Return of the Willys/Jeep Hurricane

Fiat-Chrysler is putting another Hurricane in a Jeep. This time it's 150 HP/Liter turbocharged, direct injected, VVT, all aluminum, 4 banger, to debut in the next generation Wrangler.

FCA's new 2.0-liter turbo 4-banger to make nearly 300 hp

That's a far cry from its F head Hurricane ancestors.

Makes my dumpy Iron Duke decedent 2.5l seem even dumpier.

Couldn't they have used the Go-Devil engine name instead? I'd rather have the Tornado make a return.

I can haz next-Gen (smaller, 1000Lbs lighter) Challenger with turbo 4 pleaz?

Javelin wrote: I can haz next-Gen (smaller, 1000Lbs lighter) Challenger with turbo 4 pleaz?

Meh. IMO, the Challenger/Mustang/Camaro should always have V8 power. Wouldn't complain about the lower weight, but the turbo-4 just doesn't seem right.

In reply to NickD:

I've always heard the Tornado was a nightmare, but they've always intrigued me, first mass produced OHC US domestic. I really want a valve cover to hang on my wall, or do something "artsy" with.

In reply to bigdaddylee82:

The first year they made them they had some oil leaking/consumption issues and people wouldn't check the oil and blew them up as a result. The problem was easily fixed, and Jeep actually fixed the issue for the second model year but by then, the reputation was damaged. The relative complexity of them comparative to the average American engine in the early '60s also resulted in less-trained mechanics screwing them up. As a whole though they were actually a good engine, pretty powerful for the time.

Also, a pretty interesting engine in that they only had 6 camshaft lobes. One cam lobe opened the intake and exhaust valves on each cylinder. This made for a unique camshaft profile, but it allowed the intake and exhaust valves to be precisely aligned in the spherical (don't call it a Hemi) combustion chamber for optimal breathing in the crossflow head.

I didn't mean for them to bring back the actual Tornado though. I just want an OHC I-6 in my Wranglers.

I cant wait for the internet to fill up with complaints about how the JK was the last "Real" Jeep, how JL owners don't wave and how much better the 3.8 was compared to the new engine.

What other cool stuff could this engine fit in. Maybe a certain Fiat roadster......

Javelin wrote: I can haz next-Gen (smaller, 1000Lbs lighter) Challenger with turbo 4 pleaz?

A Challenger should always be a bit larger and more "GT oriented" than the Mustang or Camaro. However, if FCA would revive the Demon concept from a few years ago...

That needs to go in a 500 Abarth.

Could be an interesting swap into a Samurai...

Rusted_Busted_Spit wrote: That needs to go in a 500 Abarth.

Mounted sideways over the rear axle driving the rear wheels, of course.

In reply to logdog:

I'll admit to poking fun at my friends with YJs, "real Jeeps have round headlight." I do prefer the TJ to the JK but I'm a little biased, and come on the 4.0l was a legend.

All that said, when the Diesel KJ Rubicon truck is available, I'm a buyer.

Last "real" Jeep was either in a Popeye cartoon, or an MB.

In reply to logdog:

Already happened. I've heard it refered to as a girls keep already with no data.

In reply to NickD:

You got it right. Mostly the engine was a victim of its own groundbreaking design

Tornado problems. I worked on them. The main problem was the front engine mount, or at least the mounting plate. Over time , this would wear the gasket, creating an oil leak. sometime later this was changed to block mounts. Since the basic block was the old 226 flat head with an overbore. Hence the engine mounts. Other than that I never saw any blown up from oil consumption. Or any other problems for that matter.

Now give us a full range of engines from this to the Hellcat instead of just one mediocre V6. I want options dammit!