7,000 Miles and Loving Our Bronco

[jh3113]

Consider contacting the company Luno! They make custome air mattresses for vehicles and if they get enough demand they might make one for the Bronco that takes care of the lip in the back.

Sponsored

 

[ChrisD]

ChrisD
I’d love to see pics of your non-SAS Badlands with the 315s. Also, which level kit did you use? I’m looking to do the same with mine and it should be here in a few weeks!

Not to hijack the thread, but something like this - I went with +10mm offset wheels and the Zone Offroad leveling kit. Also the metal bushwacker fenders from Ford Accessories. The leveling kit needs an alignment afterwards, so I just had one of the local Ford dealerships install it and do the alignment in one swell foop. I'm at 12" of clearance at the lowest point now, which I'm pretty happy with.

 

[MayhemMike]

Referring to handling. Sasquatch is albsolutely "smoother" meaning bumps and pot holes are less noticeable with the larger tires. BUT (and this is a big but), the handling is more "floppy" as I said in my other reply on here. It is harder to turn the steering wheel at speed, more body roll, the tread blocks on the tires squish a bit so the steering response is slower, and you can tell the vehicle is more reluctant to change direction. But certainly, on a bumpy bit of road, the sas will be smoother. The biggest difference between the KO2s and the sas Wranglers is the tread compound and tread pattern. The KO2s are better for on-road manners while still maintaining the great off-road ability. The Wranglers are mud-terrain and it shows; more suited to off-road driving. I'm sure if your colleague took the KO2s and Wranglers on a perfectly smooth bit of interstate or state highway the KO2s would perform better - or maybe he/she did and our experiences differ!

Thanks

 

[BroncoPA65]

The K02's and the Sasquatch MT's weigh about the same. Wheels weigh about the same. Unsprung mass is about the same (maybe more in Badlands due to sway-bar disconnect). Rotational mass is slightly more in Sasquatch due to 1.6" increased tire diameter. I think it boils down to the tire diameter along with rolling resistance and aerodynamics of tires.
You are the first person I have heard that thought there was a big difference in the road manners between non Sasquatch Badlands and Sasquatch.
Do you think it's the taller squishy tire sidewalls? Should I stick with my 33" MT's vs the Sasquatch for my Badlands?
Night and day difference, really?

I have to say, after driving both SAS and non-SAS, you can feel a difference as explained, meaning that the feel of the road is more muffled but more bouncy/floppy because of the larger tires.

I'm getting the 33's, but they're both great in my view. Since I'm in the northeast, won't be the same trail riding as people in the west. I believe the 33's are the best of both worlds for what I'll be doing with it.

 

[GBlue]

Thank you.! That’s crazy ain’t it.!? I’ve put a deposit on a mannequin that was spec'd exactly to my liking, but I’ve been telling myself that the $2300 for leather could have been left off.! Now I’m glad it’s there.!

1150 per cup holder...not bad : )

 

[The_Phew]

The fact that you've averaged 20.7mpg is fairly impressive. That's about 12% better than I'd expect.

Unsurprisingly, most of Utah is about 12% lower density than sea level. Thinner air=less drag. That plus turbo engines actually get MORE efficient at higher altitude (up to a point), so that explains the OP's mileage.

 

[Mattwings]

Great report. I have a non SQ BL 4dr as well. 19.6 overall mileage, 5.5k miles. I love it and don’t find the interior sound a problem based on my past Jeep hard top. I do hope MIC2.0 doesn’t leak though that does seem to have resolved itself, along with the popping that was horrible the first month. I do have a little brake or hub squeak I will have the dealer check out when my new top comes in. Enjoy and hopefully more and more members get theirs soon (I could care less about rear cup holders, but I can see it being a problem if I was using mine for family trips).

 

[Defyfate11]

We have had our Bronco for about 2.5 months and have put 7,000 miles on it. It has been phenominal, on and off the road! We took it on the Hog's Back Jeep trail yesterday. This was the most extreme trail that we have taken the Bronco on so far. Not crazy extreme but it keeps you on your toes for sure. It's tight between the trees and would have probably gotten some pen-striping had we not installed PPF.

Some things to note. Major pros and cons remain about the same as they did from the beginning.

Pros

• Power and torque of the 2.7 is great!
• On-road handling.
• Off-road ability.
• Large screen and technology.
• Fuel economy has been surprising. At 7,000 miles, we are getting 20.6 mpg. This includes a little bit of towing and quite a bit of off-roading. Of course 20.6 mpg isn't great but it is better than we were expecting.

