View Full Version : Hot Set-up 2.4 ltr or 1.4 Turbo?

12-03-2014, 08:40 PM
Was looking at the engine specs for the forthcoming 500x and notice that our faithful Abarth Turbo is up slightly on torque over the 2.4 ltr option , but down on HP with our turbo generating 160hp and 20 more hp for the larger non-turbo engine. Which would you think would have the performance edge? Also note that the turbo is Italian sourced and the 2.4 ltr comes from Dundee, Mich---Is this more of a Chrysler engine adapted for use in the X or is it an original Italian design...(Also see that the 2.4 ltr does not recommend 91 octane)

What do the sages of the forum think?


12-03-2014, 09:21 PM
Well if its a Chrysler 2.4, it'll be the same as the 2.4L Dart engine. I don't like large 4-cyl engines, they run funny.

I would vote the turbo, but you'd have to drive one with each engine.

12-03-2014, 09:29 PM
I think that it will be a 1.4 liter Multi-Air turbo, no?

12-03-2014, 09:29 PM
Indeed, assume a typo

12-03-2014, 09:42 PM
The 1.4t currently has more power potential than the na 2.4. Not sure about the future though. Being that the same engine combo is in the Jeep version, there might be more demand for turbo kits and tuning for the 2.4. Also, the Dart SRT4 is rumored to run a 2.4 turbo with AWD. They might actually come out with a factory turbo kit. All speculation at this point.

12-03-2014, 10:06 PM
What i think is just wait for the abarth version but thats just me. But if you have to have one, id still go with the 1.4t. There will be alot more out for it vs an NA version. And the jeep version is ugly as sin. But people are buying the new cherokee, just goes to show what I know. lol

12-03-2014, 10:20 PM
Did you have a transmission preference?

The 1.4 comes standard on the Pop, with a six-speed manual

The 2.4 is available on the Pop, and comes standard on the Easy, Trekking, Lounge, Trekking Plus. It comes with a nine-speed automatic.

The 1.4 is not available on the other trims. Just the Pop.

12-04-2014, 10:37 AM
Thanks for all the good info. -I'm sure it would be the 9spd auto as this car would be my wife's, who prefers an auto. I suppose the torque vs hp difference wouldn't equate to much of a performance difference in everyday use. As was mentioned guess we will have to wait and see once the N.A. versions hit the road in the Spring.

12-04-2014, 01:05 PM
Could be wrong but I think the 9 speed auto and it's very wide gear spread/ close ratios will more than make up for the torque disadvantage of the 2.4L ...

948TE Nine Speed Automatic Ratios

First- 4.70, Second- 2.84, Third- 1.90, Fourth- 1.38, Fifth- 1.00, Sixth- 0.80, Seventh- 0.70, Eighth- 0.58, Ninth- 0.48, Reverse- 3.80

C635 Six Speed Manual Ratios

First- 4.154, Second- 2.118, Third- 1.361, Fourth- .978, Fifth- .756, Sixth- .622, Reverse- 4.000

Just a guess on my part but I don't think you'll give up anything when it comes to performance with the automatic- I wouldn't be surprised to find the 2.4L/948TE to be quicker than the 1.4L/C635. Your wallet may be a fair amount lighter if you pick the 2.4L/automatic though.

The current 2.4L (Tigershark) motor could be be considered a hybrid Fiat/Chrysler design- it's an evolution of the World Gas Engine, an engine family from the Global Engine Alliance, a partnership that included Chrysler, Mitsubishi and Hyundai- Chrysler bought out Mitsubishi and Hyundai's shares about 5 or so years ago iirc. The Fiat influence in the Tigershark really shows in the cylinder head- Multiair II.

I could see an Abarth version of the 500X in the future. There was an older turbocharged version of the 2.4L in the Dodge Caliber SRT4- 285 hp ... a turbocharged version of the Tigershark seems like a natural.

12-04-2014, 07:35 PM
Rustbucket, thanks for the great info---This makes sense and for sure with a Multi Air II head, the 2.4 litre will be greater than a sum of its (original) parts---The 9spd tranny should be very efficient...Hope the handling will be closer to the original 500 than to your typical SUV (a class of vehicle I usually loath)---Thanks again for the great info!

12-05-2014, 03:06 PM
Head over to the dart forum and look at the 2.4 dyno numbers. MISSERABLE. On paper it has more power. The dyno disagrees. Essentially the same horse power. They make a little more power down low but the 1.4T is better everywhere else. Pop a tune into the 1.4T and wham, no comparison.

12-07-2014, 08:14 PM
But I personally will want a higher trim than the Pop, so I get no choice, I'll be stuck with the 2.4. Sigh.

I hope there is a better option for the forthcoming (supposedly) Abarth version. If it is a Fiat I want some awesome exhaust and attitude and I'm not sure the 2.4 can deliver that? Wait and see I guess.

Klasse Act
12-07-2014, 08:53 PM
Just my .02 cents worth but on a true DD, one that just gets you around, on an AWD small SUV, I would want more torque down low, keep it simple stupid. For instance, when its deeper snow I want the torque to kick in sooner and get power to all 4 wheels ASAP! Sure more performance is great but this is a high sitting SUV, so why does it matter.

12-07-2014, 10:20 PM
But I personally will want a higher trim than the Pop, so I get no choice, I'll be stuck with the 2.4. Sigh.
If it is a Fiat I want some awesome exhaust and attitude and I'm not sure the 2.4 can deliver that? Wait and see I guess.

That sounds almost like the same complaint people had about the plain 1.4.;) Not that it'll come to pass, but it has been written elsewhere that the 2.4 engine was also designed to be turbocharged.