Build & Price Update from Ford – Q&A with Bronco Brand Manager

[dgorsett]

I watched the video a couple days ago and read the transcript today. Funny, the video is a total cluster, but the transcript sounds reasonable. Still not necessarily the answers I want to hear, but reasonable.

Sponsored

 

[jaruss01]

My take/estimations - Ford needs to cap GVWR at 6000 to stay in the class.

if a 2.7L 4 dr loaded OBX is say 5,000 lbs wet, and a 2.7L 4 dr loaded BL is say 5,200 lbs wet, that leaves you with a 1000 lb payload vs 800 lb.

if you do some digging on how you typically calc payload and ran the math...for a family of four, with a full cargo hold on a road trip... let’s say 200 lb dad, 150 lb mom, and two 100 lb teenagers (give or take smaller kids or add dog) plus 50 lb luggage each, 100 lb misc. that’s 850 lbs. add loaded cargo box at 150 lbs for kids random stuff (I know max cargo box weight is capped off slightly lower per ford, but forget) and you’re at 1,000 lb total payload.

looking at SUVs most safely exceed payload of 1,000 lbs falling around 1,300-1,500 lbs.

So if I’m thinking about this right, and the roof rack is the biggest tell on what Ford wants you to strap on the roof, the OBX 2.7 does allow for the rack, and the BL 2.7 does not. That seems to be about the difference of the added weight of a loaded cargo box. And roughly the difference of 800 vs 1000 lb payload.

What’s most telling is the wildtrak and FE which are preconfigured with all that weight, don’t even have the option of choosing a rack. It’s simply not there!! Why? Because it’s not like optioning up the car would trigger the rails being locked out. The car is heavy enough it’s in stock trim that Ford just removed the option of the rack all together.

So if you plan on occasionally using this like an explorer for family road trips, the badlands 2.7 may not be the trim for you. Nor is any trim configured with 2.7 and sas.

sure, the GVWR is an arbitrary number, but if we do find out that we can’t add 1,000 payload to a 2.7 BL I can’t bring myself to get that trim just based on my families safety. If you google other guys asking if it’s okay to exceed GVWR the responses are not very comforting. Could it handle more? Probably. Is Ford capping GVWR to compete with wrangler? Probably. But to strap my family into a tall roofless truck with 1,000 lbs of stuff for a long trip and go against the numbers is not something I’d be comfortable doing.

before you bash me and say well go get an explorer then! Fine. But all Im saying is if you want this truck to serve double duty, for off roading or over landing plus family trips, we may find out we need to be more selective over our build. This could rule out the 2.7 sas 4 dr and potentially the 2.7 BL 4 dr. There’s a reason Ford says there’s a trim for everyone but it sounds like we should be prepared to find out a more extreme build with bigger tires and a lift won’t have enough payload to serve double duty.

That’s my take. So until we know the GVWR numbers I can’t bring myself to getting the BL. I’d rather have the peace of mind on a different build/trim where I pick up more payload.

but let’s allow the numbers to be released and do the talking...

Following up on my post above. I found a payload figure at the far bottom of the prelim specs! But I don’t know what trim it applies to.

here are prelim published facts - 4 dr

max payload - 1,370 lbs

2.3 manual curb weight - 4499 lbs
Lightest 2.7L - 4661 lbs
Heaviest 2.7L - 5320 lbs

Knowing GVWR needs to be under 6,000 (FYI the wrangler is 5,500 with the rubicon at 5,800), then...

If max payload is applied to the lightest curb weight (4499+1370) the GVWR is 5,869. Carrying the over to other trims, it equates to 1,208 payload for the lightest 2.7L and 549 payload for the heaviest 2.7L. The GVWR feels right but the payload on the heaviest 2.7 is just too low to be supportable.

Or, if max payload is applied to lightest 2.7L, 4661 + 1370 = 6031 GVWR. Meaning the heaviest 2.7L has a 711 payload. So that feels more correct (as it’s starting to get really limiting when you get into a 2.7 BL or sas), however it’s technically greater than 6,000 threshold, so who knows.

For all we know the non sas have a GVWR under 6,000 and they find a way for a separate vehicle class for the Sasquatch versions where GVWR exceeds 6,000.

No way to determine, but thought I’d throw this out there

 

[grtskydog]

Meh.
There's an old saying in aviation that probably a few here have heard before: "Never fly the A model." We should all be aware of and accept the risks involved in doing so...or cancel your order and wait a year or two. No wrong answer IMO. BTW, anyone hear any regrets from the ground-floor Ranger owners? I haven't done the research honestly.

