+1

I think it's this new era of buyers created by the JKU. People who buy the 4 door wrangler to go to the mall and to/from work without ever taking it off road. If that's the case then sure IFS is the way to go for a more comfortable ride on the street. I'm really looking for a Bronco/Ranger that shows Ford is serious about taking on Jeep.

 

If this is true - then in my mind, and the minds of MOST enthusiasts, it isn't a Bronco, or even a Bronco II. Everest, Explorer II, Bronco III? However they want to put it... It's NOT going to be a Bronco in the eyes of the enthusiast.

Pretty sure the new Ranger will be a winner though.

 

Who anymore is actually buying a brand-new $50+k vehicle and taking it rock crawling? You make a good point Jeeper. Why are we worried about the off-road capabilities of a vehicle that, in the hands of 90% of consumers, will never see more than a gravel road! Look at the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon; most buyers are urban professionals who never go any further off-road than the parking lot at Starbucks! That's who is buying these vehicles these days, so that is who Ford is going to target the Bronco at. Give them the off-road enthusiast image, with the on-road driving excitement of an I-Pad! And the Millennials will line up to buy it.
We might as well prepare ourselves for the worst now; because Ford will most likely ruin this.

 

The only way for Ford to ruin this would be to build a crude solid axle vehicle that would sell in tiny numbers. They are in biz to MAKE MONEY, not cater to the wishes of a small number of serious off-roaders.

If you are a serious off-roader, you're gonna buy something older and used and modify it. So wait until the very plentiful Jeeps depreciate while left in relatively mint condition and buy/modify them...that is your source of serious off-road vehicles.

How many 150-200 mph pony cars and sports cars are out on the road? How many of them hit top speed with any regularity? How many of them see a race track? People buy vehicles for image--they WEAR them, not use them.

George

 

Well, you could go to the opposite end of the spectrum, too- They have the GT, which is a low production vehicle that costs A LOT, angled towards a very limited group of very specific buyers. One thing that vehicle does is increase brand recognition, and to a certain extent increase foot traffic through the dealerships. Who's to say they might not go a similar route on the new Bronco? Best of the best off road, but low production with a limited audience. It is an "also" vehicle at the assembly plant, after all.

 

Ford has moved Focus and C-Max production out of the Wayne, MI plant to Mexico. They NEED, and everyone in town WANTS the Wayne plant to keep our southwest Detroit area neighbors at work. Ford can't make money building small/medium cars in the US any more. Everyone in the Detroit area is happy that the new Ranger and Bronco will give the Wayne plant a chance. (I was proud when I bought my new wife a brand new Escort GT in 1986--it was built in Wayne, MI.)

The GT is a "halo" car like the Viper, made to draw people into the showroom. It doesn't share anything major with other vehicles. It probably loses money.

Ford and the UAW are staking the future of this plant on some big production numbers, which will only happen with big volume sales. The Everest is built on a shortened Ranger frame just like the Toyota 4Runner is built on a shortened Tacoma frame. They will have the same relationship and it only makes sense to use the same construction for production flexibility as well as crash test results. And it only makes sense for Ford to go for big volume with both the Ranger and the Bronco.

 

Very well said, George.

I hope for a vehicle that does a better job fitting my needs than the current offerings, and from what I understand, the Bronco could be just that. Give me some towing capacity and fuel economy with a bit of ground clearance and I'll be quite happy.

 

I want Ford to make money as much as the next guy, but... Beware the sell, sell, sell, attitude. The Mustang II had great sales numbers the first year, but was only saved when the Mustang was totally redesigned a couple of years later.

More to building a car company than raw sales numbers.

 

The wrangler has a solid front and last time I checked, it's selling pretty d*mn well. Why do you need a ifs for it to sell well? The wrangler has proven that you don't. You will need a solid to please the enthusiast. Guess what happens if you stop making new ones? The old one run out. News flash, if you take away what creates the image, the image goes away! If all the sudden sport cars became slow af, the image goes away and they become normal cars that may or may not look better than others. Image can fade, it's not immune. It will go away if it doesn't have a solid front.

 

Every vehicle you just named sucks off road. The wrangler is the only good off road vehicle left, it needs some competition. I'll bet the number is higher than 5% bet even if that's accurate, if you ruin that capability, everyone will know it. Its image will fall and it's sales will plummet.

