SavageGeese review the Bronco Sport

[FR739]

 

 

[FordBuyer]

At least they didn't give it the hit job they did on the Ranger and Explorer. They seemed to give it grudging respect. The constant harping on how slow it was was overdone though. A 0-60 time of around 7.9 is not slow. And 180hp is not below average for the segment. Also surprised how they didn't like how it rode on paved roads. Every other review has praised its ride on paved roads. They seemed to like its cuteness, character, and not much else. Guess they are used to driving vehicles that go 0-60 in under 4 seconds and have magna ride suspensions.

[fuzzymoomoo]

4 minutes ago, FordBuyer said:

At least they didn't give it the hit job they did on the Ranger and Explorer

Ive always found him to be pretty fair. The one complaint I've usually had with his reviews are complaints of audio systems. I don't care what his tests say, a properly EQ'd system won't sound like he claims. It's not that hard to do and it's more subjective than any other element of a car. I managed to do it on a Ranger with B&O in about 20 seconds during the ready for Ranger event when it launched. 

[FordBuyer]

8 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Ive always found him to be pretty fair. The one complaint I've usually had with his reviews are complaints of audio systems. I don't care what his tests say, a properly EQ'd system won't sound like he claims. It's not that hard to do and it's more subjective than any other element of a car. I managed to do it on a Ranger with B&O in about 20 seconds during the ready for Ranger event when it launched. 

 

Watch the SG review of the Ranger snd Explorer. Forget the dudes name, but he was savage on both throughout the review. I wanted to put a sock in his mouth as he went on and on with contempt for Ford. If I were Ford, I wouldn't give them anything. Maybe that's why they acted nicer on BS, even the interior. The bald headed reviewer seems to hate Ford interiors, even on his Mustang GT 350. Never misses a chance to diss Ford interiors with his haughty attitude.

[fuzzymoomoo]

27 minutes ago, FordBuyer said:

Watch the SG review of the Ranger snd Explorer. Forget the dudes name, but he was savage on both throughout the review.

I watched both of those when they came out. I don't believe he said anything that was too unfair at the time, audio system complaints not withstanding. 

[rperez817]

31 minutes ago, FordBuyer said:

Never misses a chance to diss Ford interiors with his haughty attitude.

 

I don't find Savage Geese and his team to be haughty at all. He is more knowledgeable about automotive engineering than most other amateur automotive reviewers. His reviews are very objective and he doesn't recite stuff from automakers' marketing materials in his reviews. Very refreshing. I wouldn't be surprised if Savage Geese has an engineering or related degree.

 

Ford branded vehicles in the U.S. market are well known for cheap looking, cheap feeling interior materials and design (except for high end F-Series, Expedition, and Mustang Mach-E). For Ford sheeple like me, it's just something we accept. But for a general audience, Savage Geese is justified in pointing this out. 

[fuzzymoomoo]

26 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

 

I don't find Savage Geese and his team to be haughty at all. He is more knowledgeable about automotive engineering than most other amateur automotive reviewers. His reviews are very objective and he doesn't recite stuff from automakers' marketing materials in his reviews. Very refreshing. I wouldn't be surprised if Savage Geese has an engineering or related degree.

 

Ford branded vehicles in the U.S. market are well known for cheap looking, cheap feeling interior materials and design (except for high end F-Series, Expedition, and Mustang Mach-E). For Ford sheeple like me, it's just something we accept. But for a general audience, Savage Geese is justified in pointing this out. 

Exactly. It comes across as harsh at times but he's not talking out of his ass, he clearly has some knowledge about what he's saying. I really don't believe he's being unfair. 

[kyle]

He loves the Aviator and praised the sound system.  I think he’s pretty damn objective and not sure anyone would praise a 350 Mustang.  It’s a POS inside for the money but also realize that’s not it’s mission. 

Not  sure if he just sets the radio on stock settings but he’s the only reviewer I’ve seen with some type of software that analyzes the performance so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. 
Will check out his BS review next few days. 

[rmc523]

2 hours ago, FordBuyer said:

At least they didn't give it the hit job they did on the Ranger and Explorer. They seemed to give it grudging respect. The constant harping on how slow it was was overdone though. A 0-60 time of around 7.9 is not slow. And 180hp is not below average for the segment. Also surprised how they didn't like how it rode on paved roads. Every other review has praised its ride on paved roads. They seemed to like its cuteness, character, and not much else. Guess they are used to driving vehicles that go 0-60 in under 4 seconds and have magna ride suspensions.

 

I will say 7.9 seconds is slow.   BUT, it's all relative to what you're used to.  These guys drive faster vehicles regularly, so to them it feels slow.  I said the same about the Mach E I drove the other day - I'm used to faster vehicles, so it felt slow, but for the segment and what most people will be looking for, it works well for both Mach E and this Bronco Sport (Mach E of course has the GT model on the way too).

 

I don't know if they've driven any of the competition like the Renegade or Compass or Cherokee.

