Technophobes: How Scared Is Too Scared?

[BroncoBuyer]

Anyone that is seriously complaining about the weight that a heated seat (which will 100% be an OPTION) or electric window please tell me you’re joking.

I know for a FACT you are going to be the one throwing on 35’s, a smittybilt steel bumper front and rear, electric side steps, gas cans, a harbor freight winch, angry eyes, Underbody LED’s, roof rack, and a high lift jack on your bronco so don’t complain about the 5 pounds of weight a heated seat adds

Bwahahahahah!! Sorry need to wipe the tears from my eyes from laughing so hard.. That’s funny right there...

hey and don’t forget the home made rock rails and that new muffler that have about a 30 pound spool of welding wire in.

Sponsored

 

[BroncoMike]

Mike...I've enjoyed the thread. As with other topics - a broad range of divergent views. I'm not a vehicle 'buff', nor mechanically inclined...so on most vehicles I don't give a hoot about details.

It could be the broncobronco doesn't prompt total infatuation - but I'm hoping it does. If its not just another 'tool' to go from A to B, I guess we'd all like it to be as custom tailored as a Savile Row suit; that's just human nature. My current Renegade meets my needs - but its just a 'tool'...I might swap for another of those, or the baby bronco if its close to Renegade's footprint.

But I'd sure like to think broncobronco will turn out to be more than a 'tool' - something on the level of a 'possession'.

Oh, hell yes. It's a passion product, for certain. OEM customization will be a key element of success, but there are economic factors involved in the degree to which that can be offered. They have to appeal to the broadest possible segment of potential buyers, from the technophobes to the gadgeteers - those on the far ends of either spectrum get left out. Pretty much the entire industry is that way, competition makes it so.

My guess is that people who want to pick out their individual options on a new car purchase are few and far between. Only an empirical observation, but my guess is the vast majority of new vehicles sold are out of dealer inventory and not special order. This model works - it efficiently feeds the masses. Enthusiasts - the kind of people who hang around on Internet forums and argue over the pros and cons of different suspension designs - are the exception. And I'm sure it varies by model - the Bronco will be a passion product, so the effect is exponential. People buying Camrys probably don't wrestle with such issues, I'd venture the "special order" rate on Camry is very low; pretty much choose between a few different trim/package levels, color, and take it or leave it.

 

[BroncoBoy22]

BM you hit the nail 100% on the head.

that’s why all the technophonia of some posters on here is ridiculous. Having preferences for options and configurations is one thing, but to expect ford to custom build these things and make every option ala carte and not share common technologies with other ford vehicles (infotainment, auto stop/start, blind spot assist, etc) is dumb because the probability of it is so low.

they’re trying to build the bronco to have the widest appeal within its niche. Catering to the few folks who want a dinosaur mobile would not be smart. Maybe a limited edition version but even then...

some folks basically want a 2000 Cobra R version of the bronco (it was totally stripped and track focused) and that was 20 years ago and even then it was a super limited special edition not the main stream model

 

[Carolina Jim]

the few folks who want a dinosaur mobile

well...my preferences don't quite go That far. But I will make a coupl'a points:

1. 'Preferences' drive all types of transactions. What if Bronco met ALL your design/performance priorities - but was only offered in "Hot Pink"...would you be as happy with it in pink as you would be in your personal color preference. However I agree that Extreme customization probably drives prices too high.

2. Personally I think auto makers owe it to society in general to make 'affordable' trims available. And I don't just mean the $14K barbie-sized vehicles. I read a wide range of financial publications & you can't go a week without seeing an article that X% of the population (usually about half) can't handle an unexpected $400 expense. That fact is also reflected in the average vehicle loan term bumping up on 6 years.

3. I don't know if electronic components come in varying levels of ruggedness. I do know if you drove a new car over a pothole in the 1970s there was a good chance your built-in clock no longer worked. The more micro-stuff is in a vehicle, the more stuff can go wrong.

Just sayin'

 

[BroncoBoy22]

Agreed Jim. I wouldn’t put you in the same bucket I’ve harped on others for being in.

I wouldn’t care at all if there were stripped down models. I’d be happy those folks got what they wanted. I just want people to be reasonable lol.

personally I would love a coyote in this thing. All my vehicles are Ford V8s. But I realize with today’s regulations an ecoboost is far more likely. So I’m not gonna make thread after thread complaining about it.

Ford has a difficult job trying to predict people’s preferences. Luckily for them the JL numbers show what people tend to buy.

