away around here.

I would not have a truck with a 4 in it. 6 maybe, like the old Ford 6/300 with a 4 speed manual, no frills but ran forever. That's where they need to go back to, not all these nanny nanny boo boo electronic stuff, but me thinks those days long gone.

EDIT: I had a Ford with the 300, went to a V8, but that 6 ran well, just had too many miles, was destined for the rebuild shop. I did have an ED, but at 10K, that puppy was big time gone. Just my personal experience.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't for me; however, it's a tool for those who need it. There's going to be plenty of owners who don't need to tow and this works for daily driving. It's really just the opposite end of the spectrum from those who buy 2500/3500 Cummins just to drive for milk and eggs.

That said...I can't wait to read the threads about someone who bought it, put 35/37s under it and can't figure out why their MPGs suck or the random rants about how they bought it but towing their 10k bumper-pull is hard and the truck doesn't handle it well.

 

[MrBonez]

Add in pre-ignition concerns mean pulling timing, which means even more fuel needed to make the same power, which makes more heat, and it spirals. It's why the Hurricane HO has a lower tow rating than the SO, can't shed heat fast enough to maintain that (admittedly insane for the displacement) amount of power while the dumb ol' 6.4L BGE will chug along at high demand without meltdown.

Yep - All that adds up to the bad side of things here.

It's been said before - "There is no substitute for cubic inches" and a larger displacement engine always does better under these conditions.

The exact displacement of a Hurricane engine is 183 cubic inches, which is only 13 cubes more than what I had in my old 64 Falcon 4-door that really didn't have alot of power to begin with.
In the case of my Pinto, the 2.3 turbo made plenty of power and was properly built for it too, also had it in a vehicle suitable for it in terms of size and weight but even then I had to be careful at times with it.
If I was driving it around normally it did quite well as a daily and was really good on gas too - Loved that about it!

A Hurricane, being of such a small displacement with potential for running hotter than the sun under the conditions it's setup for will run hot(ter) due to the fact it's turbo'ed and that's just asking for trouble long-term.

One thing that can happen is the oil in the engine could get hot enough it actually loses viscosity and thins out, in turn making the engine lose oil pressure and a turbo's bearings are NOT a fan of that at all..... In fact every bearing in the engine is like "Nope - Can't do that".
And you know what comes next.....

The company is trying to do several things at the same time here, with different reasons for each thing about it and it's adding up to nothing but trouble for "Us", the ones paying for and driving these around.
I'll keep my 5.7 truck and keep riding for as long as it will go.

 

[tjfdesmo]

I am not against turbo gassers per se. We owned a couple Volvos, one turbo 4, and one turbo 5. Both reliable as an anvil. Things are just absurdly complex now, and, as I said before, GDI sucks.

 

[MrBonez]

I am not against turbo gassers per se. We owned a couple Volvos, one turbo 4, and one turbo 5. Both reliable as an anvil. Things are just absurdly complex now, and, as I said before, GDI sucks.

As long as you keep the oil changed like you should a turbo engine like what you had or even what I had does fine.
However a Hurricane or these turbo 4's are a different story because the truck body is already heavy due to it's size and on top of that it's expected to haul/pull a load too.

Similar thing when GM decided to drop a 4.3 in a full sized pickup designated as a work truck model - Good engine, just wasn't "Right" for what they had it in because you know some of those had tool bodies loaded full of stuff and so on.