If all the sudden jeep was stupid enough to put ifs in, all the reviewers and hardcore fans will say how crap it is (because it would be) and it would destroy the names. The ones that still buy it will be meet with everyone saying that the old one was better,

 

Why are we making truck that can tow if so few people actually do? Why are we making sports cars if so few people track them? Why are we building anything other an a fusion? It's called pleasing people that want something different. You build something to fit a specific need. Naturally you have people that buy it and will never use its uniqueness but some people will. People that are using its unique capabilities will buy it first which builds a name. Then you have the wanna be people that wish to be associated with them. Take away that first component and you quickly lose the second, enthusiast will help speed that along with all their hating on it. If Ford does not have a solid front, it is no different than the crap they already have or that anyone else has. Ever wonder why the wrangler sells so well and jeeps other models don't?

 

Jeep Wranglers sell because they have the Jeep reputation and look and people want to "wear" them, not use them. Well-to-do families in my area buy or lease them for high school girls. There is no way that a new Bronco coming fresh out of the gate is gonna have that Jeep magic, just like no copy of a Fender Stratocaster or Telecaster will ever BE a Fender Strat or Tele, and no copy of a Gibson Les Paul will ever bee a Les Paul, speaking in guitar terms. Brand name and style matter. Think of Harley Davidson....

The new Jeep Cherokee is selling in really large numbers--MORE than the Wrangler--and it's based on a Fiat car chassis with a transverse engine... The new Escape and Explorer are selling in really large numbers because people want SUV's, not Fusions.

For the real rock crawlers, there will be more than enough used off-lease Jeep Wranglers formerly driven by high school girls to serve your market.

The Ranger will be based on the world Ranger, and the Bronco will be based on the Ranger, and neither of these have a solid front axle. I have nothing to do with the design of Ford vehicles but might be interested in a new Bronco if it a good street vehicle but has some real ground clearance and toughness. I'd consider buying a 4Runner if it wasn't a Toyota. Here's a realistic article:

Baloney: Ford Bronco, Ranger Getting Solid Front Axle | truck News @ Top Speed

 

ok answer me this. Why do you want this new bronco? What is unique about it that makes you want it? If you want a ifs off-roader that's comfortable on the street, you already have the raptor. You want it for the name? Well that will go away if they do the crap you say they are going to do. Then what does that leave you? An SUV exactly like every other one? Let's see no 2 door, no removable roof and a pos week a*s front suspension just like every other suv. What's the point. If they do that I hope Ford doesn't make it and if they do I hope the sales crash and burn. If you want comfortable daily drive DONT BUY A BRONCO! That's not what it's for.

Lol some toughness?! With ifs? Lol toughness and oem ifs are a joke.

Once again how did jeeps reputation get there? By being good off road. Reputation will go away if they made it less capable (aka putting ifs in it). Yes bronco will not have the name right away that's why you have to build it. Name will not be built if it is no different that every other SUV. Name will be tarnished because the people that wanted a capable off-roader will be furious. Yes your are right, people want SUV and we have a crap ton of them. Bronco needs to be different and actually capable off-road with on road compromises. Don't want on road compromises? Get something else.

 

Separate body/frame SUV with some ground clearance and relative toughness. Don't need a rock crawler. I like the 4Runner and the Everest and the pre-2011 Explorer. And about that size. Not car-based like the Edge (which is a good size but is a transverse engine). We'll see what Ford gives us.

The Raptor is the size of the Queen Mary and is not an SUV. Not interested in that or the Expedition which is also huge and way too expensive for what I want. Don't need a top that comes off.

We might as well relax and wait to see what happens; I'm assuming that you are not in Ford Motor Company management or engineering and neither am I although I know a bunch of engineers. Your profile says you're 20 years old. Do you have 40 grand to spend on a new Bronco if it meets your criteria?

Take care,
George

 

Off road in general or rock crawling?

I've solid front axle trucks, TTB trucks and now an IFS truck. Can someone please give me solid advantage to having a solid front axle truck as opposed to any of the others that I mentioned?

Additionally, why in hell would Ford build the Bronco with a solid axle when the Ranger will likely come with IFS? This vehicle is already going to be expensive, how much more so does it have to be?