First impressions of Manual Bronco Badlands & Black Diamond Sasquatch in person. Pleasantly surprised, with couple concerns

[markregel]

Don't you have to remove the bumper and headlight to change a headlight bulb in that generation of 6?

Mazda was not making excellent cars in your generation. Sure some stuff was easy to reach on the engine, but that's because it failed so frequently. (Full disclosure: I had an '07 Mazdaspeed3 and currently own an '18 Mazda6 GT-R)

The last of the "Buy a new RX-8, get TWO free engines before it's out of warranty" was going on at Mazda back then as well. A buddy was their service manager and I couldn't swing by for service in the MS3 without seeing at least two RX-8's in for new engines. They ordered them from J. A. pan a half dozen at a time to cut down on wait times for customers.

I guess you could argue that because the engine bay was so well organized in the RX-8, engine removal times were some of the lowest in the industry... It does say something for the quality of the unit, however.

The RX8 did have issues attributed to the challenges of meeting emissions and MPG with the rotary engine. My 2012 Mazda6 aside from air bag recalls like everything else has not has any issues, none. Very happy with it l don't regret getting it over Camry l cross shopped. You do know this generation of Mazda6 is basically a Ford Fusion right? In fact, the Bronco 2.3L is a turbocharged version of the same engine. I hope your right and the Bronco turns out to be a reliable car. I was so excited about everything else then saw the engine pics and it's like OMG WTF is that? I just checked out some pics of the Ranger engine bay and it looks much better. What's up with that? The Bronco is the one vehicle Ford needs to get right. This is probably why Ford didn't let reviewers see under the hood? Okay l need to stop fuming it is what it is.

Sponsored

 

[Rick Astley]

The RX8 did have issues attributed to the challenges of meeting emissions and MPG with the rotary engine. My 2012 Mazda6 aside from air bag recalls like everything else has not has any issues, none. Very happy with it l don't regret getting it over Camry l cross shopped. You do know this generation of Mazda6 is basically a Ford Fusion right? In fact, the Bronco 2.3L is a turbocharged version of the same engine. I hope your right and the Bronco turns out to be a reliable car. I was so excited about everything else then saw the engine pics and it's like OMG WTF is that? I just checked out some pics of the Ranger engine bay and it looks much better. What's up with that? The Bronco is the one vehicle Ford needs to get right. This is probably why Ford didn't let reviewers see under the hood? Okay l need to stop fuming it is what it is.

There are about 50 different cars over the years that have had the Ford 2.3 which I didn't know about (or care, for the most part). But you're going to have to go back.

Wayyyyyyy back into time.....

To get your LL23 Ford 2.3 engine references accurate... '74 was before my time, and in the "dark decades" of American automobiles that I won't own (anything from 1964 through 2014), so I can't comment on how the engine has evolved to where it is today, but we can appreciate the long journey that little guy has taken to get us where we are today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto_engine

BTW: You didn't answer the question....... What do you have to remove to replace a headlight or turn signal bulb in your Mazda6?

You're going to want to say "nothing" to make a valid argument against the Bronco, but i'm guessing you're going to have to say "shop time is 1.3 hours for R&R".

 

[RPF]

markergel is correct, the 2.3 Ecoboost is a derivative of the Mazda L series engine. It had nothing to do with the "Pinto 4" other than it has 4-cylinders, a 2.3L displacement and it was built by Ford. The Pinto 4/OHC/LL25 was last used by Ford in the 2001 Ranger at 2.5L before being replaced with the Mazda L derived Duratec at 2.3L.

 

[B Wants A Bronco]

Thanks for the info i go next week here in ca. First thing im going to check is the footwell box,pedal room im getting a manual and thats important to me.
That softtop looks like a shitshow.

In San Diego they were only letting people sit in the Bronco with the auto. Once I did that, I asked if I could sit in the one with the manual and they said sure. Totally worth it, made my whole trip to see the Bronco. My point is, if they have a manual at your event but they are telling everyone to sit in the other one, ask to sit in the manual one.

 

[markregel]

There are about 50 different cars over the years that have had the Ford 2.3 which I didn't know about (or care, for the most part). But you're going to have to go back.

Wayyyyyyy back into time.....

To get your LL23 Ford 2.3 engine references accurate... '74 was before my time, and in the "dark decades" of American automobiles that I won't own (anything from 1964 through 2014), so I can't comment on how the engine has evolved to where it is today, but we can appreciate the long journey that little guy has taken to get us where we are today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto_engine

BTW: You didn't answer the question....... What do you have to remove to replace a headlight or turn signal bulb in your Mazda6?

You're going to want to say "nothing" to make a valid argument against the Bronco, but i'm guessing you're going to have to say "shop time is 1.3 hours for R&R".