 

Reviews online I found say Renegade or Compass are around 9.3 seconds.  Cherokee drops to 6.7.

 

So for the primary competition, it performs better.

[fuzzymoomoo]

1 hour ago, kyle said:

Not  sure if he just sets the radio on stock settings but he’s the only reviewer I’ve seen with some type of software that analyzes the performance so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt

In the Bronco Sport video is shows the audio settings screen and it's set to the default. Hopefully he knows better but obviously I can't prove it. 

[akirby]

13 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Reviews online I found say Renegade or Compass are around 9.3 seconds.  Cherokee drops to 6.7.

 

So for the primary competition, it performs better.

And the base CX-5 is 8.3 seconds.   Context is important especially when faster versions are available.

[FR739]

3 hours ago, FordBuyer said:

At least they didn't give it the hit job they did on the Ranger and Explorer.

Those were not hit jobs.  They were very accurate and fair. It’s ok to call out poor design or shoddy materials.  
 

As for the BS they clearly get it.  It’s a vehicle designed for the Renegade crowd and for those who want an Escape but one that doesn’t look like...well...an Escape.  
 

As for the sound system, the B&O logo is all that makes the system B&O.  It’s still a cheap, basic audio system.  Not sure why B&O would want their name tied to something so cheap but hey, money is money.  It reminds me of the Bose system that was in GM vehicles in the 2000s.  It was crap 

[fuzzymoomoo]

1 hour ago, FR739 said:

Those were not hit jobs.  They were very accurate and fair. It’s ok to call out poor design or shoddy materials.  

Hell, I've even done it before on this very forum. There's a detailed write up I did on the Ranger when I went to the launch event at the plant and sat in one for the first time. I called out a few things that I felt needed to be called out but I felt I was very fair about it. I intent to do the same with Bronco if they have an event like that again. 

 

1 hour ago, FR739 said:

As for the sound system, the B&O logo is all that makes the system B&O.  It’s still a cheap, basic audio system.  Not sure why B&O would want their name tied to something so cheap but hey, money is money.  It reminds me of the Bose system that was in GM vehicles in the 2000s.  It was crap 

You're right it's not a huge upgrade but it is an upgrade. The wiring is a little different with a different style of connector that is supposed to mean a better connection and the speakers themselves are made with a different material over the standard paper ones, plus the addition of a few more speakers and a subwoofer. You can definitely do better aftermarket if you want to spend the money but for what it is and for what else you usually get for checking that option it's generally worth the upgrade. 

[slemke]

4 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

I don't find Savage Geese and his team to be haughty at all. He is more knowledgeable about automotive engineering than most other amateur automotive reviewers. His reviews are very objective and he doesn't recite stuff from automakers' marketing materials in his reviews. Very refreshing. I wouldn't be surprised if Savage Geese has an engineering or related degree.

 

Ford branded vehicles in the U.S. market are well known for cheap looking, cheap feeling interior materials and design (except for high end F-Series, Expedition, and Mustang Mach-E). For Ford sheeple like me, it's just something we accept. But for a general audience, Savage Geese is justified in pointing this out. 

But is it really cheap?  Way back when Ford was considered to have low quality interiors I read an article about it in automotive engineering.  The materials Ford used were the same grade of plastic as Honda.  Just how they used them differed so one was considered cheap.  Media keeps telling everyone they have cheap materials and looks cheap eventually people believe it.

 

I can say, though, that the materials Ford does use stand up well.

 

in a comparison between the Infiniti G30 andLincoln LS, the Infiniti was praised for its quality materials and the LS panned.  Within a year, the paint was peeling off the center stack in the Infiniti.  The overhead console fell out of the headliner on a Maxima I test drove.  There are cars with far lower interior quality than Fords.

[FR739]

48 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Hell, I've even done it before on this very forum. There's a detailed write up I did on the Ranger when I went to the launch event at the plant and sat in one for the first time. I called out a few things that I felt needed to be called out but I felt I was very fair about it. I intent to do the same with Bronco if they have an event like that again. 

 

You're right it's not a huge upgrade but it is an upgrade. The wiring is a little different with a different style of connector that is supposed to mean a better connection and the speakers themselves are made with a different material over the standard paper ones, plus the addition of a few more speakers and a subwoofer. You can definitely do better aftermarket if you want to spend the money but for what it is and for what else you usually get for checking that option it's generally worth the upgrade. 

Great points.  Much like society in general, it seems facts and honesty have no bearing.  You should just follow and repeat the narrative. I don’t know why honesty is so despised.  
 

Also I watched both the Ranger and Explorer review and found them to be very accurate. Of note, during the Explorer review when they were discussing the awful stereo, their chart of the analysis did say that a lot of the issues were present regardless of how the EQ was set.  So I’m lead to believe they do adjust it.  

[T-dubz]

I found this review to be a bit lacking. It didn’t seem to go into as much detail as the other reviews they have done. Maybe it’s because it wasn’t the bald guy doing the review.