Cons

• We camp/sleep in the back and the 3" step is very frustrating.
• No heating/AC vents in the back.
• No cup holders in the back.
• Wind noise from the MIC top over 65 MPH. Hopefully MIC 2.0 will help.

Overall, we are loving it! As you can see, the cons are little things. There is nothing major that we don't like about our Bronco.

There have been no glitches or unexpected problems. One thing we did experience was a completely black screen one time after we started it. My wife Googled the problem and found out that it just needed to be re-booted by holding down the radio power and the fast-forward scan buttons for about 5 seconds. Worked great!

Hopefully you all will be getting yours soon and begin your Bronco adventures

I am interested in knowing what PPF brand you used, was it a full vehicle application, did you have ceramic applied afterwards, and what was the total price paid?

 

[jd-ford-hd]

1150 per cup holder...not bad : )

And don't forget the 2 or 3 water buffalo who sacrificed their lives for me to have 2 cup holders.!!

 

[sledboy]

I am interested in knowing what PPF brand you used, was it a full vehicle application, did you have ceramic applied afterwards, and what was the total price paid?

When we looked at pricing for full PPF, it was between $6,500 and $8,000. That price was just too high to justify. But we want to use our Bronco off-road without worrying about pen-striping from all the trees and brush. So we got the Xpel pre-cut kit. Cost us about $2,500 for all the pieces. We have installed all of them expect for the hood. We will probably finish that up some time this week.

I have mixed thoughts on whether or not it was worth it. It's not a quick and easy process. But it was that or nothing so we chose to try it ourselves.

 

[Blue's B6G]

Fuel economy has been surprising. At 7,000 miles, we are getting 20.6 mpg. This includes a little bit of towing and quite a bit of off-roading. Of course 20.6 mpg isn't great but it is better than we were expecting.

This isn’t realistic and no one should be expecting these numbers. OP is probably coasting to every stop light at 5 mph.

 

[Defyfate11]

When we looked at pricing for full PPF, it was between $6,500 and $8,000. That price was just too high to justify. But we want to use our Bronco off-road without worrying about pen-striping from all the trees and brush. So we got the Xpel pre-cut kit. Cost us about $2,500 for all the pieces. We have installed all of them expect for the hood. We will probably finish that up some time this week.

I have mixed thoughts on whether or not it was worth it. It's not a quick and easy process. But it was that or nothing so we chose to try it ourselves.

I am also going to do a full vehicle PPF install myself. I am planning on do a bulk install and will spend roughly $1,500 for the material. What advice can you give if you were to do it all over again? It appears to be very forgiving which is why I am even considering doing it myself as well.

 

[Rick Astley]

No. The marine grade vinyl does not. Only the leather has the fold down arm rests with cup holders.

Thank you.! That’s crazy ain’t it.!? I’ve put a deposit on a mannequin that was spec'd exactly to my liking, but I’ve been telling myself that the $2300 for leather could have been left off.! Now I’m glad it’s there.!

This opens up a TON of design space for vendors. Ranging from titanium to carbon fiber, they could be making mole-mounted or headrest mounted rear seat cupholders and charge $2,299 for them and you would save a bunch of cash over having to get leather.

Have to say, I would have never come to the decision that $2,300 was a valid price for cupholders, yet here we are in 2021 and it's happening!

The fact that this would even be necessary on a $50 some thousand dollar truck is ridiculous, but I was thinking about one of these for the rear seats…
Pilot Automotive Pilot 124809 Universal Truck Seat/Bench Contractor Center Console Business Organizer and Storage with Adjustable Cup Holders, Clip Board, and Padded Top Lid for Armrest, Black https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007KXJG6...abc_JAR394HAJS3GZF4Z70B1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

Sweet! Another opportunity to mention inflation because time exists!

Unlikely you would click a link with the ol' tired-and-untrue "$50K" or "$60K" as the foundation for the argument, but here you go.

https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/thre...rformance-size-price.11209/page-5#post-411513

And yes, Bronco MSRP today is just about the same today as it was in 1978, Soooo, assuming our personal feelings (of victimization) don't cloud the argument then if I may re-interpret what you're actually saying is:

"OMFG, Bronco has an amazing amount of content for the price!!!!"

I didn’t know there were adults that based their needs/wants on what other people think, let alone Europeans. Seems like that sort of person should be made fun of.

