Hello, Allpar Forums member or visitor! If you were a member, you would not see this ad!
Register or log in at the top right of the page...
Discussion in 'Mopar News' started by Dave Z, Dec 4, 2017.
Correct... you can see the paddles in this photo...
The Neon 2.0 Magnum was a replacement for the first gen 2.0 DOHC as the upgraded engine.
Second gen Neon dropped the 2.0 DOHC. Instead R/T and ACR used a 2.0 Magnum. The 2.0 Magnum had an active intake manifold with cam and exhaust changes.
Yes, that is what I meant. lol
Can someone tell me if the new Hurricane/eTorque engine will continue the almost exclusive to Chrysler use of speed density air flow induction or did they go to mass air flow intake system?
Any chance I'll be able to get this engine in a Compass in the next couple of years? And they really should work on a catchy name like Ecoboost. I'm not a huge fan of the Ecoboost Fords, but the marketing is working well for them.
I disagree. In the Jeep application "torque" has been a point of contention for a long time. The Pentastar IMO is underpowered in the Wrangler, the EcoDiesel was a no-brainer, and if they want to go with an engine that could be perceived as underpowered due to displacement, using a name with "torque" in it is a good move.
Yep. For off-road use, torque is king. High torque at low rpm is what you need when you're trying to creep through difficult terrain. Calling out the better torque performance of the engine is good.
There is potential for confusion if the old 1.6 eTorq motor is offered in any US-market cars (I don't think it is, though) - you don't want potential customers thinking that FCA fitted a small-displacement economy passenger-car engine to a two-and-a-half-tonne SUV.
It isn't used in any US-market cars.
We'll have to agree to disagree.
I don't have a problem with the use of the torque in the name, but I grow tired of companies adding a letter before a name and thinking it is cool. In my book doing so is as dumb as just using alphabet soup to name your vehicles....MKZ, TL, Z3, CTS, 200...
Yeah I'm not an "iGuy" either, however, the "e" one could argue is designated for "ELECTRIC-Torque", which actually makes sense.
While I agree you could make that argument, I still think it sounds...dumb.
But then I think iPhone sounds dumb too and it has been around a long time.
I believe I read in another thread that maybe when the Compass gets another update, not sure if they meant re-design or refresh, in a couple of years it may appear.