I feel like this is a lot of us right now

[Jalisurr]

I don’t get why they would build another desert runner, ford already rules in that category. If they build the Bronco with an IFS they’re only going to take away from their own sales and compete with themselves.......

the raptor

it’s like the 3 bears. Which would you like?
Full size F150?
Mid size ranger?
Smaller Mid Size? Bronco

but they all do the same thing. Lol.

See, it's funny you mention that...that's exactly what I want. The Raptor is far too large for my usage. I want something with raptor-like capability in a smaller 2 door SUV body. That's exactly what I'm hoping for. I know a lot of you want a rock crawler wrangler competitor, so....let's hope Ford gives us options to make us all happy I guess.

Sponsored

 

[Carolina Jim]

let's hope Ford gives us options

Best example I've seen of why auto makers have a societal obligation to offer a low price BASE option for Bronco....and everything else as well:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-45-0...are-going-underwater-on-car-loans-11573295400

John Schricker took out a loan to buy a car in 2017. Then he took out another. And then another.

In two years, the 40-year-old electrician signed up for four auto loans, each time trading in the previous car and rolling the unpaid balance into the next loan. He recently bought a $27,000 Jeep Cherokee with a $45,000 loan from Ally Financial Inc.

Consumers, salespeople and lenders are treating cars a lot like houses during the last financial crisis: by piling on debt to such a degree that it often exceeds the car’s value. This phenomenon—referred to as negative equity, or being underwater—can leave car owners trapped.

Some 33% of people who traded in cars to buy new ones in the first nine months of 2019 had negative equity, compared with 28% five years ago and 19% a decade ago, according to car-shopping site Edmunds.

 

[Nanook]

So it's interesting you mention that. ALL of the vehicles you mentioned (taking the second gen XTerra for this) were introduced around 2005-2006. Looking at sales figures, all of them were initially quite successful, the XTerra with a more established name actually matching jeep wrangler sales and the other two not all that far behind. However, when the recession came in 2009, all of their sales dropped off (everything was selling poorly, fun, inefficient vehicles especially), and as of 2011 they were all left to either wither on the lots with no updates for a few more years or were discontinued in the case of the H3.

Now, let's look at the 4Runner and the Wrangler. They followed the exact same pattern, selling well in 2005-2007, losing a ton of sales around the recession, and then finally recovering in 2012 up with refreshed or redesigned versions. Both are now selling stronger than ever before. Since around 2015, the market absolutely loves off road focused vehicles. The 4Runner certainly can't match the pure rock crawling capability of the wrangler with its IFS, but it absolutely competes with the wrangler unlimited in the off road SUV space.

I'd be willing to bet that if Nissan introduced an all new XTerra with the same sort of off road capability of the old one, into todays market, it would do very well. The wrangler competitors of 2005-2006 died off because of their timing. Without established nameplates to carry them through, their companies allowed them to die off during the recession. There haven't been any new attempts to make a wrangler competitor since then for us to truly evaluate.

I agree the 4Runner is an exception because it has 30years of Reliability and capability associated with it.
The others you can blame the recession for their failure or you can also introduce a 4dr wrangler and completely takeover the market.
Like you said and I had as my number 1, the aftermarket needs to embrace the Bronco as a MODIFIED Wrangler competitor. Even tho the majority of modified wranglers are never used anywhere near their actual capability, they have an image associated with them because they do have the capability to do what they look like they can do.
#2 remains, Ford has to get potential and current Wrangler owners to switch. New Wrangler owners weren’t cross shopping the 4Runner, that’s what the Grand Cherokee is for. So if you’re going head to head with the Wrangler you better bring a gun to the gun fight not a different tool.
For those that keep saying “Ford never said they were going after the Wrangler, they said they were going after Jeep” I say if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, it’s probably a midsize, 2dr and 4dr, removable body panel BroncoWrangler.

