It's funny you say that, I was looking for a fun "toy" for occasional driving and was looking at a Porsche 911, AMG GT or used Ferrari F430, but I kept coming back to the Jeep as something that was fun and practical. And something that could carry the whole family. I think I've fully converted from sports cars altogether given MA roads and weather, the utility factor of SUVs, and having kids. I'm not sure there's a better alternative for me than the 392 in terms of a fun, practical "convertible" that you can also take on the beach. Plus, the maintenance cost and effort is so much easier with a Jeep.
How much is that beast going to weigh?Nothing motivates you to get the 392. You are happy with what you have, so this 392 isn't for you. It isn't for alot of people for various reasons.
My case is different. This Jeep is my summer / hobby vehicle which I DD in the summer, but store in winter.
I drive on the dunes all summer where horsepower is king, and the more horsepower, the more fun.
For me, this is a bucket list dream item come true. I've been waiting 15 years for Jeep to make a vehicle like this, and I am willing to sacrifice to get it.
Edit: We have a Mustang GT as well. But you know what? We can't use the full potential. Unless I go to the drag strip, or on the street in a few small spurts here or there, it serves the same purpose as a basic car other than looking cool.
This Jeep on the other hand, I can make full use of the power, and will on the dunes. There are very limited rules out there. You have to be extremely careful, but it is one of the few places this kind of power can genuinely be used legally, so that is why I am in.....
How much is this beast going to weigh?Clearance depends on tire radius/diameter, and does not correlate necessarily with height of body above the ground. Both the Rubicon and 392 ride on the exact same 33” tires. The 392 clearance is lower because the hight of the engine drops the engine bay about and inch. We do know from the press release vehicles that the 392 can ride on 37s without issue like the Rubicon can ride on 35s.
One other point of interest is the 392 water fording depth is 2.5” more than a Rubicon.
The Lamborghini would admittedly be worse off road than the Jeep on road. But considering how much time most jeeps spend off road or even just with the top off, most drivers would be better suited with a minivan. The same holds true for the Vette and the Lambo. For as much time as people actually drive them fast, they would be better suited with a honda civic.Ahh yes, those new all-wheel-drive Lamborghinis are great at off-roading. Oh, and you missed the MSRP by a factor of 2.
No, and neither are the people who buy the sports cars.First, I love the C8, as with all Covettes, it's always been a great performance value. But you can keep your significantly slower, 14 year old Gallardo.
Second, you're comparing two cars that have absolutely nothing in common with an off-road designed Jeep. We aren't buying these to "win" at Le Mons.
No, and neither are the people who buy the sports cars.
And, neither are the people who buy the Rubicon's going to run the Rubicon.
"The 392 IMO is the pentacle of of the best off road vehicle ever produced"Yes the price of the 392 is steep, if you just look at at the price. It's expensive but not excessively for what it is in a stock Rubicon. For those comparing it to the bronco.... there's been other attempts to knock the wrangler off it's throne. The FJ, perfect example. I my self am coming from a completely built up 4runner, and in no way did it compare to a wrangler unless I want to pass one going 80+ on the freeway. The 392 IMO is the pentacle of of the best off road vehicle ever produced. The bronco is another suv that is off-road capable, nothing more. Look at it's introduction video with a wheel dangling in the air on a road that looks nothing more than a service road. I'll even admit that some of my 4runners limitation where operator orientated but I'm pretty sure the IFS had a lot to do with that. I hope that some of your predictions about the price dropping and this becoming readily available are right. Though it seems a lot of bad ass models through out the years have had extremely short productions and to me rolling the dice with this isn't the worth extra 10k, 15k, 20k, how ever you want to equate the difference. I would easily through that into another Wrangler trying to get it to where the 392 comes from the factory.