New “Specialty” Jeeps

[Outrun]

I hope Jeep releases a 1.21 gigawatts hybrid LOL!

Sponsored

 

[ObiMatt87]

I'm an old guy too, unfortunately I never grew up. The battery power model thrills me less than the wife's special flashlight she keeps in the night stand. The 392 however, makes me feel funny inside. Kinda like those Farrah Fawcett posters we use to have.


Wearing out tires is, fun. And it also has a loud button so you can't hear the honks while texting at the light.


Now, if you want to not understand something, I'm all for not understanding that OP banner thing.

Mmmmmm, Farrah Fawcett. Greatest. Poster. Ever.

 

[Rumplemenz]

Well, I know I’m an old guy and not “kewl”, but frankly the new “specialty” Jeeps are something I totally fail to get. You’ve got the 4XE and the 392. Both cost more money ( a 392 a LOT more money), burn more fuel (4XE is significantly worse than the 2.0 or 3.6 when running the engine). The hybrid also adds a ton of complexity, and I’m sure your insurance agent will be your new best buddy when you insure the 392. I just don’t see the point of either option. Neither will do anything that a regular gasser won’t do (ok, the 392 will wear out tires faster when doing burnouts), neither will go places lower models won’t. The top speed of the hot rod is still only 99 mph... unless a guy is just driven to have something “different” and has a lot of money to throw away I can’t figure what the “gain” would be to owning either model. The hybrid “might” have an edge is you commute in yours daily and the total trip is under 20 miles, but you’re dragging around a lot of extra weight and a lot of electrical and mechanical complexity to get that short 20 mile “gas free” trip. My 2.0 has consistently been mid 20’s on combined roads and I can baby it and hit 30. (I don’t, but I have just to see if I could). Anyway, different strokes for different folks I guess, but both models to me look like solutions in search of a problem. YMMV

392 is siiiick and i need it..want it.... one day

 

[mike813]

Well, I know I’m an old guy and not “kewl”, but frankly the new “specialty” Jeeps are something I totally fail to get. You’ve got the 4XE and the 392. Both cost more money ( a 392 a LOT more money), burn more fuel (4XE is significantly worse than the 2.0 or 3.6 when running the engine). The hybrid also adds a ton of complexity, and I’m sure your insurance agent will be your new best buddy when you insure the 392. I just don’t see the point of either option. Neither will do anything that a regular gasser won’t do (ok, the 392 will wear out tires faster when doing burnouts), neither will go places lower models won’t. The top speed of the hot rod is still only 99 mph... unless a guy is just driven to have something “different” and has a lot of money to throw away I can’t figure what the “gain” would be to owning either model. The hybrid “might” have an edge is you commute in yours daily and the total trip is under 20 miles, but you’re dragging around a lot of extra weight and a lot of electrical and mechanical complexity to get that short 20 mile “gas free” trip. My 2.0 has consistently been mid 20’s on combined roads and I can baby it and hit 30. (I don’t, but I have just to see if I could). Anyway, different strokes for different folks I guess, but both models to me look like solutions in search of a problem. YMMV

Many of us buying the 4xe have a history with electrics or hybrids, and chose the 4xe over other non-Jeep alternatives. This certainly isn't a Jeep for everyone, but it has its place. For me, with a short commute (all-electric unless I open it up) and occasional off-road needs for work and fun, this has been a great little vehicle. I bought it because of the tax credit, sky-high trade-in values (on the vehicle I traded in), and fun factor. This is bridging a gap for me between a Nissan Armada (traded in) and a Rivian R1S (delivering next year). I'm sure the 392 will have buyers in similarly unique situations. Definitely different strokes for different folks, just sharing my perspective as this forum has been very helpful for me. I applaud Jeep for trying new things and hitting a couple of interesting niches.

 

[Muddledmike]

The reality is that battery production and waste is definitely harmful for the environment, but you need to stack it up against fossil fuel environmental impacts to try to find the lesser of two evils.

But the bottom line is we can't keep closing our eyes and plugging our ears to the changing environment and our impact on it. You don't need to be part of Greenpeace to accept the fact that our industries are having a negative impact on the planet's ecosystems. We can't just keep growing at this rate and doing things the way we've always done them. Changes need to be made in a lot of areas.

Industrious and determined people will find ways to accept this change and adapt and even create opportunity through the challenges. The people who just cross their arms and stick to the same sad name-calling are just being willfully ignorant, in my opinion.

There's something else people tend to forget about the EV powertrain and it's environmental impact or technology. The ICE is more than 100 years old and has a huge amount of development behind it. EV power training has not even started in terms of development (compared to ICE). Imagine what this option will be looking like in the years to come. I don't think it will be long before EV cars have 1000+ mile range and much faster charging.

