Just Venting...

[LawrenceR]

Back in 2020, when I ordered my Willys, I put out into this open forum a question, "...has anyone tried to put a V-8 in a Jeep, or why doesn't Jeep offer this?"

I got the typical smart ass - but funny, responses, bottom line Jeep didn't offer this at the time. I'm a bit offended because Jeep did have this in the works, about a year later, Jeep offered the Rubicon with a 392 without any notification.

My understanding is, the 392 is only available with the four door Rubicon, my question is... WHY?

Please educate me, with all of the engine options available, why can't a guy get a V-8 engine in a Jeep without getting into a Rubicon? Just for starters, going from the base price of any Jeep versus the base price of a Rubicon is thousands of dollars in difference - monies that most of us don't have.

I also wonder if Jeep has given any thought to how many add on sales they might have if they offered something other than a Jeep Rubicon, say a Willys, with a
V-8, 2" lift with 33" - 35" tires, something like the Tow Package to get engine and transmission coolers, larger brakes, limited slip diff, and auxiliary fuel carriers.

If Jeep decides to do this, I want my cut of the profits....

Sponsored

 

[Rustynail11]

Probably because market research tells them that the majority of the people that will pay the $$ for a V8 are the same people already willing to pay the $$ for a Rubi.

 

[TheRaven]

Yup...and it doesn't matter if it's in a Rubicon. If they put it in a Sport you'd be complaining that the 392 Sport costs $65k. They don't want to sell too many 392's. So they find ways to limit uptake without explicitly LIMITING uptake. Simplest way to do that is with price.

 

[LawrenceR]

Ya, you are most likely right, thanks for the response. My dad built engines for a living and would typically swap from the factory base engine to something with a bit more performance.

I think all vehicle manufactures are missing the boat, even with the trend of going electric, I believe there is still a market for us "old school guys" who would like a V-8.

 

[Carolina Jeeper]

I think that there are emission and gas guzzler limitations for car manufacturers that are getting in the way.

I vaguely remember reading an article over 20 years ago explaining this restriction on how many high emission and low gas mileage vehicles they can build/sell. To me it explains why some pickup trucks have relatively small engines and not very many models have V8 engines any longer.

That's just how it seems to me.

 

[TheRaven]

I think that there are emission and gas guzzler limitations for car manufacturers that are getting in the way.

I vaguely remember reading an article over 20 years ago explaining this restriction on how many high emission and low gas mileage vehicles they can build/sell. To me it explains why some pickup trucks have relatively small engines and not very many models have V8 engines any longer.

That's just how it seems to me.

FCA struggles with this much more than most other manufacturers - they have an entire brand who's popularity is built on big 'ole V8s. In order to offset the massive CAFE disadvantage that they generated by 392'ing and Hellcat'ing everything in sight, they really need to push the tiny little 4's in their other brands.

 

[Warped]

Don't forget the governments CAFE standards. The Corporate Average Fuel Economy has been driving all manufacturers to smaller motors and increased usage of turbos or super chargers. Also, HP has drastically increased performance of smaller motors and cleaned up emissions.

@sourdough - " The 304 has a displacement of 304 cu in (5.0 L), which produced 210 hp (157 kW; 213 PS)(gross rating) in 1970-71 and was built starting in 1970.[20] Output declined yearly thereafter, initially due a shift from SAE Gross to SAE Net horsepower. 1972-75 models were rated at 150 hp (112 kW; 152 PS) (net rating from 1972 onwards). It was rated at 130.5 hp (97 kW; 132 PS) in 1978, and 125 hp (93 kW; 127 PS) in 1979, the last year it was installed in passenger cars, and in 1980–81, the last years it was used in Jeep vehicles. " Source - AMC V8 engine - Wikipedia

 

[John VonJeep]

Jeep should have offered the 5.7 Hemi in the JL. Would have been a perfect engine for the platform and much less high strung than the 6.4. The fact that they came out with the 6.4, and not the 5.7, tells you everything you need to know. Jeep decided they could sell a boutique/gonzo 6.4 V8 for insane prices, rather than offer the 5.7 as a modest (say $3,500, as in the GC a few years ago) upgrade.

Now, of course, the V8 is gone from the GC and you can only get a Trailhawk as a 4xe.

As a great man once said, life moves pretty fast.

 

[mnjeeper]

Back in 2020, when I ordered my Willys, I put out into this open forum a question, "...has anyone tried to put a V-8 in a Jeep, or why doesn't Jeep offer this?"

I got the typical smart ass - but funny, responses, bottom line Jeep didn't offer this at the time. I'm a bit offended because Jeep did have this in the works, about a year later, Jeep offered the Rubicon with a 392 without any notification.

