2021 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 392 V8 - Specs, Wallpapers, Videos!

[starrs]

I apologize to you and all the others who had to put up with this

All good

Advertisement

 

[RubiTuesday]

I'm curious. Why does it lose 1/2" under the differential?

I'm curious about this too, but I don't think we have a definitive answer yet. The specs are 10.8" vs 10.3". I suspect it has something to do with reinforcements that FCA/Dana did. Perhaps the increased weight is squishing the tires just a bit more? Maybe someone else has other ideas?

 

[Drytellsr]

Please let me know where I insulted you. You have chosen not to agree with some factual points that were shown to you and that is certainly your choice. I have yet to see anyone that agrees with you. You came onto a thread of people excited about this option in a Jeep and told everyone that their dream was stupid. Don't be surprised that a few people might get defensive.

You haven't Insulted me but Others have insulted me in a more direct manner which is uncalled for
.

Look, I see your trying to express your thoughts in a more productive manner but please don't add fuel on the fire. I never called anyone's dreams stupid! I expect much more from the vehicle.

 

[CockneyUSA]

Reached out to two E TX dealers in regards to the 392. One reposne is useful the other is a poor attempt.

1. "Great choice in the 392 Wrangler.

Unfortunately no pricing is available until December. Please keep in mind as well this will be a very limited production and orders started today.

I know that seems strange without pricing structure but once these allocations are gone you won't be able to request one until late 2021/2022."

2." There have currently not been any Rubicon 392s built, and they cannot as of yet be ordered from Chrysler. The only available info on them comes currently from the the FCA press releases online- you can google the same info we have available at the moment as dealers. I can tell you this.... the 392 is a naturally aspirated 6.4L Hemi V8 that makes around 480 hp in most applications. The Rubicon trim in the Jeep Wrangler sports a sway bar disconnect in the front axle for superior articulation of the front wheels, locking front and rear differentials for true four wheel drive, and is the only stock vehicle capable of navigating the Rubicon Trail in Utah without modification....hence the name. As we receive more info, I'll be happy to pass that along to you. In the meantime, I'd just google the press releases from FCA. "

Thanks response number 2. HA

I'm ordering mine today. My dealer has an allocation of 4 for the dealership. Mine will be apart from those and will be MSRP.

 

[word302]

You know this thread is headed for deletion because you guys are Too Triggered and overly obsessed with me.

You are obviously trolling, why don't you just move along since you supposedly have no interest in this thing.

 

[JayJay]

I'm curious about this too, but I don't think we have a definitive answer yet. The specs are 10.8" vs 10.3". I suspect it has something to do with reinforcements that FCA/Dana did. Perhaps the increased weight is squishing the tires just a bit more? Maybe someone else has other ideas?

I saw a post from someone that claimed to have talked to the Jeep folks and they said that it was the exhaust that was lower. Made sense to me but could be a problem?

Later,
Johnny

 

[RubiTuesday]

BINGO! My Dollar! I see no off road benefit! I listed my concerns and get dumped on and insulted by frustrated people who have a Hardon for a Hemi that they themselves won't buy

I'm trying to see your perspective and think I may have found it. Are you saying that the 392 has no off road benefit for the money?

This statement "THE 392 RUBI HAS NO OFF ROAD BENEFIT OVER THE 3.6L RUBI" is just false. I and others have given several scenarios where the 392 Rubi does have a benefit over the 3.6 Rubi off-road.

But if the claim is "The 392 Rubi has no off-road benefit over the 3.6 Rubi, for the money" that's a very different argument. I'd entertain that argument (and probably agree), though it would be difficult to get too detailed since we don't know what FCA intends to charge for the 392.

 

[Drytellsr]

You are obviously trolling, why don't you just move along since you supposedly have no interest in this thing.

I have come to this thread to discuss my concerns and opinion about this model. Its where it belongs. There is NO other thread about the 392 that a person who has a different opinion about it can go without getting dumped on. Even if I started a thread, I expect i would receive the same guff. Are we not allowed to have different concerns and expectations? Different opinions? why are you policing my free speech?

 

[Young04]

I'm curious about this too, but I don't think we have a definitive answer yet. The specs are 10.8" vs 10.3". I suspect it has something to do with reinforcements that FCA/Dana did. Perhaps the increased weight is squishing the tires just a bit more? Maybe someone else has other ideas?

I read somewhere that it was mostly the exhaust.

 

[Drytellsr]

I'm trying to see your perspective and think I may have found it. Are you saying that the 392 has no off road benefit for the money?

This statement "THE 392 RUBI HAS NO OFF ROAD BENEFIT OVER THE 3.6L RUBI" is just false. I and others have given several scenarios where the 392 Rubi does have a benefit over the 3.6 Rubi off-road.

But if the claim is "The 392 Rubi has no off-road benefit over the 3.6 Rubi, for the money" that's a very different argument. I'd entertain that argument (and probably agree), though it would be difficult to get too detailed since we don't know what FCA intends to charge for the 392.

Don't we all speak from personal perspective? To assume my opinion, or anyone else's, is false is un-American. Opinions lead to discussions and debate. Thoughtful insights are raised and it can come to a consensus or non consensus but insults have no place.

 

[mnjeeper]

OH Wait!!!! that 392 with all its power, Torque and BRAVADO has a Tow rating of 3500 LBS. Holy crap!!! such an improvement over the diesel and the 3.6L RUBI and 2.0L RUBI for that 20k-30k extra cost. OMG I gotta have one and NO-One is gonna criticize it again! I'm converted and you two have earned my total respect and admiration. "NOT"

Tow rating has precious little to do with the engine.

 

[Drytellsr]

Tow rating has precious little to do with the engine.

Correct. but its still a shame

 

[aus-jeep]

Don't we all speak from personal perspective? To assume my opinion, or anyone else's, is false is un-American. Opinions lead to discussions and debate. Thoughtful insights are raised and it can come to a consensus or non consensus but insults have no place.

Sorry...but the way you're communicating is by trying to present your opinions as facts, when they are clearly more about your own personal preferences and values

My opinion is the 392 is going to be better in deep sand, mud and snow where your engine bogs down and you need wheel speed, as well as bumping up big obstacles and rock walls off idle, and doing high speed desert running.

Can the 3.6 get all of that done? Of course, but it won't be better in any of those scenarios.
At best it will be equal, and at worst I'll be very happy I have the extra power/torque

 

[word302]

I have come to this thread to discuss my concerns and opinion about this model. Its where it belongs. There is NO other thread about the 392 that a person who has a different opinion about it can go without getting dumped on. Even if I started a thread, I expect i would receive the same guff. Are we not allowed to have different concerns and expectations? Different opinions? why are you policing my free speech?

I'm not policing anything. You don't want to have a conversation, you just keep repeatedly screaming the same statement like a child.

 

[rcr1340]

Has anyone seen what the GVW is? I'm hoping 6000 or more. Diesel is 6100