How long will Jeep offer the 392?

developerlaw

Member
First Name
Doug
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
11
Reaction score
11
Location
St. Augustine, Florida
Vehicle(s)
2021 Rubicon 392; 2021 Mercedes G550
Large powerplants that are loud and suck fuel are going to be short lived for vehicles under 6,000 lbs. Would love to see the 392 production last a few years and maybe even have a refreshed version (I need ventilated seats) but I assume that is highly unlikely. Jeep is more likely to produce a high powered electric Wrangler, which I find as exciting as the thought of having sex without sensation or feeling, you will know something is happening but it just isn't the same.
Advertisement

 

sourdough

Well-Known Member
First Name
Strider
Joined
Nov 12, 2017
Messages
1,439
Reaction score
3,080
Location
93013
Vehicle(s)
white JLR
Build Thread
Link
Occupation
wanderer
Vehicle Showcase
1
Huh, another opinion thread. IMHO FCA shit the bed with the 392. Some guys are reporting 14/15 MPG or lower which just isn't logical today. There where many options for more power than a normally asperated V8 lump. I lived and drove in the mucle car era but that was 45/55 years ago folks. Gas was 50 cents and 10/12 MPG was the factory HP V8 norm. Soon the 392 will quickly fade and be seen as what it is, a dinosaur for the museum.

392 T-Rex dinosaur.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Young04

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2018
Messages
684
Reaction score
639
Location
MA
Vehicle(s)
Hydro Blue 392
Huh, another opinion thread. IMHO FCA shit the bed with the 392. Some guys are reporting 14/15 MPG or lower which just isn't logical today. There where many options for more power than a normally asperated V8 lump. I lived and drove in the mucle car era but that was 45/55 years ago folks. Gas was 50 cents and 10/12 MPG was the factory HP V8 norm. Soon the 392 will quickly fade and be seen as what it is, a dinosaur for the museum.
As much as I love my 392, I often wonder how much better served it would be with a V8 from BMW or AMG.
 

guarnibl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
1,656
Reaction score
1,318
Location
Scottsdale
Vehicle(s)
'21 JLUR 392 XR, '21 JTR, '21 JLR, '09 JK
Huh, another opinion thread. IMHO FCA shit the bed with the 392. Some guys are reporting 14/15 MPG or lower which just isn't logical today. There where many options for more power than a normally asperated V8 lump. I lived and drove in the mucle car era but that was 45/55 years ago folks. Gas was 50 cents and 10/12 MPG was the factory HP V8 norm. Soon the 392 will quickly fade and be seen as what it is, a dinosaur for the museum.
My M5 got 11....the current generation. My buddy's AMG gets 13. At some point when you're mixing a brick with any type of decent power from a gas-only engine it is what it is. I think the 392 will do pretty well though -- it's nostalgia, just like classic cars do well, so will the 392.

Only decent option is hybrid or diesel at the moment, but I'd prefer hybrid.
 

SSWIM

Well-Known Member
First Name
Sam
Joined
Jun 24, 2020
Messages
338
Reaction score
689
Location
Colorado
Vehicle(s)
Too Many
Huh, another opinion thread. IMHO FCA shit the bed with the 392. Some guys are reporting 14/15 MPG or lower which just isn't logical today. There where many options for more power than a normally asperated V8 lump. I lived and drove in the mucle car era but that was 45/55 years ago folks. Gas was 50 cents and 10/12 MPG was the factory HP V8 norm. Soon the 392 will quickly fade and be seen as what it is, a dinosaur for the museum.

I LIKE dinosaurs. :like: :clap::LOL:

Sam
 

guarnibl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
1,656
Reaction score
1,318
Location
Scottsdale
Vehicle(s)
'21 JLUR 392 XR, '21 JTR, '21 JLR, '09 JK

flot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2018
Messages
163
Reaction score
199
Location
South Florida
Vehicle(s)
Waiting on a 392
Huh, another opinion thread. IMHO FCA shit the bed with the 392. Some guys are reporting 14/15 MPG or lower which just isn't logical today.
I sold my 2020 3.6 JLUR with 5000 miles on it and ordered a 392.

I never reset "trip b" in the gauge cluster - my lifetime fuel economy average with the 3.6 was 12.4 mpg. I would be thrilled to get 14/15 mpg.
 

Bocephus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2018
Messages
433
Reaction score
498
Location
Virginia
Vehicle(s)
'18 JLUR
Occupation
Sam’s Decorative Automotive Button Emporium
Huh, another opinion thread. IMHO FCA shit the bed with the 392. Some guys are reporting 14/15 MPG or lower which just isn't logical today. There where many options for more power than a normally asperated V8 lump. I lived and drove in the mucle car era but that was 45/55 years ago folks. Gas was 50 cents and 10/12 MPG was the factory HP V8 norm. Soon the 392 will quickly fade and be seen as what it is, a dinosaur for the museum.
You can argue that Jeep shouldn't have built it, or that its silly (opinions), but sh*t the bed means failure (right?)...and I think Jeep scored a runaway hit for their intentions.

