EcoDiesel versus MOAB?

[Rickeoni]

I have a ecodiesel Wrangler and a 392 Durango, so not a direct comparison. They both make around the same max torque only difference is it comes in at 1600 in the diesel and at 4300 in the 392. There is nothing more satisfying than letting the 392 hunt on the freeway. When it hits around 3500 RPM the engine really begins to sing and just keeps on accelerating. There is also somerhing very satisfying about nudging the go pedal in the wrangler and just clearing the big obstacles with seemingly zero effort. I don't think I would want a 392 for off roading nor as a daily driver. Not to mention watching my buddies fuel up at the end of a day of wheeling and I don't have to.

Sponsored

 

[Twisted10]

i thought about it, but unless its deleted, nope. and i have a diesel truck, so 392 it was.

 

[aerosynch]

Not really since the diesel is an awesome combination for a Wrangler. Mine is my daily driver and wheeler with 63k miles. I just finished a 6100 mile roadtrip from Miami and back and went to Vegas, Bonneville Salt Flats, Sand Hollow, Denver, etc. without issue. I can do about 19-20 hours before needing to stop at a hotel to sleep so for me the Jeep is comfortable enough, and on 40s and 4.5” lift with long arms and Spicer UD60s.

I have driven Miami to LA then Rubicon Trail and back, and wouldn’t hesitate to do it again tomorrow.

My only complaint is the smaller fuel tank (17 gallons). I average about 17-18 MPG going 80 but still get a range of around 300 miles to a tank

 

[Skyvet]

This month is the 6th anniversary of the first Wrangler EcoDiesel deliveries. When the MOAB was announced, I definitely toyed with the idea of moving on—I’ve never kept a vehicle this long.

And sure, nothing is as intoxicating as the lumpy idle of a big V8. But there’s something almost otherworldly about the EcoDiesel’s two standout traits that usually don’t coexist: massive low-end pulling power and excellent fuel mileage.

I was an early buyer of the GC 5.7 Hemi, and while I’ll admit I haven’t driven a Wrangler 6.4 Hemi, I’m confident I’d love it. That said, there’s also something about the diesel’s loud, throaty clatter that scratches a similar itch—maybe not quite as much as a Hemi’s rumble, but close enough to keep things interesting.

For now, I’m all-in on the EcoDiesel. Anyone else feeling the itch?

I have both. A '21 ecodiesel and a '24 392. I love both for different reasons. I actually prefer the diesel for longer distance traveling, and while not the throaty 392, it still has it's own distinct sound that I love. Every time I get in the 392 I risk a speeding ticket but the sound it makes when you turn the key almost makes you weep with the joys of remembered youth.

 

[AskBin]

i have better power delivery and towing torque than my dads 5.3 silverado and better fuel milage than my moms GMC terrain and my old subaru impreza...

I really do love having my cake and eating it too with this refridgerator on wheels, plus it does big smokey burnouts all the same as a V8 just with more wooshy jet turbo noises

to each their own i suppose, im just not a v8 everything kinda guy

 

[2nd 392]

Every time I get in the 392 I risk a speeding ticket but the sound it makes when you turn the key almost makes you weep with the joys of remembered youth.

this
If I could only put a respectable cam in it I would have completion.

 

[jharp]

I love the perspective that both have their merits.

I had the ecodiesel in our 2023 Gladiator rubicon, loved that setup. I've always been a diesel guy, and the 3.0 never disappointed me. Given, I never towed heavy with it (most I ever hooked up to was about 3500 lbs) so I never saw the overheating issues others have reported.

I've never had a 392 Wranger. I did have a 3500 dually with the 6.4 Hemi (with 4.10's & LSD) It was a freaking beast, an absolute blast to drive. Called it the Silver Bullet. Something about a crew cab long bed dually smoking the tires gave me chub every time.

If you love the quiet grunt keep the diesel. If you want more scoot, get the Hemi.

Can't go wrong with either.

 

[fe731as]

We also have both. I drive a '23 JLURD, wife has the '23 392. We bought mine new, hers used June'25 w/ 12k miles (she wanted the color - Earl (aka "Robin's egg Blue"). I told her the mpg's would be about half the diesel (she was driving a '20 Sahara Diesel, now driven by our daughter) - she 'hypermiled' on the way home and got the 392 up to 24mpg! - until we hit the mountains...done.
I love the sound of the 392 AND the diesel. Love the performance of both.
Dread the gas mileage in the 392(like most everyone). Yes, I know - you don't buy a Jeep for the mpg's...
I have experienced the dreaded "derate" in my diesel - my only complaint -- IF I can figure out how to eliminate that, it'll be perfect and I'll keep it. Otherwise...I'm waiting for Jeep to drop the 5.7l into the JLU or the JT (*for a reasonable price). Or, if I'm 'chosen' as one of the luckys for the Fox "Commando", then we'll have 7 Jeep Wranglers in the family - and it'll have the Whipple S/C!

 

[TEAMSLO]

Can't go wrong with either although I did get rid of my JLURD for the 392. I do miss certain things about the diesel but they both have their own quirks.

Both setups have their place for sure.

 

[flick2614]

My goal is to keep the diesel to 300k. Long way to go. Sure the 392 would be cool but the diesel spanks it for offroad capability. Its always fun cruising obstacles in 4hi with just a touch of the accelerator while everyone else is roaring and spinning. That low end torque just puts everything else to shame.

Sponsored