Coulomb Technologies Sales Channel Closes Two Distribution Agreements for Plug-in Charging
New Generation Audi Q7 SUV Models Feature Lower Fuel Consumption and Emissions

Chrysler Introduces Next-Generation V-6 Engine: the Pentastar

Pentastarv6A
The new 3.6-liter flex-fuel Pentastar V-6. Click to enlarge.

At the New York International Auto Show, Chrysler LLC introduced the first of an all-new line of V-6 engines intended to improve fuel efficiency across the Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge lineup by 8% on average compared with previous Chrysler V-6 engines.

The 3.6L engine, which is flex-fuel capable, will ultimately replace seven current Chrysler V-6 engines: 2.7L; 3.0L (China); 3.3L; 3.5L; 3.7L; 3.8L; and 4.0L. Chrysler anticipates that the new Pentastar V-6 will contribute a 2 mpg increase to Chrysler’s CAFE by 2015.

The new 3.6-liter V-6 engine (originally called the Phoenix (earlier post) as late as Chrysler’s viability submission in February 2009) is part of a new family of V-6 engines to be built on a single architecture, representing the largest powertrain program ever undertaken at Chrysler. It will first be offered in the all-new 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee, unveiled at the New York International Auto Show and at the Jeep Safari in Moab, Utah.

“The all-new Pentastar is the most advanced six-cylinder engine Chrysler has ever offered. This new family of engines uses an architecture conceived with future technology growth and integration in mind.”
—Bob Lee, Vice President
Powertrain Product Team

The new Pentastar V-6 is an all-new design, featuring a double-overhead cam (DOHC), narrow included valve angle cylinder head and high-flow intake and exhaust ports. This design, combined with dual independent cam phasing, allows optimum volumetric and combustion efficiency over the full speed and load range, resulting in a flat torque curve along with high specific power. The engine’s torque exceeds 90% of its peak value from 1,600 to 6,400 rpm—which will provide customers with outstanding drivability and responsiveness, without the need for premium fuel.

The engine delivers 280 hp (209 kW) at 6,400 rpm and 260 lb-ft of torque (353 N•m) at 4,800 rpm—an increase of 33% in horsepower and 11% in torque over its predecessor, while providing an 11% fuel economy improvement.

Low cost of ownership was an initial design requirement for the engine. The powertrain engineering team created an efficient design and integrated a host of technologies required for low fuel consumption, reduced emissions and improved refinement, as well as the considerable performance increase at a total engine cost comparable to the outgoing V-6 engines.

During the initial goal setting for the program, many of the “world’s best’ engines were analyzed to find functional targets, such as fuel consumption and refinement. The engine’s architecture also allows for future growth and technology applications.

The initial version of the Pentastar V-6 applied in the Grand Cherokee uses multi-point port fuel injection. Chrysler says that the new Pentastar engine meets competitive fuel economy and performance goals without direct injection. However, direct-injection, as well as other technologies, have been included in the future powertrain planning horizon for Pentastar’s engine family. Turbocharging is also a future possibility.

Nor did Chrysler opt to apply its MDS cylinder deactivation system in this first application of the Pentastar, although it is integrated into the Pentastar architecture. Chrysler said that the customer benefit in the initial application (Jeep Grand Cherokee) “did not justify the use of this approach, but it may in other future products.

An advanced oil filter system eliminates oil spills and contains an incinerable filter element—more efficient disposal than the typical spin-on filters, which are disposed of in landfill sites. The use of long-life spark plugs and a high-energy coil-on-plug ignition system also helps to reduce cost of ownership.

The Pentastar V-6 is designed to run on regular gasoline, offering a 10% reduction in fuel cost compared with premium fueled engines. The engine also is fully flex fuel capable, offering consumers the choice of gasoline or E85 fuel without any degradation in performance or emissions.

The new state-of-the-art Trenton (Mich.) Engine South Plant will be the lead facility for production of the Pentastar V-6 engine. A duplicate, new facility in Saltillo, Mexico, will ramp up for the 2012 model year.

In the 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee, the engine is coupled with the W5A580, a five-speed automatic transmission. The five-speed W5A580 transmission includes adaptive electronic control or Electronic Range Select (ERS) driver-interactive manual control and an electronically modulated torque converter clutch.

Comments

ejj

They might be able to sell more of these engines if the name is "Penthouse Star" instead of "Pentastar"....just a thought....

jimfromthefoothills

make they two votes for Penthouse Star!

jimfromthefoothills

"Chrysler anticipates that the new Pentastar V-6 will contribute a 2 mpg increase to Chrysler’s CAFE by 2015."

Maybe it is just me but I am not sure I would have issued a press release on this. I think filling the tires with air may have yielded a better result.

Peter9909

Why does anybody need a 3.6L engine? In France, even bigger cars and minivans typically come with a 2.0L engine and full size vans come with a 2.5L engine, which certainly helps to explain why France's average fuel economy is more than 2mpg better than the average in the US.

Will S

I find it ironic that they've replaced 2.7 and 3.0L engines with a 3.6L, making the claim of greater fuel efficiency "on average", without providing anything to back up the claim. It's obvious that they could have done much better, but their push for "more horsepower" won out.

