Full size Bronco vs Bronco 2

[bobbywalter]

I would so love to do that, but the front bodylines are much different.

the aftermarket glass at one time would allow this if a guy wanted to widen and heighten one of these. i dont know if a product is available now or not though.

 

[disciplerocks]

Between a FSB or a BII I wouldn't get either, like previously mentioned the Explorer Sport is pretty much what both aspire to be.

When I was looking for a motor donor, I told myself if I found a sport, I would throw my suspension under it and sell the B2. It didn't work out that way and I'm glad.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

When I was looking for a motor donor, I told myself if I found a sport, I would throw my suspension under it and sell the B2. It didn't work out that way and I'm glad.

My Ranger is slowly evolving into an Explorer. I already have console out of one and the seats out of another, rear axle and springs out of a third, and new front springs for one. All I need is the front axle and I have as many Explorer parts as I want.

So lets see, combined with the overflow tank I nabbed out of one, that is four Explorers so far and counting.

 

[Twister]

Like others has said, it comes down to what you are doing with it. If it is a daily driver and sees little to no hauling, go with a Bronco II. If you get a late model (89-90) it will have a 2.9 with the improved heads. If taken care of the 2.9L will run and run, mated to a 5 speed you should get decent gas mileage (cant comment because i have an 85 with the 2.8).

Yes there are some weak points to the truck but they share the same weak points with the same year rangers. The d28 front end and the 7.5 rear should hold up perfectly fine with daily driving, and occasional off-roading.

In the 2 yrs of driving my Bronco II, i have never gotten a feeling of it tipping over, they seem to be pretty stable.

 

[elpoffroad]

I have both currently actually 3 an 87 bronco 2 on 37's, a 93 on 33 and a 78 that is a money pit. To me the bronco 2 and the FSB feel the same driving, they both have a sway to them but not bad (that is also saying i dont run sway bars in either) The big difference to me is gas mileage. I am getting 18-20 mpg in the B2 and the FSB if luck downhill 12 mgp. Now On the B2 its the 2.9 5 speed with the stock 3.73 gears and 37's which make it a huge slouch and 5th gear is useless. Hoping to get the slouch problem fixed a little with 5.13's . Now the FSB has a 351w FI auto w/o and 3.73 gears also. It runs great on the highway. Has plenty of power to move around nicely, sounds very good and is great when you need to take a good amount of stuff in the back like camping. So the question that i would ask myself what to chose between the two if I had a choice??? B2 for one reason............. it fits on the trails lol the FSB would fit threw the trails but end up leaving half of the body behind. For sand dunes and muddy places that dont really have size requirements then defiantly the FSB

 

[pontiacfieroguy]

ive owned both and greatly prefer the b2. 3 times the mileage, plus i took it down trails i would never have been able to take my fsb on. and as far as being "tippy" its not a low slung sports car and as long as you dont try to drive it like one you dont have to worry about it.