 

[Stampede.Offroad]

So it's interesting you mention that. ALL of the vehicles you mentioned (taking the second gen XTerra for this) were introduced around 2005-2006. Looking at sales figures, all of them were initially quite successful, the XTerra with a more established name actually matching jeep wrangler sales and the other two not all that far behind. However, when the recession came in 2009, all of their sales dropped off (everything was selling poorly, fun, inefficient vehicles especially), and as of 2011 they were all left to either wither on the lots with no updates for a few more years or were discontinued in the case of the H3.
...

Except they kept building and selling them all until ~2015, and they introduced a new model at about the same time as the JK. Their failure to take off is their own. They had a modest start and that was it. Whatever niche they were trying to fill just wasn't that big, or they didn't deliver what buyers in that segment wanted. JK didn't update for another several years, so its not as if they were wowing people with modern styling and the others weren't, the 4Runner was even newer.

Their sales advantage prior to 2007 is arguably only due to offering a 4-door when Wrangler didn't -- without that, they were an "also ran". 4Runner with a much longer heritage managed to cling on to a portion of the segment, but it went from a decade of beating the Wrangler at around 2:1 to having that ratio reversed, even though it was newer and more reliable. Without that form factor advantage, the Wrangler trounced them with capability and the image that brings.

The Jeep chief engineer Pete Milosavlevski interviewed by TFL for their diesel video recently said 2-door sales only account for 10% of Wranglers today.

.

.

 

[Cybrrstarr]

I agree the 4Runner is an exception because it has 30years of Reliability and capability associated with it.
The others you can blame the recession for their failure or you can also introduce a 4dr wrangler and completely takeover the market.
Like you said and I had as my number 1, the aftermarket needs to embrace the Bronco as a MODIFIED Wrangler competitor. Even tho the majority of modified wranglers are never used anywhere near their actual capability, they have an image associated with them because they do have the capability to do what they look like they can do.
#2 remains, Ford has to get potential and current Wrangler owners to switch. New Wrangler owners weren’t cross shopping the 4Runner, that’s what the Grand Cherokee is for. So if you’re going head to head with the Wrangler you better bring a gun to the gun fight not a different tool.
For those that keep saying “Ford never said they were going after the Wrangler, they said they were going after Jeep” I say if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, it’s probably a midsize, 2dr and 4dr, removable body panel BroncoWrangler.

here here, well said. Hit the nail on the head.

Remember I’m a TOYOTA fanatic ready to buy the next thing that can go head to head with a solid front axle wrangler. A vehicle that can walk the walk and talk the talk. And I’m sorry but IFS is the last thing I want to see on it.

 

[Nanook]

Just remember the IFS is all but confirmed and an IFS bronco raptor makes the most sense for brand and marketing purposes. However we still know very little, maybe the 2dr will have an SFA at launch and the 4dr IFS. Then let sales and demand drive the reason for SFA on the 4dr to keep it fresh and live a longer life.

 

[BroncoMike]

Sooo ... if you want to go fast poorly, you get the short wheelbase Bronco?

If Ford put the Ranger and F150 Raptors with the same level of modification as purpose built racers in the same event with the Bronco, I think it's pretty clear how that would shake out. Why not aim for something the Bronco is going to be better at than their other offerings, since we can be fairly confident the next Ranger is going to offer a Raptor variant for NA?

Maybe we'll see a Bronco in KOH if racing is how they want to promote it? There are sure to be lots of "Jeeps" at that event they can try to steal a crown back from ...

.

That was exactly my point - they all do different things. For each owner, their truck has a virtually unique application. Maybe FX4 owners can't afford a Raptor. Maybe Raptor owners need a more plush suspension for their environment. Maybe future Bronco owners need an enclosed area and a shorter wheelbase. No two owners have exactly the same needs.

