392 and Xtreme Recon Gladiator not happening; but 4xe likely...

[Klutch]

I’ll agree and disagree with your comments

First, I agree the 392 is a niche market. That and the 5.7 are going out the door and Stelantis is just using up the parts bin. When they’re empty the Hurricane engine will be the optional engine for those who want more power and compete with the Bronco. In fact, in the less powerful variant of the Hurricane it should replace the Pentastar due to it’s being more emission complient.

I read an article that the Hurricane engine is being produced in Mexico and that they intend to produce 250,000 of them per year. That’s way more than all the Wagoners that will be produced. Also, due to the new design the engine will be more fuel efficient as well as more powerful than the current offerings.

One of the articles I’ll link specifically mentions this longitudinal space required for this engine and says that the Gladiaor, Wrangler and Grand Cherokee will all fit this new engine.

https://media.stellantisnorthamerica.com/newsrelease.do?id=23660&mid=1

and

https://getjerry.com/auto-news/meet-stellantis-new-inline-six-hurricane

I hope you're right about that.

Sponsored

 

[MPMB]

If you were a ginormous global auto manufacturer, which would you rather produce:

A. 5.7L + 6.4L + 3.6L + 3.0L (diesel)

-or-

B. 3.0L TT (SO and HO variants)

Seems like an easy choice to me? : shrug :

That's really over-simplistic and not really accurate.

They produce a lot more engines than what you list across the board. Sticking to what we really care about - the Gladiator and Wrangler (since they're basically the same) - there are 5 combos across the 2 models. 4xe, 2.0L, 3.6L, 3.0L, and 6.4L.

If the Gladiator gets limited to the 3.0TT, I don't think anyone will really miss having options.

 

[IHCDave]

I couldn't afford a 392 JT and have no interest in a 4Xe JT.

Hey Jeep! How about make the 5.7L Hemi a $2-$3K option across all the JT trim levels? I would trade mine in tomorrow for one and I'll bet you would sell a ton of them.

I love my Gladiator but it would be gone tomorrow too if I could get the 5.7 Hemi.

 

[Rahkmalla]

At first blush, your question / statement does appear as though jeep took the $27k difference purely to the bottom line as mark up. However, in the limited prior research I once did on the 392, I understood that it was practically a fully loaded rig. So, it’s a bit unfair to simply attribute all that increase pricing to just a V8 when, in fact, your getting things like leather seats, bead lock capable rims, convenience packages, etc. that you’d have to otherwise pay a premium for in an alternatIve trim, but are standard in the 392 package trim. Now, I can understand that some may not want those other packages, but it’s unfair not to value those packages as part of the cost of that 392 trim IMO. Also, some recoup of engineering time and expense merited for alternative solutioning and redesigns of bracketing, oil pans as well as upgraded components such as things like steel knuckles, brakes, etc. that they pulled from the gladiator down to the 392 wrangler. Of course, those were off the shelf pulls, but again, just being fair to the notion that the 392 wrangler trim is not an apples to apples comparison of just a swapped v8 compared to a lesser trim wrangler.

You are correct, but not the first person to point it out to me so I've already done the direct comparison and it turns the 392 into a 19k option, not a 30k option. In a world where you can get a proper Cummins for under 10k on a 2500, special intake, slightly larger wheels, and reinforcements offered for cheap on the mojave don't make a 392 worth 19k.

 

[Glad_he_ate]

I don't get the 4xe. It seems to be just a short term entry point into full electrics. The tech with the 4xe is something else to fail. Especially with a FCA product lol.

For what it’s worth I have a 4xe and a jtwd and the 4xe has yet to go in for any issues.. the jt has seen a total of 3 weeks in the shop and a total of 6 trips for warrantee work.. mostly for the auto stop start shit but I also had the chassis wiring harness replaced .. that’s no small issue lol

 

[Oilburner]

That's really over-simplistic and not really accurate.

Simplified however absolutely accurate. Think of the Total number of parts for all the variations of those current engines + assembling them in several different places. My point is that from the manufacture’s perspective, going to one platform produced at one plant will save them a Lot of money.

