The IFS vs SFA Thread

[BroncoMike]

how is ford targeting wrangler without a SFA????

Impossible and Ford is going to be just like Tesla when it unveiled the “Cybertruck”. I seriously wanted to throw my remote at the TV because I was that disappointed.

And it’s going to fail like it did in its own sponsored “Baja Bronco R” in its own race. What an upset.

HA! So it was YOU who broke the steel windows!

Sponsored

 

[Jalisurr]

3. Because you are the one who made the blanket statement that "expecting a V8 in a midsize vehicle is unreasonable." I was simply pointing out many of the midsize vehicles that do have V8s. As for putting a V8 in a Wrangler, the only barrier is CAFE ratings which the Wrangler does badly enough at already. Many aftermarket companies put V8s in Wranglers with factory form, fit, and function.

It's not just CAFE. Jeep have stated multiple times that while the engine fits, it would be impossible to pass crash tests. From Jeep head Kuniskis (https://www.autoblog.com/2019/04/09/hellcat-motor-jeep-wrangler-and-gladiator/):

"There's no air space around the engine [...] so you have no crush space, you have nothing that can be used to absorb energy in a crash. It's not a problem to put it in — other than emissions and fuel economy — except it would never pass any crash tests, and that's a problem,"

Now, could a modified/redesigned T6 platform be made to fit a V8 and also pass crash tests? Maybe. But for me, if it means they would have to compromise something else, make the vehicle larger, reduce the length of the control arms, whatever, I'm perfectly happy with the TTV6. Ford has also made it pretty clear that they want to put Ecoboost engines in their Halo products with the new GT and the current Raptor. There were plenty of people on forums mad about the lack of V8 in both places but they don't care.

 

[EvlNvrDys]

how is ford targeting wrangler without a SFA????

Impossible and Ford is going to be just like Tesla when it unveiled the “Cybertruck”. I seriously wanted to throw my remote at the TV because I was that disappointed.

And it’s going to fail like it did in its own sponsored “Baja Bronco R” in its own race. What an upset.

That all depends on how you think Ford is targeting the Wrangler. Are they targeting off-road capability? Or are they targeting sales? One has little to do with the other. As I've stated all over these boards, I bet the majority of Wrangler owners NEVER take their Jeeps off-road. They make them look tough, but never see any dirt or rock.
So in my opinion, for Ford to target the Wrangler they would need an off-road capable SUV that appeals to the masses. My personal opinion is, I'd rather have IFS. This will be a daily driver, on major highways doing 80mph. I prefer IFS for that over SFA. If it gets me through the snow, I'm happy.

 

[BroncoMike]

That all depends on how you think Ford is targeting the Wrangler. Are they targeting off-road capability? Or are they targeting sales? One has little to do with the other. As I've stated all over these boards, I bet the majority of Wrangler owners NEVER take their Jeeps off-road. They make them look tough, but never see any dirt or rock.
So in my opinion, for Ford to target the Wrangler they would need an off-road capable SUV that appeals to the masses. My personal opinion is, I'd rather have IFS. This will be a daily driver, on major highways doing 80mph. I prefer IFS for that over SFA. If it gets me through the snow, I'm happy.

One has EVERYTHING to do with the other. Soccer moms buy Rubicons because they have a tough image; that image comes from actual performance that maybe 3% of buyers use, but it's plastered all over the Internet and on the covers of magazines at the grocery store. The driver can be a complete poser because those skills are rarely on display; but everyone knows if the vehicle is the real deal. A vehicle simply can't attain the image without proving the capability in the first place... I bet you don't see a lot of winch bumpers, rock rails, and lift kits for the new Blazer.

The new Bronco won't achieve icon status by just being able to get "through the snow", and all of the hard-earned legacy image won't help if it doesn't rock Wrangler's world.

