Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 392 MPG Ratings Worse Than Lamborghini Huracan

Let's face it. Nobody expected the Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 392 to be a fuel economy hero. For that matter, we seriously doubt anyone considering the pricey V8-powered Wrangler is even remotely interested in such things. Still, its official fuel economy ratings from the EPA are just 13 mpg city and 17 mpg highway, resulting in a combined rating of only 14 mpg. Ouch, Jeep.

Naturally, we couldn't help doing a variety of comparisons starting with other offerings in the Wrangler family. If you trade gasoline for diesel, the 3.0-liter turbocharged EcoDiesel does far better – 23 combined mpg with 26 mpg on the highway. Horsepower is certainly down compared to the Hemi, but the diesel's torque is comparable at 442 pound-feet versus 470. Stepping back to gas, the turbocharged 2.0-liter Wrangler is nearly as efficient at 22 combined mpg, as is the V6 at 21 combined. These stats are all for four-door models with automatic transmissions. Official ratings for the plug-in hybrid 4xe aren't available yet.

None of those Wranglers will rip to 60 mph in 4.5 seconds, but the Dodge Challenger SRT 392 will. It packs the same 6.4-liter engine making 485 hp, but its mileage is considerably better at 18 combined mpg and an impressive 24 mpg on the highway. Aerodynamics and gearing certainly work against the Wrangler, but that could also be said (somewhat) for the Ford Explorer ST. It's a full second slower to 60 mph, but it also manages its performance with a combined 20 mpg.

To find vehicles with fuel economy ratings similar to the Wrangler Rubicon 392, you have to go deep into big horsepower territory, and we mean big. The Hellcat-powered Dodge Durango SRT Hellcat is slightly worse at 13 combined mpg, but it also has over 700 hp from its 6.2-liter supercharged V8. Similarly, the Ram TRX with its Hellcat only manages 12 combined mpg. When it comes to supercars, both the Lamborghini Huracan and the insane McLaren 720S are slightly better at the pump. You need to step up to bonkers hypercars like the Lamborghini Aventador or Bugatti Chiron to do worse, but they won't take you rock crawling at Moab.

Yes, we've made some insane comparisons here and perhaps you're already writing a snarky comment about how this doesn't matter. And you know what? You're absolutely right. The truth is the Wrangler Rubicon 392 is in a class by itself. The Mercedes-AMG G63 is comparable off-road, but it lives in a different universe when it comes to price, luxury, and power. The Bronco Warthog will be a direct competitor, and it will almost certainly fare better at the pump. Even then, with the Wrangler Rubicon 392 rumored to cost nearly $80,000, buyers won't care a teeny bit about poor fuel economy.

But it's still interesting to see how it stacks up.