Firstly going all the way back to 1964 as the dark days of the American automobile is crazy! I was reading a 1967 edition of Popular Mechanics a few months ago and there were reviews and ads for cars like GTO and Mustang. There was also an ad for a MG FWD sedan that looks like a YUGO. I chuckled to myself seeing that piece of crap next to what are now legendary (American) cars. I had a 1964 Impala 2-door, was my Grandmothers car and also a 1967 Plymouth, great cars. If only I had that Impala today! Advance to the mid seventies and your in the dark decade of American cars. The Ford 2.3L of today have nothing to do with engines of the seventies or the Pinto as far as I know. The modern Ford 2.3L traces its lineage to the Mazda L engine. The Pinto engine was of eurpoean origin. So you could say that the dark decade started with imports from Europe. Anyway -- for your question! I did see in the manual that changing one of the bulbs requires removal of the fender. That is only the high beam projector lamp and will probably never need replacing. The low beam can be easily replaced. I agree that is not good design, but overall its been a great car. **** Now the important Bronco related stuff. I searched for photos of the Toyota Tacoma engine bay and crap without the cover it looks just as bad!! We all know how highly regarded Tacoma is, I stand corrected. Can't judge the engine based on a klugey looking engine bay. I do think they did a better job with the Ranger -- maybe because they are keeping things higher on Bronco for water fording?

 

[flatlander40]

Are we saying that a busy and crammed engine bay equates to unreliability? Is there data that the more hoses an engine has leads break downs? Or is the problem that it’s ugly? Lol

 

[Lakelife36]

'74 was before my time, and in the "dark decades" of American automobiles that I won't own (anything from 1964 through 2014)

Those are awfully specific numbers to not have an awfully specific backstory for...

 

[swooshdave]

Those are awfully specific numbers to not have an awfully specific backstory for...

I agree. A lot to unpack with those years as not much comes to mind. I mean I’d get it if someone said the pre-smog days but there were a heck of a lot of nice cars post-1964. Sure it was pretty bleak in the 70-80s but why 2014?

 

[Efthreeoh]

There are about 50 different cars over the years that have had the Ford 2.3 which I didn't know about (or care, for the most part). But you're going to have to go back.

Wayyyyyyy back into time.....

To get your LL23 Ford 2.3 engine references accurate... '74 was before my time, and in the "dark decades" of American automobiles that I won't own (anything from 1964 through 2014), so I can't comment on how the engine has evolved to where it is today, but we can appreciate the long journey that little guy has taken to get us where we are today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto_engine

BTW: You didn't answer the question....... What do you have to remove to replace a headlight or turn signal bulb in your Mazda6?

You're going to want to say "nothing" to make a valid argument against the Bronco, but i'm guessing you're going to have to say "shop time is 1.3 hours for R&R".

The Bronco 2.3L is not based on the Ford Lima 2.3L. I'm not sure if that is what you are saying.

 

[Efthreeoh]

Firstly going all the way back to 1964 as the dark days of the American automobile is crazy! I was reading a 1967 edition of Popular Mechanics a few months ago and there were reviews and ads for cars like GTO and Mustang. There was also an ad for a MG FWD sedan that looks like a YUGO. I chuckled to myself seeing that piece of crap next to what are now legendary (American) cars. I had a 1964 Impala 2-door, was my Grandmothers car and also a 1967 Plymouth, great cars. If only I had that Impala today! Advance to the mid seventies and your in the dark decade of American cars. The Ford 2.3L of today have nothing to do with engines of the seventies or the Pinto as far as I know. The modern Ford 2.3L traces its lineage to the Mazda L engine. The Pinto engine was of eurpoean origin. So you could say that the dark decade started with imports from Europe. Anyway -- for your question! I did see in the manual that changing one of the bulbs requires removal of the fender. That is only the high beam projector lamp and will probably never need replacing. The low beam can be easily replaced. I agree that is not good design, but overall its been a great car. **** Now the important Bronco related stuff. I searched for photos of the Toyota Tacoma engine bay and crap without the cover it looks just as bad!! We all know how highly regarded Tacoma is, I stand corrected. Can't judge the engine based on a klugey looking engine bay. I do think they did a better job with the Ranger -- maybe because they are keeping things higher on Bronco for water fording?

I'm an old dude and a Ford guy from way back. I've had 4 Pintos, three had the TL 2.0L "Pinto" engine and one had the "Kent" 1.6L. My mother had 2 Mustangs, a '78 with the 2.3L Lima engine and a 1985 convertible with the Lima 2.3L. I'm very familiar with both the 2.0 and 2.3. As I remember it, there wasn't much similarity between the 2.0L from Germany and the 2.3L from Ohio. I don't even think the engine blocks were the same. The 2.3L was a noisy mess full NVH as compared to the 2.0L "Pinto" engine.

