that was my point that it has been out for only 3 years we still can't judge let's hope this 48V is good for the long run , just a question what is (power pack unit wits number 7) in the manual what's is it for and which fluid is used for it ??
The 48v battery has it's own cooling system. The etorque system has been out for a decade in other FCA vehicles. Which engine it is attached to shouldn't effect its longevity or reliability in any way as it's 100% external.that was my point that it has been out for only 3 years we still can't judge let's hope this 48V is good for the long run , just a question what is (power pack unit wits number 7) in the manual what's is it for and which fluid is used for it ??
Even now the price difference is nowhere near the $30k mark people quote by just looking at base msrp. Built the same with auto/35s/4.56 gears/body color top and fenders etc that come standard on the 392 as of right now the Rubicon X is $71k msrp and the 392 is $89k. Take 7% off at any of the number of dealers that offer that on custom orders and you're looking at $66k vs $82k. Is the 392 worth $16k? That's up to you, but it's a much closer consideration than $30k.
But is it even close to $16K ? What would a functional scooped CAI hood and water diverting system option cost, damn sure wouldn’t be cheap. Frame reinforcement, 8HP75 trans options ? Perhaps other “standard equipment” differences. I’m with you, this type of price comparison has been my take ever since early 21 with the ENGINE isn’t worth $20K , now increased to $30K, must be inflation. ?
