e-Bronco - Thoughts?

[the paws]

To JDC. I don’t think you are up to speed on statistical analyses. Everything being equal, like quality of parts, the more parts there are, the higher probability of failure. It’s a pretty simple concept. Here’s a quote from Einstein: :The simplest design that works is the best design”. Statistically, if every part has a 1% probability of failure, a system of 10 parts the system has a 10.4 % chance of failure. [1.0-(.99^10)]. If you think about that, its amazing that cars last as long as they do. A car has over 30,000 parts. That means for only one failure per 100 cars, each part has to be 99.9999665 percent perfect. BTW, the highest milage car still running has over 3 million miles on it. Its a pretty simple car.

Sponsored

 

[Oneand0]

If gas price doubles, I’m all in.

 

[GiddyUpThatPony]

BTW, the more complicated a machine is the less reliable it is. I’d take a 4 liter aluminum short stroke V8 way before a twin turbo v6. I don’t know of one NA V8 that blew a $2500 turbo.

You’re absolutely right. I’ve never ever heard of a naturally aspirated V8 blowing a turbo. Ever.

 

[BroncoDude]

EV Bronco? No thanks.

 

[Jdc]

To JDC. I don’t think you are up to speed on statistical analyses. Everything being equal, like quality of parts, the more parts there are, the higher probability of failure. It’s a pretty simple concept. Here’s a quote from Einstein: :The simplest design that works is the best design”. Statistically, if every part has a 1% probability of failure, a system of 10 parts the system has a 10.4 % chance of failure. [1.0-(.99^10)]. If you think about that, its amazing that cars last as long as they do. A car has over 30,000 parts. That means for only one failure per 100 cars, each part has to be 99.9999665 percent perfect. BTW, the highest milage car still running has over 3 million miles on it. Its a pretty simple car.

1. I'm certainly familiar with statistics and MTBF. Things don't have just a 1% chance of failure. It would have a 1% chance of failure over a given time span. Not all parts will wear at the same rate and therefore have different lifespans.
2. In terms of reliability as I mentioned earlier, the metric you'd actually want to focus on is quality and more specifically what percentage of defective parts escape manufacturing.
3. There's no evidence Einstein ever said "The simplest design that works is the best design”, though the phrase "Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler" is usually attributed to Einstein. I'm also pretty sure he was talking about science and not engineering. Simple doesn't equal efficient. As an example, one of the first problems computer science students learn to solve is sorting numbers and almost all of them come up with the same simple solution. It's terribly inefficient and they learn more complicated but much much faster and efficient ways of doing the same thing.

Finally, it's ironic that you mention statistical analyses but finish with an anecdote.

 

[JoeSpeed]

 

[Jdyount]

Hybrid makes a TON of sense, and I would absolutely consider it.

All-electric doesn't make sense at all—at least not right now. The Bronco is an off-road vehicle, designed to be able to go out into the wilderness. With a hybrid or gasoline engine, you can effectively increase the range by carrying more fuel with you. If you run out of fuel, you can ride into town with a buddy, get more fuel, and refuel your Bronco.

This isn't to say an all-electric will never work. But we need improvements in either charging technology to allow for charging off the grid, or in electric storage so we can bring extra "jerry cans" of electricity before it will be viable.

There is more to off-roading than just overlanding.

I have been waiting for an electric off-road vehicle to completely disrupt the market for years. Just think how good rock crawling could be without a drivetrain. 4-wheel independent motors with portal gearboxes. No axle to get high centered, no driveshaft to beat-up on the rocks, no cv-shafts or u-joints, no gear shifting....

Instant torque. Independent wheel speed control. 4-wheel steer. Regenerative braking for downhill. Think of what kinda of crazy electronic-controlled suspension you can have without a drivetrain to connect to.

It will completely change off-road vehicle capabilities. Completely.

They could design something like an off-road trailer with 35's, an extra battery module, and a tent on top for the overlanders.

 

[CashOfLegend]

Broncos have the aerodynamics of a brick, and being they are off-roaders I don’t really seeing them being a good candidate for mass EV applications. A Hybrid however could be very exciting. Especially for the low speed stuff. Furthermore Jeep has proven the application with the 4XE.

 

[CashOfLegend]

There is more to off-roading than just overlanding.

I have been waiting for an electric off-road vehicle to completely disrupt the market for years. Just think how good rock crawling could be without a drivetrain. 4-wheel independent motors with portal gearboxes. No axle to get high centered, no driveshaft to beat-up on the rocks, no cv-shafts or u-joints, no gear shifting....

Instant torque. Independent wheel speed control. 4-wheel steer. Regenerative braking for downhill. Think of what kinda of crazy electronic-controlled suspension you can have without a drivetrain to connect to.

It will completely change off-road vehicle capabilities. Completely.

They could design something like an off-road trailer with 35's, an extra battery module, and a tent on top for the overlanders.

So you want a Rivian…

 

[mattymik]

So you want a Rivian…

I kinda do!

Why not both.gif

 

[CashOfLegend]

I kinda do!

Why not both.gif

i kind of do too!

I think SUV makes more sense than the pickup. The auto cover alone makes me not want the truck. Have you seen what loading a motorcycle does to them? No more worky!!!

 

[Jdyount]

So you want a Rivian…

Rivian was my backup for a Bronco (and if I won the lottery). The problem with the Rivian, or the Cyber Truck, which may or may not launch in my lifetime (and I'm only 37), is that they're designed as trucks first. Towing capacity, bed,..... An EV Bronco should be spec'ed to CRUSH the current off-road market. It would have an off-road oriented suspension and features. You're probably never going to see 37's on a Rivian.

 

[Jdyount]

Broncos have the aerodynamics of a brick, and being they are off-roaders I don’t really seeing them being a good candidate for mass EV applications. A Hybrid however could be very exciting. Especially for the low speed stuff. Furthermore Jeep has proven the application with the 4XE.

Eh, a hybrid Bronco doesn't excite me at all. Sure you're going to get better milage but it's just another reason to squeeze another $20k out of you and with no real benefit to off-roading.

I'd much rather see a factory package with 37's that doesn't have to say "Raptor" on it (aka "pay an extra $15k plus pay your dealer an extra $50k ADM")...

 

[RAKET]

I’m mixed on this. With the level these vehicles are computerized I’m in the camp of looking for a 60’s-70’s Bronco. I can’t be the only one concerned about how automated these vehicles are… right?

 

[CashOfLegend]

Rivian was my backup for a Bronco (and if I won the lottery). The problem with the Rivian, or the Cyber Truck, which may or may not launch in my lifetime (and I'm only 37), is that they're designed as trucks first. Towing capacity, bed,..... An EV Bronco should be spec'ed to CRUSH the current off-road market. It would have an off-road oriented suspension and features. You're probably never going to see 37's on a Rivian.

given there is no center differential to get over a set of 33”s would have similar clearance to a set of 37”s on a normal vehicle. The Rivian already has 34” stock. Not sure what the 37”s would give you.

Sponsored