 

[BroncoMike]

Catering to the few folks who want a dinosaur mobile would not be smart. Maybe a limited edition version but even then...

some folks basically want a 2000 Cobra R version of the bronco (it was totally stripped and track focused)

Hmmm. This got me thinking... back in the old days, there were special editions, homologation vehicles, and focused-interest production runs. Usually they were stripped down versions, not overbloated luxury barges like most "special editions" are today. Maybe make a Baja version that has a bedliner interior, manual HVAC controls, no nav/infotainment. Make 500 of them, see how they sell. That won't address all of the concerns that have been posted on over-electronic-ing modern vehicles, as EPA and DOT minimums would still have to be met and there just isn't a better way to do it at the moment, but it could get closer to the purist's vision.

Personally I think auto makers owe it to society in general to make 'affordable' trims available.

It would sure make buying a Bronco easier for a lot of people, especially the people who want to 'wheel one aggressively but think about the sticker price and either wait to buy a beat-up used one or buy an expensive new one and end up being afraid to use it the way they initially intended.

I do know if you drove a new car over a pothole in the 1970s there was a good chance your built-in clock no longer worked.

That made me laugh - yeah, I can't think of many 1970's cars that had a working clock, come to think of it. What were they replaced with? Digital. And before you object... yes, the early ones crapped out also. Now we have digital displays showing an analog face. *sigh*

 

[Jake_zx2]

It's a pretty well established truth that accessories in general add weight.

*ADDED* accessories can add weight, but that's not what we're talking about here. we're more on the premise of something like an analog gauge cluster vs a digital gauge cluster... the weight difference is going to be negligible (and, in some cases, the more advanced technology may even be lighter) and ultimately won't make a difference in performance. This to me seems more of a case of older folk who don't understand modern technology looking for SOME kind of fault to write it off without sounding like an idiot

A Sync3 touchscreen radio does NOT weigh more than a sync1 "calculator screen" radio... they weigh the same, one is just simply better. Improved technology DOES NOT mean more weight. I promise you, that "rolling rock" Bronco startup sequence isn't going to drop your 0-60 time by a tenth

 

[BroncoMike]

*ADDED* accessories can add weight, but that's not what we're talking about here. we're more on the premise of something like an analog gauge cluster vs a digital gauge cluster... the weight difference is going to be negligible (and, in some cases, the more advanced technology may even be lighter) and ultimately won't make a difference in performance. This to me seems more of a case of older folk who don't understand modern technology looking for SOME kind of fault to write it off without sounding like an idiot

A Sync3 touchscreen radio does NOT weigh more than a sync1 "calculator screen" radio... they weigh the same, one is just simply better. Improved technology DOES NOT mean more weight. I promise you, that "rolling rock" Bronco startup sequence isn't going to drop your 0-60 time by a tenth

I agree the weight issue is probably closer to a wash than many would think. As for the prior example, my guess is the sunroof motor, support, and glass was the majority of the weight difference claimed.

I may or may not qualify as "older folk" (probably, though), but it isn't a confusion/understanding thing as I was in an extremely technical digital field for many years. The objections I have is technology strictly for technology's sake - someplace where it isn't necessary; or displays/systems that are too busy for a driver to instantly discern what he/she wants to adjust. My girlfriend's Explorer is a great example of that, the infotainment screen always seems to be on the wrong page when I need something. And the screen defaults to the "home" screen upon startup every time, not the one I last used or most frequently use. Just a minor annoyance, but technology should assist us, not annoy us.

Some complain about potential reliability issues, and there's no argument that introducing an electronic option and removing a manual option can introduce (more accurately, substitute) a failure point - but so far, in the automotive systems I've encountered, I've only experienced this once, and it was a non-critical component (memory seat adjustment stopped functioning). Yes, I do prefer a manual transfer case shifter - probably more for nostalgia's sake - but in all the 4x4s I've had since the first push-buttons came out, I can't say I've had an issue with any of them functioning. Early Broncos? I had all kinds of problems with floor shifters. I have had the auto function fail on manual hubs, but those had the option of manual actuation as well so when they failed, it was just a loss of convenience. To me, the latter was the best of both worlds: convenience, backed up with a manual fail mode.

Funny story: My son-in-law got a used Diesel Excursion, and they had the first big snowstorm of the season. He went out to dinner with his family and got the Excursion stuck (in a not-so-difficult spot), had to call and wait for a cab to get home at midnight. He called me in the morning to pull him out, explaining that the 4x4 "wasn't working". I met him on the street where he had to leave it (now plowed into a 3-ft snowbank), started it, engaged the 4x4 on the dash, and sure enough, although the button illuminated the "4x4" light, the front tires were definitely not helping out. I manually locked in the hubs, jumped back in and blasted through the snowbank. The look on his face was priceless - but not as good as the look on my daughter's face!

