Ugly Test Mule

[Stampede.Offroad]

That's what I would guess it was there for as well. That more cut-out looking rear fender probably works better for articulation than the fender skirted version we've seen more often.

It will be interesting to see if Ford really pushed articulation values and markets on those numbers. It is a practice common with marketing small displacement off roaders like side-by-sides and ATVs.

Sponsored

 

[Idahorocks]

Some more testing photos from australia posted today, can't see anything new of note though:
whichcar.com.au/news/ford-bronco-mules-australia-spyshots

Thanks for sharing. That 2 door mule perspective is useful for a competitive comparison.

 

[BroncoRevital]

I'm a little surprised how short the wheelbase is. I thought it would be at least 100". Looking at this short mule it looks on par with a Wrangler at 96". Nice photo overlap @Idahorocks

 

[BroncoBuyer]

I just wonder why they keep putting camo on the ranger body. The jig is up Ford, we all know what’s under the wrap.

 

[JimmyDean]

I just wonder why they keep putting camo on the ranger body. The jig is up Ford, we all know what’s under the wrap.

because they don't want us to see the bronco body yet?

 

[Stampede.Offroad]

because they don't want us to see the bronco body yet?

I think the question is, why does the Ranger body need camo at all. It will not be used for anything but testing, and we already know what the Ranger looks like.

I think the answer is that the psychedelic polkadots are there to make sure people do notice it and take some pictures. It isn't camouflage, its meant to attract attention. These Frankenrangers are probably being used primarily for theatrical purposes to give the public something to look at once in a while to keep communities like this alive or growing.

There are probably other mules that have genuinely effective camouflage, ones that nobody pays attention to or purposely takes pictures of. Those are probably the ones most of us would rather see, because they're doing something interesting. But with a beat up old Ranger body that looks like it has been used as a trail rig for years, it doesn't attract the eye of most people, and can go about testing without drawing attention. A vehicle that looks like it could have been a salvage title with a few cobbled together newish looking parts under it would be perfectly normal in that environment.

If an old single cab Ranger had a slightly reduced length 'short box' on the back, running around on fire roads in the mountains, hardly anyone would ever see it, and most who did wouldn't think it was anything other than someone's beater for hauling firewood etc. But the chassis, drivetrain, and suspension could be 100% new with a little dirt or rust colored paint to disguise it.

The mules we really want to see probably exist, but few people see them, and fewer notice. A fugly looking lump with psychedelic polka dots driving through a major metropolitan area will get many orders of magnitude more attention, and Ford can trot it out whenever it's convenient or 'Bronco' hit numbers on the search engines are waning.

 

[3crows]

The body on this alleged test mule has nothing to do with the supposedly coming Bronco. It is just an irrelevant wrapper on the candy.

If the real thing has that sloped back windshield, I will pass and just get the Wrangler I am slowly coming to think is the only real deal.

 

[BroncoMike]

The other possibility is that the camo body isn't of the current Ranger, but of the next-gen. I have difficulty believing they are that far ahead on it, but that's the only other viable reason I could see.

 

[BONESTOCK]

I just wonder why they keep putting camo on the ranger body. The jig is up Ford, we all know what’s under the wrap.

haha!! Can't wait until they use Vanta black instead of these camo wraps! BMW did a car in it! https://www.fastcompany.com/9039652...he-worlds-blackest-black-is-deeply-unsettling

 

[BroncoBuyer]

I never even knew such a thing existed.. Weird!

 

[indio22]

The body on this alleged test mule has nothing to do with the supposedly coming Bronco. It is just an irrelevant wrapper on the candy.

If the real thing has that sloped back windshield, I will pass and just get the Wrangler I am slowly coming to think is the only real deal.

Sadly for the most part, Wrangler is the only real deal here in the USA. Hard to believe none of the other automakers have been competing in this area, leaving it all to Jeep for so many years. When was the last open top truly rugged 4x4 available in the USA? I hope finally the new Bronco provides some competition.

I looked at new Wanglers, but instead several months ago, I bought a used Jeep TJ for $6000. We are having a lot of fun with that vehicle. I'm not clear at this point, how dropping 30+ grand (or 40 or 50+ grand yikes like some new Rubicon owners) can provide more bang for the buck in terms of fun. At least for my use case.

I hope the new Bronco is a true successor to the original 1966-77 Bronco. Until that time, at the moment I'm taking a break from rebuilding the rear axle of my 1972 Series III Land Rover. I got that for $6000 many years ago as well. The fun/cost of these older 4x4s is hard to beat. In fact, I wouldn't even want my teenage sons driving around dinging up a new Wrangler/Bronco, would be too much of a headache.

Sponsored