And neither are comparable or remotely related to a modern 2.3L Ecoboost.

 

[markregel]

I'm an old dude and a Ford guy from way back. I've had 4 Pintos, three had the TL 2.0L "Pinto" engine and one had the "Kent" 1.6L. My mother had 2 Mustangs, a '78 with the 2.3L Lima engine and a 1985 convertible with the Lima 2.3L. I'm very familiar with both the 2.0 and 2.3. As I remember it, there wasn't much similarity between the 2.0L from Germany and the 2.3L from Ohio. I don't even think the engine blocks were the same. The 2.3L was a noisy mess full NVH as compared to the 2.0L "Pinto" engine.

And neither are comparable or remotely related to a modern 2.3L Ecoboost.

Thanks for this info. I'm pretty sure the ecoboost 2.0 and 2.3 are derived from the Mazda L. The 2.3 LIMA is derived from the German 2.0 Pinto. l had one in a 2001 Ranger. All 4 cylinders of this era had NVH issues. It was an iron block SOHC design. In the Ranger it had 8 spark plugs and no distributor. This was a very reliable engine. For that reason l would choose it over the 3.0 and 4.0 V6 in that generation Ranger.

 

[Efthreeoh]

Thanks for this info. I'm pretty sure the ecoboost 2.0 and 2.3 are derived from the Mazda L. The 2.3 LIMA is derived from the German 2.0 Pinto. l had one in a 2001 Ranger. All 4 cylinders of this era had NVH issues. It was an iron block SOHC design. In the Ranger it had 8 spark plugs and no distributor. This was a very reliable engine. For that reason l would choose it over the 3.0 and 4.0 V6 in that generation Ranger.

I know wikedpedia says the 2.3 came from the 2.0L, but the engines are so different in operation. It might be my memory is of a nearly emission-free equipped 2.0L and a mid '70s emissioned-up 2.3L Lima. The 2.0L was noisy for sure, but it sounded good; the Lima, no so much.

I remember the Ranger 2.3L well, and my experience with the Lima in Mom's Mustangs led me to get the 2.9 V6 in my '87 STX.

 

[71to21-2DR]

Made it to Beach Ford in Virginia Beach to see the Bronco in person for the first time. They had a 4 dr Black Diamond SAS in Antimatter Blue and a 4 dr Badlands in Iconic Silver.

Just walking up to the Bronco for the first time after spending countless hours watching youtube and social media, and constantly reading through this forum. All the hype about this vehicle is real. It 100% lives up to it's reviews in my opinion. It seemed perfectly proportioned and not overwhelming at all. The seats were very comfortable in the front and back. The 12 in screen is enormous. If you are a not a tech person, the 8in seems more than enough in my opinion. We ordered an auto but I did run through the gears on the manual and the length of throw is spot on. I was expecting very long throws but it almost feels like a sports car. It will not feel like a chore to change gears at all for an off road rig. I think what I was most impressed with was the doors. Not having a full frame door makes the whole feel of the vehicle way more open. Easier to take on and off with one person as well. Watched the Bronco nation reps putting the doors back on with the bag still on did not look very difficult.

My big concern was seeing if the Bronco SAS was going to be to big for my gf to daily drive. Great news! it's not at all. The height of the SAS felt lower and easier to get into than my 2013 f150 with a 2in lift and 34.5's. Her opinion of the 35's was that it was just right. She said any bigger would be to much for her, but she liked the SAS much more than the 33's on the badlands right next to it.

Some minor things that I hope are addressed for production.
The upper control arms are mounted to something inside the engine bay and it leaves a massive gap in the fender well for mud/debris to go straight into the engine bay. I didn't get a picture but I remember thinking, this is going to be a firehose of mud going straight into the engine bay if they don't seal this up better. Maybe someone else on the forum who has seen this can provide pictures.

The doors extend out further than the rock rails that ford provides. I will be waiting to find a nice set of rails from the aftermarket that can double as a step and a slider so the doors don't get smashed by people not paying attention.

Other than that, I was blown away by the attention to detail in this vehicle. After spending over an hour examining this thing from the ground up. went to dinner and parked next to a new sahara Jeep. The Jeep looked like it came out of a cereal box compared to the Bronco. (I own an XJ)

Hope this helps with perspective for some.

So some of the dealers have demos already?

 

[BlackBronco21]

Thank you so much for sharing the pics. I am the same size as your girlfriend. I was hoping it wasn't too big for me either. I am a 61 year old 'Grammy" and this Bronco is for me, I am super Psyched to get it. Great vehicle for all sexes and ages.

Sponsored