Ford teases the new Bronco

for general use i like the ttb.


this platform having a solid makes sense.....no other reason to build this size vehicle in fords line up.



making an option for the ranger would be even better.


not likely to happen. find out soon enough.

There's what the consumer wants, and then there's what makes sense on paper, and what Ford is willing to build. I'd be shocked if the new Bronco was anything more than an Everest with a make over. Over the years, Ford went to an independent front suspension to offer a better ride and handling. Jeep has always been a solid front axle, well, because it's a Jeep. Jeep knows they'd alienate their flock if they stopped offering one.

Jeep has a monopoly on the solid front axle market. I did a quick search and found some Jeep Wrangler stats:

Year - Number Sold

2017 - 190,522
2016 - 191,788
2015 - 202,702
2014 - 175,328
2013 - 155,502
2012 - 141,669
2011 - 122,460
2010 - 94,310
2009 - 82,044
2008 - 84,615
2007 - 119,243 (1st year of 4-door Wrangler)
2006 - 80,271
2005 - 79,017
2004 - 77,550
2003 - 70,093
2002 - 64,351
2001 - 68,830
2000 - 82,254
1999 - 89,174
1998 - 83,861
1997 - 81,956

I got those figures from http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/jeep/jeep-wrangler/

But then I decide to look for Ford Explorer sales:

Year - Number Sold

2017 - 271.131
2016 - 248.507
2015 - 249.251
2014 - 209.994
2013 - 192.397
2012 - 164.207
2011 - 135.704

The Explorer is definitely beating the Wrangler in sales. The question becomes, how many people would actually buy the Bronco that the Ford enthusiasts want to see, and would it be worth it for Ford to design? Could it compete with Wrangler sales? Would the consumer want something that was made to compete with a Jeep, instead of just getting a Jeep?

This is why I see a Ford Everest with a makeover. I just don't know if it would appeal to enough people to redesign the front suspension to add a solid axle.

It would be cool if they did though.

How many of those wrangler buyers actually would rather have a bronco?

I feel like the big issue is though, most bronco loyalist became loyalist after 78. There gonna want a fullsize.

rusty ol ranger said:

How many of those wrangler buyers actually would rather have a bronco?

I feel like the big issue is though, most bronco loyalist became loyalist after 78. There gonna want a fullsize.

Click to expand...

If the Wranger buyers decided to get a Bronco type of vehicle they would probably get a Grand Cherokee than a US market Everest .
I love Broncos...both big and small, but I am not to hopeful on this new version yet as something I would own.
If Ford did the retro thing like they did with the Mustang, T-bird and the GT40 like they showed years ago with the Concept Bronco I would already have had one on preorder.
Solid axles, removable top, 5.0 coyote, or diesel powered.

I am still waiting for the big reveal to pass judgment.
Until then I will keep tinkering on the 85 bronco ii my kids and I have as a project.

rusty ol ranger said:

How many of those wrangler buyers actually would rather have a bronco?

I feel like the big issue is though, most bronco loyalist became loyalist after 78. There gonna want a fullsize.

Click to expand...

A lot of the loyalist herd has probably been thinned over the 24 years between Broncos too.

I could see a lot of the "loyalists" hating anything new Ford builds anyway.

I don't know the numbers but on paper the Everest is set up to be a 4Runner contender. Independent front, solid rear axle, 4dr, decent offroader. Also Jeeps main competition. People go nuts over them and they sell for a lot of $$. If they crack that market I could see it being a cash cow for them with minimal investment.

adsm08 said:

Eh, Ford has teased me enough over the last 12 years.




Well there were rumors of a factory solid front axle and manual transmission, as it is supposed to be trying to directly compete with the Wrangler.

Although, as far as automatics go, a 10 speed isn't really that bad of an idea. The more gears you have with close ratios the better performance you can get by not constantly revving the engine past it's usable power band and then dropping it back to the bottom of that band on the shift.

Plus you can get 10 speeds out of most common current automatics without adding a bunch of extra parts. Just a few more solenoids in the valve body and some extra fluid passages.

Click to expand...

IDK, I'd think, more speeds would equal more hunting for the right gear, more heat and more expensive when it fails. People don't keep vehicles long enough anymore to know, and the long term tests that manufacturers do aren't real world usage so its hard to say how things will go but they think adding more gears gives them better fuel economy but it don't, its just a more expensive failure item. I bet they'd change their minds real fast if they had to shift through all those gears manually LOL.

wildbill23c said:

IDK, I'd think, more speeds would equal more hunting for the right gear, more heat and more expensive when it fails. People don't keep vehicles long enough anymore to know, and the long term tests that manufacturers do aren't real world usage so its hard to say how things will go but they think adding more gears gives them better fuel economy but it don't, its just a more expensive failure item. I bet they'd change their minds real fast if they had to shift through all those gears manually LOL.