They brag that the Grand Cherokee will see some improvement on fuel efficiency, but this SUV is a dinosaur that should have been retired. When gas prices rebound to (and above) record levels, Chrysler will be scratching their heads as to why they can't give these gashogs away. Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titantic may give the appearance of doing something, but won't save Chrysler from what appears to be it's eventual fate.

ExDemo

The 3.6 revealed in the next Grand Cherokee, the biggest car/SUV in their lineup, is only one of a series of engines at 3.0, 3.3. 3.6 and 4.0 liters.

They might even spin off a new 4.7 liter v8 off the Pentastar to replace the 5.7 and 6.1 liter v8 Hemis.

Together with the 1.8, 2.0 and 2.4 liter I-4s from GEMA introduced only 4 years ago, Chrysler has a modern DOHC, VVT,SPI, All-alloy engine fleet going forward into the future.

JosephT


Peter

I would bet those 2.0L and 2.5L engines you are reffereing to are diesel.

dursun

Great engines!!! Too bad they are a decade too late.

Peter9909

JosephT, you're right. They are Diesel. I think we need more Diesels here. Some companies have brought out 50-state-legal Diesels, proving it can be done. The beauty of the Diesel is that you can downsize the engine while maintaining gargantuan torque, which explains why full size vans in France get by on a 2.5L engine while most of the full size vans here (Sprinter Diesel excluded) come with engines twice that size or even larger.

Nick Lyons

They need to hurry up and apply the downsizing, turbocharging, direct injection options and get the fuel economy up. More importantly for Chrysler, they need to start building cars that people might want to buy...

SJC

"Why does anybody need a 3.6L engine?"

In the U.S. it may be more customer perception. People may need to feel that they have the HP when they need it. They do not use 200 hp, but they do not want it underpowered. I am not saying that this makes a lot of sense, but it might explain the V6 purchases versus the I4 in the same car.

ai_vin

I always figured that when somebody says they "need" this kind of HP they're only compensating for some sort of shortcoming in some other area.

ai_vin

;^)

paul in hampden

While this is a good replacement for the engines larger then 3.3lL its a poor replacement for the smaller engines. A 4 cyl would do better there.

fred

Sorry...wrong engines!!!! This country, this planet needs more V6s like(fill in your own blank). Double heads, double cats, double O2 sensors, double variable valve timing sprockets, double, double, double. Am I making the point? Maybe DOUBLE turbos, on four or five cylinders, direct injected or diesels, but PLEASE, stop the insanity.

otisps

I am going to be so relieved when they file for bankruptcy!!!

These people do not deserve to be in business, make or sell anything. They are just filling junkyards.

Matthew

I am not saying that this makes a lot of sense, but it might explain the V6 purchases versus the I4 in the same car.

Don't forget that many of us out there simply enjoy driving, and don't particularly want the bare minimum of power. This is politically incorrect to be sure, but it's our choice to make in a free society.

Peter9909

I enjoy driving too. I drive a four cylinder Jetta. Plenty of enjoyment there, and adequate power too. If anything, a less powerful car can be more fun because you get to rev it more and here the engine scream without ending up at four times the speed limit in 5 seconds. I drive a stick and will always drive a stick. A four cylinder with a stick is more fun than any engine with an automatic transmission. Many American cars, particularly the ones with larger engines are not even available with a stick. That's a curious definition of fun.

Matthew

Peter - it all depends on what turns your crank. I did the four cylinder/stick thing for a while (124hp Saturn SC), and it was indeed fun. But I enjoy my current 222hp Maxima more, and I expect I will like my upcoming 330hp G37 more still.

For some of us, exceeding the speed limit in a matter of seconds is where it's at.

jimfromthefoothills

If you want to drive a race car then get on the track! Public roads are the commons and these high horsepower cars are a nuisance.

I test drove a 135 twin turbo and after getting off the on ramp I looked down and I was going 125mph. I kept my honda civic hybrid.

It sounds kind of dickish to say, but the roads are not created for your personal recreation space. our government should limit both the GVW of horsepower of vehicles allowed on the roads.

HarveyD

Should infrastructure $$$ be used to build 1K + race tracks around the country for people with race cars (and over powered muscle vehicles) to practice their sport?

alpha1847

I'd have to say that I was pretty excited about this at first, as I saw it as a step in the right direction. Then, after going through the spec sheet, my initial reaction was tempered quite a bit.

I remember reading an article about the current generation Grand Cherokee, and the chief engineer blaming Daimler for all of the weight it picked up from the previous generation. So, what do they do now? Model for model, they each pick up 200-300lbs. The V6 limited 4x4 is listed at 4850 lbs!

It seems every advance in engine technology is offset by weight increase. I was really hopeful that manufacturers would start leveling things off and heading in the opposite direction, but here we have another high-volume vehicle, which basically continues that trend for another 5-6 years. Just when I started to think Chrysler was starting to get it....

ToppaTom

To the Vespa rider the driver of the Smart car is an insecure juvenile that shuld be jailed for buying a big dangerous gas hog.

The comments to this entry are closed.