Give Ford dual kudos: for reprising one of its most iconic nameplates and for equipping its 2021 “built wild” Broncos with the style and substance necessary to succeed in the fierce SUV arena. Riding on two different platforms and available in two- and four-door body styles, the new Bronco brand will be the eighth member of Ford’s rambling SUV/crossover household when it reaches showrooms at the end of this year. A standard 4×4 driveline underlines these new models’ off-road chops. Full price outlines haven’t been announced, but the base two-door Bronco will start at $29,995 including destination fees; a $100 deposit will hold your place in line a Bronco starting today.
Read the full article on Hagerty.com:
Just like when the Explorer replaced the Bronco II, this Bronco should have replaced the Explorer. The car that took on the Explorer name should have been a replacement for the Ford Edge... Still glad to see the Bronco back though, only been waiting 24 years!
Still wish the Bronco would retain a solid axle front end as Jeep Wrangler has. Seems to have too much electronic gadgetry in the driveline area.
The prices might be lower for using more basic, easily serviceable components like the original Bronco.
@nsg24, many very capable off-readers (Land Rover, etc.) do fine without a solid front axle. What they gain is far better on-road driving dynamics. The Bronco will be a better daily driver and match or exceed the Wrangler off-road.
I am very curious how the Bronco Sport will be priced in the real world. I thought Ford was coming for that Subaru Crosstrek money, but Crosstrek pricing stops where the Bronco Sport starts. Will Ford make up the gap with generous incentives after the launch rush?
Hopefully the Bronco's independent front suspension translates to on-road manners that can give the 4Runner some competition, because Toyota needs it. All of the 4Runner's natural competitors from 20 years ago have disappeared, or become soft-roaders except for the Jeep Grand Cherokee. And the GC relies on air suspension to do what comes naturally to the 4Runner.
Under powered, overall length to wheelbase suggests bad approach and departure angles, and why is a manual only available with the smaller engine? It’s cool looking (2 door), and I love the granny gear idea, but when you start adding bigger tires (and let’s face it, 35s are small in today’s off road circles) it’s going to be a dog off the line and have low torque for crawling. I also foresee many broken front drive shafts if you wheel it to hard. Love the concept, disappointed with the execution.
Compare the axle locations to the Swiss military vehicle, Pinzgauer. You will notice the the approach angle is very similar to minimize impact before wheel contact. The departure angle is extremely good to avoid bumping it's butt on ascent.
Ford has been running experimental off road vehicles testing some of the equipment just for this Bronco. I think the engineers at Ford have taken into consideration axle strength to accommodate the larger wheels and tires. Jeep certainly didn't outfit their vehicles with 35's at the factory. Ford is rumored to be making a factory lift kit for the 37's.
Ford did well with the Raptor series for off road capability. I can't wait to see how this Bronco does. I'm already considering selling my TJ Wrangler to offset the cost of the two door Bronco.
I have an Eco Boost in my Expedition. That motor is very capable and full of torque.
I can't imagine 400lbs of torque being a dog off the line for a lighter vehicle such as this.
Under powered? Compared to the Wrangler, which has less power? Or the old Bronco, which is down more than 70 hp and 40 lb./ft. from the base 4-cylinder motor and a massive 110 hp and 140 lb./ft. from the V6?
Not sure why you think 35s are small. Real off-roading has been done for years on smaller tires. I've done level-4 trails in Moab with 33s on a Wrangler--a far less capable setup than the Sasquatch Bronco. That's one great thing about off-road SUVs like these--they get so many people thinking they need more than they actually do, as they imagine themselves conquering the Baja 1000 or the Rubicon trail when most never even get close.
The Bronco Sport should satiate the needs of former Land Rover Freelander drivers who've almost recovered financially from trying to keep them going. The Bronco answers the question of what the International Scout would look like today had it remained in production without a better new idea for the past 40 years, as has occurred with the Porsche '911.'
The Jeep Wrangler is apparently going to get a V8 to respond to the Bronco. If Fiat is smart about it, they'll offer the basic 5.7 as an option in every model instead of putting the SRT6.4 in some special edition. If they do offer the 5.7 for under $40K, the Bronco will be over before it starts.
Don't hold your breath for a V8 Jeep priced under $50K. It's going to be a halo model, and will likely easily pass $60K when even modestly optioned.
As well-thought as these vehicles are, the Bronco models are bringing much-needed competition to Jeep. FCA (and it's precursors all the way back to AMC) have been slow to improve the Jeep for far too long. It looks like Ford asked every Jeep owner what they would want improved and did it. Maybe now Jeep will start to fill those long-overdue wish lists. Healthy competition is good, the same way the big three make full-size trucks better.