 

[Nanook]

It's not just CAFE. Jeep have stated multiple times that while the engine fits, it would be impossible to pass crash tests. From Jeep head Kuniskis (https://www.autoblog.com/2019/04/09/hellcat-motor-jeep-wrangler-and-gladiator/):

"There's no air space around the engine [...] so you have no crush space, you have nothing that can be used to absorb energy in a crash. It's not a problem to put it in — other than emissions and fuel economy — except it would never pass any crash tests, and that's a problem,"

Now, could a modified/redesigned T6 platform be made to fit a V8 and also pass crash tests? Maybe. But for me, if it means they would have to compromise something else, make the vehicle larger, reduce the length of the control arms, whatever, I'm perfectly happy with the TTV6. Ford has also made it pretty clear that they want to put Ecoboost engines in their Halo products with the new GT and the current Raptor. There were plenty of people on forums mad about the lack of V8 in both places but they don't care.

The GT was forced to use the 3.5 because of racing regulations. It is a race car not a street car like the 05 GT.
There was enough criticism for the Raptor using the 3.5 that Ford is making a limited run of GT500 powered raptors.
What’s so wrong with demanding a V8 option? if the 2.7 is a lock...great you’re safe. The look and sound of a V8 in a Bronco is Iconic and the coyote has proven its durability and reliability, seems like a fantastic option.

 

[Jalisurr]

The GT was forced to use the 3.5 because of racing regulations. It is a race car not a street car like the 05 GT.
There was enough criticism for the Raptor using the 3.5 that Ford is making a limited run of GT500 powered raptors.
What’s so wrong with demanding a V8 option? if the 2.7 is a lock...great you’re safe. The look and sound of a V8 in a Bronco is Iconic and the coyote has proven its durability and reliability, seems like a fantastic option.

Nothing wrong at all with wanting a V8. Heck, if they do end up being an option I'll take one too. I'd rather have a narrower overall vehicle with the same length of control arms though, if that would be the cost of being able to fit a V8 into it.

The GT wasn't forced to use the 3.5, they could have used a V8 if they wanted. The Corvette, Ferrari, and BMW GTLM cars the GT fights against are all using V8s. They used the V6 because of...packaging! They were able to have a narrower engine area and better aero with the V6. Same reason that not having a V8 might end up better for the Bronco.

 

[Nanook]

Nothing wrong at all with wanting a V8. Heck, if they do end up being an option I'll take one too. I'd rather have a narrower overall vehicle with the same length of control arms though, if that would be the cost of being able to fit a V8 into it.

The GT wasn't forced to use the 3.5, they could have used a V8 if they wanted. The Corvette, Ferrari, and BMW GTLM cars the GT fights against are all using V8s. They used the V6 because of...packaging! They were able to have a narrower engine area and better aero with the V6. Same reason that not having a V8 might end up better for the Bronco.

Wrong, the max displacement for forced induction motors in their class is 4.8 or 4.9 liters. The voodoo was not competitive enough and and the coyote was too large for forced induction. The 3.5 has been proven reliable over 600hp and that’s why they went with it.

 

[Jalisurr]

Wrong, the max displacement for forced induction motors in their class is 4.8 or 4.9 liters. The voodoo was not competitive enough and and the coyote was too large for forced induction. The 3.5 has been proven reliable over 600hp and that’s why they went with it.

I don't believe for a minute that Ford couldn't make one of their N/A V8s make enough power to be competitive if they had a reason to. GTLM cars only make around 500-550hp with the restrictors, the race GT makes less power than the road car. The 5.5L N/A V8 in the C7.R seemed to do well enough to win the championship a couple times. However, Ford didn't do it because the V6 was a better choice for the overall package. And that's exactly the argument I'm making about the Bronco.

 

[Nanook]

I don't believe for a minute that Ford couldn't make one of their N/A V8s make enough power to be competitive if they had a reason to. GTLM cars only make around 500-550hp with the restrictors, the race GT makes less power than the road car. The 5.5L N/A V8 in the C7.R seemed to do well enough to win the championship a couple times. However, Ford didn't do it because the V6 was a better choice for the overall package. And that's exactly the argument I'm making about the Bronco.

