F250

Maybe the workers in Kansas City MO will refuse to ship a truck unless the panels are straight. This sort of thing isn't like a squeak or rattle it's pretty obvious if someone just looks at the truck before it's shipped.

"Good enough" ain't going to cut it. That is a $56,000 Platinum and the buyer sure as hell shouldn't have to put up with that sloppy work.

Ford already has Explorers and Expeditions and Ford has long ago decided they knew the buyers of 4-doors don't want or need serious off-road capability leaving that market to the Wrangler Unlimited and Grand Cherokee. So we are considering a remake of the original Bronco not the full size which was about 9 inches wider than the original. Someone mentioned Jeep has unmatched popularity and aftermarket support in the segment which is true. But when arguing that Ford could not compete consider Bronco has been out of production for 19 years and the original 66-77 has been out 38 years yet the aftermarket offers complete body tubs, wire harnesses, chassis parts everything to build a new 40 year old Bronco. Considering the harsh abuse an off-road vehicle takes (compared to say a road car like a classic Mustang) and how many were built in that era there are a remarkable number of survivors most in outstanding condition. What does this prove? Well a considerable number of real buyers in this market want a Ford Bronco enough to spend big bucks restoring or building one from the ground up. If Ford had an outstanding modern version on the showroom they would sell quite a few kind of like new Mustangs vs classics. Once the Bronco is in production models could be added like a 4-door or half-cab pickup. But it has to be done right the original was perfect sized and capable the full size Broncos were too big and the Bronco II was too small, not as capable and hard top. Did someone say Green??

Through the years certain Ford plants had a reputation for consistent outstanding quality and some others were known for shipping poorly built vehicles. This seemed to be a serious problem in the late 1950's. I think you'll find this story interesting: http://hamptonroads.com/node/67561 The assembly quality of these vehicles was so bad thousands were shipped to a separate Ford assembly plant that did not originally build them to have all the quality issues corrected. "In 1957, dealers angered by the poor workmanship "demanded a quality car," Jimmy Holt says. "Our guys made sure they got it."

Car is 14 years old I doubt it would be a "design flaw." Why was the heater core replaced, leak or clogged? If it was clogged and the system was not thoroughly cleaned the problem remains. One of these is very helpful to diagnose a problem like this:

DTP is Ford's no expense spared best of everything home plant and they can't get the bumpers and doors hung straight! "It's a big risk. So far this year, one out of every three vehicles Ford sold in the U.S. was an F-Series pickup. Morgan Stanley estimates F-Series trucks account for 90 percent of Ford's global automotive profit...The aluminum-sided F-150 could set a new industry standard — or cost the company its pickup truck crown." And they're apparently shipping sloppy work just to meet a launch quota!

How bad are these Deanh? Do you have pictures? I realize the bumper is fixed mounted to the frame and the cab assembly is dropped later with insulating mounts but your first post referred to body panels so misaligned you sent the DX truck back. Looks like Dearborn hasn't progressed much since they built my Mustang.

No offense (really) but I don't think you understand the target segment.

That and sometimes...don't quote me on this... it may be hard to believe but people drink a little beer while they're on the beach. And it may impair their judgement. Plus the Yahoo factor must be accounted for.

Incredible. Ford spent a ton trying to launch the aluminum F150 clean and it comes out like this?!

Looks like that's what that lame CUV needed. My assumption is the CUV was buried deep in the sand sitting on the pan and attaching high on the bar gave some lift while pulling that car out.

Roll bar. Don't ask me why,

It's probably regional our Wranglers were/are soft top and opened frequently however my sister-in-law lives in Wyoming and her Wrangler is a hardtop. In the summer most around here especially on the beach are topless. Sometimes with a bikini or just the top section left on as a sun shade. If it rains the interior is made to hose out so it doesn't matter. That's another reason Wranglers don"t have a quiet ride no insulation at all but easy to get sand, mud or whatever out.

A hot rod CUV. No thanks. This is what happens to AWD CUVs on the Hatteras Island beaches.