 

[JimmyDean]

I haven't weighed in much on this topic, I am not so much concerned with the tech itself, we will get most of it whether we want it or not.

I am just concerned that they do it right. no exposed wiring, wiring higher up in the frame. pot/seal electrical components for waterproofing. My 82 bronco, all of the ignition is marine equipment. I can swamp that vehicle up to about 5ft before I have to worry.

 

[BroncoMike]

I haven't weighed in much on this topic, I am not so much concerned with the tech itself, we will get most of it whether we want it or not.

I am just concerned that they do it right. no exposed wiring, wiring higher up in the frame. pot/seal electrical components for waterproofing. My 82 bronco, all of the ignition is marine equipment. I can swamp that vehicle up to about 5ft before I have to worry.

Nice. I am always amazed at the "danger zone" a lot of modern vehicles have the electronics at. Excursion, the Injector Drive Module is in front of the firewall (engine side) down low behind the inner fender - too low, in my opinion, and a real challenge to get to for diagnostics. At least put it up high under the dash, but preferably up really high like in an overhead console. If that sucker gets underwater, you're probably not "driving" anymore anyways.

Having done marine electronics/propulsion control installations, and those of the military variety, I can appreciate a (literally) bulletproof adverse environment setup. Most modern vehicles have fairly adequate environmental protection (moisture/chafing/vibration) for day-to-day commuting, but military/aviation/marine applications take it to a higher level.

 

[JimmyDean]

Nice. I am always amazed at the "danger zone" a lot of modern vehicles have the electronics at. Excursion, the Injector Drive Module is in front of the firewall (engine side) down low behind the inner fender - too low, in my opinion, and a real challenge to get to for diagnostics. At least put it up high under the dash, but preferably up really high like in an overhead console. If that sucker gets underwater, you're probably not "driving" anymore anyways.

Having done marine electronics/propulsion control installations, and those of the military variety, I can appreciate a (literally) bulletproof adverse environment setup. Most modern vehicles have fairly adequate environmental protection (moisture/chafing/vibration) for day-to-day commuting, but military/aviation/marine applications take it to a higher level.

certainly agree. And I don't see why it would be so difficult to do so on a primarily off road designed vehicle. You mount stuff up high, and you pot all the boards. A couple of feet of vent tubing would add what, $2 to a mass produced truck?

At least make no electronic boards lower than the dash, and shrink wrap all wire connections below that. Hell, I'd love to see a radio that is mounted top side since you can't pot that really (it would overheat).

Ideally, at least, for a factory vehicle, I would really prefer to see the fording depth be at least floorboard deep, if not knee deep.

 

[OX1]

*ADDED* accessories can add weight, but that's not what we're talking about here. we're more on the premise of something like an analog gauge cluster vs a digital gauge cluster... the weight difference is going to be negligible (and, in some cases, the more advanced technology may even be lighter) and ultimately won't make a difference in performance. This to me seems more of a case of older folk who don't understand modern technology looking for SOME kind of fault to write it off without sounding like an idiot

A Sync3 touchscreen radio does NOT weigh more than a sync1 "calculator screen" radio... they weigh the same, one is just simply better. Improved technology DOES NOT mean more weight. I promise you, that "rolling rock" Bronco startup sequence isn't going to drop your 0-60 time by a tenth

No, only you honed in on that with whatever definition you decided "tech" was. And if you do an honest assessment of this video,
you can see it is not "nothing". Electronic module is larger, appears metal cased (vs module under console appears plastic cased) with heat sinks.
Screen is certainly larger and also seems metal encased vs 4" screen that is clearly plastic cased, extra harness, extra USB outlet.



Of course it is not a huge weight increase, but adding that screen also adds
Audio System from Sony® with AM/FM stereo/single-CD player with MP3 capability, 12 speakers and HD Radio™ Technology,
so you could be 10-15 lbs just from that (and the upgraded stereo I would have gladly taken, even with touch screen, if I could have
found it without 10 other options that I didn't want to pay thousands for, for no reason). Of course you can order a car, but it is unlikely
you get 8-9 grand off sticker, like the later 2017 FS's were selling for in early 18, off the lot.