They're a good looking vehicle for sure. BEFORE I would buy one I'd look into the paint issues. I've owned two new Fords (2002 Crown Vic, 2016 Explorer) and can't justify buying another one.
The engine options seem inappropriate for the environment they appear to be marketing towards. Simple powerplants have always marked the most successful offroad capable vehicles because of the conditions offroading presents. I would be hesitant to take a turbo engine through a river or a mud bog. Too many electronics and ancillary systems that could fail. Maybe Ford has everything in tidy ziplocks for protection. But the simplicity of the 2.5 or 4.0 Jeep, or 4.5 Landcruiser, or even the smallblock Chevy makes them not only durable, but more easily repaired if something goes sideways on the trail. I love the 2.3 turbo SVO, but anyone that's owned one knows that they require more attention than naturally aspirated engines. I love the design, but of course most of these will never see the first gravel. I see visions of Land Rovers....
I just received a video from Motor Trend and they say only two engines for both, the 2.0L and a dual turbo 6. And a 6+1 standard which is a 6 speed with a "low-low" for off road.
|2009 - current Ram 2500/3500||383 hp @ 5,600 rpm|
|2013 - current Ram 1500||395 hp @ ,5600 rpm|
|Peak Torque:||2003 - 2008 Ram 1500/2500/3500||375 lb-ft @ 4,400 rpm|
I'll take mine with a 5.0, Dana 44 front, Dana 60 rear, 37" tires and 7 speed manual (2022 model year options, I hope)
Off to the Rubicon for some rock crawling and fishing. Cannot go this year so I can wait for the 2022 model. Be safe out there! Aloha
Too bad the smaller WB is monocoque and not the transfer case, 11 inch ground clearance $ w/o the other goods on the bigger. The bigger have these but will have difficulty on trails etc due to size. Even w/that the smaller is still close to a foot too long. I'll wait, seen these "it is xxx" too many times to say the thing is available NOW.
Same platform as Escape but different wrapper is a win... everything else is same body as Escape on each brand's individual platform. This segment was greatly in need of some things that look different.
Kind of holds true in the large SUV segments too, you either look the same or are Jeep (and in some cases the Jeeps look the same but have that grill treatment).
I hope Ford succeeds with this and we get more variety moving forward. How about a big Blazer that looks and acts like a Blazer from GM? Bring back the Suzuki SUV family to North America while we are at it.
Sorry Ford. Looks like an Explorer and a Jeep had a baby. Dropped the ball yet again in the design department. First the Mach E, then the Mach 1 (really disappointed in that one!!) and now the Bronco. Could have been so much more.
I like that 2 door model! I used to work at the Ford plant up in Wayne MI, the little bronco's were always around as the security vehicles. I'm not ready to trade in my diesel ZR2 anytime soon though, as I need a truck more than an SUV. I had a 94 2 door explorer for many yrs, that really was an excellent 4 wd suv. I bet these new Bronco's are going to be hot!
Ford just raised the bar. I'm sure Toyota will respond. Chevy is history even with the AEV connection but Jeep, WOW the new JL looks 20 years old. Watch the Ford Used Car Lots fill with Jeep JKs.
The big story is how the Bronco outperforms the Wrangler. Bronco 94:1 Crawl Ratio, Rubicon 73:1. Bronco 35s from the factory. Wrangler, you need a lift, new wheels plus you end up wasting the factory rubber. Take off the Bronco doors and they store in the back. Wrangler doors????
Ford if they can deliver will steal half the Wrangler sales.
Seems like a nice package until you get to 3 cylinder or 2.0. That's supposed to be off-road fun? Where's the V8? I wish they would have left the Bronco name alone and called it something like the Escape II.
Well I guess you're not up to speed on today's clean diesel technology. Diesels are now near zero emissions, way cleaner than a dirty gas engine. Then there is tons of low rpm torque and unheard of mileage as well as superior durability. Everything heavy duty is diesel. If Ford can't offer a diesel then they are presenting a weak offering for unknowledgable consumers which is how they like it.
I have had them all--jeeps,broncos---have a 1973 bronco currently with a 302 V-8. No matter what the specs say--- I would'nt trade the 302 for any of the turbo V-6s---why do they think Jeep has a huge aftermarket demand for V-8 swap kits? Like the add goes-'' I could have had a V8''. IMO often durability is related to simplicity.