I like you Richard. I know I can type until my fingers bleed and never get you to move an inch on your opinion. That's cool, it's a BON thing. I will blast you back with a reminder the original Bronco had a removable top and was not a rebadged Jeep. Your turn.

And if you decide to get the hardtop the front section is easily removable like T-tops on an 80's Mustang. Some people have both tops and just bolt the hard top on for the winter.

Now you be careful young man those damn motorcycles are dangerous! Nice bike, don't see many Aprilias around here (Virginia Beach)

I dont recall saying doors. Top yes. My old 1972 IH Scout II had a removable top. It was steel. Yes, steel...I removed it once while I owned it. Only once damn thing weighed a ton.

Probably the best post I've seen on BON in a long time. Thank you. We sometimes can be intolerant of other opinions around here, or at least it comes off that way in writing. If we were all sitting around having a beer and talking cars/trucks/bikes it would be less abrasive. Expression, body language and tone make a difference. Good comparison with the motorcycles. I've had a few of those to, loved those British bikes (Triumph) and as far as performance you cant beat a bang-for-your-buck ride like the Triumph Speed Triple. But I'm 6'1" and old so I find my Harley Wide Glide fun these days. Besides, I'm partial to American machines. My black Wide glide and my wife's pink flamed 1200 Sportster:

Had a 1993 Wrangler for 17 years it was my wife's daily driver. My daughter loved it to so when she got her drivers license we gave it to her. I think she was the only kid in her class who learned to drive with a manual transmission. We got a new Wrangler in 2012 with the new pentastar v6 engine and automatic transmission. What a difference.

See my edit above. Most would consider your Mustang GT too small inside, the ride too hard (especially that solid rear axle) its v8 engine way to thirsty and therefore an inadequate daily driver. Different horses for different courses you love it they don't. Nothing wrong with that. By the way Mustang racked up 82,635 sales last year on a unique platform.

You compared two vehicles designed for entirely different purposes. Opposite ends of the spectrum. The Mustang cannot do what the Wrangler was designed to do and vice versa. And that's your opinion of an inadequate DD, many more buyers would consider a small 2-door car with a gas guzzling V8 and harsh suspension a lousy DD.

For all of the happy Escape owners: Glad you got the CAR you wanted Ford has a hit in the CUV segment for sure. But we are talking about a new Bronco which if done right could be a real asset in the Ford model line along side the CUVs that Ford already has. I believe Ford can build a serious competitor and be successful with the project if they make the commitment.

Thank you for your apples to oranges Wrangler vs Mustang comparison. I have an old Mustang GT as well. Its a fun car but when I need to tow my 8,500 LB boat I grab my F150 keys. The Mustang performs well but not when I go beach driving on Hatteras island.

The current Jeep Wrangler is not as you say "a woefully inadequate daily driver" I own one do you? I have had several Jeeps, Broncos and one IH Scout II. IF Ford is going to re-enter this market they should make the investment to do it right, not cobble something quick and dirty off of an existing platform and call it a Bronco. They did it right before with the original well respected Bronco and built it with only mechanical upgrades for 11 years. At that time the market was much smaller than today. The original Bronco had a removable hard top, soft top and pickup half top options why not do it again. Many here have been clamoring for a small Ford truck. In a utility it becomes a 3-in-1 vehicle custom fit to the buyer's needs/wants. Removable doors are not required on a new Bronco. You claim a soft top option is not needed, well cancel the Mustang convertible again. I'm talking about an American designed and built utility for the American market first, if it can be sold in other less profitable markets that's okay. But don't dump some Suzuki Samurai clone Troller here. You preach about the "business case" for a vehicle well let's see Ford utility total 2014 sales results: TOTAL = 693,524 (20,655 of these were the fleet Police utilities) Jeep Wrangler = 175,328 The Wrangler came in third in the Jeep line behind the Grand Cherokee and Cherokee. TOTAL Jeep brand sales for 2014 = 692,348 So replace the Flex with the Bronco. Other manufacturers looked at the successful Mustang formula and jumped in the game to compete with vehicles that are very capable yet not the same. But do a new Bronco right from the ground up or stay off the field.