Anthony
-
Posts
6,240 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
48
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Anthony
-
-
11 minutes ago, jcartwright99 said:
I'm starting to wonder if the SAS package really makes ride that much smoother than the other more road setups (base/bb/ob)? I guess I will just have to drive it and find out.
I am going to throw out the golf clap for Ford and the engineers behind the Bronco. They have clearly come out with a better Jeep. If it weren't for Covid and all the underlying problems that it created, I think Ford would of caught Jeep even more off guard. Jeep had plenty of time to develop the 392, hybrid, and Rubicon package (35's) to counter Bronco. That's about all they can do right now until a full redesign.
Well, one thing is for sure, Jeep is not giving up their golden egg without a fight so we are going to see some awesome "back and forth" features being added to both the Bronco and Wrangler for the foreseeable future which is going to make for some incredible vehicles. The next era of vehicles is off-road!
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, FordBuyer said:
Still don't get their complaints about the "underpowered" 4 banger turbo with 300hp and plenty of torque. They talked like the 2.3 is not a turbo and modest horsepower. In the Ranger, the 2.3 is a very robust engine and it has less hp than Bronco. I've watched a number of reviews of 2.3 Bronco and no one complained about underpowered. Maybe against Hemi V8 power, but 300 hp is not underpowered.
Not sure if the gearing and tire packages on the Bronco make the power delivery feel different as well. I know my Ranger feels pretty quick with the 2.3L, but who knows. They seemed pretty hungry for the 2.7L as well, so the 2.3 may always have been the lesser engine to them no matter how strong it is.
-
18 minutes ago, PREMiERdrum said:
Garage mural upgrade is underway before the arrival...
That is sweet!
-
1
-
-
Just finished watching the SavageGeese review. Wow. Those guys are notorious Ford haters (I'm still smarting over their Ranger review). For them to sing such flowery praises for the Bronco means a lot.
I'm looking forward to more longer term reviews (1 week, etc... instead of just a rushed 24 hour the first drive reviews all seem to be).
Can't wait to see some member reviews too!
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, akirby said:
Savage Geese just said the ride quality was dramatically better than Wrangler. So it’s hard to really other than there appears to be a lot of subjectiveness at play here, or maybe comparing different models.Awesome, I'm only 2 minutes into that video. Thanks for pointing that out. I really need to dig more into these reviews. ...and yes, I'm sure it also has to do with which trim each reviewer is testing (a la 35" tires vs base tires, etc...)
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, FordBuyer said:
Uh, the Wrangler has solid front axle and Bronco has independent front suspension which makes for significant better steering feel over bumps in road. No contest. Wind noise bsy be comparable, but not steering comfort, especially over longer drives. Wrangler wanders over road meaning lots of minute steering corrections.
Hey man, it isn't my review. And let's be clear... just because the Bronco has IFS does not automatically mean you are going to see massive improvements in ride quality, especially if the rest of the suspension has been dialed in for use on rugged terrain. I'm only making note that so far, some of stated differences have not been as far apart as some thought they were going to be, more subtle than gigantic. Counterpoint: I'd much rather have better steering feel any day of the week. I had a ZJ and that thing felt like the steering shaft was connected to a jar of mayonnaise before being routed to the wheels.
-
I've only read two reviews so far (Jalopnik and TFL) and they both mention that the on-road driving experience isn't really much different from the Wrangler as we expected. TFL mentioning the difference is really subtle and David saying the Jeep was actually smoother on-road (though advised the Bronco felt a bit more stable at speed). I only mention this because I know that was surmised to be one of the big differentiators for the two vehicles. From the sounds of the TFL article, it sounds like the ride will be similar to the Ranger (which is fine by me!)
PS: Thanks for posting all the review links, I'm going to make my way through them all!
-
12 minutes ago, jcartwright99 said:
I don't think so. David is the 1% of off road truck owners. A self proclaimed Jeep shit box rescuer, who knows how to wrench and go off road. I think his opinion will be very different than most reviewers but I appreciate it. Keep in mind, David was an engineer for Jeep for a while, so he knows what it took for Ford to create the Bronco. I expected his review to be less rosy than others since he has a higher standard, and he didn't disappoint.
Now, are his gripes warranted (about the ride)? Who knows! I think we'll find out as more folks get these in their hands and more trims get tested. I fully expect the Base, Big Bend, and Outer Banks to be most civilized for on road duty. The other models (or models with SAS package) will be more wallowy and louder, as to be expected.
I didn't find his review really bad at all. Just honest from his point of view with his background. Anything negative he said was backed up with his reasoning and still the end result was that he thinks it is most likely better than the Wrangler.
-
1
-
-
Hey there. Which vehicle are you looking to do this on?
-
I've got a half finished photoshop of a modern Ranger flareside lying around on my hard drive somewhere.
