The worst engine choice. The 392.

[jkuhn1113]

The 392 is by far the worst engine to choose to be in your Wrangler.

Think about it. What’s a rubicon built for? Off-road.

You don’t go fast off-road except maybe in dunes, but, even then you don’t ever go over 99 mph…

You can’t stay at an off-road park for the whole weekend without worrying about refueling halfway through your second day.

If you’re actually overlanding you’re going to have to worry about fuel much more than the weekend warrior offroader.

You have to use 91 or above fuel to power this monster.

Besides Jeep limiting your options for interior color, small exterior color palette choices, and required options on the 392. The con that makes this the worst choice to wheel on the weekend, overland for the week, and even daily drive (especially in today’s fuel price state) is the fuel mileage. The 392 has a drinking problem.

Also I know some like to go fast. However, when you lift a Jeep and throw 37-40in tires on it, 1, you’re going to be slower and 2 it feels a lot more sketchy to be going 80mph in any wrangler with that build regardless of engine!

I’m sure there is some extravagant reason that the 392 is the best wrangler to buy for some crazy build with endless fuel cans and being pulled on a trailer or something, but, most people won’t do that.

So basically what I’m saying is the 392 really limits your your range too much.

With all that said. I still love the 392 just for the soul reason that it’s so cool.

Sponsored

 

[Retrograde]

Buys a Jeep with a Big Block stuffed in it, acts surprised when it behaves like a Jeep with a Big Block stuffed in it.

 

[gerlbaum]

I hate to say it but in about 10 years we’re all going to be worrying about staying at off road parks for a weekend and worrying about recharging so you mind as well get used to it with a 392 while you can. That engine just got retired from most of dodge’s line up by 2024.

 

[calemasters]

The 392 is not needed in the Wrangler. But I think it is cool that Jeep offers it. It is tempting, but I love my diesel.

The 392 has 470 lb.-ft. of torque. The 3.0L has 442 lb.-ft. of torque so like the 392 it is traction limited, not torque limited when rock crawling.

 

[2nd 392]

Yep, the 392 is not the most practical. But we have been down the practical vs fun, personal choice for enjoyment, passion and being willing to accept the cons with the pros before

 

[jmccorm]

More than anything, I think the 392 is a collector's vehicle and is more for auto enthusiasts than rock crawlers. We [most of us] are not so much the target market for this vehicle, but for the right segment, it's a clear winner.

 

[wolf]

A Ford coyote engine or such would be an alternative or not?adapters can be made for anything.

 

[ekim]

Ha - OP's points are all true. I considered them all and opted for it anyway as daily driver and trail rig. Assuming the daily fun factor of driving it will outweigh all those items.

 

[cbh]

The 392 is by far the worst engine to choose to be in your Wrangler.

Think about it. What’s a rubicon built for? Off-road.

You don’t go fast off-road except maybe in dunes, but, even then you don’t ever go over 99 mph…

You can’t stay at an off-road park for the whole weekend without worrying about refueling halfway through your second day.

If you’re actually overlanding you’re going to have to worry about fuel much more than the weekend warrior offroader.

You have to use 91 or above fuel to power this monster.

Besides Jeep limiting your options for interior color, small exterior color palette choices, and required options on the 392. The con that makes this the worst choice to wheel on the weekend, overland for the week, and even daily drive (especially in today’s fuel price state) is the fuel mileage. The 392 has a drinking problem.

Also I know some like to go fast. However, when you lift a Jeep and throw 37-40in tires on it, 1, you’re going to be slower and 2 it feels a lot more sketchy to be going 80mph in any wrangler with that build regardless of engine!

I’m sure there is some extravagant reason that the 392 is the best wrangler to buy for some crazy build with endless fuel cans and being pulled on a trailer or something, but, most people won’t do that.

So basically what I’m saying is the 392 really limits your your range too much.

With all that said. I still love the 392 just for the soul reason that it’s so cool.

All valid points. I believe the Rubicon 392 is a multi-niche vehicle that appeals mainly to the “non-hardcore-rock-crawling” enthusiast. I sold my KTM adventure bike when I moved to Florida but missed the thrill of a powerful, fast bike that can also negotiate unimproved roads, back country terrain and doesn’t look like an anemic crossover vehicle. My Rubicon 392 fills that niche.

 

[Deleted member 73239]

To each his own but I agree that it’s not very practical but some folks would say that about Jeeps in general I would imagine. For me, Wranglers have been the only vehicle that I always go back to. Started with. YJ then went to a very built JKR and now a JLUR with XJ and ZJ in between those. I’m real curious how the 392 will do in the Phoenix summers, there are a few shops here that have done Hemi conversations for years and it always results in overheating and how many electric fans and size of radiator can we fit in a relatively small front end.
other than that, I think “too much is just right” especially when it comes to HP.

 

[guarnibl]

You're not wrong.