This is the most America-centric post of the entire week! Individualism at extreme levels is awesome! Just don't forget that using the system you advise above, you have to take all 320,000,000 Americans individual viewpoints as solid fact and basis for sound argument.

Wow, that system of extreme individuality breaks down pretty quickly when it applies to everyone.

So we did not see much change in mpg after the break-in period. It's been pretty consistent since we have had it. But here is more info about how we drive our Bronco.

We mostly use our Bronco for road trips to get to off-road trails. For the most part, we drive between 65 and 75 MPH. One thing we do that definitely helps keep our mpg a little higher is to only drive 75 on the freeway where the speed limit is 80 MPH. The one time I drove 80 MPH for 250 miles, it dropped our mileage by 2 mpg.

Here is an example of our current mileage. Yesterday evening, we drove the last leg of our latest trip. I reset the "Trip 1" meter during our last fill-up. Then we drove 117 miles home averaging 65 to 75 MPH. I just checked and the Trip 1 mileage reads 23.3 mpg.

FYI, I have only checked the accuracy of the Bronco's computer once. But there was only 1/10 mpg difference between what the Bronco said and what we calculated at the pump.

Obviously a different engine, but in our '19 Ranger (2.3/AT), we had zero change between break-in mileage and now that we're in the low teens. Others on Ranger5g reported the same at higher mileage than we have. Interesting characteristic of the engine not to see those expected changes.

I have to say, after driving both SAS and non-SAS, you can feel a difference as explained, meaning that the feel of the road is more muffled but more bouncy/floppy because of the larger tires.

I'm getting the 33's, but they're both great in my view. Since I'm in the northeast, won't be the same trail riding as people in the west. I believe the 33's are the best of both worlds for what I'll be doing with it.

Having finally had some seat time in a Wildrak last weekend, it was interesting to feel the difference compared to the Badlands with 33" tires as well. You're spot on with your assessment.

Note: I wasn't going squatch anyway, but it was interesting to experience the difference. Quite a change coming from a car wearing Pilot Super Sport 4s that I drove to the dealership on.

Unsurprisingly, most of Utah is about 12% lower density altitude than sea level. Thinner air=less drag. Turbo engines actually get MORE efficient at higher altitude (up to a point), so that explains the OP's mileage.

Very much this! Thanks for adding this fact to the thread.

Once the 4 and 4+ bar MAP sensors were widely available and the engine can re-tune for elevation and air density then small displacement turbocharged cars are really the cats meow.

 

[jd-ford-hd]

This opens up a TON of design space for vendors. Ranging from titanium to carbon fiber, they could be making mole-mounted or headrest mounted rear seat cupholders and charge $2,299 for them and you would save a bunch of cash over having to get leather.

Have to say, I would have never come to the decision that $2,300 was a valid price for cupholders, yet here we are in 2021 and it's happening!

For me the luxury of leather is way more important than cupholders. The last 5 new Fords I purchase were ordered with leather.! BUT, in the case of this purchase, namely a mannequin '21 Bronco, I had to take it or leave. Everything else on this jewel is perfect. Leather in a new Bronco means that when you and your Bronc' are nasty, you cannot go thru the automated car wash with the top removed like you could with the marine grade interior.!! (just kidding..!! LOL.!)

 

[stm378]

Sweet! Another opportunity to mention inflation because time exists!

Unlikely you would click a link with the ol' tired-and-untrue "$50K" or "$60K" as the foundation for the argument, but here you go.

https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/thre...rformance-size-price.11209/page-5#post-411513

And yes, Bronco MSRP today is just about the same today as it was in 1978, Soooo, assuming our personal feelings (of victimization) don't cloud the argument then if I may re-interpret what you're actually saying is:

"OMFG, Bronco has an amazing amount of content for the price!!!!"

I'm not saying that it doesn't , particularly when you're talking about a basesquatch, I don't feel victimized in the least....I'm not that guy. I understand that it's all about economics in the long run, and I don't debate that the Bronco is a good deal for what it is, the issue that I take with it is more with the fact that they tacked on the cupholders and tray table on leather so they know that it's a good addition, but they only put it on with leather as if people with cloth seats (or MGV seats) and have to pay in excess of $2,000 for the right to get rear cupholders. I've had plenty of cars in the past with cloth and leather seats and I can't recall one of them where if the model had some type of armrest in the back for one trim it had it all the way down to the cheapest one. It just feels like a really odd place to chose for cost cutting on their end.

I'm likely going MGV and just getting some type of solution like the one that I posted, so it's not that big of a deal to me.

Sponsored