Click to expand...

Tractors have had 10+ speed manually shifted automatics (aka power shift transmission) since the 60’s. Guys love them. Keep the oil clean and they run forever.

Keeping the engine in hits happy spot is easier on the engine and more efficient.

rusty ol ranger said:

How many of those wrangler buyers actually would rather have a bronco?

I feel like the big issue is though, most bronco loyalist became loyalist after 78. There gonna want a fullsize.

Click to expand...

awesome point.






















we have an everest.....its called the explorer


there is the new micro ute xo, ecosport.. which i actually fit in... and i am just over 5 foot 9....

the baby ute xo....escape..

the mom ute xo....edge

the executive mom mid ute xo.....explorer...very capable by the way.

and the big ute......expedition.

then the lincoln variants....





think about that for 30 seconds.

Hold on. You're 5'9"? I had you a lot taller than that.

a little taller.....

fastpakr said:

Hold on. You're 5'9"? I had you a lot taller than that.

Click to expand...

6’-2” in cowboy boots and I was looking up at him...

Wife is nuts for an Ecosport, I would prefer something with a little more heft to it, like another Edge.

wildbill23c said:

IDK, I'd think, more speeds would equal more hunting for the right gear, more heat and more expensive when it fails. People don't keep vehicles long enough anymore to know, and the long term tests that manufacturers do aren't real world usage so its hard to say how things will go but they think adding more gears gives them better fuel economy but it don't, its just a more expensive failure item. I bet they'd change their minds real fast if they had to shift through all those gears manually LOL.

Click to expand...

No, you are wrong. The idea of an auto isn't to pick a gear and sit in it. Autos these days generally try to run up to top gear ASAP while keeping the engine as close to the peak of it's power band as possible. I've watched on a scanner as a 6 speed auto ran itself up to 6th gear by the time I was doing 35 MPH.

So a 10 speed auto isn't going to hunt in the usual manner a 4 or 5 speed would.

Also, this isn't your granddaddy's auto. Like I said, with modern electronic controls on them you can turn what was once a 4 speed trans into a 10 speed with more software changes than hardware changes. And most of those hardware changes would be in the valve body.

A 10 speed manual is a little untenable in the average passenger vehicle. Unlike an auto where you can stack ratios through the gear sets, which can each produce multiple ratios, included several OD ratios, to tailor things, in a manual you have to add a physical gear (two actually) for each new ratio. You also need a new fork and rail for every two gears. This means a 10 seed manual will be both very long and very wide.

Tractor Trailers get around this with their "18 speed" transmissions the same way Wheel Horse built "8 speed" mowers in the 80s. They put a reduction splitter on, which is essentially a two-speed transfer case with no front output, so they get to count each gear twice. A far more complex and expensive process.

excellent post adsm.


i would have babbled him to death. the concise brevity is stellar. they also skip shift like a mofo....and many of the units are actually clutch to clutch for most gears and bullet proof compared to the best manual transmissions 15 years ago.


i like the aod because its mechanical, but its very inefficient compared to the 10 speed.

of course the 10 speed is only as good s its programming.


good shit....on the horizon.....but its all too late....






i am ready for 4 electric hub motors now.....fawk drive shafts, transmissions and transfer cases...small efficient tdi burnin a gen to run a bank and hub motors...


(swapped into my pos ranger of course)

adsm08 said:

No, you are wrong. The idea of an auto isn't to pick a gear and sit in it. Autos these days generally try to run up to top gear ASAP while keeping the engine as close to the peak of it's power band as possible. I've watched on a scanner as a 6 speed auto ran itself up to 6th gear by the time I was doing 35 MPH.

Click to expand...

My 2016 Expedition displays the gear you're in on the dash. It's interesting watching how much it jumps around. It shifts through gears pretty quickly and smoothly, and you probably wouldn't realize it if you didn't see it on the dash.

Jim Oaks said:

My 2016 Expedition displays the gear you're in on the dash. It's interesting watching how much it jumps around. It shifts through gears pretty quickly and smoothly, and you probably wouldn't realize it if you didn't see it on the dash.

Click to expand...

Same with my F150s.