Official EPA MPG Mileage for 2021 Bronco posted on fueleconomy.gov

[Jdc]

"Better" is subjective of course. I would trade a mpg or two lower for a NA engine. I just trust the longevity and real world performance better. There are plenty of F150 data showing the 5.0 mpgs aren't much worse than the ecoboosts. I just like the simplicity and longevity of naturally aspirated. A mini 7.3 Godzilla is what I would like to see dropped in.

The weight is a concern for sure on a hybrid/electric but both Jeep 4XE and Ford F150 powerboost have figured it out. I would personally trade a few extra pounds for the option. I also would love to see a full size bronco which may make a hybrid more feasible due to extra space for batteries.

I think a F150 powerboost hybrid that has an electric only option like the Jeep 4XE with a bit more all electric range would be perfect. Then you could run all electric around town and on the trails and then also use the batteries as a generator for camp. I think we are only a year or two away for some legitimate electric/hybrid competitors so it makes me hesitant to jump in on the current offerings. Not to mention the tax credits and rising gas prices.

The electric range of the 4XE is perfect for me and my commute...when I actually go back to commuting

Sponsored

 

[jackwise]

I was wondering if maybe those small turbo motors would work some magic?

The only magic turbos work is to convince the latest generation of know-it-alls to buy into their BS. Turbos suck. Always have. Always will. Now that you see the dismal MPG numbers file that away in your memory banks and start thinking about how they babied the vehicle to max out the EPA numbers. Then start thinking about how ridiculously hard those engines will be working to haul around that weight day to day. Then, start calculating in your head the longevity of said turbo engine - which is inherently less reliable than an NA engine if for no other reason than there's more stuff to break. Finally, just think how you could have gotten rid of all the turbo complexity, gotten longer engine life and pretty much the same MPG if Ford would have just added two more cylinders to the damn thing. Turbos. Pure nonsense.

 

[Razorbak86]

The only magic turbos work is to convince the latest generation of know-it-alls to buy into their BS. Turbos suck. Always have. Always will. Now that you see the dismal MPG numbers file that away in your memory banks and start thinking about how they babied the vehicle to max out the EPA numbers. Then start thinking about how ridiculously hard those engines will be working to haul around that weight day to day. Then, start calculating in your head the longevity of said turbo engine - which is inherently less reliable than an NA engine if for no other reason than there's more stuff to break. Finally, just think how you could have gotten rid of all the turbo complexity, gotten longer engine life and pretty much the same MPG if Ford would have just added two more cylinders to the damn thing. Turbos. Pure nonsense.

OK boomer.

 

[chobit]

The only magic turbos work is to convince the latest generation of know-it-alls to buy into their BS. Turbos suck. Always have. Always will. Now that you see the dismal MPG numbers file that away in your memory banks and start thinking about how they babied the vehicle to max out the EPA numbers. Then start thinking about how ridiculously hard those engines will be working to haul around that weight day to day. Then, start calculating in your head the longevity of said turbo engine - which is inherently less reliable than an NA engine if for no other reason than there's more stuff to break. Finally, just think how you could have gotten rid of all the turbo complexity, gotten longer engine life and pretty much the same MPG if Ford would have just added two more cylinders to the damn thing. Turbos. Pure nonsense.

I've heard people stated in the past how turbo isn't as reliable as NA, but then there are some relatively reliable turbo engine like the 911 Turbo, or Subaru WRX STi which I had in the past.

 

[chobit]

and yet it can tow 3500 lbs while the 15 yr old dog turd can tow 6500 ..... WOW how ignorant!!

It works best not to compare tow rating that was before 2015: https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/features/no-go-for-standardized-tow-ratings.html

The am pretty sure this same Bronco would easily rated over 5000+ lb in tow capacity. Even the same car in Euro are normally rated with higher with higher tow capcity.

 

[Techun]

The only magic turbos work is to convince the latest generation of know-it-alls to buy into their BS. Turbos suck. Always have. Always will. Now that you see the dismal MPG numbers file that away in your memory banks and start thinking about how they babied the vehicle to max out the EPA numbers. Then start thinking about how ridiculously hard those engines will be working to haul around that weight day to day. Then, start calculating in your head the longevity of said turbo engine - which is inherently less reliable than an NA engine if for no other reason than there's more stuff to break. Finally, just think how you could have gotten rid of all the turbo complexity, gotten longer engine life and pretty much the same MPG if Ford would have just added two more cylinders to the damn thing. Turbos. Pure nonsense.

No one gets to "baby" anything for the EPA test cycle. They all run the same speeds/pattern.

You can try and game the test by selecting shift points, using manual shift lights, or just outright cheating like VW did to detect the test cycle.

 

[GiddyUp’21]

I feel it's a bit ironic the manual Badlands gets the worst MPG.

It isn’t ironic. See the second row = nothing to do with manual. Badlands has the highest weight due to the extra body armor.

 

[MayhemMike]

I don’t understand how the 2.3 auto BL gets LESS mpg at highway then city. I also fail to see why they bothered to offer four and six cylinder engines when both basically get the same mileage. Yeah I realize there is a small hp and ft lb difference, but will the majority of drivers ever realize that small difference? It has to be something to satisfy some government over reach.

 

[da_jokker]

I don’t understand how the 2.3 auto BL gets LESS mpg at highway then city. I also fail to see why they bothered to offer four and six cylinder engines when both basically get the same mileage. Yeah I realize there is a small hp and ft lb difference, but will the majority of drivers ever realize that small difference? It has to be something to satisfy some government over reach.

Just some possible ideas here but ...

1) city could be better due to ESS
2) there is more than a small Tq and HP difference, and more importantly where does that Tq come into play for normal driving. That 2.3 will require more throttle and higher rpm to equal the 2.7.

 

[AKBronc49]

It isn’t ironic. See the second row = nothing to do with manual. Badlands has the highest weight due to the extra body armor.

The exact same Badlands 2.3/auto is rated higher. Most people buy manuals (one reason) for the improved MPG. It's like the textbook definition of ironic.

 

[Lakelife36]

Most people buy manuals (one reason) for the improved MPG. It's like the textbook definition of ironic.

 

[AKBronc49]

Ehh, “better car control”, “makes me feel connected”, “gets better MPG”, “more reliable” are always the lines you get from manual buyers. Feel free to add to it, but the majority (not sports car or off-road) claim better MPG...think economy cars.

 

[AcesandEights]

Yep. Ford could have given us the same economy at less complexity and expense. It may have been at the expense of max power, but that just shows they are trying to win a marketing race, hype, not produce the best vehicle for the customer. They want to win short term customers, and higher profits.

 

[Lakelife36]

Ehh, “better car control”, “makes me feel connected”, “gets better MPG”, “more reliable” are always the lines you get from manual buyers. Feel free to add to it, but the majority (not sports car or off-road) claim better MPG...think economy cars.

MT buyers have been buying economy cars because that's what manufacturers generally put MTs in. This is pretty well understood.

Sponsored