Ford Bronco Megathread

mmcartalk

Expert
Messages
4,155
Reactions
2,675
The interior is very poor for how much they ask for. But that's the same problem for the Wrangler and 4Runner too.

The interior of almost any purpose-designed hard-core off-roader is going to be stark and with relatively waterproof materials. It makes little sense to have a Bordello interior that is going to be subjected to mud, snow, dirt, etc.....

In fact, if you think the Bronco has a stark interior for the price, check out the Land Rover Defender, for almost twice the Bronco's price.
 

NXracer

Admirer
Messages
939
Reactions
675
Ford and FCA seem to be really good lock on the trends that have arisen in the market for OR vehicles. Its like they timed it really well and are poised to really use that as a catalyst to make some exciting products in ICE, PHEV, and EVs.

I do think that luxury offroading is still the LX/G wagon and anything below that price point is dabbling with compromises, but I doubt too many in the US will sign up to take showroom fresh vehicles into the wilderness.
 

Levi

Expert
Messages
2,707
Reactions
3,134
Ford and FCA seem to be really good lock on the trends that have arisen in the market for OR vehicles. Its like they timed it really well and are poised to really use that as a catalyst to make some exciting products in ICE, PHEV, and EVs.

I do think that luxury offroading is still the LX/G wagon and anything below that price point is dabbling with compromises, but I doubt too many in the US will sign up to take showroom fresh vehicles into the wilderness.
G Wagon is "luxury" only in price, in product it is uncomfortable and unpleasant to drive, to such an extent that they swapped SFA for IFS.
 

mmcartalk

Expert
Messages
4,155
Reactions
2,675
G Wagon is "luxury" only in price, in product it is uncomfortable and unpleasant to drive, to such an extent that they swapped SFA for IFS.


The G Wagon was originally designed, in the late 70s, as a vehicle for the German and Austrian militaries. It was not intended to be a luxury SUV.
 

Levi

Expert
Messages
2,707
Reactions
3,134
The G Wagon was originally designed, in the late 70s, as a vehicle for the German and Austrian militaries. It was not intended to be a luxury SUV.
I know, that is why I don't consider it as LX/Landcruiser equivalent. It is its own niche now. The G Wagon professional can be considered an equivalent of the LC 70.
 

mmcartalk

Expert
Messages
4,155
Reactions
2,675
Never get tired of seeing a Bronco around.


Good...because you are going to see a LOT of them. They are multiplying like rabbits here in the D.C. area, even with production-shortages due to the pandemic and lack of computer chips.
 

ssun30

Expert
Messages
3,326
Reactions
7,418
I just test drove a Bronco 2 door Base with manual transmission, which is exactly how I will spec it if I buy one.

The powertrain is okay. If I hold gears it will pull quite well. But it has very far spaced gears. 1 and 2 super short and 4 to 6 super long. The engine has no torque below 2400rpm, so this needs a late shifting habit.

The overall ride quality is way better than the Wrangler thanks to IFS. Handling is way sharper although the nose diving under braking is very bad and scary. But overall what I'd expect from a barebones dedicated offroader.

I already know the interior is going to be crap before I drive. But it still disappointed me in terms of usability. First the digital tachometer has long latency. This may not be a problem at all for AT but it makes rev-matching really hard to do on the MT. The clutch has no feedback at all, so it could be challenging to judge your bite point when offloading (but I guess it will brute force it with the crawl gear). The shifter gives me mixed feelings. On one hand it had a very mechanical feel (almost like a gated shifter), but on the other hand the shifter is very low and short making it a little uncomfortable to use, and I prefer long throw on a 4x4. The electronic parking brake is terrible to use because of its location. I just want a mechanical lever! Also not having a handle and step bar makes it very hard to get into, but a simple aftermarket job will solve it.

And finally, 49k for a base MT is a scam! There's no reason it's priced that high. I've seen much worse for ChDM parallel imports but it's supposed to be affordable in America.

So overall the Bronco is a little worse than I expected, but it's way better than my old Wrangler. I can be patient and wait for the new 4Runner. And now I definitely appreciate the GX so much more and understand why it's so popular among the off-road people: it has the capabilities to go on most trails but you don't have to live with the terrible comfort of a "hardcore" offroader. I would daily a GX but never a Bronco.
 

LateToLexus

Follower
Messages
139
Reactions
154
Recently spent 1,000 miles in a "fully loaded" Bronco road tripping with neighbor. Like most Ford products, this 100% has planned obsolescence in the very near future. Mike will enjoy seeing them around and in 3-4 years car lots will be littered with used Broncos once their warts start showing.

Any GX >>>> Bronco. Big tires on Broncos are overcompensating for other "insecurities".......
 

ssun30

Expert
Messages
3,326
Reactions
7,418
I agree the big foot package on Bronco is completely unnecessary. Makes it look stupid and kills daily usability.

But it's still better than tiny "mall crawler" tyres on a lot of Toyota BOF products, even the most "hardcore" ones. The LCP/GX/4R/Tacoma need 32s, the LC/LX with 34s and Tundra/Sequoia with 35s to look right.
 

ssun30

Expert
Messages
3,326
Reactions
7,418
Recently covered 400mi/650km in 5 days with a rental Bronco 4 door Badlands 2.3T. The Ford 10AT calibration is so bad that it makes the Toyota 8ATs look good. It just wants to stay at highest gear without stalling, often hovering near 1200rpm where the engine is completely gutless. It constantly hunts gear and need a lot of encouragement to downshift and request boost. It became so frustrating that I ended up driving in manual mode the entire trip because we are constantly climbing mountains. Im the correct gear the engine performs well but the tune is just not ideal. 2500rpm for any boost is way too late for a truck/off-road SUV. I think the Tacoma's tune should be way better than this. Horsepower figures are a useless criteria in this situation.

I don't know if the V6s fix the problem but I think an easy fix is to add a Sport mode. There are tons of GOAT modes but they somehow forgot about Sport and Normal is like Eco on most cars.

The GOAT modes are super easy to use and reduce the complexity of operating an off-road vehicle. But I think they are too eager to engage lockers instead of letting traction control do most of the work. In general you want to use lockers only as a last resort since they put extra stress on the drivetrain and reduce your maneuverability. I don't like the Badlands 4.7:1 final drive because it makes 4L only usable below 25mph/40kph so you can't use 4L for downhill engine braking (which we constantly do with 3.7:1 or 3.3:1 axles).

Overall this longer experience reduced my enthusiasm about the Bronco. It still looks by far the coolest, but I'm thinking maybe J250 is most likely my JK Wrangler replacement.
 

carguy420

Admirer
Messages
741
Reactions
1,000
Signs of trying to compensate for an inefficient engine: trying too hard to keep revs down with the transmission. This Bronco's 10AT is sounding more like the CVT in the ASEAN-market Yaris I've driven before than a typical torque converter AT, always in too high of a ratio and always having to aggressively stomp on the throttle to force a kickdown just to go from 100km/h to 110lm/h lol, it legit was frustrating to drive.