Also 2026:
Also 2026:
Yes. The 2.0L Wranglers seems to be doing OK, but I have no interest in that engine. It's the 3.0 I'm interested in and I've read a lot of mixed reviews. If it does make it to the Wrangler maybe they'll have it dialed in, and I'll feel more confident in it.I know BMW managed to do non-hybrid DI on their 3.0L I6 and it doesn't fuel dilute, but there are certainly advantages with the hybrid setup (one of them not being the obvious complexity of having two fuel systems) in terms of not having to get your intake valves blasted.
Ouch! It looks like someone tossed a bit of sand in that oil.Also 2026:
View attachment 283513
I don't think they need to add more power to it, it has good power for its size. But the lack of investment into improving the base engine design is showing. Like it needs mid-grade and two spark plugs, to produce its rated power. That lead me to believe the speed of combustion happening the combustion chamber is slow compared to more modern engine design. GM hasn't added power to the 5.3 but they have continued to improve efficiency and continued to reduce the criteria emissions of it. Last I checked, for 2025 the GM 5.3L has Tier 3 Bin 30 rating while the last 5.7L was still at Tier 3 Bin 70. So I don't think it needed a complete redesign, but just an iterative design improvements to it. But this is just me keyboard engineering.Part of the reason people like it is that it's a very traditional port injected V8, so it doesn't have all the fun issues with DI and fuel dilution. It's a pig on fuel (and the 6.4L is even worse), but it makes nice sounds when it's working and is pretty reliable. It has 40HP on the DI AFM 5.3L GM EcoTech, so I don't think it's really wanting for power either.
The semi-hemi chambers have horrible low speed swirl, that's why they need 16 spark plugs (phased ignition). The advantage of course is peak HP, which is why it makes more HP per litre with port injection than the 5.3L does with DI. So that's the tradeoff, if you ditch the semi-hemi chamber design, you basically kill what makes it what it is.I don't think they need to add more power to it, it has good power for its size. But the lack of investment into improving the base engine design is showing. Like it needs mid-grade and two spark plugs, to produce its rated power. That lead me to believe the speed of combustion happening the combustion chamber is slow compared to more modern engine design. GM hasn't added power to the 5.3 but they have continued to improve efficiency and continued to reduce the criteria emissions of it. Last I checked, for 2025 the GM 5.3L has Tier 3 Bin 30 rating while the last 5.7L was still at Tier 3 Bin 70. So I don't think it needed a complete redesign, but just an iterative design improvements to it. But this is just me keyboard engineering.
I hear ya. I'm eagerly following the 3.0L Hurricane although I still have mixed feelings about it. I'd like to see if it makes it to the Wrangler and well how it does. I don't like way they implemented their DI. I think the way Ford and Toyota has it would be better. I do like the I6 though. Time will tell.
I feel the same about the Hurricane. I have not come across any catastrophic failures; but several minor issues that seem sporadic. From my reading; it seems that more of the issues seem to be related to the electrical architecture. I hope that's something they are working on.
I would be really curious to see the BSFC map for both of the engines to what the efficiency of combustion is.The semi-hemi chambers have horrible low speed swirl, that's why they need 16 spark plugs (phased ignition). The advantage of course is peak HP, which is why it makes more HP per litre with port injection than the 5.3L does with DI. So that's the tradeoff, if you ditch the semi-hemi chamber design, you basically kill what makes it what it is.
GM added DI to the 5.3L, which certainly improved efficiency, but of course adds the issue of intake valve fouling, soot and fuel dilution. All of which you avoid by keeping port injection on the HEMI.
You could probably get more out of it with more cam, but then that would also likely negatively impact emissions performance.
I'm not sure it's "as good as it can be", but it may be at the point where it's simply not going to yield anything worth the investment required to make any improvements to it.
And to think the 5.7L is now running on that same electrical architecture.I feel the same about the Hurricane. I have not come across any catastrophic failures; but several minor issues that seem sporadic. From my reading; it seems that more of the issues are related to the electrical architecture. I hope that's something they are working on.
And of course the 3.0L Hurricane is DOHC with, I assume, the typical pent-roof combustion chamber used on that style, which are pretty much "peak" efficiency, and it's designed around DI and forced induction.I would be really curious to see the BSFC map for both of the engines to what the efficiency of combustion is.
I'm sure they looked into updating the 5.7L but the 3.0L hurricane was probably already on the drawing board and they didn't think an update to the 5.7L would be worth once the 3.0L engine was released and they were probably right
I would also assume the 3.0L is the pent-roof, high tumble/swirl combustion chamber design. Its probably the only way to get combustion to happen fast enough to avoid knock. The 3.0L very much a monster engine and I hope it holds up well. It has one of the highest BMEP I have seen on a production gasoline engine at just under 30bar for the HO variant. The only one that comes to mind that is higher is the Mercedes Benz M139 at over 31 bar. For reference, the SRT Demon had a BMEP of "only" 21bar.And of course the 3.0L Hurricane is DOHC with, I assume, the typical pent-roof combustion chamber used on that style, which are pretty much "peak" efficiency, and it's designed around DI and forced induction.
While the 6.2L HEMI is a monster, you can get a good portion of the way there with the 3.0L I6, which speaks to the robustness of that engine, as well as the efficiency.
It'd be interesting to see the sales figures by engine for the F-150 and the GM twins. I'm willing to bet that having a V-8 option is important, but the boosted engine options will continue to drive the majority of the sales.They are responding to what the public wants.
Horrible a company would do that, right?
But that requires far more precision and more expensive parts. Also, since N54 (2006-2010, some models 2013) BMW did have IVD issues bcs. PCV is well executed, but again, precision, complexity and quality (expense).I know BMW managed to do non-hybrid DI on their 3.0L I6 and it doesn't fuel dilute, but there are certainly advantages with the hybrid setup (one of them not being the obvious complexity of having two fuel systems) in terms of not having to get your intake valves blasted.
I read in one of the articles that they are doing it this way since they still can still use the 2022 model year government approvals for the 5.7 with the eTorque, if they don't make any changes. Otherwise, it would take more time and retesting to get it to production.Good move, they listened to what people want, and no DI. Too bad they didn't improve upon it and ditch the eTorque. Flame suit on.
If they sold it at 2022 prices it would be a hit!I read in one of the articles that they are doing it this way since they still can still use the 2022 model year government approvals for the 5.7 with the eTorque, if they don't make any changes. Otherwise, it would take more time and retesting to get it to production.
The 5.3 doesn't want for power either - under normal driving conditions. The 5.3 has been updated. Whether those updates are a good thing seem to be a mixed bag.Part of the reason people like it is that it's a very traditional port injected V8, so it doesn't have all the fun issues with DI and fuel dilution. It's a pig on fuel (and the 6.4L is even worse), but it makes nice sounds when it's working and is pretty reliable. It has 40HP on the DI AFM 5.3L GM EcoTech, so I don't think it's really wanting for power either.
On the Ram forums I read a few horror stories. IIRC we had a member here with a catastrophic engine failure. I haven't been following it as closely as I was, I put it on the back burner for now. In any event I hope they get it dialed in. IMO it would be a beast in a Wrangler.I feel the same about the Hurricane. I have not come across any catastrophic failures; but several minor issues that seem sporadic. From my reading; it seems that more of the issues are related to the electrical architecture. I hope that's something they are working on.