Finally test drive a 392

[Overwatch]

Just my opinion, I get that, but I love mine. I respect other's views and if it's not for you that's fine. However you came on here to tell others it's not that great which sounds more like sour grapes that you didn't buy it. It is plenty fast...scary fast for a Jeep. Comparing a 2.0 to a 392, that's just not going to work.

Sponsored

 

[BigTalker]

I just got back from a dealership in PA and test drove a used (5k Mile) 392. I was planning on either ordering a custom 392 or getting this one, but wanted to test drive before I pulled the trigger. My experience was exactly like the OP's. I was just looking for confirmation to buy but that test drive has me second guessing it. All the videos and comments I've seen the thing should have blasted me into orbit, but pedal to the metal on the highway felt almost identical to my '18 Sahara V6. I'm so confused now... anyone have any suggestions why the one I test drove lagged or didn't seem any different?

 

[Traveller128]

You lose 3% of horsepower per 1,000', but I've never heard that translate into 0-60 impact.

Of course it does. You lose power at higher altitude, and acceleration slows as a results. In drag racing, there's altitude correction factors to correct for E.T. and trap speed so you can factor for correction at different tracks. As soon as you get away from a "standard day", then you gain or lose depending on air quality (temp and humidity, pressure altitude). 0-60 numbers are only accurate for the conditions they were run in originally, and don't reflect running in worse atmosphere. Weight of the vehicle is also a factor, 1/3 tank versus full tank runs are quicker.

 

[HBDiesel]

There’s a video of the 392 at 5000 feet it runs 6.8 or something like that to 0-60. light weight with high power if you want to go street car fast.
I don’t see any use for a “fast” Jeep. But to each there own.

 

[graytrucks]

I could care less about the 0-60 of the 392 (I have alternatives if I want to drive fast), but driving a 392 with an open roof is an experience that’s hard to recreate. The sound and feel are special.

 

[bohnster]

I don’t see any use for a “fast” Jeep.

I bet Ned Beatty woulda liked to have one in "Deliverance"...

 

[Steph1]

The XR makes a huge difference. My last jeep was a JKUR manual with 5.13's and 37's. The 392 is definitely MUCH more fun. Once you do all the fun mods (lift, gears, 37's, protection and winch) the 3.6 is a dog in comparison. As it was mentioned above, a ballerina. A large, athletic ballerina, much like a NFL defensive lineman. It throws heads back and makes heads turn. If you couldn't get it to 60 in under 5, 3 things may have happened......you didn't do it correct, the timer you were using was not used properly or you didn't have a footprint gas pedal.....because it is a HEMI!!!

I can totally relate. When I sold my 911 which I totally loved and was overprotective of, the feeling of relief far exceeded sorrow when I saw the new owner leave my house with it.

 

[Bayrat]

This is the 392 I drove last week, it's a 2022 and used as a daily driver and in the mud and dirt back country. It does not have the XR package, yet it rode and handled much better than my 2019 JLU with the six banger. From a rolling start, this thing will suck the air out of your lungs.

 

[rickinAZ]

Of course it does. You lose power at higher altitude, and acceleration slows as a results.

Just to be clear, I wasn't suggesting that power doesn't impact acceleration. I just hadn't heard of an actual rule-of-thumb for 0-60'. I've only heard 3%/1,000'.

I lived at 8,200' in the Colorado Rockies for most of my adult life. I felt the elevation impact every day.

 

[Traveller128]

Just to be clear, I wasn't suggesting that power doesn't impact acceleration. I just hadn't heard of an actual rule-of-thumb for 0-60'. I've only heard 3%/1,000'.

I lived at 8,200' in the Colorado Rockies for most of my adult life. I felt the elevation impact every day.

No rule of thumb, as there are so many vehicle specific things that will affect it greatly. Power to weight, gearing, all comes into play. A light car with good gearing might only lose a few tenths, while a, say, 5800 turbo brick will lose 1.5 ....

 

[RELBUS]

Traded a 2.0 for a 392. You crazy!

 

[BEACHED WHALE]

Just my opinion, I get that, but I love mine. I respect other's views and if it's not for you that's fine. However you came on here to tell others it's not that great which sounds more like sour grapes that you didn't buy it. It is plenty fast...scary fast for a Jeep. Comparing a 2.0 to a 392, that's just not going to work.

The forum shares great insight and opinion (much better on the regular forum). In fact I was convinced by another member w/out ever test driving by way of the charts. The truth is a lot of people are buying $90,000 Jeeps w/out test driving. Im just hear to say that its not light and nimble like the jeeps we are all accustomed to. Not even close to the heavy diesel. It drives like a bad truck. The 2.0 came out just a few years ago after the JK. Being that the JK went through the "MOD renaissance" there was tons of insight & research done. Its a far superior engine then the old pentastar. In fact its an upgrade when you fill out trade-in value. So If I were to choose either the bronco raptor or 392 w/out driving, I would choose modern tech & go Raptor. The 2.0 turbo gives a similar feel to todays engines. The takeaway I hope here is to go out and test drive one before you put a deposit or wait for something u won't be in love with.

 

[2nd 392]

Grand Cherokee SRTs are just as heavy as a Wrangler 392.

My guess is the key variable holding back acceleration on a 392 are the 35-inch tires. It takes a tremendous amount of torque to start turning those tires.

Butt dyno tells me the GC SRT is likely a little quicker than my non XR, but it certainly wouldn’t lose it (until 99 mph) just wish the GC had a loud button. BTW, the GC has been a garage Queen since getting my 392, there is a reason! Much More Fun to drive!

 

[3TV]

Even my TRX has been a garage queen since I got my 392 XR, except for one spirited run in the desert, which the TRX does very very well. I don't plan on 90+ mph runs in the desert with my 392, but for slower more technical terrain, daily driving, ease of parking, and just a great driving vehicle, the 392 is hard to beat as far as I'm concerned.

 

[DaltonGang]

The forum shares great insight and opinion (much better on the regular forum). In fact I was convinced by another member w/out ever test driving by way of the charts. The truth is a lot of people are buying $90,000 Jeeps w/out test driving. Im just hear to say that its not light and nimble like the jeeps we are all accustomed to. Not even close to the heavy diesel. It drives like a bad truck. The 2.0 came out just a few years ago after the JK. Being that the JK went through the "MOD renaissance" there was tons of insight & research done. Its a far superior engine then the old pentastar. In fact its an upgrade when you fill out trade-in value. So If I were to choose either the bronco raptor or 392 w/out driving, I would choose modern tech & go Raptor. The 2.0 turbo gives a similar feel to todays engines. The takeaway I hope here is to go out and test drive one before you put a deposit or wait for something u won't be in love with.

So, let me get this straight. You would choose the Bronco/Raptor over the Jeep 392, even if you hadn't driven them. If you couldn't figure it out, I'm now rolling my eyes at your comments, and logic.
Just out of curiosity, is MPG also a big factor in your off-road decisions?

.

Sponsored