-
2
-
-
Speaking of Civics, here's a Maverick next to a Civic from a couple generations ago (posted by @phoebesaid on Twitter)
-
1
-
-
Yeh, that C-pillar is pretty bad. They had a winner with the Mustang Mach-E C-pillar, I guess they didn't want a direct copy? But man, woof.
-
36k reservations in 9 days following reveal.
-
3
-
-
Beautiful site seeing a Bronco going down the line in between two Rangers!
-
7
-
-
1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:
I have to agree on this-it can take styling cues from the Raptor and use it for its own thing.
Its like when Flush headlights where a big deal in the 1980s...the Taurus pioneered it and the 1986 Mustang and 1987 T-bird headlights where similar.’m
Oh I know they can put it anything they want, but I was just saying it hasn’t really been a design trend they has been shared with non-Raptors.
I mean it would be one thing if it was integrated into other vehicles in the lineup after the Raptor came out, but it’s been 3 generations and no other vehicles had used it.
Only two vehicles are produced with that grille right now and both are Raptors (F-150 and Ranger). -
26 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:
Plus this little Easter egg on the camouflage
We know Warthog is the internal name and the camo could clearly be referring to that. I think it really could go either way. With Raptor they already have built in name recognition, but they could name it Pink Unicorn and it wouldn't deter sales of this beast.. The grille really has me confused as to what it will be named.
-
Seeing that grille will revive the Raptor rumor. Honestly if that’s what it looks like, even I think it may be Raptor and Warthog is just the internal name like Terminator. That grille has been one of the defining stylistic traits that define the Raptor. Hmmmmmmm…
-
Boy, the trim with the tow hooks looks so much better than the ones with the bumper pods on the lesser versions.
Are driving lights not available on any version?
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, bzcat said:
The next logical step for Ford is to make Bronco Sport and Maverick "global" products instead of "regional". Both are currently considered exclusive to the Americas but I see no reason why they couldn't be sold in Europe and Middle East.
Both would also seems to be popular in Asia Pacific region where their size and form factors really fit local tastes and expectations. Too bad neither were provisioned for RHD. I can see Ford selling quite a few in Australia. I wonder if it is possible for Ford to make RHD Bronco Sport and Maverick but fitted with RHD Kuga dash and center stack... not idea but it would be a cheap way to get the products out to handful of RHD markets where the pair should do well - Australia, Thailand, New Zealand, South Africa.
I was suprised the Maverick at minimum was not offered ROW. So many other automakers have similar products in other markets that the Maverick seems a no-brainer. Unless they just want to focus where there is no competition first or just don't have the capacity to build it elsewhere.
-
4 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:
Maybe a hybrid isn't for me then. Nowhere in the Detroit area can I get away with driving slower than 70 on any freeway. Many places it's less than 75Move to CT, you'll never get above 20!
-
The front end isn’t terrible, it’s unconventional. More automakers need to design outside the box and not what people perceive as what a car should look like.
It may not suit everyone’s fancy, but the front end of cars don’t need to look like two headlights and a grille anymore. Lighting and cooling technology have gotten us to a place where front end design didn’t need to be constrained into what has previously been limited by functionality.
I dig it.
-
1
-
-
As much everyone is talking about the XL, I doubt they will account for more then 10% of sales or so because 1) very few people these days wants a bare bones vehicle. 2) dealers aren’t going to want order many of them when they know the higher trims will sell easier even though they cost more (especially in the first year when demand will be high)
The real value winner is the XLT. For the same price as a basic economy sedan you can have a well-equipped 40 mpg crew cab pickup.
What is the plant capacity? Do we know what the limit on how many of these things can be built per year? Because they are going to sell every last one.
-
3
-
-
I'm impressed! I think I know what my son(s) first vehicles are going to be!
I agree on the weirdness of the frontend / headlights, but I also know in person it will most likely look just fine. They are going to sell all of them!
-
30 minutes ago, jpd80 said:
Think about it, a 2WD Regular Cab Ranger pickup would have cost much less than the 2WD Super Cab,
we’re talking in the the low $20K region before fleet discounts. The one thing Ford didn’t want to do is
go back to that cheap little Ranger runabout like they killed back in 2011, it’s all about selling as many
of those 4WD Crew Cabs as possible…….the same formula for success as F150.
Flip side: I also imagine the margins on the lower-priced Maverick are going to be razor thin if the pricing rumors are true. They are going to make more money on an XL Ranger or XL F-150 than they would on an XL Maverick. If the rumors of pricing are accurate, how many $20k Mavericks (barebone XL models I assume) do we honestly think will be built and what can the margins even be on a 4 door crew cab pickup at that price?
Bronco and Bronco Sport World Premier July 13th!!
in Ford Motor Company Discussion Forum
Posted
WWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOO