10R60 (not 10R80) 10-speed automatic transmission for 2021 Bronco [update: confirmed in Ford parts system]

[Djdmustang]

I stand corrected, BUT y'all still crying over spilt milk. I guess that's what forums are for though, right?

10 years absent from car forums, same whiners complaining off speculation

you are good at back-pedaling........

Sponsored

 

[Hemisfear]

No Its not, we have been deceived / shined many times by Ford. We (members of this forum) are doing what real reporters should be doing, finding the truth not just taking things that are forced fed by the the people in charge. We want the truth.

Deceived, more like assumed! lol

 

[Mattwings]

I don’t think anyone knows enough to say Ford is deceiving anyone. I can’t find anywhere that they claim it’s anything other than a 10sp (no claims it was the “60” or “80”.I am also not concerned about the shifting properties. Not that it can’t be bad, but my experience and opinion already varies wildly form others rests and impressions of the F150/2.7, so it remains to be seen. I would like to understand the rationale and what Ford has done to validate the performance and durability in the Bronco application. It may be a short lived vehicle in my stable if the truck can’t be used the way I intend, but that’s TBD.

 

[AcesandEights]

Why would Ford use this under spec transmission for our Bronco’s they know what its meant to be used for smh .

Money?

 

[sledboy]

I don’t think anyone knows enough to say Ford is deceiving anyone. I can’t find anywhere that they claim it’s anything other than a 10sp (no claims it was the “60” or “80”.I am also not concerned about the shifting properties. Not that it can’t be bad, but my experience and opinion already varies wildly form others rests and impressions of the F150/2.7, so it remains to be seen. I would like to understand the rationale and what Ford has done to validate the performance and durability in the Bronco application. It may be a short lived vehicle in my stable if the truck can’t be used the way I intend, but that’s TBD.

I agree 100%. I would love Ford to respond with ALL the info including their reasoning for using this transmission along with what they have done to resolve the known tranny issues they are having with the Explorers. Also why they used a tranny whose capacity is near maxed out with the 2.7. What about the tune Ford is supposed release? What about other tunes that will surely produce torque over what the transmission is rated for?

 

[Lab00Rat]

Not to be that guy, but the 2020 Explorer cannot be flat towed behind a motorhome. I suspect it's because it lacks a 4WD transfer case even though it come in 4WD options.

This is starting to make me concerned all together about the Bronco. Flat tow is a must, Ford said it could be flat towed. Therefore, someone has their information slightly off because 2020 Explorer != 2021 Bronco - even with a R60/R80 tranny.

 

[Bronco2021RV]

I feel very sorry for your dealer who will now lose future allocations

I think you might be in the minority feeling sorry for a dealer that will probably make $5000 over MSRP. But for whatever it’s worth to you the dealer is already informed me that if for any reason I didn’t want the Bronco there would not be a problem for them. So feeling sorry for a dealership I’m not sure if that makes a lot of sense. But to each his own.

 

[VelocityBrew]

you are good at back-pedaling........

I think we consider back pedaling two different things. I'm still not bent outta shape about getting a 10r60.

But my comment does still stand, this forum is FULL of whiners

 

[mC.242]

One more thing to worry about even though not one of us has ever driven a bronco let alone own one.
Seriously I am tired of these theoretical debates on performance and reliability. I guess it's just something to debate/complain about until we get them.

 

[SnowBronco]

One more thing to worry about even though not one of us has ever driven a bronco let alone own one.
Seriously I am tired of these theoretical debates on performance and reliability. I guess it's just something to debate/complain about until we get them.

Exactly. Am I happy that it gets a slightly downgraded trans knowing what I am going to put mine thru? No. Do I know how this one differs and how it will work on the bronco? No. Is the Bronco a totally different beast than the exploder? Yes. Do these family of trans do vastly different things in vastly different vehicles? Yes. So while I'm not exactly pleased..... I think all the whining and conjecture is redundant at this point and some of y'all need to step away from the computer.

 

[flatlander40]

It’s a terrible transmission for a $50,000 vehicle!! Y’all should cancel you orders!!

 

[NotApplicable]

there is no way the Ranger should have a better transmission than a $60k Bronco

No one said the 80 is better. By literally all accounts (explorer reviews), the 60 is better behaving. Max torque is lower but still 120%+ Bronco’s factory torque rating…

 

[Djdmustang]

I don’t think anyone knows enough to say Ford is deceiving anyone. I can’t find anywhere that they claim it’s anything other than a 10sp (no claims it was the “60” or “80”.I am also not concerned about the shifting properties. Not that it can’t be bad, but my experience and opinion already varies wildly form others rests and impressions of the F150/2.7, so it remains to be seen. I would like to understand the rationale and what Ford has done to validate the performance and durability in the Bronco application. It may be a short lived vehicle in my stable if the truck can’t be used the way I intend, but that’s TBD.

I don’t think anyone knows enough to say Ford is deceiving anyone. I can’t find anywhere that they claim it’s anything other than a 10sp (no claims it was the “60” or “80”.I am also not concerned about the shifting properties. Not that it can’t be bad, but my experience and opinion already varies wildly form others rests and impressions of the F150/2.7, so it remains to be seen. I would like to understand the rationale and what Ford has done to validate the performance and durability in the Bronco application. It may be a short lived vehicle in my stable if the truck can’t be used the way I intend, but that’s TBD.

This process of not being forthcoming and releasing specifications is deceiving in my opinion. This forum has picked up on many issues and called out for answers: from the GVWR, to towing, to MPG, the release of information is not there. Ford designed the Bronco from the Base to FE with similar capabilities and not a real gap between the models when one can upgrade a Base model almost as good as the top model. They should have had one model as the overlander that can tow and carry more than the Baja racer or Rock Crawler. Separate the trims for goodness sake. That would please many and would clearly define a purpose for each tool one wants or needs. Just my opinion. Separating the trims wood provide an easier more forthcoming and less secretive approach to release information and specs to their clients.

 

[TheObiJuan]

The Bronco should get the heavier duty one, I'm just happy I'm getting the manual to not worry about it.

I have driven the Explorers with the 10R60 and it is extremely sluggish, is constantly shifting, and can't decide what gear it wants to be in. It also causes extreme delay in normal and aggressive acceleration. It's brutal.

I own a tuned Explorer ST with 10R60 and it’s a wonderful shifting and intuitive transmission, but it’s weak. Perhaps you had a faulty one. The weak as FUCK tranny rated for just 443TQ and with an E85 tune it breaks. Even aftermarket upgraded trans are having flex plates break because those upgraded parts aren’t available yet.

It’s an absolute disservice to this platform for Ford to charge us $60k and give me shit sandwich, penny-pinching tranny.
Shameful.

Sponsored