[Anthony]

I watch all their interviews and find them pretty fair.  I own a Ranger and while that review was tough to watch, he wasn't really out of line.  

[fuzzymoomoo]

49 minutes ago, Anthony said:

I watch all their interviews and find them pretty fair.  I own a Ranger and while that review was tough to watch, he wasn't really out of line.  

Try being someone who builds them ?

 

Though like I said I thought he was fair and he had some of the same thoughts I had about the interior. 

[FordBuyer]

2 hours ago, Anthony said:

I watch all their interviews and find them pretty fair.  I own a Ranger and while that review was tough to watch, he wasn't really out of line.  

 

Let's see.....he hated the trans, he hated the ride, he hated the interior, and basically hated the Ranger in general. Meanwhile, I have seen and read scores of reviews of the Ranger, and the great majority are very positive. Many have it best in class. And the Explorer sells like hotcakes and gets heavy duty use from police departments around the country. All major auto companies make good vehicles and thus scathing reviews are suspect to me. 

[FordBuyer]

10 hours ago, T-dubz said:

I found this review to be a bit lacking. It didn’t seem to go into as much detail as the other reviews they have done. Maybe it’s because it wasn’t the bald guy doing the review.

 

Yes, the other guy is much more fair and goes down easier. The bald headed guy acts like his wife just kicked him out of the house and locked the doors when he gets a Ford product. However, he did buy a GT 350 and loves it, but doesn't miss his chance to diss the GT 5.0. Uh baldy, the GT 350 is a $70,000 track racer and the GT is $25,000 less.

[Anthony]

17 minutes ago, FordBuyer said:

 

Let's see.....he hated the trans, he hated the ride, he hated the interior, and basically hated the Ranger in general. Meanwhile, I have seen and read scores of reviews of the Ranger, and the great majority are very positive. Many have it best in class. And the Explorer sells like hotcakes and gets heavy duty use from police departments around the country. All major auto companies make good vehicles and thus scathing reviews are suspect to me. 

The interior is pretty meh (it came out in 2015). The ride is more wallowy than others. And sure, depending on how you drive, the trans can bog down (not in 95% of use cases though). He isn’t wrong in any of those counts. If you don’t like his delivery, that’s one thing. 

Does any of that that make it a horrible vehicle?  No, I wouldn’t trade it for any other midsizer. It’s far from perfect, but I believe the positives outweigh the negatives (especially that sweet turbo 4).
 

Some other competitors do some things better, but I believe overall the Ranger is the best in its current class.  That also isn’t saying much of what is currently available in its class. They all are kinda mediocre. The next gen of midsize are the ones to watch for stellar features and attention to detail. 

[FR739]

1 hour ago, FordBuyer said:

 

Let's see.....he hated the trans, he hated the ride, he hated the interior, and basically hated the Ranger in general. Meanwhile, I have seen and read scores of reviews of the Ranger, and the great majority are very positive. Many have it best in class. And the Explorer sells like hotcakes and gets heavy duty use from police departments around the country. All major auto companies make good vehicles and thus scathing reviews are suspect to me. 

The 10-speed has been problematic since day one regardless of application. 
 

Yes he called out The interior which is mediocre at best (especially the infotainment and that screen) and the ride he said was trucking which he liked!

 

As for the Ranger, that was deserved too. Cheap center stack, sluggish infotainment, cheesy and awful augmented engine noise, and a gauge cluster from a 2011 Edge.  His complaints were valid. 
 

And his praises were valid too.  He praised aspects of both vehicles as well. 

Edited March 19, 2021 by FR739

[rperez817]

2 hours ago, FordBuyer said:

All major auto companies make good vehicles and thus scathing reviews are suspect to me. 

 

At the same time, all major auto companies have areas for improvement in their products. Scathing reviews are often appropriate. 

 

YouTube automotive reviewers that consistently fail to highlight weak spots in the vehicles they test are suspect. Some of them are so bad it's as if they're reading cue cards of manufacturer marketing materials. As FR739 mentioned, Savage Geese does an excellent job of combining both constructive praise and constructive criticism in his videos.

Edited March 19, 2021 by rperez817

[CurtisH]

35 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

 

At the same time, all major auto companies have areas for improvement in their products. Scathing reviews are often appropriate. 

 

YouTube automotive reviewers that consistently fail to highlight weak spots in the vehicles they test are suspect. Some of them are so bad it's as if they're reading cue cards of manufacturer marketing materials. As FR739 mentioned, Savage Geese does an excellent job of combining both constructive praise and constructive criticism in his videos.

I’m sorry, but it’s ridiculous to complain that a 10 speed transmission shifts too much.  There is no way to classify that as constructive criticism. 

[fuzzymoomoo]

12 minutes ago, CurtisH said:

I’m sorry, but it’s ridiculous to complain that a 10 speed transmission shifts too much.  There is no way to classify that as constructive criticism. 

His bigger complaint (more with the smaller 4 cylinder engines) is the 10 speed is too harsh, not that it shifts too much.