 

[guarnibl]

To each his own but I agree that it’s not very practical but some folks would say that about Jeeps in general I would imagine. For me, Wranglers have been the only vehicle that I always go back to. Started with. YJ then went to a very built JKR and now a JLUR with XJ and ZJ in between those. I’m real curious how the 392 will do in the Phoenix summers, there are a few shops here that have done Hemi conversations for years and it always results in overheating and how many electric fans and size of radiator can we fit in a relatively small front end.
other than that, I think “too much is just right” especially when it comes to HP.

They really shouldn't overheat if done properly and driven normally, but you also shouldn't expect to drive it like you stole it when it's 110 degrees out. If I can keep a 1200 horsepower 2 door (with a blown 427) from overheating in Phoenix summers, a 6.4 N/A shouldn't be too hard. Can I get it to overheat? Sure -- it'll start creeping up in temperature if you start doing repeated hard pulls to drive up IATs but that's an issue with many blown vehicles. But other than that, it does just fine even in traffic.

Many conversions I've seen were just done like shit or didn't find the proper recipe (either b/c they didn't know it, or the customer didn't want to pay for it).

I'm anticipating the 392 will do just fine in PHX summers, again, if you're driving normally. Start beating the piss out of it uphill on repeat and I'd imagine you are going to start having temp issues.

 

[Big_Lebowski]

The 392 is by far the worst engine to choose to be in your Wrangler.

Think about it. What’s a rubicon built for? Off-road.

You don’t go fast off-road except maybe in dunes, but, even then you don’t ever go over 99 mph…

You can’t stay at an off-road park for the whole weekend without worrying about refueling halfway through your second day.

If you’re actually overlanding you’re going to have to worry about fuel much more than the weekend warrior offroader.

You have to use 91 or above fuel to power this monster.

Besides Jeep limiting your options for interior color, small exterior color palette choices, and required options on the 392. The con that makes this the worst choice to wheel on the weekend, overland for the week, and even daily drive (especially in today’s fuel price state) is the fuel mileage. The 392 has a drinking problem.

Also I know some like to go fast. However, when you lift a Jeep and throw 37-40in tires on it, 1, you’re going to be slower and 2 it feels a lot more sketchy to be going 80mph in any wrangler with that build regardless of engine!

I’m sure there is some extravagant reason that the 392 is the best wrangler to buy for some crazy build with endless fuel cans and being pulled on a trailer or something, but, most people won’t do that.

So basically what I’m saying is the 392 really limits your your range too much.

With all that said. I still love the 392 just for the soul reason that it’s so cool.

Mostly accurate, but absolutely untrue that more power is not helpful ("off road") when rock crawling. I have on occasion struggled with my little 3.6, while others in my group have been able to more easily crawl an obstacle with the added torque from a 392 or LS. I'm talking extreme stuff here like 8-10 level trails, so not applicable to most I'm sure.

 

[Old Dogger]

Interesting comment, of which some I agree with. But, if I was buying a new Wrangler as of current, which I am not, it would be the 392.. I see comments ongoing about fuel economy, plus high octane expense required. The way that I look at it is, if one can afford a Wrangler 392, the fuel cost are a mute point.

 

[Uncommon Sense]

The 392 is by far the worst engine to choose to be in your Wrangler.

Think about it. What’s a rubicon built for? Off-road.

You don’t go fast off-road except maybe in dunes, but, even then you don’t ever go over 99 mph…

You can’t stay at an off-road park for the whole weekend without worrying about refueling halfway through your second day.

If you’re actually overlanding you’re going to have to worry about fuel much more than the weekend warrior offroader.

You have to use 91 or above fuel to power this monster.

Besides Jeep limiting your options for interior color, small exterior color palette choices, and required options on the 392. The con that makes this the worst choice to wheel on the weekend, overland for the week, and even daily drive (especially in today’s fuel price state) is the fuel mileage. The 392 has a drinking problem.

Also I know some like to go fast. However, when you lift a Jeep and throw 37-40in tires on it, 1, you’re going to be slower and 2 it feels a lot more sketchy to be going 80mph in any wrangler with that build regardless of engine!

I’m sure there is some extravagant reason that the 392 is the best wrangler to buy for some crazy build with endless fuel cans and being pulled on a trailer or something, but, most people won’t do that.

So basically what I’m saying is the 392 really limits your your range too much.

With all that said. I still love the 392 just for the soul reason that it’s so cool.

There is absolutely no practical or ratioanl reason for the 392. None.

As such, i absolutely had to buy one.

I get the restomod looks of the wrangler. It comes lifted with 35s. All warrantied. I can smoke most cars at a stop light and it sounds symphonic.

Mine will never go off road although chicago streets and potholes are probably rougher than some trails.

Looks good, sounds good, and i can put two kids in back. Checks all my boxes. Getting rid of a far more practical jeep grand cherokee...

It is a working mans G wagon.

Got to live a little.

Sponsored