TNcoupe

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2018
Messages
368
Reaction score
1,043
Location
Decatur,TN
Vehicle(s)
2019 Veloster N, 1964 Fairlane 427W, 1955 Thunderbird, 1970 Bronco
Clubs
 
I understand that logic but I rather see people have the choice on rowing their gears or not, even if it's not a sports car.
Same. I just chose the 2.7 and auto cause I'm gonna buy a cheap fun car to go with my Bronco so I can still autox and do track days.





Advertisement

 

rand442002

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
77
Reaction score
192
Location
Montana
Vehicle(s)
'91 Ram W250
Yeah, I’m happy and would probably still get the 2.3 even if the 2.7 was an option, and yes I wish it was an option. It’s not though, so take rate will be put up or shut up. You want the manual or not. If enough of us take the 2.3 manual, we might get the 2.7 manual option. If people flake out and don’t get the 2.3 manual, you can forget the 2.7 manual. I’m taking what they’re giving instead of shopping elsewhere.

Im not worried about the 2.3 though because proper gearing is more important than displacement. I’ve driven a properly geared 4cyl Tacoma long enough, plus an older Dodge Powerwagon that was 150hp but could pull stumps.

It’s up to you though, be part of the take rate, or work against it. It’s OK if you don’t get the manual, but then don’t complain later if the option is not expanded.
I have 2 issue with taking the 2.3 just to get a manual. The 1st isn't relevant for this discussion so I'll skip to the 2nd, resale value. I understand buying a new vehicle isn't an investment and I'll lose money on it instantly so the only real question becomes how much will I lose. Because this is a brand new vehicle we just don't know and any guesses are just that, guesses. Ultimately I'm guessing the 2.7 will hold better value than the 2.3.

So am I willing to give extra money to Ford by going with the 2.3 manual in hopes they'll give me a 2.7 manual eventually? I don't know yet and fortunately I have time to think about it.

To me, it still just doesn't make sense that Ford paired the enthusiast transmission (manual) with the bottom tier motor instead of what is think is the enthusiast motor. Look at the enthusiast out there, they're the ones going 40's and bigger, more powerful engines.
 

kodiakisland

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
1,229
Reaction score
3,107
Location
Arkansas
Vehicle(s)
2012 Tacoma, 2016 Camaro, 2018 Indian
Clubs
 
I have 2 issue with taking the 2.3 just to get a manual. The 1st isn't relevant for this discussion so I'll skip to the 2nd, resale value. I understand buying a new vehicle isn't an investment and I'll lose money on it instantly so the only real question becomes how much will I lose. Because this is a brand new vehicle we just don't know and any guesses are just that, guesses. Ultimately I'm guessing the 2.7 will hold better value than the 2.3.

So am I willing to give extra money to Ford by going with the 2.3 manual in hopes they'll give me a 2.7 manual eventually? I don't know yet and fortunately I have time to think about it.

To me, it still just doesn't make sense that Ford paired the enthusiast transmission (manual) with the bottom tier motor instead of what is think is the enthusiast motor. Look at the enthusiast out there, they're the ones going 40's and bigger, more powerful engines.

I don't know. Most of the people I personally know with manuals, including me, are somewhat simple folk who are not running anything near 40s. Obviously I run with a low crowd though, as that's where I fit in. You give me proper gears and a decent platform and I'll give you hell with 150hp, so for me it's OK.

I'm excited Ford changed their mind and is giving ME the mansquatch and I'm sure Ford is excited because I'm giving them more money than I would otherwise. Besides, I'm the kind of guy who doesn't settle for an auto.
 

rand442002

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
77
Reaction score
192
Location
Montana
Vehicle(s)
'91 Ram W250
I'm excited Ford changed their mind and is giving ME the mansquatch
Despite how I may be coming off, I too am excited Ford has done this. It gives me a glimmer of hope for a future 2.7 with a manual and it sounds like a lot of folks are getting what they want. I really think it's great and am genuinely happy for all of you.
 

rapidredbronco2021

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Aug 8, 2020
Messages
322
Reaction score
304
Location
Westchester, New York
Vehicle(s)
DD 2019 Ford Escape
Your excited about the mansquatch and it sounds like many others are as well and that's great. If that's what you really wanted I'm happy for you. But would Ford have made that available without the "complainers"? If we don't make our issues known then they don't at least have the opportunity to fix the problem.
There's a difference about complaints revolving around the manual at first not available with the Sasquatch and people that complain about manuals not being an option on a certain engine or model. When there's complaints about features or handling or performance, etc; people should make their complaints heard by the manufacturer. This complaints are different than the ones about manuals and why they aren't mated to a certain engine or whatever.

