392 Sluggish vs Modded 2.0

[ag4ever]

With a 5,000lb trailer. Into a wind. Uphill.

Yes, I would assume so, but not sure why that would be impressive. I can also do it chained to a tree, but why?

When I have a cold engine, I keep the RPMs under 2,500 untill I have 180 oil temp. It still drives faster than most other vehicles on the road.

Sponsored

 

[2nd 392]

Yes, I would assume so, but not sure why that would be impressive. I can also do it chained to a tree, but why?

When I have a cold engine, I keep the RPMs under 2,500 untill I have 180 oil temp. It still drives faster than most other vehicles on the road.

See my previous post on the all time top 10 fastest NA Muscle Cars. 9 of them were a 12.0 - 12.5 second 1/4 mi. A showroom 392 is within ~ .3 second. The fastest, a Challenger R/T 1320 about a whole second faster. Think about that.

the 392 Wrangler can play in their court, they damn sure can’t play in Wrangler’s court. ….
And it wouldn’t take a lot to shave .3/5 second to equal most of the top 10 Mustangs and Camaros. …. How well can they do off road ?

 

[Guv]

Little spaghetti burner with a hair dryer seems to have hit a nerve
OP’s finding is not surprising, a lot of automatic trans in powerful vehicles have very conservative tuning and can feel sluggish until you bury the fun pedal.
My 5.0 F-150 skips 2nd and 5th gears unless you use Sport, Tow/Haul mode or bury the accelerator My wife’s Explorer 2.3 uses every gear, every time in Normal mode and feels very responsive. But line them up and one driver is going to see nothing but tail gate pulling away.
Incidentally, they both get almost the same gas mileage, probably can partially be attributed to the vehicle tuning.

 

[Captainwilsh]

You didn’t drive a lemon. You drove a stock 392 in the wrong mode on the wrong terrain for its strengths. Put that 392 in Off-Road+, turn off traction control, and then compare it to your modded 2.0T from a 20-roll. You’ll immediately understand the $30k price difference.

 

[Guv]

You didn’t drive a lemon. You drove a stock 392 in the wrong mode on the wrong terrain for its strengths. Put that 392 in Off-Road+, turn off traction control, and then compare it to your modded 2.0T from a 20-roll. You’ll immediately understand the $30k price difference.

Shouldn’t need a 20 mph roll.

 

[Twisted10]

 

[WannFly]

I was going to get a Tazer and run it on RWD, but it seems like I will miss out on the launch if do it, or get launched.

Now the first world problem... do i try and save the gears in RWD or just launch every chance I get...

 

[yokramer]

I was going to get a Tazer and run it on RWD, but it seems like I will miss out on the launch if do it, or get launched.

Now the first world problem... do i try and save the gears in RWD or just launch every chance I get...

Put an Atlas in it.

 

[Matt878]

All your feeling is how torque comes on.

2l=bottom end quick hit then falls on face

v8=building slightly then takes off.

that’s like comparing my 427 ci (7.0L) Lingenfelter Trans Am to my STi…there is no comparison, but when the turbo kicks in on the STi for a few moments it feels strong…

meanwhile the Pontiac would quite literally win in a head to head by about a football field

 

[moabman-OG]

I bought the 392 and I returned it because it rolled over at the track and then like it didn't get to 200mph, even downhill with the wind and it was like 0-60 in like 4.5s so that thing is a piece of junk and slow, wtf?! I returned it, I thought I was buying a race car.

 

[2nd 392]

I was going to get a Tazer and run it on RWD, but it seems like I will miss out on the launch if do it, or get launched.

Now the first world problem... do i try and save the gears in RWD or just launch every chance I get...

Put an Atlas in it.

Plus a D-60, I’ve been told 392 owners are loaded, I’m sure you can afford it.

 

[3TV]

Test drove a stock 392 today with the factory 4.56 gearing (2026 Moab). I'm coming from a full bolt on modded 2L turbo with a 2" lift and 35s (gears, intercooler tubing, CAI, ECU tune, exhaust you name it). The 392, keeping that heavenly exhaust note aside, felt sluggish in the limited city driving i did during the test drive. They didnt let me drive it in Offroad+, which Im guessing would've changed everything. Noticed a lot of throttle lag, lack of low end torque which is the turbo shines, and a very front end heavy planted feel.

Makes me realize how peppy and quick our little 4 bangers are off the line if you do it up right. Im sure the 392s at/near WOT unleash a whole other beast, and probably where they shine is the instant limitless pull you get at high speeds. But just want to make sure this is whats expected or did I test drive a lemon?

Snicker, snicker, snort, guffaw.

We have a 2.0T in a 2-door and a 392. The 2.0T is quick for a brief instant as the turbo hits. The 392 pulls like a freight train far beyond where the 2.0T falls flat. I think you needed more open space to get the feel for what a 392 is like.

 

[yokramer]

Plus a D-60, I’ve been told 392 owners are loaded, I’m sure you can afford it.

What are you waiting for?

 

[2nd 392]

What are you waiting for?

Priorities, “Loaded” owner’s hat, jeans, and shoes

Have you seen Ca gas prices ?

 

[yokramer]

Priorities, “Loaded” owner’s hat, jeans, and shoes

Have you seen Ca gas prices ?

White Trash Chic is in these days with the bourgeoise

Sponsored