Sure, Ford is going to play up the Bronco's better-known off-road history. It is irrelevant to most buyers that Baja is not it's greatest strength or the best Ford product for the job - they're flying the flag in a well-known venue with plenty of photo ops. My guess is that Bronco probably doesn't have the chops to go head-to-head with Wrangler in Wrangler's backyard - Moab or Rubicon Trail - so they are marketing it in an alternative playground where Jeep doesn't have such an overwhelming presence.

What is it that the Bronco does better than their other offerings? We haven't been told yet. If they were targeting Wrangler, at least in the more capable configurations, then rock crawling would be the obvious venue - but they're not doing that (so far). They can't challenge that space without directly confronting Wrangler, unless they're going to say "the best rock crawler available with a blue oval" or something equally limiting. "Better than everyone else except Jeep" doesn't have an appealing ring to it.

I don't like the way it appears - that they don't have the confidence to square off with Wrangler - but it sort of smells that way to me. Hopefully it will be capable "enough" to be successful, perhaps in another area not yet defined.

 

[Nanook]

That was exactly my point - they all do different things. For each owner, their truck has a virtually unique application. Maybe FX4 owners can't afford a Raptor. Maybe Raptor owners need a more plush suspension for their environment. Maybe future Bronco owners need an enclosed area and a shorter wheelbase. No two owners have exactly the same needs.

Sure, Ford is going to play up the Bronco's better-known off-road history. It is irrelevant to most buyers that Baja is not it's greatest strength or the best Ford product for the job - they're flying the flag in a well-known venue with plenty of photo ops. My guess is that Bronco probably doesn't have the chops to go head-to-head with Wrangler in Wrangler's backyard - Moab or Rubicon Trail - so they are marketing it in an alternative playground where Jeep doesn't have such an overwhelming presence.

What is it that the Bronco does better than their other offerings? We haven't been told yet. If they were targeting Wrangler, at least in the more capable configurations, then rock crawling would be the obvious venue - but they're not doing that (so far). They can't challenge that space without directly confronting Wrangler, unless they're going to say "the best rock crawler available with a blue oval" or something equally limiting. "Better than everyone else except Jeep" doesn't have an appealing ring to it.

I don't like the way it appears - that they don't have the confidence to square off with Wrangler - but it sort of smells that way to me. Hopefully it will be capable "enough" to be successful, perhaps in another area not yet defined.

If that was Ford intentions they should have built the real Full Size Bronco with F150 raptor suspension and the coyote V8. It’s badass, it’s fast, and it doesn’t compete with anything directly.
Like it or not the bronco Ford is building will be compared directly to the Wrangler.

 

[TeocaliMG]

Guys, can we acknowledge a couple things? if we are going to have an honest technical discussion?
1: Regardless of suspension or sales figures all of those IFS examples delivered lackluster specs compared to the Wrangler, especially in tire size which is pretty objectively the most important one.
2: We don't yet have the official specs on the Bronco but we can be pretty d*mn sure they will be better across the board than any of those "failed" IFS rigs.

Whether or not you think they failed because of suckyness or recession doesn't change the fact that they fell short on a technical basis on FAR more than the "preferred" suspension architecture. I'll add that that very suspension will be yet another thing the Bronco will improve on vs those previous rigs. Lets not use straw man arguments here

 

[Nickp]

Guys, can we acknowledge a couple things? if we are going to have an honest technical discussion?
1: Regardless of suspension or sales figures all of those IFS examples delivered lackluster specs compared to the Wrangler, especially in tire size which is pretty objectively the most important one.
2: We don't yet have the official specs on the Bronco but we can be pretty d*mn sure they will be better across the board than any of those "failed" IFS rigs.

Whether or not you think they failed because of suckyness or recession doesn't change the fact that they fell short on a technical basis on FAR more than the "preferred" suspension architecture. I'll add that that very suspension will be yet another thing the Bronco will improve on vs those previous rigs. Lets not use straw man arguments here

Agree 100%. The areas where Bronco could easily match or beat Jeep:

Tire size

Center of gravity

Crawl ratios

Approach/departure/break over angles

Overall ground clearance

Off road tech (crawl control/ etc)

Horsepower

Suspension geometry overall

All of these are either just as, if not more important than a solid axle. Example A being a Jeep gladiator, the bronco will likely be a way way WAY better crawler than the gladiator just from break over and departure angles alone.