 

[SKTexas]

There's something else people tend to forget about the EV powertrain and it's environmental impact or technology. The ICE is more than 100 years old and has a huge amount of development behind it. EV power training has not even started in terms of development (compared to ICE). Imagine what this option will be looking like in the years to come. I don't think it will be long before EV cars have 1000+ mile range and much faster charging.

And to get there it's going to take those of us who invest in the early iterations to drive that research and technology.

 

[RedundanT]

I'll beg to differ a little bit on that statement.
You are absolutely correct that we need to replace fossil fuels. Where I differ is that we do actually have the answer in electricity, but there are three fundamental problems with electricity;
1) How do we create it without raping and pillaging some other part of the environment?
2) How do we move it in much larger quantities than we move it today?
3) And, how do we store it once we get it to where we need it?

Once those questions are answered, we're good to go. Maybe there really is an Arc Reactor out there somewhere

You actually made my point. Electricity "could" be the answer, but we are trading one mess for another. Today it costs too much to recycle lithium so it just gets scraped. Hopefully the technology will get there, right now we may as well be driving coal fired steam cars.

 

[Punknhed]

Pretty much everything is bad for the environment lol. It sucks, but, sorry its true. I grew up in Michigan, and much of my 20s was spent going to car shows, and "cruising around" after work. Seeing old camaros, chevelles, corvettes, mustangs, street rods with the nice thumpy thump of a huge cam was incredible. Carburetors were still the rage lol, then along comes more modern, and much better fuel injection. Everyone swore the world was ending. My brother along with others learned how to use HPTuners, and other tuners, and what do you know, 2002 Camaro with a nice lumpy cam started up first try every try, no surging, no stalling 22mpg 80mph w the ac running. Point is whether we like it or not change is going to happen, is happening, and isnt a damn thing we can do about it. Case in point new Corvette, NO MANUAL TRANS....... holy cow, how can u have a sports car without rowing your own gears. Yes it can shift faster then a human, no i dont like it, when i finally get a chance to buy a Vette it will be a previous gen with a stick. Some changes just cant be gotten over LOL. Bottom line, if you dont like it dont buy it. if you do like it more power to you, go buy it lol

 

[TrailScooter]

..... right now we may as well be driving coal fired steam cars.

You might be onto something. It would get rid of that auto start/stop thing by necessity. In the wild overlanding range would be almost infinite. Well, in some environments.


Water fording might be compromised tho.

 

[DrPerez007]

I am seriously considering the 392 Hybrid just released.

It burns both gas and rubber.

 

[Sital]

Mmmmmm, Farrah Fawcett. Greatest. Poster. Ever.

Two words...Cheryl Tiegs.

 

[rallydefault]

There's something else people tend to forget about the EV powertrain and it's environmental impact or technology. The ICE is more than 100 years old and has a huge amount of development behind it. EV power training has not even started in terms of development (compared to ICE). Imagine what this option will be looking like in the years to come. I don't think it will be long before EV cars have 1000+ mile range and much faster charging.

Oh, for sure. It's going to evolve exponentially like most technologies have done over the last 10-20 years. 20 years ago most computers were comprised of towers and monitors that would take up most of a large desk, but now we're walking around with smart phones and smart watches that are thousands of times more powerful. Look to military, medicine, entertainment... very few areas of tech that haven't progressed incredibly fast over the last couple decades. With everything tech is giving us these days and the minds working on this stuff, I just don't see electric car batteries being something that stumps engineers for years to come. Progress will continue to be made.

It's just gonna take time. I understand where the nay sayers are coming from because we haven't reached the tipping point yet. My grandfather's business was one of the last in the area to switch from horse-and-buggy to motor cars. I get that it's tough to change. But it's coming, like it or not.

 

[JackA]

I do wonder if those will still be there in 3-5 years. Or if they'll still have a Jeep logo.

More likely these Level2 chargers will be gone... level3 chargers are so much faster and Jeep will need them for the all battery Wranglers that will be smashing the trails of Moab...

 

[FinnCustomKnives]

And here I am with an ecodiesel feeling left out for not being chastised at my powertrain choice.

 

[FinnCustomKnives]

There's something else people tend to forget about the EV powertrain and it's environmental impact or technology. The ICE is more than 100 years old and has a huge amount of development behind it. EV power training has not even started in terms of development (compared to ICE). Imagine what this option will be looking like in the years to come. I don't think it will be long before EV cars have 1000+ mile range and much faster charging.

Yes and no. Ev powertrains specific to vehicles are actually older than ICE but the application specific development is low due to lack of widespread usage.
However battery and motor development has been happening the entire time too, and we are still where we are. The biggest speed bump for EV's is a batteries energy density, plain and simple. Currently it, in the case of lithium chemistry batteries, is anywhere from 50-100 times less than gasoline, depending on cited source, so thats a mighty hurdle to have to jump over. And while true electric motors are much more efficient, under ideal operating conditions, than gasoline vehicles, it will take quite a while or a giant leap in battery chemistry for there to be parity.

Sponsored