Bronco Raptor vs Jeep 392 Comparison [TFL]

[JoeSpeed]

Did I miss something about the Raptor engines? How are they foreign-ish?

Twin turbo V6, using turbos inleu of displacement for hp

you dont see twin turbo 6’s in old muscle now, unless someone built it that way

Sponsored

 

[pakrat]

My brother has the 392 (not recon edition) and I've driven it extensively around town and on portions of the Rubicon trail this past fall. It really does put a shit eating grin on your face when you stomp on it! But like some have said , doesn't do much more than a regular Rubicon other than haul ass between stoplights on the way to the mall, all the while emptying your pocket book before you even get there. Just getting off the show room floor costs over $10k more than a Raptor, and that doesn't include 37's.

I'm also at a loss with the rock crawling argument. If you are so into rock crawling on any terrain that requires more than the Bronco can handle why wouldn't you just get a dedicated rig for that purpose that will put a Jeep to shame? Don't tell me it is cost because you are breaking stuff on the regular if drive that type of terrain anyhow no matter what your rig is. Bronco handles trails like the Rubicon trail just as well as 99% of the Jeeps out there...392 or not. At least with the Raptor you can tow a rock crawler or side by side to the trail with 1000 lbs greater towing capacity all with much better road manners than a 392.

All that said, put a V8 in a Bronco and I'm first in line!

 

[Laminar]

Twin turbo V6, using turbos inleu of displacement for hp

you dont see twin turbo 6’s in old muscle now, unless someone built it that way

How does that make it "foreign-ish"? If we don't do something like we did in the '60s, that means the commies won?

 

[r21free]

If the bronco raptor with a 3.0 is so great.Then why did ford build the bronco R with a v8 for off road competition. By the way I love my manual bronco badlands to play off road..

 

[Laminar]

If the bronco raptor with a 3.0 is so great.Then why did ford build the bronco R with a v8 for off road competition.

They pulled out the AC and windows, too. Why didn't Ford do that on the Bronco Raptor?

 

[JohnG]

Haha! Yeah, man...
Put a boat anchor up front, Take away hundred of pounds of payload, reduce the driving range, cost of fuel/mpg...
Do you want me to go on??
I s'pose you're one of those "Bronco should of had a V8!" people??
Nonesense he says...
Yeah, like you have no sense.
Keep on trucking to that Costco with the wife and kids

Ok, let’s get this straight. You lead out with your excitement to LOL at a 392 for making a Jeep an EVEN MORE useless offroader.
What do we perceive from this statement?

Perhaps that you’re the type that relishes mocking someone else’s preferences if they differ from your own. You not only believe the hemi to be useless for off road application, but that jeep wranglers, in general, are already useless for off-roading.

This gets called out as nonsense, and representative of terrible enthusiast-forum etiquette that should stop.

In order to disprove this accusation, you cite your own off-roading preferences (light weight, payload maximization, fuel economy/range, low cost of operation) as dispositive proof of what makes for acceptable off roading, implying that someone else’s preferences (power, and, I don’t know…articulation, a front axle that doesn’t explode over slippery logs and the like, a platform that can be built to roll 40’s no problem) have no merit.

In an impressive leap of logic, you then assert that anyone who can appreciate the 392 must also be unable to appreciate the ecoboost.

You then take great strides to defend your low forum etiquette accusation by telling me to keep trucking to Costco with the wife and kids.

Keep up the good work.

 

[WuNgUn]

Ok, let’s get this straight. You lead out with your excitement to LOL at a 392 for making a Jeep an EVEN MORE useless offroader.
What do we perceive from this statement?

Perhaps that you’re the type that relishes mocking someone else’s preferences if they differ from your own. You not only believe the hemi to be useless for off road application, but that jeep wranglers, in general, are already useless for off-roading.

This gets called out as nonsense, and representative of terrible enthusiast-forum etiquette that should stop.

In order to disprove this accusation, you cite your own off-roading preferences (light weight, payload maximization, fuel economy/range, low cost of operation) as dispositive proof of what makes for acceptable off roading, implying that someone else’s preferences (power, and, I don’t know…articulation, a front axle that doesn’t explode over slippery logs and the like, a platform that can be built to roll 40’s no problem) have no merit.

