[Max Sartin]

Short of a strong headwind, my 2014 with the 6 speed manual does great.

 

[rsmwrangler]

Why would you think a JK should be fast ? If you wanted something fast within the Jeep family, a GC SRT8 would have been a better fit.

 

[Hilldweller]

"Fast" is a relative term...
The JK doesn't have a torquey engine and isn't all that impressive off the line. Not to me, anyhow ---- I've had torquey vehicles, like the Power Wagon with 4.56 gearing and a Hemi. It would snap your neck if you punched it.

The JK likes to rev. Wind it out and it's quick enough for a 4x4. But don't race anything stoplight to stoplight. You'll lose.

 

[AlaskaErik]

I have a 2015 JKUR with auto and I just pulled a 2500 lb trailer over the Continental Divide and I had no trouble maintaining the speed limit.

 

[gregtay]

I just sold my 2008 v10TDI Touareg and picked up a 2016 JKUR... I love the Jeep but it is painfully SLOW... snails pace slow!!! The Touareg was... well... in one word, 'Amazing'. I was also expecting a tad bit better performance from almost 300HP.

 

[14Trailcrawler]

I'm not familiar with any generation of Jeep that was known as a speed machine.

Grand Cherokee SRT.

 

[Omar Brannstrom]

I found this comparisson, Wrangler with 3.6 liters Pentastar against old muscle cars.

"Here are some numbers from 1960 to 1970's "muscle cars", (0 to 60 and 1/4 mile times)...All I say is that a 6.6 second for a 4x4 Wrangler with a V6 is not bad.
1973 Pontiac Firebird 455ci 7.3 15.0
1974 Pontiac Firebird 400ci 10.4 17.1
1975 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 400 9.8 16.8
1975 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 455 7.8 16.1
1977 Pontiac Firebird Formula 12.0 17.9
1978 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 6.5 15.3
1972 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 7.5 15.5
1974 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 8.1 15.4
1975 Chevrolet Camaro 350 11.0 17.4
1975 Chevrolet Camaro RS 8.5 16.8
1967 Chevrolet Corvette L71 5.6 13.8
1968 Chevrolet Corvette 327 7.7 15.6
1968 Chevrolet Corvette 427 6.3 14.1
1969 Chevrolet Corvette 427ci 435hp 5.3 13.8 (C&D Sep '69)
1970 Chevrolet Corvette 427 6.1 14.3
1973 Corvette 350ci L82 6.7 15.1 (C&D Dec '72)
1973 Corvette 454ci 6.4 14.6 (C&D Dec '72)
1975 Chevrolet Corvette 350 9.6 16.4
1976 Chevrolet Corvette 350 8.1 16.5
1977 Chevrolet Corvette 8.8 16.6
1979 Chevrolet Corvette L82 7.3 15.7
1980 Chevrolet Corvette L82 7.4 15.4
1967 Ford Mustang (390ci V8 w/4spd) 7.4 15.6
1971 Ford Mustang (351ci V8 w/4spd) 5.8 13.8
1973 Ford Mustang 351ci 8.9 16.3
1974 Ford Mustang II 4sp 14.2 18.8
1974 Ford Mustang II Auto 15.6 19.4
1975 Ford Mustang II (302ci V8 w/3spd) 9.6 17.5
1977 Ford Mustang II 302ci 11.3 17.7
1970 Ford Mustang Boss 302 6.5 14.9 (C&D Feb '70"

 

[Clyde45]

Turn off hill hold, push the traction control and wind it up. It'll go.

 

[Omar Brannstrom]

Not a Touareg but a Volkswagen Tiguan that is less powerfull but still intresting to se

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzJvm3e2kXI

Toyota against wrangler, they are close

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teCnz1CucE0

 

[Pmryall]

I had an N54 powered e93 BMW 335i. Also 300hp. Probably weighed almost as much as the Wrangler (convertible, so hundreds of pounds of extra weight for the roof structure, chassis bracing, etc). The 335i will out-accelerate, out-brake, and out-handle ANY Wrangler - even a rental. Wranglers aren't fast. You learn to deal with it.

yeah, the wrangler is just over 1.5 seconds slower 0-60, but considering the bmw is a sports sedan and the wrangler is a square tent on wheels I'd say that extra second and a half although noticeable certainly makes the wrangler no slouch. I wouldn't call it slow.

 

[MacGyverDXS]

I have a 2014 JKUR with automatic and it's by no means a slouch. It's far more responsive than my 2011 4Runner was, and the 4Runner has a bigger engine. At the end of the day though, my decision to get a Wrangler wasn't about speed but more about capability and customizing options. If you want something fast from FCA I suggest you look at the Challenger Hellcat.

 

[blkyukon]

My Jeep is faster than I thought it would be. Easy to peel out when taking off, I feel confident passing cars on 55mph two lane roads...

Just not the vehicle you want to cruise 80mph on the interstate in

 

[jkjouster]

I have a 2015 2dr with six speed manual. With almost 300 hp I thought it would be reasonably fast. My old Touareg that's much heavier and has a small 240 hp V6 is actually faster than the smaller wrangler why? It barely keeps up with traffic especially 0-60

how many miles on yours so far?

i find the (18K Miles) 2015 sahara soft top rental i am in feels way faster then my (under 1K miles) 2016 rubicon, then again, rubi is heavier wheels/tires and a hardtop

 

[socalwk]

Are you shifting correctly?

