Jeep Teases 392 6.4L Hemi V8 Wrangler?!

[DaveNH]

This^^ If they are gonna do it it will be the Gladiator it's the only one that makes sense..... Better towing capabilities

I doubt that the tow rating would increase, just as the diesel is rated lower than a Max tow Gladiator.

The issue with the diesel was supposedly cooling, due to the space taken up by the charge air cooler. I would suspect that a Hemi would be similarly limited.

Sponsored

 

[DaveNH]

Correct. He did state that. However, if FCA desires to put a V8 in the Wrangler. They certainly have the engineering know how to acccomplish it and ameliorate any of the safety concerns. It just costs money to do it.

Reactive armor.

I mean, the crash test standards don't say the other vehicle's occupants have to survive, right?

 

[spurly]

Everything that's happening here, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram is exactly what Jeep wants. Extra buzz and attention pulled away from the Bronco. I still think it says 3.92 and I have a hard time believing they'll put a 6.4 in a Wrangler, the lawyers wouldn't allow it. A 5.7 is more believable.

 

[DaveNH]

I think he might be talking about litebrite and the shitshow they had when they installed their turbo.

Nope.

FCA was working on direct injection and turbocharging for the pentastar, but apparently the direct injection testing had problems. This prompted development of an I6 based on the 2.0.

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/future-straight-six-engine-is-big-ram-and-jeep-news/

 

[aldo98229]

A few automakers have said that building a 2.0 liter 4-cyl that can be expanded into a 3.0 liter I-6 by adding 2 cylinders, or a 4.0 liter I-8 by bolting two 2.0-liter 4 cylinder motors together, can save billions of dollars in development and regulatory costs. Turbocharging can further expand this family of motors without the cost of developing separate V6 and V8 motors. I believe this is the line of attack FCA is following as well.

I have owned several FCA vehicles with 6.1 and 6.4 HEMIs. They were great, sweet and good fun. But the day of huge motors has truly sailed IMO. HEMIs sound great, but they tend to be heavy and bulky. Shoehorning a 6.4L HEMI into a JL, particularly at this point, highlights FCA’s ongoing unwillingness to spend time, money and resources on real innovations.

 

[rubileon]

But the day of huge motors has truly sailed IMO.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-ca...9/ford-super-duty-73-v8-engine-details-specs/

 

[Young04]

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-ca...9/ford-super-duty-73-v8-engine-details-specs/

This article does not support your point that big displacement engines are not dead in passenger vehicles. Quote:

The EPA doesn't require automakers to report fuel-economy figures for pickups with a GWVR of over 8500 pounds, so these trucks can be as efficient or inefficient as the automakers like.

 

[rubileon]

This article does not support your point that big displacement engines are not dead in passenger vehicles. Quote:

The EPA doesn't require automakers to report fuel-economy figures for pickups with a GWVR of over 8500 pounds, so these trucks can be as efficient or inefficient as the automakers like.

Where did you see me saying "big displacement engines are not dead in passenger vehicles"?

Or did you just assume?

 

[ThirtyOne]

Nope.

FCA was working on direct injection and turbocharging for the pentastar, but apparently the direct injection testing had problems. This prompted development of an I6 based on the 2.0.

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/future-straight-six-engine-is-big-ram-and-jeep-news/

Thanks for posting. I knew i had read that but couldn’t find the source.

 

[Young04]

Where did you see me saying "big displacement engines are not dead in passenger vehicles"?

Or did you just assume?

You called out this part of someone else's post: " But the day of huge motors has truly sailed IMO" with an article talking a newly developed 7.3L pushrod V8. Mine seems like the most logical interpretation of your point.

 

[sost1sg]

I have a grand Cherokee SRT and one of the things to remember is these are niche vehicles built for one purpose - street and track. This is about as far off-road as my grand Cherokee can handle:

If they were to drop a 6.4 in the wrangler I don’t think it would be reasonable to expect it to be a trail vehicle. Like the grand srt, I’m sure there will be plenty of buyers who never take their wranglers off-road anyway who flock to it.

 

[breakerbaker]

They cannot just drop a 392 in the JL currently due to safety standards. They would have to lengthen the front end to allow a better "crumple" zone to pass safety measures. I personally believe this is a publicity shot at Ford's Bronco getting release in 12 hours now.

As for me, I have already placed my 2021 order for a JLU Sport fully loaded. I'll just slap a "392" badge on the hood and call it a day!

 

[imperial4ever]

Guys, it’s 3.9.2
It’s just an updated unconnect firmware teaser.

I agree. I do no think it says 392. There is at least one . In 392

 

[TXRubicon]

It unfortunately reeks of desperation by FCA. There is no way that teaser is of a production vehicle and is likely an EJS concept they haven’t shown yet due to EJS being cancelled.

FCA has every right to be worried and I’d be sweating if I were in product planning but releasing this teaser with no context is just silly.

I personally believe this is a publicity shot at Ford's Bronco getting release in 12 hours now.

 

[Rico1111]

There is clearly a dot/point located between 3 and 9 when filtered through photoshop. Still could be a stunt!

Sponsored