In an impressive leap of logic, you then assert that anyone who can appreciate the 392 must also be unable to appreciate the ecoboost.

You then take great strides to defend your low forum etiquette accusation by telling me to keep trucking to Costco with the wife and kids.

Keep up the good work.

Oh.... You can put 40's on a Jeep and go crawling???
Lol
As to the rest of it... It's a forum bro. I don't even wanna imagine how much time you wasted writing that. Lol
Anyway, you probably hang out on the Jeep forums I suspect? Uh huh... This ain't that...

 

[JoeSpeed]

How does that make it "foreign-ish"? If we don't do something like we did in the '60s, that means the commies won?

Skyline, Supra, current M3/4’s, Infiniti, Audi with the B5 and B9 S4, etc..

not commies won, just big trucks should have big blocks imo

 

[Rusty416]

I can't wait to laugh at the first 392 Jeep I see on the road... Lol
How to make a Jeep an even more useless offroader...

Yeah not with a weak 400hp.

 

[WuNgUn]

Yeah not with a weak 400hp.

... And 11mpg

 

[Bigcountry03]

Well, I’m enjoying my 392 Xtreme Recon quite a bit. 37s are going on next week. Threw a 3.5” lift on it last week. It’s an AWD Charger in a straight line which is hilarious on the streets yet I can take the doors and roof off and take it to Moab if I want. Best of both worlds for me.

With that said, I am definitely eying the Bronco Raptor in 23’ or 24’. Gonna give them a year or two to work any potential kinks out, let the demand die down some and then I’ll probably buy one. I really want the painted modular top on whatever Bronco I buy too which is more reason for me to wait.

Unless you’ve driven a 392, you don’t really have any room to talk. It’s truly an amazing vehicle. And I’m planning on running quite a few trails with mine in the near future. Blind brand loyalty is hilarious

what lift kit did you use, looking for 2.5 but can’t seem to find what I am looking for. And until anyone drives the 392, they should keep their mouths shut. I grin every time I get in it. What a great vehicle to drive.

 

[Zero_chance]

Have you ever driven something with a Coyote? There's a huge delay in torque production, it doesn't really come on until about 2750rpm. It's a total dog below that.

I’m sorry what car exactly is performing at under 3k?

I hope so, because the 2.7/3.0 was developed for the F-150 and is built in Ohio - nothing "foreign-ish" about it.



Peak power is a useless metric for comparison, as is hp/liter. I could build an engine that produced stratospheric peak power and an extremely high hp/liter and you'd haaaaaate driving it.

You could throw different heads, cam, and intake on the 392 to give it a "better" peak horsepower rating, but it'd be entirely at the expense of the 1000-3000rpm range. You know, where you spend most of your time.

They’re the only available metrics for comparison given how we don’t have dyno sheets for the BR engine yet, actually. It’s about efficiency and Chryslers pushrod engines just don’t have it. Period. Even the Gen 3 5.0 platform from Ford is up to 480 HP from a 5.0, Chrysler continues to use outdated inefficient technology as their calling card.

 

[BroncoRevital]

Have you ever driven something with a Coyote? There's a huge delay in torque production, it doesn't really come on until about 2750rpm. It's a total dog below that.

I have not. Good to know. That sucks

 

[JohnG]

Oh.... You can put 40's on a Jeep and go crawling???
Lol
As to the rest of it... It's a forum bro. I don't even wanna imagine how much time you wasted writing that. Lol
Anyway, you probably hang out on the Jeep forums I suspect? Uh huh... This ain't that...

It’s a forum, so thoughtful commentary isn’t valued, and defective arguments followed by LOL’s and emojis are where it’s at. Got it.

 

[Tabman10]

speak for yourself, Im impressed it got a Real American engine (V8, 392 no less) instead a Foreign-ish 3.0 V6 twin turbo

Too bad that ”Real American” engine is made by a foreign owned company…

Sponsored