I'm not too worried really, but then I'm just getting a Base and doing everything aftermarket myself (5K+ to upgrade wheels/tires? ? ). I WAS doing the 2.7L until the bait n switch "errors" in B&P with the A10. Oh well, I can live with the HP/TQ of the 2.3L...hell it's like having an old GT40 5.0L. Plenty for me! I'm just counting on the aftermarket to jump in as soon as these things start hitting the road. As long as Ford builds me a good foundation to work with, I think I'll enjoy owning one. It looks to be up to the task of driving on the beach, and occasionally towing 2500 lbs of boat and trailer. The other 90% will be hardcore asphalt just like almost everyone else.

 

[t3n2and4]

I am confused by one statement regarding the carpet on the back of the seats. It then says that teh sport has a rubberized rear cargo area. Does this mean that the regular bronco cargo area is carpet I thought pictures i saw it was also rubberized?

It’s a layer of rubber mats clipped *over* the carpet. There’s still carpet on the BS seatback, under that rubber. The wincing and dancing around it in the video indicates to me they didn’t have that accessory figured out for Bronco when it went in for some calculations and so they will probably miss their internal deadlines for the first MY with it, meaning no go to us. It also felt like a ‘sore spot’ in internal wrangling. He made the same face I do when people ask me about a certain bolt on my current project. What could have been if ...

 

[broncoj11]

At this point, why doesn’t Ford just delay delivery/production until everything is figured out.........all Broncos should be 2022 MY and it’ll probably end up that way anyway. How embarrassing

 

[Carolina Jim]

why doesn’t Ford just delay delivery/production until everything is figured out

Multiple Choice:

A Cash Flow
B Cash Flow
C Cash Flow
D All the Above

 

[MotoCeptorMan]

Best thing on the sport I saw in person.

How did Ford get this so wrong? This should be in the topless Bronco and the carpeted seat backs/cargo area should be in the Sport. What is the "true" story Ford? It's not to protect doors in bags or to preserve the weight budget. And if Ford wants to point to crash-safety, should I feel safe riding in a Sport? How about just coming clean and telling us the truth.

 

[Carolina Jim]

How did Ford get this so wrong? This should be in the topless Bronco and the carpeted seat backs/cargo area should be in the Sport. What is the "true" story Ford? It's not to protect doors in bags or to preserve the weight budget. And if Ford wants to point to crash-safety, should I feel safe riding in a Sport? How about just coming clean and telling us the truth.

Ford is doing the best they can do with the people they have. Which is sad.

 

[broncoj11]

Ford is doing the best they can do with the people they have. Which is sad.

Then they should hire some of us lol.

 

[t3n2and4]

How did Ford get this so wrong? This should be in the topless Bronco and the carpeted seat backs/cargo area should be in the Sport. What is the "true" story Ford? It's not to protect doors in bags or to preserve the weight budget. And if Ford wants to point to crash-safety, should I feel safe riding in a Sport? How about just coming clean and telling us the truth.

Look close. There’s carpet *UNDER* that rubber.

 

[MotoCeptorMan]

If Ford is unable to swap the Bronco rear seat carpet with a rubberized backing in the next couple of months, hoping some Buckaroo entrepreneur will come up with an aftermarket solution.

I'll also be looking for that as well. And if drainage is an issue in the cargo area, maybe add a bilge pump?

 

[toystwo]

6000 # and over is considered by the IRS to be Heavy equipment and has over time been given very generous business tax deductions. Some manufacturers have run into trouble labeling vehicles 6000 #'s when they were not. Thinking Ford maybe trying to stay clear of this.

What manufactures rated a vehicle as able to carry more weight (higher GVWR) than the vehicle was cable of carrying?

 

[Bronc-O]

Yeah, I guess they are “following people around” in a way, as several other manufacturers abandoned paper manuals first to no detriment. There is also plenty of survey based research info that says people don’t read them. So yes, that is a very simple thing to know....not sure how that relates to supply issues though.

I think someone must of had a bad holiday judging how triggered they've been.

 

[MotoCeptorMan]

At this point, why doesn’t Ford just delay delivery/production until everything is figured out.........all Broncos should be 2022 MY and it’ll probably end up that way anyway. How embarrassing

Shareholders. Ford is a business and needs a return on investment. Without this, there is no Ford in our lives. This doesn't make me feel any better about some of the initial design issues, but they need to start cranking these things out to recover their initial investment and start earning a profit. The Bronco will improve as a result of enthusiasts' bitching/initial purchases along with Ford's fine tuning of an automobile with great potential. Bronco's future looks pretty bright?

 

[MotoCeptorMan]

Look close. There’s carpet *UNDER* that rubber.

That won't work either. Hopefully, they'll get this fixed by MY22.

Sponsored