Suggestion to Ford: Make Sasquatch a "Badlands lite" for Manual transmission cars

[Omarius]

I understand that there may be issues with the MT and 35s, but since they've developed the mt for the badlands with 33s, why not just slightly water down the sasquatch package for the manual transmission and offer the badlands suspension, 33s, and front/rear lockers? This would require no additional development on Ford's end. Has this been suggested to them at all?

Sponsored

 

[Foordbrawnco]

looking at the badlands straight from the ford site, it shows the 35’s as optional with no mention of the Sasquatch package... I wonder if this will be a standalone upgrade, or they just forgot to asterisk the 35’s.

 

[PDiddy]

Yeah, they could make two or three levels of Sasquatch, like they have for the interior packages. Not a terrible idea. Plus, some people may want a badlands package, without the 35s.

 

[cal jammer]

This would make too much sense

 

[BuckeyeinNV]

looking at the badlands straight from the ford site, it shows the 35’s as optional with no mention of the Sasquatch package... I wonder if this will be a standalone upgrade, or they just forgot to asterisk the 35’s.

They mixed in the Sasquatch options with the rest on those pages, that doesn't mean anything. A Ford rep has confirmed you can't get 35s without Sasquatch.

 

[BuckeyeinNV]

I understand that there may be issues with the MT and 35s, but since they've developed the mt for the badlands with 33s, why not just slightly water down the sasquatch package for the manual transmission and offer the badlands suspension, 33s, and front/rear lockers? This would require no additional development on Ford's end. Has this been suggested to them at all?

Seeing as that's literally just the Sasquatch with 33s instead of 35s, I'm sure the answer would be an unequivocal no.

 

[Omarius]

Seeing as that's literally just the Sasquatch with 33s instead of 35s, I'm sure the answer would be an unequivocal no.

Well, they cite technical reasons for not making the sasquatch available on the manual. This is likely a gearing issue. They can't really use that, or cost as an excuse with the 33s.

 

[BuckeyeinNV]

Well, they cite technical reasons for not making the sasquatch available on the manual. This is likely a gearing issue. They can't really use that, or cost as an excuse with the 33s.

Unless they said, "It's not the gearing."

 

[Squatch]

The only real reason* given is the "Trail Control" that is part of the Sasquatch package which requires the automatic transmission. The only difference between the Badlands trim and Sasquatch seems to be 35 in tires, bump stops/"limiters" to prevent the larger tires being too stuffed, and the "Trail Control" feature which requires auto. Somebody at Ford is determined to keep the Sasquatch package for automatic transmissions only.

*from the Q&A the forum came up with for the recent Bronco event

 

[Omarius]

Unless they said, "It's not the gearing."

Well, whatever magical unicorn problem it is, they seem to have solved it for the badlands.

 

[BuckeyeinNV]

The only real reason* given is the "Trail Control" that is part of the Sasquatch package which requires the automatic transmission. The only difference between the Badlands trim and Sasquatch seems to be 35 in tires, bump stops/"limiters" to prevent the larger tires being too stuffed, and the "Trail Control" feature which requires auto. Somebody at Ford is determined to keep the Sasquatch package for automatic transmissions only.

*from the Q&A the forum came up with for the recent Bronco event

No, it was a canned answer with no specific reason noted. Forum members just tried to read between the lines. They're being cagey about it for whatever reason.

 

[KyTruckPlant]

The only real reason* given is the "Trail Control" that is part of the Sasquatch package which requires the automatic transmission. The only difference between the Badlands trim and Sasquatch seems to be 35 in tires, bump stops/"limiters" to prevent the larger tires being too stuffed, and the "Trail Control" feature which requires auto. Somebody at Ford is determined to keep the Sasquatch package for automatic transmissions only.

*from the Q&A the forum came up with for the recent Bronco event

Makes sense to me. I think it may also explain why the Cyber Orange 2 door MT that employees were taking pictures with at MAP was riding on 37"s with a 2" lift.
It looks like they think the MT can handle the tires, but trail control can't manage the driver's shifting.

 

[RedHotLava]

Okay, so help me understand guys.... nothing has changed, correct? You/we cannot get a Sasquatch package with a manual trans still, correct?

I have some donkey on a ford IG Pic that I commented on telling me otherwise...

 

[BR0NCO]

The only real reason* given is the "Trail Control" that is part of the Sasquatch package which requires the automatic transmission. The only difference between the Badlands trim and Sasquatch seems to be 35 in tires, bump stops/"limiters" to prevent the larger tires being too stuffed, and the "Trail Control" feature which requires auto. Somebody at Ford is determined to keep the Sasquatch package for automatic transmissions only.

*from the Q&A the forum came up with for the recent Bronco event

I wouldn’t think that’s the reason, why would trail control be a ‘must have’ for Sasquatch? My manual Rubicon has what I would consider a trail control, if I put it in 1st and keep my foot off the pedals it will crawl over anything within its ability to do so. It will maintain idle speed and will not stall unless a wheel cannot physically rotate. I can have my diff up against a rock and it will just sit there with all 4 tires spinning without stalling.

 

[DrewBronc21]

Well, they cite technical reasons for not making the sasquatch available on the manual. This is likely a gearing issue. They can't really use that, or cost as an excuse with the 33s.

Manual Badlands gets 4.7 gears so it’s not gearing, it’s gotta be the trail assist, potentially suspension

Sponsored