 

[Pedal Metal]

You are correct, but not the first person to point it out to me so I've already done the direct comparison and it turns the 392 into a 19k option, not a 30k option. In a world where you can get a proper Cummins for under 10k on a 2500, special intake, slightly larger wheels, and reinforcements offered for cheap on the mojave don't make a 392 worth 19k.

Without doing any further research, I wouldn‘t be surprised if that number was spot on the money. I‘ve pondered the 392 wrangler for myself, but I just don’t know if it fits me enough for the price of that super wrangler. Still, in its defense, Wranglers have historically enjoyed a favorable resale value. Although, that may give way as Bronco continues to blaze a path into what was more of a Jeep space than any other. As for restricting a v8 option for only a maxed out optioned trim level; well, I have very little respect for that type of marketing, but I won’t loose any sleep over it tonight. Yet, Jeep may want to listen to their fan base a bit more as history is loaded with companies that held too tight of controls over their market influence until they lost the market to the vision of others I.e. Sears Catalog, Atari, Eastman Kodak, Blockbuster Video, Beta, etc.

 

[NEWBWHEELER]

Xtreme recon was already a poor answer to Sasquatch. Only Rubicon automatic 4drs first, then barely expanded to willys automatic 4drs? Please. It's a joke. If xtreme ever comes to gladiators, it'll be the same restrictions. Automatic only. Rubi and willys only.

Also why stop at 8 inch wide rims? Would 8.5s really have been that hard? Jeep doesn't even want to try to touch the value of a base 2dr bronco sasquatch, and I don't understand why. Maybe once Ford stops fucking up their entire production line and demand and supply are more in line, jeep might have to answer for someone eating their lunch. For now? Ford as a threat is a whisper on the edge of hearing. But eventually growing pains and supply constraints will pass.

As for the 392, it's too rich for my blood. If someone can explain why a v8 is a $3000 option on a ram and a $30000 option on a wrangler, I'm all ears. Is the extra 27k the special intake?

No shit! I’m wondering the same thing. 30000 k because that’s what the aftermarket was charging for a swap is pretty short sighted imo. There is no way in hell a 392 wrangler is worth that much money.

 

[MPMB]

Simplified however absolutely accurate. Think of the Total number of parts for all the variations of those current engines + assembling them in several different places. My point is that from the manufacture’s perspective, going to one platform produced at one plant will save them a Lot of money.

If you are narrowly focused and ignore pretty much the entirety of the auto world.

In simple terms, yes, having 1 or 2 engine options across multiple platforms would be cheaper for economies of scale. However, it's not practical in real-world markets.

In your example, you include the 5.7 in your engine list, which isn't an option in any Wrangler/Gladiator model. From the get-go your argument is flawed. If you're going to include the 5.7, you have to include all the engines across the company.

If you're talking about *all* the engines the nameplate has to build to supply the models and think that one configuration (with 2 tunes) would be cheaper for the nameplate, you're simply ignoring the totality of models that nameplate - and it's owners/subsidiaries - have at their disposal.

If you were a global auto manufacturer, you would have at minimum 3 engine options, likely per market segment (Americas, Asia, EU, etc).

1. 2.0T - European standard (I think I read somewhere long time ago that the UK or EU had a displacement requirement/restriction)
2. A diesel equivalent
3. A high-mpg or workhorse engine (opposite ends of the spectrum)

And since you're a global auto manufacturer, you're involved in motorsport, so you'd have engines built to maximize the rules packages per motorsport type. FIA, NASCAR, SCCA, NHRA, etc.

A global auto manufacturer also owns various nameplates that span the market from econobox offerings to luxury and/or exotics. So we have a bunch of 1.6L or smaller engines, going up to fire-breathing, twin-turbo V12s or whatnot. Oh, and specialized, "tuned" versions of common models for the global enthusiast market.

You're also into cargo operations, so you'll need a torquey engine that will last for 300,000 miles and have minimal mechanical needs (that is, no high compression, no supercharger).

You're also into recreational vehicle market, so you're producing chassis configurations and engine combinations/tunes not available to the "commuter" market.

But if you simply wanted to say it'd be cheaper for Jeep to produce the Wrangler and Gladiator with the new Hurricane engine and skip messing around with the 4xe, diesel, and 392 versions, well, yeah, duh. The response to that would be if that's the case, why do we still have manual transmissions?