Obvi the 392 was not Jeep's attempt at a modern economy power dose for the platform. The PHEV may be that (and more!) - which I think is the second most powerful in the lineup.

The 392 came with the attempt at being a little loud, dramatic, even romantic - big old NA v8. And they stole the show. Its the spirit that sets FCA brands apart, from every other boring US brand (save Tesla) imho. It is definitely not logical / economy power, but it's also not the wrangler for the masses or even very many.

Celebrate that lovely dinosaur if you can afford to (to your point, affordability is certainly an issue). This is a last hurrah - that big loud lovely lump. Next car will be a stupid Tesla, it will be awesome, I'll probably hate it.

In fairness, you may have more of a been-there / done-that sense of it all, having grown up with muscle cars. For guys like me, the most modern / economic power option isn't the complete appeal.

In any case, more power to you bud!
 

@minutemen

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
239
Reaction score
265
Location
New England
Vehicle(s)
Black '20 JLUR
I think it's not so much about resell as much as it is about whether one needs to spring for the 392 now or can wait a year (or more).
This. I want one but was planning on keeping mine until the warranty runs out. Would love to still see them available in a year or two. Otherwise, a swap may be on the table 👀

I sold my 2020 3.6 JLUR with 5000 miles on it and ordered a 392.

I never reset "trip b" in the gauge cluster - my lifetime fuel economy average with the 3.6 was 12.4 mpg. I would be thrilled to get 14/15 mpg.
I heard they get better with age but here I am still averaging less than 14 mpg on a 3.6 :facepalm:
 

JJMalone

Well-Known Member
First Name
John
Joined
Mar 4, 2020
Messages
90
Reaction score
171
Location
Eugene, Oregon
Vehicle(s)
392, '20 JLR, '00 TRD Tacoma
Huh, another opinion thread. IMHO FCA shit the bed with the 392. Some guys are reporting 14/15 MPG or lower which just isn't logical today. There where many options for more power than a normally asperated V8 lump. I lived and drove in the mucle car era but that was 45/55 years ago folks. Gas was 50 cents and 10/12 MPG was the factory HP V8 norm. Soon the 392 will quickly fade and be seen as what it is, a dinosaur for the museum.

392 T-Rex dinosaur.jpeg
I can't figure out whether to agree or disagree. I love my 392 and make excuses to drive it; such as going to lunch in small towns a couple hundred miles away. I guess I agree because I'm also a dinosaur but I'm going to burn as much gas as I can with it while I'm able! I also lived through the muscle car era and had several. They were not the same. This Jeep can give a decent account of itself just as a jeep but you'd be hard pressed to make one of those old "muscle car era" cars compare for straight line muscle.
 

2nd 392

Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jun 20, 2021
Messages
365
Reaction score
476
Location
Ca
Vehicle(s)
Grand Cherokee srt.V10 Dodge 4x
You can argue that Jeep shouldn't have built it, or that its silly (opinions), but sh*t the bed means failure (right?)...and I think Jeep scored a runaway hit for their intentions.

Obvi the 392 was not Jeep's attempt at a modern economy power dose for the platform. The PHEV may be that (and more!) - which I think is the second most powerful in the lineup.

The 392 came with the attempt at being a little loud, dramatic, even romantic - big old NA v8. And they stole the show. Its the spirit that sets FCA brands apart, from every other boring US brand (save Tesla) imho. It is definitely not logical / economy power, but it's also not the wrangler for the masses or even very many.

Celebrate that lovely dinosaur if you can afford to (to your point, affordability is certainly an issue). This is a last hurrah - that big loud lovely lump. Next car will be a stupid Tesla, it will be awesome, I'll probably hate it.

In fairness, you may have more of a been-there / done-that sense of it all, having grown up with muscle cars. For guys like me, the most modern / economic power option isn't the complete appeal.

In any case, more power to you bud!
AMEN !
 

Jeepfamilia

Active Member
First Name
Jay
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Messages
39
Reaction score
48
Location
Charlie1
Vehicle(s)
Jeeps
I cannot see how the 392 will be available for more than two to three years.

If you have one/will be ordering one hold on to it.

To keep up with the HP race and meet emissions standards it is more likely that we will see a 2.5/3.0 turbo version in the future. I will not be surprised if the Ferarri based 2.9 turbo power plant, that is currently used in the Alfa Giulia QV, are used in future Wranglers. The Alfa 2.9 twin turbo produces 505 Hp and 443 Fp torque, it will scare any Ford produced Bronco for quite some time.
I love that engine
I had a Giulia Qudrafoglio then it was stolen :/
 

Deb3667

Member
First Name
Deborah
Joined
Sep 15, 2021
Messages
5
Reaction score
4
Location
Alabama
Vehicle(s)
Jeep unlimited
I’m late to the game. I had been on the Bronco trail… but I think I’m over it. Anyone order a 392 in last few days? I intend to contact dealer tomorrow.
 
Advertisement

Icon Vehicle Dynamics
 
Advertisement
Top