hey all you eb people! some of you may already know, but in case you don't... check out ford's new concept truck! what do you think?? can you remake a classic??

http://www.autointell.net/Events/nai...hts-bronco.htm

 

No. The concept doesn't say 'Bronco' to me. It's a diesel engine, why? There's no need for that. Also, there are floating rumors saying that it might be/ would be FWD or possibly AWD. Nobody knows........
-wb

 

i know what you mean. i've been a huge early bronco fan since i was 16 (5 years) and i just can't make up my mind about it. i want to love it, cuz it's a "bronco", and if it ever came to be, i probably would, but in the mean time... i think it needs work. won't start on the look of it... i still can't decide there. but the diesel engine... i don't mind that, diesels provide A LOT of torque... i don't know why it's just a 2L tho, even if it is a turbo! it must be some 2L... i work at a VW dealership (don't ask) and our 1.9L TDi turned out a wussy 90hp but 155 ft-lbs (or lb-ft) of torque at like 1500 rpms and they just twicked it to get a lil more. i also think the spare should be mounted on a swing rack like the real one, for a vintage look and more cargo room. and the thing that really gets me... IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE ABLE TO GO TOPLESS!! it should have a built in roll cage and a removable top if you ask me.

-lj

 

I've had my 69 Bronco since I was 19 (almost 15 years ago) and am a big fan of all Broncos. I saw the 'Bronco' concept vehicle pics and liked it at first glance. Delving deeper into the article, I was disappionted about the 4cyl diesel and possibly being built on some unibody econobox chassis. In any case, I doubt anything will become of it, especially since Ford already has so many other SUV's in thier product line, but I do like what they did with the 2005 Mustang!

 

I'd love a diesel in a Bronco. Just think of the Torque! You'd climb over anything with little effort.

Rumor is the drive train would be a slight upgrade from the current escape which is Front wheel drive with Rear wheel assist when needed, or commonly referred to as AWD. It'd Suck!!!

Now if they kept the diesel with a 9" rear and D44 front, That'd Rock!

But Ford has the Bronco listed as 'Slim' possibility for Production.

 

Diesel and torque usually do go together, but it's a 2.0 L.... You can only do so much with 122 cubic inches, and I'm pretty sure it's not something I would want. Going from memory, I think the current Dodge Cummins diesel has the highest specific torque output in a production light truck, and I think it is 560 ft*lbs (I'm too lazy to look it up). This is from a 5.9L engine. That gives a specific torque output of 95 ft*lbs/liter.

If you applied that same ratio to this 2.0 Liter engine, you would come up with 190 ft*lbs, which to me, is worthless. Great, a truck that wouldn't win any drag races or be able to tow anything. Plus, remember that they have been tweaking the dodge engine for over 10 years to make it that strong, and the hard parts (connecting rods and whatnot) are the heaviest and strongest I've ever seen to be able to take that kind of abuse. Check this out: http://www.fordcummins.com/images/rodcomparison.jpg There is no way any 2.0L anything would ever be built heavy enough to handle that kind of abuse.

What is my point? Ford really dumped this one - they took a great name and created a decent looking concept truck that has a gutless engine and craptastic drivetrain. What a shame.

 

I think you should read the news on the front page of tihs site --- you would have known about this on January 4th, when it was discussed in at least a half dozen threads!

https://www.ford-trucks.com/news/2004/news2004-1.html

 

sorry, i was out of the country for a while, so i wasn't able to get to a computer till the other day . i'll have to look for those threads.

about the torque. the new bronco's 2.0 gets around 250 lb-ft of torque and 218 hp. the cummins has 600 lb-ft at 1600 rpms.

 

Actually, they've been tweaking the Dodge chassis and drivetrain to handle the de rated output of the B series. Those engines were around way before Dodge ever used them and making a lot of power for industrial and logging applications. They have them "turned down" so much in the pickups to help the drivetrain survive. That's why the power is so easy to find.

As far as the Bronco concept, its a step in the wrong direction as far as I'm concerned. They should take the Super Duty chassis (or maybe with a 3-4 link coil susp.) and shorten it down to a 100-115" wheelbase, with all of the same drivetrain options, retro styling, no frills (maybe an XLT package), removable top, and give it a price tag that is affordable. They've done it with the new T Bird and the '05 Mustang.

Jason

 

I do like the styling, and with the gigantic Ford parts bin should be able to build an unbelievable 4X4. Every thing that we are trying to do with our EBs a Ford engineer gets to do on the company account. If I was turned loose I think I would do something like this.

Same boxy styling with a hint of fins in the front.
flair the fenders so that we don't have to butcher them to fit tires.
V6 with a 5.4 option
Removeable top
6 sp tranny with 6:1 first , 3.5 second, 2.0 third, 1.4 fourth, 1.0 fifth, and .75 OD. with a 3.0 low range T case and 4.10 gears with stock 285-75-16 on 16x8 rims.
Offer detroit True Tracks front and rear with upgraded options of the new electric selectable lockers.
As far as suspension, four link coils. nothing less.
solid front axel


Am I asking for too much????

 

I owned an early bronco, and did alot of hard off roading in it (74) 302
to me, the size is perfect. If I wanted something "big" I would take my suburban.

I like the idea of the diesel, they last a long time if built right, generate gobs of torque, and get good gas economy.

Befor I get flamed on my last comment, remember 911? I do not wish my $ sent to finance another terrorist action... just a thought

HP and torque take second place to proper driveline. with the right gear selection, you can power a locomotive with a volkswagon. I don't think anything this ratical is needed in this circumstance but you get the idea, a 3:1 transfer case with a 6 speed tranny ought to make a very good rock crawler, as well as well behaved highway crusier. I will hold with the people who want a stout frame, and the spare tire on a rack outside. as long as it is mounted better than the originals, they tended to bang around alot.
Skip the fancy computer controlled traction and give me some air lockers, with a stout air tank that can double duty to air up my tires after a good crawl over the boulders.

Like the interior, but keep the floor a rubber mat that likes to have mud and snow on it, with drains built in.

Marty

 

I think they should put a 4.0 or a 5.4 in it. Also 18" arent cool for a 4x4 they should just put 15" chrome steel super single styled wheels on some BFG MT 31's. I would buy one if I wanted to take money away from my project truck if they make it.

 

To match the size of the original EB, you get the Escape platform Sorry, I'll take the full size drivetrain and deal with a little extra width on the trail.

I could agree about the right drivetrain making up for a lower powered engine for rockcrawling (although you don't hear of many swapping the 302 for a 6 cylinder). But many of us have needs other than just a rock crawler. Mine is purpose built for the rocks, but I also run the dunes, play in the mud, and anything else that comes along. In all of the available 6 speeds, 1st gear remains the same as in the 5 speed, they just shorten the ratios between 2nd through 5th. The first gear ratio really isn't that great for a crawler. And you won't be able to pull 6th under 65-70 on the flattest road.

Stick with the 17-18" wheels to cover the large disc brakes and to be able to make good use of the latest large diameter radials available.

Jason

 

Am I missing something? This is a concept Bronco, they can design a new driveline, which can handle the loads, the new bronco’s size doesn’t necessarily mean you are stuck with anything. They can also change the gear ratio with a transfer case to just about anything, check out

“ http://www.off-road.com/ford/flashback/klune/ “

I do admit I tend to only look at rock crawling, not much mud in AZ, I guess if I wanted to blast the dunes, I’d get a sand rail, but it’s a good point.

I also would want steel rims, steel will bend on impact, alum tends to break. I would rather have a bent rim to wobble home on then a fractured rim in the desert.

Marty