2022 392 Stripper?

[Zandcwhite]

At $60k I'm not saying totally stripped down. It will still have power windows, lockes and a lot of good options. Instead you would just be able to chose Soft top ,cloth seats and plastic bumpers for example. And it should be cheaper then $60k but I'm being realistic with Jeeps pricing.

Basically not even really a stripper version. It will be the same. Just have more options to chose from besides top of the line premium. Not everyone wants leather especially for off roading. I know I don't. And I don't have anywhere to store a hard top safely. It would just be nice to be able to option it they way we want and save a little money. That's all.

So you want to remove $5-7k in options and drop the price by $20k+? I think every buyer could get behind that math, businesses on the other hand probably not.

Sponsored

 

[OffroadCalling77]

Fords competition has brought us the 392 and the XR . But there inability to deliver hasn’t done a thing to bring prices down

And the fact that they’re teasing the bronco raptor for 2022 release is a joke in my opinion.

Also I was kind of interested if it had a TwinTurbo V6 if they offered it in a two door as well because that would be really fun but it doesn’t look like it’s going to be offered in the two-door.

 

[OffroadCalling77]

Now that raptor version of bronco is confirmed and teased it might make Jeep push for the 392 as long as Stellantis approves

Except it’s rumored the bronco is using a TwinTurbo V6 and not our beloved 392 V8.

Sometime in 2023 when these bronco raptors actually start hitting the streets maybe we will have that in line 6 as an upgrade option on a standard Rubicon and no more 392.

 

[GrayHawk20]

Except it’s rumored the bronco is using a TwinTurbo V6 and not our beloved 392 V8.

Sometime in 2023 when these bronco raptors actually start hitting the streets maybe we will have that in line 6 as an upgrade option on a standard Rubicon and no more 392.

In line turbo. I think that’s supposed to go in the track hawk well rumors at point.

 

[shekmark]

I think Jeep created the 392 for a niche market, and made it really high-end. The V8 is not necessary for a Wrangler, it doesn't really make it any better offroad as the main powertrain offers more than enough torque and power for low speed off-roading. As a light off-road vehicle that's designed to go through rough terrain with ease a V8 really makes no sense at all. No improved towing, or payload, nothing. Just a loud Jeep. It is a piece of jewelry, a show jeep. Jeep did not intend for it to be practical. And I agree with you, I would never buy a 80k car unless I was making 500k a year at least. Or if I was a hardcore jeep hobbyist and really wanted one.

Now what would make sense would be a 60k V8 Jeep (as you said) that had a non-removable top that could carry plenty of gear. A beefier suspension and frame that could tow over 5,000 lbs. A vehicle designed to take into long expeditions. Like the V8 toyota land cruiser F series offered in remote parts of the world.

But yeah. a 60k stripped 392 might sell. Lots of mall crawlers out there who would love one. I still wouldnt buy one. Why would I?

I have thought this all along. To me, the 392 should be in Saraha trim. I more "street" model. It makes little sense for rocks and trails. I highly doubt there will be many 392's getting Pennsylvania pinstrips at AOAA or Rausch Creek.

 

[JeepViking13]

I have thought this all along. To me, the 392 should be in Saraha trim. I more "street" model. It makes little sense for rocks and trails. I highly doubt there will be many 392's getting Pennsylvania pinstrips at AOAA or Rausch Creek.

I think it's perfect in the Rubicon trim being that the Rubicon is the king of Jeeps. But I agree I don't see many people beating it to death offroad.

 

[Fargo]

On that note, a 392 Majave Wrangler would make sense as a high speed desert runner.

 

[Fargo]

Overpriced, a loaded f150 is pushing $100k these days. The average home price out here is $1.2 million. The world is over priced. Nobody is going to suddenly sell a product that they struggle to keep up with demand for less. That’s just not how the world works. Again, bronco pricing is in line with wrangler pricing from bottom to top. I’ll agree that everything is over priced, but welcome to the world we live in. Trx launch editions were $100k, and sold out in 3 hours. A model s averages $120k. The fact of the matter is there are a shit ton of people out there who don’t bat an eye dropping $70k plus on a vehicle. It isn’t going to get better…ever.

I'm curious if you know off hand what the average household income is in CA to afford a house like that. Is income inline with pricing? The reason I ask is because if I own a house worth $1.2 million a $100,000 vehicle is less than 10% of what my house cost. On the other hand, if you live in ND or pretty much anywhere in the middle of the country where the average house cost $200k-$250k that $100,000 vehicle cost nearly half as much as your house. For example I live in a house that cost me around 200k+/- about 5 years ago. Its very hard to justify paying $60,000 for a new Rubicon.

 

[Zandcwhite]

JL's aren't light weight offroaders. Those days left with the release of the 4 door jku. Low speed off roading isn't the only thing out there, and very few people trailer their brand new rig. The 392 would make a fun daily driver and a great hill killer where horsepower and speed are 100% necessary. Even cruising wide open fire roads and desert trails the extra horsepower would be a blast. Necessary? Absolutely not. A shit ton of fun on and off road? Definitely.

