If this report is true:
http://www.autonews.com/article/2017...olid-axles-too

I'm not certain its true though. It will use Dana axles, but that doesn't mean solid axles. The Spicer AdvanTEK axles mentioned are used in solid axle and independent suspension applications:

Spicer AdvanTEK High-Efficiency Axles | Dana Light Vehicle

 

Well. this is looking good.

 

You're not going to see solid axles. Although the contract with Dana does surprise me. They don't even use Dana axles in the F-series anymore.

 

The Super Duty has a Dana 60 front axle and the F450 and larger use Dana rear axles (Dana 80 or S130 are two used)

 

The f-250 with out the heavy payload option is the only superduty that doesnt use a dana axle in the rear.

 

I was more referring to the '150, which uses a Ford 8.8" up front

 

I've been looking forward to the Bronco ever since the union president let it slip a little.

A solid front axle would be incredible, but it wasn't even in my thoughts when I imagined the Bronco. Why? Well for one, it would be almost solo in the class (only rivaling the Wrangler) in the small SUV field. Therefore, it would pit the Bronco DIRECTLY against the Wrangler. The Wrangler is the anomaly in the Jeep lineup... TONS of people want them (they sell like hot cakes) but a lot of people buy them, tons more people THINK they want them. SFA's have some concessions, such as bump steer, reduced handling on road, etc. Quite a few people that go looking at one end up in a Liberty, or Cherokee. Two, except the Super Duty's, it would be totally new for Ford. Jeep has been using them since the CJ's (there was a rumour back in the development in the TJ, but the enthusiasts changed that) so they know, that's what their customers want. Bronco? Totally new territory. The Bronco hasn't used a SFA since '79. They would be taking an enormous risk. BUT, that said, Ford gambles... the Raptor was a gamble, and a win. The Shelby GT350 and 350R were gambles. BOTH are killing the market. This might be Ford's next gamble...

The only thing I truly want is the option of 2 doors and a manual transmission. I probably won't be wheeling one as aggressively as my Jeep, but I still want the offroad prowess that comes with a well designed vehicle. Plus, with Ford's engine program, it will be extra good... so long as they don't water it down.

 

I saw this link on The Ranger Station forums on a thread talking about both the upcoming Ranger and the Bronco. An allegedly unnamed Ford Product Development Planner takes questions about both vehicles and provides the answers that he's allowed to give. At this time, Ford is not planning a 2-door Bronco. It will be 4-door with a fixed roof.
https://www.reddit.com/r/fordranger/...mpany_product/

 

Yeah, I didn't go check that link out as pretty sure thats the one that says the new Bronco will just be a rebadged Everest, which Ford has come out and said it will not be.

 

I'd be very surprised if it had a solid frond axle. Personally, I can't see the advantage of solid axles aside from mechanical simplicity. Dual A-arm independent suspension has such better ride quality and flexibility. It would be interesting to take 79 f150 (last of the solid front axles) and ramp test it against an 11th gen or newer and see how they stack up.

 

I'd be very surprised also. However I would settle for the Twin-Traction beam of the 80's and 90's!

 

I will absolutely promise you that a solid axle will perform better in an RTI test compared to an IFS. THAT's just physics... SFA benefits from forced articulation. That means while one side is going up, it's going to force the other side down.

 

Yeah, TTB was actually not a bad design EXCEPT there was no means of camber adjustment from the factory. I know you can install an eccentric pivot bushing and/or indexable ball joints, but it would have been nice of them to do it at the factory. Kind of like the 89 thru approx. 91 or 92 GM 4x4's. The upper control arm mounts were marked (stamped) where to cut them for the caster/camber kit, sold separately of course, but no adjustment was available in factory form. About 92 they got their heads out and started shipping them all with adjusters from the factory.

 

I never thought about the forced articulation aspect. Based on that, the solid axle truck would indeed produce better ramp numbers. I still think from a practical use standpoint, IFS front (or all 4 corners like my '10 Expedition had) is going to be the way they go. Construction will probably dictate that. If its body on frame we'll probably see IFS front/solid rear. A unitized body construction may go 4 wheel independent. Either way it'll be interesting to see how the thing actually ends up looking. I hope it's retro to the old square bodies.

 

Having owned SFA's and two TTB's, I'm not sold on either anymore. Yes, they are durable and capable but so is the current IFS in the F-150's. I don't think my 2011 rides any better than my '88 did, but it's just as capable and requires zero maintenance.

I don't want to turn wrenches anymore and I don't want to repack wheel bearings every 30K miles or pull them every time I've sunk the front end in muck and water.

I'm good with the current IFS design.