Why the 392 doesn't need Rubicon transfer case?

[Jeep Junkie]

If I ever blow up my pentastar, I will get that baby Cummins crate diesel engine

Sponsored

 

[Ratbert]

these diesel Wranglers are crazy, I saw one with I think 42-in tires, I will post a picture later. It's crazy, they still get like 25 miles per gallon or more

Maybe if deleted.

 

[2nd 392]

these diesel Wranglers are crazy, I saw one with I think 42-in tires, I will post a picture later. It's crazy, they still get like 25 miles per gallon or more

I was kinda kidding, there’s always an excuse for bigger tires. But they would be the equivalent of gearing it up size dependent. It sounds like he’s trying to run higher speeds in low range…
is higher speed not what high range is for ?

 

[roaniecowpony]

My guess is that the reason for not having the 4:1 case is that the torque output of the 392 + 4:1 case would exceed the limits of the front and rear (D44) axles.

 

[Jeep Junkie]

I was kinda kidding, there’s always an excuse for bigger tires. But they would be the equivalent of gearing it up size dependent. It sounds like he’s trying to run higher speeds in low range…
is higher speed not what high range is for ?

Maybe after rough patch of the trail it gets smoother again and he wants go fast and now has to switch to 4Hi. My Willys 4Lo is pretty fast, I go up the trail and then when I am coming down it is so steep that even 4Lo and 1st gear is not slow enough so I have to ride my brake. With Rubicon TC I will just crawl down in slow motion

 

[Ratbert]

Maybe after rough patch of the trail it gets smoother again and he wants go fast and now has to switch to 4Hi. My Willys 4Lo is pretty fast, I go up the trail and then when I am coming down it is so steep that even 4Lo and 1st gear is not slow enough so I have to ride my brake. With Rubicon TC I will just crawl down in slow motion

I've never had that issue with my combo. Maybe he has stupidly numerically high gears?

 

[Jeep Junkie]

My guess is that the reason for not having the 4:1 case is that the torque output of the 392 + 4:1 case would exceed the limits of the front and rear (D44) axles.

I see. And 392 drivers didn't buy that to drive like a grandma. Things will break and problems for Jeep. Maybe that's why there is no 2 door 392. Imagine if I WOT that 2 door on Snoqualmie Pass 🫣

 

[Jeep Junkie]

I've never had that issue with my combo. Maybe he has stupidly numerically high gears?

Not sure.

 

[Jeep Junkie]

Jeep Master Tech Jerry that appeared on TrailRecon's channel told me he will swap our transfer cases for $900. I just have to make it to Southern California.

 

[2nd 392]

My guess is that the reason for not having the 4:1 case is that the torque output of the 392 + 4:1 case would exceed the limits of the front and rear (D44) axles.

I considered adding that but the diesel has nearly the torque and the 4xe equals it, but does have a full time 4-1. … so why not the V8 ?

 

[2nd 392]

Maybe after rough patch of the trail it gets smoother again and he wants go fast and now has to switch to 4Hi. My Willys 4Lo is pretty fast, I go up the trail and then when I am coming down it is so steep that even 4Lo and 1st gear is not slow enough so I have to ride my brake. With Rubicon TC I will just crawl down in slow motion

Ohh My Gawd ! He has to shift the TC ! Ohh, the agony ! … Jeeez
my 63 had 16 forward speeds, and 4 reverse, with 4 sticks, it wasn’t difficult. Now he has an 8 spd automatic transmission and a 2 speed TC he actually has to shift for the same 16 speeds and complains …. remarkable.

 

[Jeep Junkie]

Maybe if deleted.

Hey I said crazy in a positive way. I mean look at this, and he said he still gets over 20 mpg Diesels are crazy impressive. I doubt the Pentastar would even move with all that.

 

[Turniipp]

My guess is that the reason for not having the 4:1 case is that the torque output of the 392 + 4:1 case would exceed the limits of the front and rear (D44) axles.

The 3.0 has 442ftlb of torque vs 392's 470ftlb. I don't know that 28ftlb is enough to exceed the limits of the D44. Especially as 3.0 owners are running tunes and taking their torque levels 80ftlbs higher to 522ftlbs.

Does the Rubicon model of the 392 really not get the 4:1 transfer case?

I've also noticed that the 3.0 gets U-joints on the front axle and the 392 gets CV joints, which I also don't necessarily understand....

In reference to your friend's 3.0 and his issues with 4Lo, is he putting his tranny into "manual mode"? I ask because that makes a world of difference and you can go up to 18-ish mph while in 4Lo. I also wonder what his throttle control/management is like because in 4Lo the 3.0 can be jerky due to the 1,600ftlbs of torque if you aren't exceedingly sensitive on the throttle.

I for one would greatly prefer a 4:1 T-case in my 392. Of course, you would need MUCH stronger brakes to get that thing to stop in low range.

I wonder if this isn't why they didn't put the 4:1 transfer case in the 392. (They didn't want to come up with another set of brakes for the 392) With the 3.0 in 4Lo (with the Rubicon's bigger brakes) there were times when I was standing on the brakes and still losing the battle vs the torque in 1st gear. I've since upgraded the brakes to compensate and I've come to use 2nd gear more vs 1st when I don't want to fight the torque.

 

[Jeep Junkie]

The 3.0 has 442ftlb of torque vs 392's 470ftlb. I don't know that 28ftlb is enough to exceed the limits of the D44. Especially as 3.0 owners are running tunes and taking their torque levels 80ftlbs higher to 522ftlbs.

Does the Rubicon model of the 392 really not get the 4:1 transfer case?

I've also noticed that the 3.0 gets U-joints on the front axle and the 392 gets CV joints, which I also don't necessarily understand....

In reference to your friend's 3.0 and his issues with 4Lo, is he putting his tranny into "manual mode"? I ask because that makes a world of difference and you can go up 18ish mph while in 4Lo. I also wonder what his throttle control/management is like because in 4Lo the 3.0 can be jerky due to the 1,600ftlbs of torque if you aren't exceedingly sensitive on the throttle.



I wonder if this isn't why they didn't put the 4:1 transfer case in the 392. (They didn't want to come up with another set of brakes for the 392) With the 3.0 in 4Lo (with the Rubicon's bigger brakes) there were times when I was standing on the brakes and still losing the battle vs the torque in 1st gear. I've since upgraded the brakes to compensate and I've come to use 2nd gear more vs 1st when I don't want to fight the torque.

Wow, I will not tell him that. I want his transfer case

 

[flick2614]

He says he's Fed Up switching between four low and four High, because his four low is super slow

I’ve never heard of a 4-1 transfer case referred to as slow . I drive a diesel too and understand what he’s saying in switching between 4lo and 4hi. I’ve come to find out that 4hi will almost handle any trail where 4lo isn’t a full time necessity. if he is stuck on having to use 4lo switch the trans to manual mode and shift up to 5th-6th gear in between obstacles. It’ll ride at 20-25mph but that’s about all you’ll get. Its a stump puller not a rally car.

Sponsored