 

[Nanook]

Sure, but can we also acknowledge that the majority of the buyers of all the previous Wrangler competitors had to defend their reason for choosing what they did vs the Wrangler? it wasn’t why’d you pick the FJ over the xterra? The wrangler is the benchmark of the segment because of the overall general markets perception that it is the best in its category because it is differentiated by its suspension and they are told this is because the SFA is the best for off-roading.
As I’ve said before, the bronco will be successful for a couple years because it is an icon and whatever it is, it will be very nice. But Ford is not going to change the general market overnight into thinking that Jeep has been wrong.

 

[Stampede.Offroad]

...
2: We don't yet have the official specs on the Bronco but we can be pretty d*mn sure they will be better across the board than any of those "failed" IFS rigs.
...

It might be nice to think that was the case, but we don't know that, because we don't know anything about the production Bronco's physical properties or capabilities. No one was even willing to give a vague hint how much the front of the R prototype might have in common with the actual Bronco, except that the shocks were definitely different. It could be anywhere from 0-90%, but less seems more likely given past observations of Ford and others products.

We also don't know that the production unit would be capable of handling those 37's, no one intimated those were any more representative of what the production vehicle could handle than the obviously race-built rear axle. Even the chassis was repeatedly referred to as merely proving what the T6 platform was capable of, not what the Bronco was capable of -- maybe they're testing it for the Ranger Raptor, it was unnecessarily long after all.

The language and descriptions they used were all decidedly and purposely vague, just like all the marketing mumbo-jumbo we've heard before. Let everyone make assumptions, and if they don't meet those expectations later say "we didn't tell you that". This kind of approach smacks of knowing that they are going to under deliver and purposely letting false assumptions boost perceptions and sales. The Emperor Has No Clothes.

 

[TeocaliMG]

It might be nice to think that was the case, but we don't know that, because we don't know anything about the production Bronco's physical properties or capabilities.

Alright, alright, alright, I get it. YOU don't know, I guess I assume too much about what you guys actually KNOW.

I feel like if I were on the outside looking in though I would have a hell of a lot more faith in those statements and the Bronco in general than I ever would have had for any of those other programs pre-launch.

It really seems like you have an axe to grind at this point. Maybe have a little faith and read between the lines

 

[Nickp]

^^^
Ford has been killing it recently. Between the GT500, new Explorer/edge ST, Ford GT, and the raptor, I’m going to trust them to not screw it up.

 

[TeocaliMG]

As I’ve said before, the bronco will be successful for a couple years because it is an icon and whatever it is, it will be very nice. But Ford is not going to change the general market overnight into thinking that Jeep has been wrong.

Back to technical discussion, there is a lot to be said about clean slate and development momentum. It is no secret that IFS has been whispered in the great halls of JEEP brand. Breathing right down the neck of Wrangler. Lucky enough for you guys, and for the sake of variety and competition in general it as avoided this fate. For now. I say this to point out that neither the Wrangler or the Bronco are 100% clean slate, and therefore you can confirm that neither is 100% "right". Again meaning we don't know how difficult it will be to convince the majority of Wrangler owners that they or the brand were wrong, at least in some respects. Again, I shouldn't need to clarify this, but the other "IFS" models have a laundry list of short comings that need to be "justified" by the buyers (against Wrangler as you pointed out). For Bronco, there may potentially be only ONE point of contention, and when you're trading tit for tat it may not be so hard to justify either case.

And if I may address the tire issue Stampede, sure you have no idea if the production Bronco will be capable of handling those 37's because you don't know the development process. Similarly you had no reason to believe the JL could handle them until the axle specs were released and/or someone actually did it! (other than the bias of your own expectations, which is indeed fair)

Sponsored