You realize that asking this in 2020 means you didn't search and see a few big companies were doing this already? Then...you got offended?

Jeep should have offered the 5.7 Hemi in the JL. Would have been a perfect engine for the platform and much less high strung than the 6.4. The fact that they came out with the 6.4, and not the 5.7, tells you everything you need to know. Jeep decided they could sell a boutique/gonzo 6.4 V8 for insane prices, rather than offer the 5.7 as a modest (say $3,500, as in the GC a few years ago) upgrade.

Now, of course, the V8 is gone from the GC and you can only get a Trailhawk as a 4xe.

As a great man once said, life moves pretty fast.

Dakota Customs will provide that 5.7 or the parts to do it "cheaply".

 

[Joaquim]

Back in 2020, when I ordered my Willys, I put out into this open forum a question, "...has anyone tried to put a V-8 in a Jeep, or why doesn't Jeep offer this?"

I got the typical smart ass - but funny, responses, bottom line Jeep didn't offer this at the time. I'm a bit offended because Jeep did have this in the works, about a year later, Jeep offered the Rubicon with a 392 without any notification.

My understanding is, the 392 is only available with the four door Rubicon, my question is... WHY?

Please educate me, with all of the engine options available, why can't a guy get a V-8 engine in a Jeep without getting into a Rubicon? Just for starters, going from the base price of any Jeep versus the base price of a Rubicon is thousands of dollars in difference - monies that most of us don't have.

I also wonder if Jeep has given any thought to how many add on sales they might have if they offered something other than a Jeep Rubicon, say a Willys, with a
V-8, 2" lift with 33" - 35" tires, something like the Tow Package to get engine and transmission coolers, larger brakes, limited slip diff, and auxiliary fuel carriers.

If Jeep decides to do this, I want my cut of the profits....

You really want a v8 paired with an m186/d30?

 

[TheRaven]

Jeep should have offered the 5.7 Hemi in the JL. Would have been a perfect engine for the platform and much less high strung than the 6.4. The fact that they came out with the 6.4, and not the 5.7, tells you everything you need to know. Jeep decided they could sell a boutique/gonzo 6.4 V8 for insane prices, rather than offer the 5.7 as a modest (say $3,500, as in the GC a few years ago) upgrade.

Now, of course, the V8 is gone from the GC and you can only get a Trailhawk as a 4xe.

As a great man once said, life moves pretty fast.

Truth, man. No idea why we have to have two very (mechanically) different engines that produce almost the same output, and one that's stupid powerful and stupid wasteful. I've said it all along - the 2.0 at 275hp, a V6 at like 330hp, and the 5.7l at 375hp would have been a perfect slate of engines. And they could still do the limited edition 392. But the Jeep brand is FCA's money fountain, so it's going to continue to be whatever produces the most revenue at the lowest cost.

 

[Warped]

What. Haha, I was not advocating for the 304 V8 to be installed in a Wrangler.

I knew that! Just that today's smaller motors are so far ahead of the old V8s in power, emissions, and economy. The 392 is a lot of power for a vehicle the size of a 2 door or even the 4 door Wrangler. I think Stellantis is afraid of too many accidents due to people that can't handle the power. Now, if they would put a V8 in a 2 door and not charge too much, I'd be in line to get one.

 

[jromanmd]

IMHO you're running out of time. With a statement saying by 2025 all models will have an electric option, the days of the V8 are coming to a close.

 

[TheRaven]

IMHO you're running out of time. With a statement saying by 2025 all models will have an electric option, the days of the V8 are coming to a close.

This statement has been made continuously for the last decade. YES the days of the V8 ARE coming to a close, technically. But the statement makes it sound a lot sooner than it really is. I know automakers are stating they're all-in on EVs and they will be all-EV by 2030, 2035...etc. But you can see signs that they are starting to quietly admit that that's not plausible. GM is already working on the Gen VI SBC. So it seems GM expects at least another decade of solid V8 demand. If GM is doing it, others will follow pretty soon.

 

[tshaw2009]

I agree that todays motors are far my powerful and a future time without a V8 NA lump. But I would rather have a NA V8 lump than the small, high tech, high performace motors. Many NA motors are running past 250,000 miles without major expense. I do not know about small twin turbos. Also, I do not agree Stellantis is worried about too much power. As mentioned all JL Wranglers have more power than previous models.

This right here exactly. I chose the 2.0L Turbo in my Wrangler but if I had been given the choice of a small block naturally aspirated V8, I would have taken the V8, even at the expense of more horse power. Nothing beats the rumble of a V8.

Sponsored