 

[RELBUS]

At $60k I'm not saying totally stripped down. It will still have power windows, lockes and a lot of good options. Instead you would just be able to chose Soft top ,cloth seats and plastic bumpers for example. And it should be cheaper then $60k but I'm being realistic with Jeeps pricing.

Basically not even really a stripper version. It will be the same. Just have more options to chose from besides top of the line premium. Not everyone wants leather especially for off roading. I know I don't. And I don't have anywhere to store a hard top safely. It would just be nice to be able to option it they way we want and save a little money. That's all.

Kind of like the 72K TRX you mentioned earlier in this thread. No way I would spend that for a pickup lacking the options I want. I was torn between the TRX and another Ram 2500. I went with the cummins for slightly less money than a stripped TRX and got a loaded 2500.
For years I focused on performance at any cost, not any more...I like the amenities too!

 

[Fargo]

The problem with a stripped down V8 wrangler for $60k is that you already have so much money into it that it becomes easier to drop another $500 here and another $1000 there to get the options you want. Pretty soon you are at $70k anyway. It takes a real commitment to stay within a budget and forgo amenities. Most people just buy what they want on monthly payments with little regard to what the thing is really costing them.

 

[JeepViking13]

JL's aren't light weight offroaders. Those days left with the release of the 4 door jku. Low speed off roading isn't the only thing out there, and very few people trailer their brand new rig. The 392 would make a fun daily driver and a great hill killer where horsepower and speed are 100% necessary. Even cruising wide open fire roads and desert trails the extra horsepower would be a blast. Necessary? Absolutely not. A shit ton of fun on and off road? Definitely.

Not saying it super light weight but a 2 door Rubicon is much lighter with a shorter wheel base. Pretty good spec for Off-roading considering what else is out there these days.

And yes I think the 392 can be fun off road in certain situations like open country, fire roads, logging roads, hill climbing ect.. I just don't know how many people will actually put it through its paces considering the cost. A few millionaires will. Someone like me that would have to YOLO their savings just to get one I don't know!?

F- it you only live once I'm getting one. I might die of Covid or a heart attack next week. Lol.. It's just money right?

 

[entropy]

I'm curious if you know off hand what the average household income is in CA to afford a house like that. Is income inline with pricing? The reason I ask is because if I own a house worth $1.2 million a $100,000 vehicle is less than 10% of what my house cost. On the other hand, if you live in ND or pretty much anywhere in the middle of the country where the average house cost $200k-$250k that $100,000 vehicle cost nearly half as much as your house. For example I live in a house that cost me around 200k+/- about 5 years ago. Its very hard to justify paying $60,000 for a new Rubicon.

it is rough man. But thats just now. where I live, 2 houses next to mine sold for 1.6million. It is a one story 2,200 sqft on a 7,000 sqft lot. that house sold on 1995 for 150k. although the owners added a lot to it. But the vast majority of people living here bought their houses in early 2000s and they were 200~400k. theres a lot of boomers holding on to their property and there is not new construction. hell man if I was one of them I would sell my million dollar house and move somewhere nicer and cheaper but oh well. this is Pasadena though which is a really nice city and 15 minute drive to downtown LA, Burbank, Glendale. And by the foothills of the san gabriels. It is prime location. You can stil buy a house in southern California further from the city from under 700k.

I bought my house 2 years ago and it was under a million. i couldnt really buy it now, or I could but it would strain my finances. Prices have been skyrocketing.

los angeles is going through a boom believe it or not. Lots of people leaving but lots of people with high paying jobs, mostly from tech coming in. This happened in San Francisco, Boston and Manhattan. it is not a bubble it is a reality. People are buying these houses.

I know a young couple bough a small 2 BR house here for 950k last year. their combined income is 300k. i would estimate most young couples buying houses here have an income of 200k to 300k a year. their mortgage is a huge chunk of their income. Past or close to the 25% recommended leaving them with a little less spending money, yet not uncomfortable.

also with prices going up so fast it is a good investment, even if it slows down. So people dont mind it as much.

 

[Fargo]

A combined household income of $300k sounds like a millionaire to me since I bring in less than $50k and my wife is a stay at home mom. I can see where a $50k jeep is not a big hurdle at that point, Until you consider the cost of the house. I can also see where that would suck up all that extra income. Its two different worlds and its hard to understand the others guys finance situation from that perspective.

Needless to say, I guess we all want what we can't have. The nature of fallen humanity and our non-stop greed and coveting of our neighbors possesions.

 

[Zandcwhite]

A combined household income of $300k sounds like a millionaire to me since I bring in less than $50k and my wife is a stay at home mom. I can see where a $50k jeep is not a big hurdle at that point, Until you consider the cost of the house. I can also see where that would suck up all that extra income. Its two different worlds and its hard to understand the others guys finance situation from that perspective.

Needless to say, I guess we all want what we can't have. The nature of fallen humanity and our non-stop greed and coveting of our neighbors possesions.

Let's not forget that $300k income comes with a 50% total tax rate out here, as our government thinks we are rich. 6 figure taxes and 7 figure homes say we are far from it. Another 15 years and I can sell this overpriced home and move the hell out of CA very comfortably retired.

Sponsored