They tried...do you really think the voodoo was built for the Gt350? In the end, it didn’t make the power of the 3.5 and it wasn’t as reliable for a 24hr race.
Again the latest GT was built as a race car first, it had to follow the rules and regulations and that meant making street legal versions. They could have built the car around any configuration they chose, the 3.5 won. There were even 1 or 2 GT’s race testing in Europe with the voodoo in it.

 

[Jalisurr]

They tried...do you really think the voodoo was built for the Gt350? In the end, it didn’t make the power of the 3.5 and it wasn’t as reliable for a 24hr race.
Again the latest GT was built as a race car first, it had to follow the rules and regulations and that meant making street legal versions. They could have built the car around any configuration they chose, the 3.5 won. There were even 1 or 2 GT’s race testing in Europe with the voodoo in it.

I guess I give the Ford V8s too much credit

If the reason they didn't use the V8 was purely because the V8 wouldn't last a 24hr race at that power level and an ecoboost would...I know which one I'd rather have!

 

[Nanook]

Don’t twist it.

if you’re so concerned about packaging, how is the addition of 2 turbos and the additional plumbing and cooling, all under the hood, a more efficient package.
Ford themselves had the aftermarket cooling break on the BroncoR

 

[Randy92Fox]

One has EVERYTHING to do with the other. Soccer moms buy Rubicons because they have a tough image; that image comes from actual performance that maybe 3% of buyers use, but it's plastered all over the Internet and on the covers of magazines at the grocery store. The driver can be a complete poser because those skills are rarely on display; but everyone knows if the vehicle is the real deal. A vehicle simply can't attain the image without proving the capability in the first place... I bet you don't see a lot of winch bumpers, rock rails, and lift kits for the new Blazer.

The new Bronco won't achieve icon status by just being able to get "through the snow", and all of the hard-earned legacy image won't help if it doesn't rock Wrangler's world.

On the new blazer, no. On 4Runners and FJ Cruisers, yes. Both of those vehicles with IFS sold well despite the FJs limited run and both have high resale value and tons of aftermarket support showing continued interest despite having IFS. If you think those vehicles don't compete in the same market segment as the the Wrangler you are mistaken. Based on opinion from the few that actually have knowledge of the vehicle it will be very capable offroad so there will be no lack of the "tough" image to ease the minds of the soccer moms out there.

 

[Nanook]

On the new blazer, no. On 4Runners and FJ Cruisers, yes. Both of those vehicles with IFS sold well despite the FJs limited run and both have high resale value and tons of aftermarket support showing continued interest despite having IFS. If you think those vehicles don't compete in the same market segment as the the Wrangler you are mistaken. Based on opinion from the few that actually have knowledge of the vehicle it will be very capable offroad so there will be no lack of the "tough" image to ease the minds of the soccer moms out there.

The numbers have been posted, the 4Runner and the FJ do not sell like the Wrangler.
The yota’s have a legacy of reliability behind them and that leads to the other point raised that for used vehicle requirements they are desirable and command a premium.

 

[JimmyDean]

The numbers have been posted, the 4Runner and the FJ do not sell like the Wrangler.
The yota’s have a legacy of reliability behind them and that leads to the other point raised that for used vehicle requirements they are desirable and command a premium.

we bought the 4runner because of reliability history, 4 door, and capacity

 

[Randy92Fox]

The numbers have been posted, the 4Runner and the FJ do not sell like the Wrangler.
The yota’s have a legacy of reliability behind them and that leads to the other point raised that for used vehicle requirements they are desirable and command a premium.

They don't sell in the same numbers but they do share a market segment. This is definitely my opinion but if Toyota brought back removable roofs I think they would steal a huge chunk of Jeep's customers. Exactly what Ford is planning to do.

Sponsored