 

[jkjouster]

I had an N54 powered e93 BMW 335i. Also 300hp. Probably weighed almost as much as the Wrangler (convertible, so hundreds of pounds of extra weight for the roof structure, chassis bracing, etc). The 335i will out-accelerate, out-brake, and out-handle ANY Wrangler - even a rental.

Wranglers aren't fast. You learn to deal with it.

hold on...why even compare????

i had an 2010 N54 335i as well. 4 door. cobb tuned ($500) and it would pull a 3.5 second 0-60

then again it blew both wastegates and turbos after a few thousand miles...

 

[HawaiiMark]

Another thing not mentioned yet is that drivetrain break-in can be really long. From engine to differentials, my 2015 was very tight for around 4000 miles. At 5200 miles now, I'm just starting to enjoy more responsiveness and even my fuel economy for the same drives has increased by >1 MPG.

Agreed, my Wrangler felt like a cheap Hot Wheels knock off with bad wheels, I could feel the resistance just letting off the gas. I am at 4,200 miles and it has loosened up noticeably. There is a whole lot of drivetrain to break in.

 

[adamo99]

hold on...why even compare????

Only because the quoted power ratings and weights are very similar.

 

[Mr.P_0_0_P]

The original poster has a 6 speed. Mine feels slow unless you burn the clutch on take off let a little rubber lay and slam the gears near redline. If you shift at 4500rpm its not "quick". This was even with stock tires and 3.21 gears you have to rev the thing and get past the 0 torque initial powerband that alot of people hate on these v6's for. 1000-2000rpm is dead. So clutch drop it at 3200 or so and it will giddy up.

Mine has 35's and 3.21 gears I couldnt chirp a tire if I wanted too....that is painfully slow.

 

[i82much]

I found this comparisson, Wrangler with 3.6 liters Pentastar against old muscle cars.

"Here are some numbers from 1960 to 1970's "muscle cars", (0 to 60 and 1/4 mile times)...All I say is that a 6.6 second for a 4x4 Wrangler with a V6 is not bad.
1973 Pontiac Firebird 455ci 7.3 15.0
1974 Pontiac Firebird 400ci 10.4 17.1
1975 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 400 9.8 16.8
1975 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 455 7.8 16.1
1977 Pontiac Firebird Formula 12.0 17.9
1978 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 6.5 15.3
1972 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 7.5 15.5
1974 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 8.1 15.4
1975 Chevrolet Camaro 350 11.0 17.4
1975 Chevrolet Camaro RS 8.5 16.8
1967 Chevrolet Corvette L71 5.6 13.8
1968 Chevrolet Corvette 327 7.7 15.6
1968 Chevrolet Corvette 427 6.3 14.1
1969 Chevrolet Corvette 427ci 435hp 5.3 13.8 (C&D Sep '69)
1970 Chevrolet Corvette 427 6.1 14.3
1973 Corvette 350ci L82 6.7 15.1 (C&D Dec '72)
1973 Corvette 454ci 6.4 14.6 (C&D Dec '72)
1975 Chevrolet Corvette 350 9.6 16.4
1976 Chevrolet Corvette 350 8.1 16.5
1977 Chevrolet Corvette 8.8 16.6
1979 Chevrolet Corvette L82 7.3 15.7
1980 Chevrolet Corvette L82 7.4 15.4
1967 Ford Mustang (390ci V8 w/4spd) 7.4 15.6
1971 Ford Mustang (351ci V8 w/4spd) 5.8 13.8
1973 Ford Mustang 351ci 8.9 16.3
1974 Ford Mustang II 4sp 14.2 18.8
1974 Ford Mustang II Auto 15.6 19.4
1975 Ford Mustang II (302ci V8 w/3spd) 9.6 17.5
1977 Ford Mustang II 302ci 11.3 17.7
1970 Ford Mustang Boss 302 6.5 14.9 (C&D Feb '70"

I think this is a bit misleading. First, there were no muscle cars after 1974, which is the year Pontiac dropped the SD-455. After that, nothing but 200 HP low compression V8's.

Second, the faster cars on that list were tested on bias ply tires in stock form. That slows you down in the 1/4, but it really kills your 0-60 because to avoid wheelspin you really can't even floor it.

Most 60's muscle cars, if equipped with gears, slicks, and headers, were in the 13's if driven properly. A JK with 4.10's and a six speed is pretty snappy but it really isn't in the same league as a decent 60's muscle car.

All of which is not to over-glorify the old muscle cars, as modern performance cars and even a lot of boring modern sedans are just as fast. And I think even a JK with 4.10's is still pretty snappy.

 

[Pmryall]

I think this is a bit misleading. First, there were no muscle cars after 1974, which is the year Pontiac dropped the SD-455. After that, nothing but 200 HP low compression V8's. Second, the faster cars on that list were tested on bias ply tires in stock form. That slows you down in the 1/4, but it really kills your 0-60 because to avoid wheelspin you really can't even floor it. Most 60's muscle cars, if equipped with gears, slicks, and headers, were in the 13's if driven properly. A JK with 4.10's and a six speed is pretty snappy but it really isn't in the same league as a decent 60's muscle car. All of which is not to over-glorify the old muscle cars, as modern performance cars and even a lot of boring modern sedans are just as fast. And I think even a JK with 4.10's is still pretty snappy.

I don't know. Put slicks on a wrangler with a blower, decent exhaust. Properly tuned etc etc etc. my point is your adding onto a stock vehicle to make it perform better and then putting it up against a stock wrangler. Stock is stock you don't get to add slicks and headers and then say hey look it did better.