There are plenty of people that complain about the manual not being offered and still wouldn't buy one when it is. People have their reasons for their choices but don't complain about the very few offerings of manuals then get one of those with an auto. Even if the Wranglers manuals take is low, they put it in the Gladiator because they have it developed and it fits.
 

Bmadda

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Brian
Joined
Jul 18, 2020
Messages
534
Reaction score
874
Location
Wisconsin USA
Vehicle(s)
1990 Bronco eddie bauer
Vehicle Showcase
1
I have 2 issue with taking the 2.3 just to get a manual. The 1st isn't relevant for this discussion so I'll skip to the 2nd, resale value. I understand buying a new vehicle isn't an investment and I'll lose money on it instantly so the only real question becomes how much will I lose. Because this is a brand new vehicle we just don't know and any guesses are just that, guesses. Ultimately I'm guessing the 2.7 will hold better value than the 2.3.

So am I willing to give extra money to Ford by going with the 2.3 manual in hopes they'll give me a 2.7 manual eventually? I don't know yet and fortunately I have time to think about it.

To me, it still just doesn't make sense that Ford paired the enthusiast transmission (manual) with the bottom tier motor instead of what is think is the enthusiast motor. Look at the enthusiast out there, they're the ones going 40's and bigger, more powerful engines.
Actually, amongst the local jeep club here I have wheeled with, the most radical "late model" rigs are stock 3.6/manual trans. Those guys spend zero dollars on engine mods except maybe exhaust and tune. 2.3 lines up pretty well power wise w/3.6, and I'd wager weighs less. I'm not sure I fully get this whole infatuation w/2.7. People talk about it like its the second coming of the boss 429. I mean what is so spectacular about that motor?
 

rapidredbronco2021

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Aug 8, 2020
Messages
322
Reaction score
304
Location
Westchester, New York
Vehicle(s)
DD 2019 Ford Escape
It’s not though, so take rate will be put up or shut up. You want the manual or not. If enough of us take the 2.3 manual, we might get the 2.7 manual option. If people flake out and don’t get the 2.3 manual, you can forget the 2.7 manual. I’m taking what they’re giving instead of shopping elsewhere.
People need to either buy one or don't and quit complaining. We should all be happy Ford gave us a manual but a weird 7 speed with a crawler gear. It's cool and weird and I'm excited for it. I think people on the fence should do some research on the Ranger with the Ford Performance tune. That plus the manual will be a winning combo because of the numbers it will put out and should be available at some point after the Bronco is on sale.

There is another choice if you want a V6 with a manual in a box on wheels, get a Wrangler and they also have one with a bed, the Gladiator.
 

rapidredbronco2021

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Aug 8, 2020
Messages
322
Reaction score
304
Location
Westchester, New York
Vehicle(s)
DD 2019 Ford Escape
Actually, amongst the local jeep club here I have wheeled with, the most radical "late model" rigs are stock 3.6/manual trans. Those guys spend zero dollars on engine mods except maybe exhaust and tune. 2.3 lines up pretty well power wise w/3.6, and I'd wager weighs less. I'm not sure I fully get this whole infatuation w/2.7. People talk about it like its the second coming of the boss 429. I mean what is so spectacular about that motor?
I bet it's the power numbers and the old saying bigger is better. But I'm just taking what they offer and I don't have a choice in different manual options.
 

rand442002

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
77
Reaction score
192
Location
Montana
Vehicle(s)
'91 Ram W250
There's a difference about complaints revolving around the manual at first not available with the Sasquatch and people that complain about manuals not being an option on a certain engine or model. When there's complaints about features or handling or performance, etc; people should make their complaints heard by the manufacturer. This complaints are different than the ones about manuals and why they aren't mated to a certain engine or whatever.

There are plenty of people that complain about the manual not being offered and still wouldn't buy one when it is. People have their reasons for their choices but don't complain about the very few offerings of manuals then get one of those with an auto. Even if the Wranglers manuals take is low, they put it in the Gladiator because they have it developed and it fits.
I honestly don't understand the point you're making in the 1st paragraph. Both the sasquatch and the 2.7 are upgrades that, at least initially, required an auto transmission. What's the difference in saying the sasquatch should've been available with the manual versus sinking that about the 2.7?

And I 100% would get the 2.7 with a manual. Now that the sasquatch is available with a manual, the 2.7 with auto only is the only thing I think is wrong with the bronco. From what I know right now, the bronco checks every box.
 

Bmadda

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Brian
Joined
Jul 18, 2020
Messages
534
Reaction score
874
Location
Wisconsin USA
Vehicle(s)
1990 Bronco eddie bauer
Vehicle Showcase
1
I bet it's the power numbers and the old saying bigger is better. But I'm just taking what they offer and I don't have a choice in different manual options.
I think maybe you gotta look at the big picture. I started out my theoretical bronco build w/a simple philosophy...minimum weight, maximum meat. 2.3/mt still fits the bill for me, especially in a 2dr.
 

Ultimate6g

Base
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
90
Reaction score
124
Location
Bakersfield, CA
Vehicle(s)
SRT8 Challenger, Nissan Xterra
Real reason:

With the bigger engine I can request a premium for not just the engine but the required automatic.

You know, same reason that LED head lights are not available on the F150 unless you pony up for a much more expensive trim even though corollas have it standard.
 

rapidredbronco2021

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Aug 8, 2020
Messages
322
Reaction score
304
Location
Westchester, New York
Vehicle(s)
DD 2019 Ford Escape
I honestly don't understand the point you're making in the 1st paragraph. Both the sasquatch and the 2.7 are upgrades that, at least initially, required an auto transmission. What's the difference in saying the sasquatch should've been available with the manual versus sinking that about the 2.7?

And I 100% would get the 2.7 with a manual. Now that the sasquatch is available with a manual, the 2.7 with auto only is the only thing I think is wrong with the bronco. From what I know right now, the bronco checks every box.
My bad there's difference between complains made about something simple of adding the Sasquatch to the manual to developing an entirely new manual for a engine that never had one. Some people will complain about manual not being offered with a certiain engine but would still most likely go with an auto anyway.

I thought they would've added the manual to the 2.7L or at least both engines. But no, I'm still getting it even though I'd would've jumped on the 2.7L with a manual.
 

Broncocito

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
B
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Messages
328
Reaction score
264
Location
NM
Vehicle(s)
2018 F150FX4 Roush
Real reason:

With the bigger engine I can request a premium for not just the engine but the required automatic.

You know, same reason that LED head lights are not available on the F150 unless you pony up for a much more expensive trim even though corollas have it standard.
I can see your reasoning.

I wanted the LEDs on my F150 and did not want step up to the top 3 trims so I spent $250 and have better LEDs than what Ford was offering.
 

rapidredbronco2021

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Aug 8, 2020
Messages
322
Reaction score
304
Location
Westchester, New York
Vehicle(s)
DD 2019 Ford Escape
I think maybe you gotta look at the big picture. I started out my theoretical bronco build w/a simple philosophy...minimum weight, maximum meat. 2.3/mt still fits the bill for me, especially in a 2dr.
I read/heard no complaints about the power from the Ranger. I'm sometimes more hesitant with base engines but I think it will perform better than what I'd expect. I need to look at the numbers to get a better understanding of what the 2 door would perform with the bigger tires from the Sasquatch.
 

FTFRS

Guest
Actually, amongst the local jeep club here I have wheeled with, the most radical "late model" rigs are stock 3.6/manual trans. Those guys spend zero dollars on engine mods except maybe exhaust and tune. 2.3 lines up pretty well power wise w/3.6, and I'd wager weighs less. I'm not sure I fully get this whole infatuation w/2.7. People talk about it like its the second coming of the boss 429. I mean what is so spectacular about that motor?
For me, it’s the fact that the 2.7 was built to be a turbo engine from the ground up, and has dual injection. Versus the 2.3 starting as a N/A engine with a turbo slapped on, with only direct injection.

Sure, comparing to the 5.3 in my ‘03 Tahoe, the 2.3 makes comparable figures, so I’d be fine with the 2.3’s figures. But, I’m still weary of having a FI engine in my primary vehicle, regardless of how good the reliability has become in the EcoBoosts. So, I’ll take the one that was deliberately designed as an EB.

As for the main topic of this thread, Ford’s decision slightly confuses me still, despite them saying Wrangler MT take rate was a big influence. To me, you have contrary evidence that MT take rate can be quite high for enthusiast vehicles right in Ford’s own line; as others have said, Mustangs have ~25% MT take rate, which is pretty damn good. The people taking MTs in the Bronco don’t seem to be taking them because they’re penny pinching and want the absolutely cheapest option, they seem to be MT enthusiasts. Plus, it’s not like Ford just slapped a run of the mill MT in for penny pinchers, they deliberately designed it with an enthusiast feature built in, the Crawl gear. So, it doesn’t quite add up to me why Ford wouldn’t just offer the MT with even just the larger 2.7 if they’re only going to offer it with one engine, because these MT enthusiasts would likely pony up for the bigger engine just to get their MT.

Personally, I’d love for there to be a 2.7 MT option, and would definitely buy it in a heartbeat if they change course. But since I’m not a diehard MT enthusiast, and I value the 2.7 more than the MT, 2.7 wins and AT it is for me.
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top