Ford Bronco Cargo Space Calculation with Rear Seats Folded Down

[Straight 6]

Based on the cargo evaluation, it will work on the diagonal. You can probably also fit them with the rear seats up. However, you’d be laying the doors on their hinge edge which isn’t ideal for protection. Also you’ll be blocking your rear view haha but there’s no point in looking behind you...when all the Jeep’s are in the dust

Keep in mind that floor with the back seats folded isn't flat,
The doors are semi fragile with glass and aluminum skins, so trying to store them in a non officially approved way may cause damage

Sponsored

 

[Mookie45]

Do we know the cu. ft. trunk space with the 2nd row folded down?

Also, I am seeing a +/- of 5 cu. ft. of trunk space on the Bronco Sport; what is making the difference?

 

[rich]

As a math nerd, I decided to calculate the cargo area geometry of a 2021 2-Door Bronco with the rear seats folded down. I then compared that to overall door length and optimal storage orientation. This calculation is based on image reference geometry analyzed in Photoshop and known specs posted on the Ford website.

UPDATE: For a more accurate calculation, I changed the reference dimension from tire diameter to wheel base, per @Fly by Nite recommendation. Thanks!

There's a few things to note:

1. In Photoshop, I measured the wheel base in pixels and set that scale to 100.4". The wheel base is the reference dimension for all other measurements.
2. The overall length (with tailgate tire) does not match the Ford advertised length of 173.70". In fact, it's off by almost a foot. Perhaps the concept models are smaller than the final vehicle. Or, Photoshop messed something up in it's measurement (highly unlikely). I double checked all my work. I also made sure to account for perspective of the vehicle in the image when measuring the lengths.
3. The back plane of the front seats is marked based on other images I've seen of the vehicle. The back seats and center console seem to end about half way through the separation beam between the first and second row.
4. The plane of the tailgate is a judgement call. I couldn't find a thickness reference anywhere. I think it's pretty close.
5. This model doesn't account for the inability to lay the second-row seats fully flat.

Let me know your thoughts or if anything should be adjusted!

UPDATE: See below for the 4-door reference calculations. It felt wrong leaving the big beauty out of the mix! Feedback appreciated!

I know this was meant for the cargo space, but is there a way to use this to measure from the ground to the top on the trail sight on the front end?
Maybe we can get someone at the next event to do real-world measurements, even if it is with the iPhone measure app.
It would be really cool to test real-world measurements against this.

 

[jaruss01]

FYI - scaling each photo, i took the measurement where the starting point was the steering wheel intersecting with the door, to the rear face of the back seat.

2 door - 65.8 inches
4 door - 65.6 inches

So i guess Ford's identical legroom dimensions for the 2 and 4 door (which many doubted) may be accurate.

And the depth of the 4 door cargo at load floor is 35", but given the flap where the rear seats meet the floor will likely cut 2" into that dimension so 33"...the 4 door cargo volume on paper is 50% larger, so given cargo holds are identical for 50% more volume = 50% deeper. Technically the 2 door depth was 20.5 (per a measurement at NYSE reveal) but that measurement was to a protruding folding mechanism behind the back of the seat and realistically the 2 door depth should be another inch and a half, so 22...22x 1.5 is 33". So that checks out

 

[jaruss01]

To piggyback off the post above

4 door cargo -33" deep (seems shallow), likely around 44" wide, but scaling the height on the photo i am getting to 23" high to sheetmetal, and 26" high to back of seat (or side/rear glass after accounting for trimwork around that glass). That makes up for a lot of the lack of depth, given you could load stuff up 26" high without obstructing your outward visability.

So real-world usable cargo volume (without blocking outwards visability) is 33x44x26 = 21.85 cubic feet

By comparison:
X3 - 35.5" deep, 43" wide, 15.25" to bottom of cargo cover (lets call is 18.25") = 16.12 cubic feet
X5 - 40.5" deep, 44" wide, 18.5" to bottom of cargo cover (lets call is 21.5") = 19.08 cubic feet

So technically, even though the 4 door bronco has a cargo hold that is much shallower than mid-size SUVs, it actually has 10% more usable cargo over an X5. The Bronco cargo height is attributed to the upright shape of the car and the swing out tailgate, and no spare underneath the cargo floor. It's like the Bronco cargo floor is like dropping the average mid-size cargo floor by half a foot. Although, the one downside is the extra volume is by way of height, and less ideal, given you need to get creative stacking your cargo to utilize that extra space....and you have less access to you gear during road trips if its buried under other stuff.

 

[Austin26]

Surprised I only found this thread today. Wonderful work y'all. Is the difference in exterior length not just the spare tire, which lines up being that the tire sizes are mostly 10.4" to 12" in width?

The dimension I want is from the dash / infotainment screen bezel to the inside of the rear gate. Annoying Ford hasn't released detailed dimensions considering they're finalized already.

 

[Fordmanbob]

The doors are right at 48” long. From the front of the door to where I guessed the back of the cargo area is, it’s about 100”. I agree that you might get close measurements using the wheelbase as the reference point.

 

[mdepll]

Anyone figure out 4 door cargo depth yet ? Or still a mystery?

Sponsored