People want options. People need options. The brand needs options to create "value" to the buyer, so they can see how much "more" they're getting for their money. It works the same way with conspicuous consumption (enter the 392 Wrangler, Raptor, Tremor, etc.)- the more it costs the better it must be, right?

So it's not really accurate to say a ginormous global auto manufacturer would rather produce one engine for all of its models.

 

[MPMB]

No shit! I’m wondering the same thing. 30000 k because that’s what the aftermarket was charging for a swap is pretty short sighted imo. There is no way in hell a 392 wrangler is worth that much money.

Union labor?

The 6.4L is only $8500 as a crate engine.
https://www.moparonlineparts.com/part/crate-engine.html

Transmission, coolers, wiring, drivelines, etc., plus spares to replace warranty work/replacement parts, it all adds up.

That's what makes the auto industry so crazy. If they're making money on a $8500 engine, they are scooping it with a shovel charging 4x that when it's in a vehicle.

I'm sure there's some formula they have that spits out a price point that will limit the number of buyers so the production system doesn't get overwhelmed.

Imagine if the 392 Wrangler only cost $65k. The 3 most popular trims would be the Rubicon, 392 Rubicon, and the Rental package. And the Gladiator sales would probably drop a bunch. Horsepower usually trumps utility.

 

[bleda2002]

I dont understand how people dont think the inline 6 isn't coming to the wrangler and gladiators. The only way thats true is if the gladiator ends up being a 1 and done or an after thought like the nissan frontier, but given the market share thats highly unlikely. The HO version, I dont see happening in the gladiator except as maybe a halo in the 2nd generation, but its hard to imagine that as they ramp up production on the i4 and i6 they dont phase out the 3.6 and replace it with a standard output i6 tuned for towing and torque.

 

[futzin']

392 and Xtreme Recon Gladiator likely; but 4xe not happening...

(fixed it for me)

 

[Oilburner]

In your example, you include the 5.7 in your engine list, which isn't an option in any Wrangler/Gladiator model. From the get-go your argument is flawed. If you're going to include the 5.7, you have to include all the engines across the company.

I am looking way beyond Wrangler or even Jeep for that matter.
You think too small.

 

[Glad_he_ate]

Union labor?

The 6.4L is only $8500 as a crate engine.
https://www.moparonlineparts.com/part/crate-engine.html

Transmission, coolers, wiring, drivelines, etc., plus spares to replace warranty work/replacement parts, it all adds up.

That's what makes the auto industry so crazy. If they're making money on a $8500 engine, they are scooping it with a shovel charging 4x that when it's in a vehicle.

I'm sure there's some formula they have that spits out a price point that will limit the number of buyers so the production system doesn't get overwhelmed.

Imagine if the 392 Wrangler only cost $65k. The 3 most popular trims would be the Rubicon, 392 Rubicon, and the Rental package. And the Gladiator sales would probably drop a bunch. Horsepower usually trumps utility.

Just curious where union labor comes into this?? The old image of a lazy union teamster or uaw worker is severely outdated. As a proud union electrician I can tell you without a doubt that a lazy union worker is an unemployable union worker even in times of Labor shortage. And for what its worth the assembly cost of a 392 vs a diesel vs a 3.6 is a moot point, it takes no more time to drop a 392 into a engine bay then it takes to drop a 3.0… labor cost is not driving up the cost of the 392 as much as overall parts cost. Union labor is simply making sure the men and women building these autos and many other things are getting their fair share. A respectable wage for a respectable days work… end rant. Also if I misunderstood your statement I apologize . I get testy when people point fingers at hard working men and women for commanding a respectable wage.

 

[Rusty PW]

If the I6 does show up in the Wrangler/Gladiator. They will have to stretch the front from the windshield forward. Because the I6 is longer than the V6. The I6 2 cylinders longer. Who wants a longer JL/JT. The JT has a wheelbase of 137". The old 3G Power Wagon is 140". The 4G and up Power Wagons are 149" So where would the new JT wheelbase be. If it's over 140", be better off getting the Power Wagon.

Sponsored