Bronco R Race Prototype Revealed for Baja 1000!

[Toyhoarder]

I would rather have TTB than SLA IFS. Cheap, easy travel and basically a solid axle with an extra U-Joint.

Yeah but you probably don’t drive with a latte in one hand and your cell phone in the other. No way my fellow millennials could handle a TTB on the street.

Sponsored

 

[TeocaliMG]

Where are the videos of Ford sponsoring a Rubicon trip?

Coming. Last time they sold/made the Bronco YouTube didn't even exist. Al Gore had only just invented the internet

 

[68fbjjz109]

I’m still not seeing how the second one leads to a higher ride yet. It only looks that way when the arm is at full droop. No mention of changing the frame rails or engine packaging either.

And the first one has absolutely no relation to TTB. The arms don’t cross. No radius arms. No floating diff. None or very little camber change throughout the suspension cycle. Other than the extra weight of the wider arms and axles I don’t see a significant difference in unsprung weight either.

Sorry I was looking at their unique cross car axle power deliver method in example 1, made me think of the TTB arms. But that extra 400+mm of control arm length is extra material, and it's extra mass, and alot of it likely close to twice the length of the current T6 control arms, which weight close to 42lbs a side as is. The long arms increase travel which is nice, but increase weight significantly as well.

For example 2 the UCA mounting point is mid way within the Wranglers frame, the T6 platform mounts their UCA near the top of the shocktower, pushing your upper pick up point that far down drives everything down because you need the front differential to clear the frame, UCA and such. From the UCA pickup to the stamped circular piercing within the T6 frame is like 250mm or 10". That means your UCA, knuckle, and LCA are all moving roughly that distance, as the axles location within the knuckle is likely and assumed in this adhoc discussion to stay in place. Resulting in a significant increase to vehicle height unless you can get the powertrain move reward a foot or so.

 

[TeocaliMG]

Yeah but you probably don’t drive with a latte in one hand and your cell phone in the other. No way my fellow millennials could handle a TTB on the street.

Just finished a 5000 mile road trip in my 87 with TTB. Rode great! I am however regretfully a millennial. I also drove it without a rear drive shaft before, that was a bit more sketchy

 

[Nickp]

I don't see how being high centered has anything to do at all with what kind of suspension or axles a vehicle has. Nice straw man argument though.

My point is there is a lot more to a good off road vehicle than just whether it has an IFS or stick axle.

 

[Toyhoarder]

Sorry I was looking at their unique cross car axle power deliver method in example 1, made me think of the TTB arms. But that extra 400+mm of material is mass, and alot of it likely close to twice the length of the current T6 control arms, which weight close to 42lbs a side as is. The long arms increase travel which is nice, but increase weight significantly as well.

For example 2 the UCA mounting point is mid way within the Wranglers frame, the T6 platform mounts their UCA near the top of the shocktower, pushing your upper pick up point that far down drives everything down because you need the front differential to clear the frame, UCA and such. From the UCA pickup to the stamped circular piercing within the T6 frame is like 250mm or 10". That means your UCA, knuckle, and LCA are all moving roughly that distance, as the axles location within the knuckle is likely and assumed in this adhoc discussion to stay in place. Resulting in a significant increase to vehicle height unless you can get the powertrain move reward a foot or so.

That is the old T6 frame. No reason it couldn’t be modified with the platform redesign. Obviously some aftermarket company can pull it off with a frame that they had no input on. Why couldn’t Ford make it happen with a clean sheet redesign?

 

[PNW_Bronco94]

PNW, you read a bit more into that statement there than what I was saying. that was about the simple fact that they are stronger. Not better, just stronger. There are plenty of viable reasons to want IFS besides just road manners.
(had to edit, starting confuse myself now....long day at work)

I get it, man. And I wasn't trying to call you out specifically. It just seems like every thread is getting cluttered with dudes trying to flex their knowledge and argue about SFA vs. IFS. Like I said, there's pros and cons to each, and it's a pointless, never-ending argument, like Ford vs. Chevy (actually, that one's easy!).

 

[Jalisurr]

Just to throw some gasoline on the fire, here's a quick interview with two time King of the Hammers Champion Erik Miller

Cool video, thanks for sharing. KOH is very interesting for sure - the mix of high speed and rock sections really does highlight that there are advantages and disadvantages of both setups, and obviously both can be made to work in either scenario or one would be dominating rather than there being a give and take between them. He mentioned in that video, the general trend has been towards A-Arms recently, but he personally prefers solid axle.

 

[68fbjjz109]

That is the old T6 frame. No reason it couldn’t be modified with the platform redesign. Obviously some aftermarket company can pull it off with a frame that they had no input on. Why couldn’t Ford make it happen with a clean sheet redesign?

Nearly identical suspension strategies, and very similar stampings.

Could it be adapted? Yea sure, you can do anything if you throw money at it.

But the simply fact is you are talking about a whole new vehicle architecture, then you can't build it the same way you do a Ranger when it comes down Michigan assembly. Variation is bad for build quality, complexity cost money.

The only way the Bronco business case works is to be smart about major capital investments, especially since its not just a rebadged Troller, it's a major top hat. I would put money that the reason we haven't seen a Ranger Raptor in North America yet is because it is help serving in some capacity to help validate the Bronco aswell. That chassis will give it a unique place in the market, meet all internal requirements, and still offroad well.

 

[HTX1811]

Maybe I trade the hellcat in for a bronco when it finally comes out. Forgo the GT500.

 

[Idahorocks]

I have nothing to contribute on the front suspension. Just playing around with the Bronco R pictures this evening.

 

[Jake_zx2]

Man, I REALLY hope it doesn’t have completely round headlights... they just make it look so goofy

Also, you forgot the stepped window line down the side

 

[Carolina Jim]

Just playing around with the Bronco R pictures this evening.

Tom...you should change your screen name to "Leonardo". Particularly the bottom image...amazing!

 

[BroncoBill]

I have nothing to contribute on the front suspension. Just playing around with the Bronco R pictures this evening.

That final picture is beautiful

Sponsored