So we all know Jeeps are flat out chitty when it comes to reliability and typically hover at or near the bottom (#26) in manufacturer reliability rankings (below) - yet cultists continue to snap them up. I personally have seen the garbage welds on Jeeps and wouldn't own one if the last vehicle on the planet.

https://www.consumerreports.org/car-...reliable-cars/

Ford isn't fairing much better as a brand (#16 spot) and I don't see things improving any time soon given the fact the company is losing money and I, for one question the use of an independent front suspension and unequal length control arms in the Bronco as I'm certain off-roading, 4x4'ing it will lead to failures (vice a live axle which has been historically more durable). Of course, it will drive slightly better on normal roads, but I think there will be more than a few unhappy campers out there once those front ends take a beating and start falling apart from off-road use-- sure you can try "beefing it up", but beef it up options are far more available if that front suspension were "live", a beam.

 

Pretty sure the percentage of these actually used off-road will be single digit percentage. Much like the Raptor and there is enough front suspension options for the enthusiast.

 

is consumer reports sort of like the national enquirer for vehicles ?

 

I wouldn't say that. They aren't as boring as they were decades ago. There reliability stuff is from owner surveys. Something to use as a comparison reference.

 

Agreed but, CR doesn't do a good job of differentiating between failures. For example, a customer's SYNC system failed in his 2020 truck, he's pissed and got a survey from CR and trashes the vehicle's reliability just because something or anything failed to work and it may have nothing to do with the drivetrain.

 

Using your example, isn't a failed SYNC a fairly expensive problem? The nav unit went out in my Grand Caravan the first year and it was a $2k replacement for the whole radio unit (under warranty of course).

If a vehicle has a chronic problem with a transmission, engine, or other major system, that will show up in the charts as such--look at CR's Focus transmission history, for instance. In those years, the Focus still has "much better than average" stats for its engine, the car's electrical system, etc., but the transmission is clearly a huge problem. Likewise, Explorer and Mustang paint problems show up very clearly (rusting hoods) in CR and while those are "minor" in terms of reliability, people don't want to pay $1000 to repaint a hood... And other areas of the Explorer and Mustang show up as much better than average.

CR is definitely imperfect, but what is the alternative? Talking to friends and co-workers can be useful but makes for a very small sample size. I have done very well buying CR-recommended vehicles over the years. You can do generic internet searches, but sometimes a very small number of people make a huge amount of noise on the internet and make a problem seem much worse than it really is--and that distortion can be far worse from the attempted neutral approach that CR takes. In the old days, car enthusiasts would pooh-pooh CR because they tested cars like they test toaster ovens, but they do use some real performance metrics these days and do address the driving dynamics of cars. (And this can also work against a vehicle like a Wrangler which has limitations in terms of noise, comfort, and handling in normal road-based driving.)

 

My '09 Tacoma was labled a "Used car to avoid" due primarily to the radio failures in almost every one of them. I had 3 radios by the time it went down the road in '17. It's an easy fix if you want to spring for an aftermarket radio, but most people don't, and most people don't want to be bothered by a bad radio. With radios being seen as a long proven item, repeated failures draw more wrath than perhaps they should. The word was they were Delco radios, made for Toyota under their partnership with GM.

I liked CR's take on the Mustang GT (Foxbody): "Gut wrenching power, and gut wrenching ride." Mustangs have been tagged as recommended several times as well.

 

what exactly are you trying to say. CR is a joke?

 

I’d say they’re a bad joke with a history of hatchet jobs.

 

After being a subscriber for almost 35 years did not renew this year. The quality of their reviews has diminished and do not reflect my own experiences in some cases. I wonder where they get all their reviews because I was never once asked by them to review any vehicle I purchased new.

 

I know Jeep's rep, but the truth is, I've not seen any broken down on the trail unless they were buit way beyond the ability of the components to handle it. I've owned three Wranglers since 1993, including a YJ, a 2008 JK, which I still own at 142k miles and counting, and a newer 2018 JL Wrangler on which I've got about 34k miles now. The 93 was trouble free for 10 years and 125k miles, in spite of literally beating the living hell out of it off-road. The JK Rubicon has been good, but had some tranmission issues that never left me stranded, but were fixed. Other than that, it has been outstanding. I think I had to replace an O2 sensor. It has also endured hard off-roading from Uwharrie to Moab and everywhere in between. The JL has been trouble-free, and like the Jeeps before it, has been off-roaded HARD from Windrock to Moab and again, everywhere in between. It had a recall for a defective steering dampener but I tossed it for a Fox dampener. It has a recall for a clutch inspection, but the clutch is fine and has been perfect. In fact, its been the best of all clutches/manual transmissions I've owned.

My Transit and F150 haven't been great. I love those vehicles, but they have been less than stellar no better than the Jeeps, and certainly not as good as my 2018 JLUR.

I think the Bronco is going to be awesome, but if its quality and fit/finish is like my Transit, then they will have some work to do. But again, I think it will be incredible. Now one thing I've always wished I could do, is to put the Ecoboost in that Transit into my JK. That would be simply amazing!

Competition is great. Just like it is now for muscle cars, I think off-roaders are entering a golden age. I particularly love that they made the doors removable on the Bronco. I think that and the lack of a removable top are why the Toyota FJ Cruiser failed.

The newest Jeep Wrangler is a great vehicle. Ford woldn't be making the Bronco if it weren't, either. That's why there are millions of Jeeps on the road. I think the Bronco will sell very well and do very well. But the Jeeps will continue to do well, too. The newest JL is simply and outstanding vehicle. Maybe the best I've ever owned. Time will tell.

I'm looking forward to seeing Broncos on the trail and seeing some great pics of them, like these! I wish I had enough money to have a Bronco, too!

 

Btw, I wrote CR off back in the early 90's. Their anti-US bias was too much to stomach then, and from what I hear, it hasn't changed. I experienced the same thing. They called every car or truck I owned garbage when I never had any problems with them and while they never surveyed me, so I agree with @RandyinTN

 

IMHO, the "new Wrangler" is nothing more than a coffin for somebody.... they scrapped all the years of safety/crush zone engineering and basically built a "Wrangler Labeled Coffin" for some poor sole who didn't know any better...but liked the PR docs!

 

If they scrapped "all the years of safety/crush zone engineering" then how did Jeep meet all the federal guidelines?

 

Ahhh....you design for the test..... when tested overseas....it failed miserably...not once, but twice even after they reconfigured the test to satisfy FCA's concerns/issues.....


Notice several items here....1) the vehicle rolled on it's side but as measured by the engineers, if this would have occurred on a street, it would have continued onto it's top.....the previous edition did not, 2) Notice the drivers side front wheel tore away from the vehicle...the previous edition did not, 3) look carefully and you can see the drivers door is collapsing because the structure of the vehicle is failing.... and the occupant (driver) safety zone (aka drivers gage) is failing to maintain integrity.... ie the front structure and drivetrain of the vehicle has moved into the occupant compartment..... that is a failure by IIHS standards (Insurance institute). The side crash test is equally if not worse and even the PASS system is is soo poorly designed that in a real world t-bone accident (again at typical city MPH, the driver would sustain substantial head/brain injury . as compared to the previous gen tests....which you can see....the suspension stays intact, the vehicle does not roll onto it's side, the drivers door remains "uncrushed"

The entire link is here....

https://autoexpert.com.au/posts/jeep...rollover-twice