The Unthinkable Just Happened

[Blindturtle]

I'm aware of what it looks like, which is how I formed my opinion, but thank you for posting a photo for my reference. Yes, hideous, and it worsens as the view of the front end becomes more oblique, the tapering back towards the fender. It lacks muscularity, and the housing and lenses the headlights have been set into feel like a compromise between the real Bronco and the CR-Vs and RAV4s this will be competing with. It's very difficult to be simultaneously svelte and muscular, but that's what they attempted, and they failed. But otherwise, it's not a bad looking rig from other angles. The aftermarket will no doubt offer several options for fixing the front end.

Don't you belong on twitter?

Sponsored

 

[BruckinFonco]

Don't you belong on twitter?

I'll assume since you chose not to directly respond to any of my points about the failed attempt at a front-end design, you have nothing of substance to add.

But enjoy driving your compromise.

 

[Blindturtle]

I'll assume since you chose not to directly respond to any of my points about the failed attempt at a front-end design, you have nothing of substance to add.

But enjoy driving your compromise.

Thank you, I will.

 

[Thechief86]

I really like the Bronco Sport as a competitor for a Subaru Forester, or Toyota Highlander, or any other soft-roader. I'd be a lot more interested if it was available with a true low range and a manual transmission.
As such, when the time comes that I'm ready to buy another new vehicle, I'll be sticking with my original plan of buying a Base Manual Squatch Bronco. Otherwise, my old Subaru with some modifications will continue to fit the bill.

 

[Outbound Exploration]

Hideous?

Let me help with that ? we're planning on getting the rig dirty this weekend. Ride is very comfortable, plenty of space for our need and will be her daily driver. We plan on using my big bronco (Wildtrak, will be changing from BL) for the long trips and main off road trails!

 

[dwbronco]

Well, then again that wasn't the most memorable time for Mustang...

Or...

 

[Headsong]

I'm aware of what it looks like, which is how I formed my opinion, but thank you for posting a photo for my reference. Yes, hideous, and it worsens as the view of the front end becomes more oblique, the tapering back towards the fender. It lacks muscularity, and the housing and lenses the headlights have been set into feel like a compromise between the real Bronco and the CR-Vs and RAV4s this will be competing with. It's very difficult to be simultaneously svelte and muscular, but that's what they attempted, and they failed. But otherwise, it's not a bad looking rig from other angles. The aftermarket will no doubt offer several options for fixing the front end.

In your opinion. Others' may vary.

 

[Headsong]

I'll assume since you chose not to directly respond to any of my points about the failed attempt at a front-end design, you have nothing of substance to add.

But enjoy driving your compromise.

IN YOUR opinion. Wow. Back to FB or something.

 

[RockEye]

That’s not a logical conclusion based on my statement at all. But they are both Mustangs.

Well then I guess they were both equally not valuable.

 

[dwbronco]

I'm aware of what it looks like, which is how I formed my opinion, but thank you for posting a photo for my reference. Yes, hideous, and it worsens as the view of the front end becomes more oblique, the tapering back towards the fender. It lacks muscularity, and the housing and lenses the headlights have been set into feel like a compromise between the real Bronco and the CR-Vs and RAV4s this will be competing with. It's very difficult to be simultaneously svelte and muscular, but that's what they attempted, and they failed. But otherwise, it's not a bad looking rig from other angles. The aftermarket will no doubt offer several options for fixing the front end.

It's looks good in pictures. In person, not so much. Also, it's freaking tiny. I'm 5'10", and I have to push the driver's seat all the way back just to be kind of comfortable. The rear seat has no room at all. My wife is 5'2". She tried sitting back there and said it sucks. Anyone who is thinking of buying this vehicle really should try it out, first.

 

[Atomicdog]

Well then I guess they were both equally not valuable.

Logic isn't everyones' forte. ?‍

 

[RockEye]

Logic isn't everyones' forte. ?‍

Don't give up now. I still have hope.

 

[Moparguy]

Looks like someone used their brain instead of their heart, you can never go wrong with that.
Enjoy your new car, keep us posted.

 

[BruckinFonco]

It's looks good in pictures. In person, not so much. Also, it's freaking tiny. I'm 5'10", and I have to push the driver's seat all the way back just to be kind of comfortable. The rear seat has no room at all. My wife is 5'2". She tried sitting back there and said it sucks. Anyone who is thinking of buying this vehicle really should try it out, first.

I haven't seen it yet in-person but I'm not at all surprised to hear that it looks worse than it does in photos. It's a compact crossover based on the Escape, a pretty terrible place to start. So far, the Sport seems like the debacle that was the Bronco II, all over again.

The real Bronco is brilliantly designed, and will very likely age well as they haven't done anything too outrageous or trendy. The Sport is shiny and new (and capable, from what I've read) but it's not going to be nearly as desirable in the long term and will obviously depreciate much more quickly. I'd wager that for those financing it, they'll be upside down on it within two years once the real Bronco's supply has leveled out to properly meet demand, and anyone will be able to walk into a dealer to buy one.

Ford appears to be making a habit now out of diluting their best brands, and I'm not sure why. Seems very shortsighted.

As I said in my original post on this thread, the Sport is the one I'd likely choose in its class, despite its looks, but I'll never be shopping in the compact crossover class anyway, so it's moot. For those who are, I get it, and fortunately the way the exterior looks is irrelevant when you're driving the poor thing.

 

[dwbronco]

Well, then again that wasn't the most memorable time for Mustang...

To be fair, I did say Mustang and not Mustang II. Ford produced both the Mustang and the Pinto for model years '71, '72, and '73. The Mustang II did not overlap any period where the Mustang was being built. So, my analogy stands.

Sponsored