And weight placement matters. 50-100 lbs in the roof is a huge game change with moonroofs, sunroofs, or Panamaric's.
Even moving that plastic module from center console to metal module higher up behind radio is more that just the weight itself.
A lot of the other tech has sensors and wiring or other small parts of hardware. Again, they weren't the main components that add weight,
but they add some weight (and again cost thousands) for a lot of crap that is unneeded, if you just get off the friggin phone and pay attention
(or learn how to drive).

And just because you are young, possibly inexperienced, and/or just flat out incompetent, that you can't feel the difference in performance
200 lbs makes in a sports sedan, doesn't mean you should try to drag down those that can. The manufacturers go to great lengths to reduce
performance cars by less that that weight (except Ford is seems, with the GT500 coming in on the rediculously porky side),
with special editions that cost upwards of $10-20K more. All I had to do was not spend 6-7K$ on options and I got the "special" lightweight
edition for 20 grand less than Ford would have charged (if they even made a special lightweight edition of a FS).

To close, I would be much less worried about weight in a new bronco than things that are not going to be environmentally friendly to very
harsh conditions. IE, believe Wrangler can be had without power seats, which are not going to be happy with even mild swamping.
In a good bit of the country, mudding and deep water is all the offroad many places have, so swamping (at least up to or a bit over floorboards)
is still going to happen.

That doesn't mean I don't want PW, or ABS, or AC. I would just like to see as "base" a version as Ford thinks they can sell, that still allows
either a significant offroad package and/or upgraded motor, without having to go to the "titanium" first.

And one more thing.
New SUV Buyers by Age Group
Age 24 and younger less than 1%
Age 25 to 54 43%
Age 55 to 64 26%
Age 65 and up 31%
https://hedgescompany.com/blog/2019/01/new-car-buyer-demographics-2019/

That is because THEY (45-50+) have the money, so ignore their opinion at your own peril, Ford...........
(I can't believe 31% of new SUV's are being bought by people even I consider old, LOL!!)

 

[BroncoBuyer]

[

And one more thing.
New SUV Buyers by Age Group
Age 24 and younger less than 1%
Age 25 to 54 43%
Age 55 to 64 26%
Age 65 and up 31%
https://hedgescompany.com/blog/2019/01/new-car-buyer-demographics-2019/

That 25-54 spread better have the highest percentage, it’s pretty much including everybody who’s not a baby or an old person..
25-54 that’s 29 years!
I would expect it to be higher than 43%

hell the 55-64 group is only a 9 year spread and it has 26% percent! Soooooo, which group would have the stronger buyer base?

 

[Stampede.Offroad]

...
The other reason was it's almost 200 lbs lighter without sunroof, cooled seats, other added tech....
("we've" weighed a bunch on FS message board). I'd rather have even the minor bits
of extra performance and gas mileage, than the other stuff.

^^I'm HIGHLY doubtful of this. ...

*ADDED* accessories can add weight, but that's not what we're talking about here. we're more on the premise of something like an analog gauge cluster vs a digital gauge cluster......

Yes, that literally is what we're talking about. There is no "hand crank sunroof" for this option to weigh less than. The alternative is that it doesn't exist at all, and the sheetmetal and headliner weighs less.

You act like this is a conversation about "technophobes" but that is a purposely obtuse fallacy. Just as it was from the beginning. No one here is illogically afraid of technology -- there's a good chance some of us have been working and living with 'technology' longer than the peanut gallery has been alive.

I for one just don't want a bunch of extra **** that will add cost and increase the list of possible causes of the vehicle being disabled in remote locations. Even if they are not accident prone, they're not invulnerable either --- more parts = more points of failure.

Technophiles have been far more likely to ruin things by driving the cost of what could have been a simple device way up. The ability of extra stuff to actually provide more capability or satisfaction is usually overblown. That's why the next new shiny thing is always needed. "If the new model has more, it must be better -- I'll be happier if I get that one" --- is rarely true.

 

[Stampede.Offroad]

... Soooooo, which group would have the stronger buyer base?

It's right there in the article, and their sources, and common sense. Older people have more disposable income, and they buy more SUVs (43:57, under/over 55).

Just like the sports cars, the Bronco will most likely follow the Wrangler with the majority of buyers over 50. These nameplates are old, and the people buying them had aspirations of owning one as youth -- so now that they've sorted out most of the big purchases and expenditures in life they're indulging by buying something they remember fondly from the good old days.

The same reason the EBs are astronomically priced. It isn't hipsters buying and rebuilding them.

Sponsored