Ranger or Bronco?

[Rico]

I would like to hear your opinions on which vehicle has more ability off-road, a built Ranger 4x4 or a lifted Bronco. The Ranger seems it would be more nimble but the Bronco seems more powerful. Does any one have input about things like size, power, weight, durability, mileage, tire sizes? All responses are welcome.

 

[dgndngrngr]

the ranger has an advantage over the bronco width wise for narrow trails and its much lighter as well. bronco IIs on the other hand have a much shorter wheelbase than the ranger. as long the power/weight ratio is enough for engine to power the vehicle through when it gets bogged down on the trail. in other words..a 4.0L six maybe be enough and doing a v8 swap for the same weighted vehicle may be overkill

 

[metalmacguyver]

Each vehicle will excel at a different task. The extended cab rangers do better at hill climbs because of the wheel base.

Also it is very difficult to compare "built" vehicles as every one builds them differently.

For example, I may not be the first person to do it but I am probably one of only a very few people to put hydroboost brakes in a ranger.

 

[MAKG]

Pickup trucks in general suffer from several significant barriers on the trail:

1. Wheelbase is generally longer than comparable SUVs, due to the pickup bed. This leads to increased risk of high-centering when cresting obstacles, and can expose the driveshaft to damage when the suspension is lifted.

2. Rear axles on pickups are generally centered on the pickup bed -- this is most appropriate for carrying heavy loads, but it also leads to large rear bumper overhang. Which means getting stuck at the BOTTOM of obstacles.

3. They are light in the rear when unloaded. It's less bad in 4WD than 2WD, but the rear end still slips around much easier than it would for a comparable SUV.

4. Pickup frames can twist between the cab and bed. SUVs are stiffer because of the continuous body.

A Bronco II (not a Bronco) is a surprisingly capable vehicle on the trail, even stock. 94 inch wheelbase, short overhang, well-distributed weight, etc. To do much better in stock form, you'll need a Wrangler, CJ, Willys, etc. Or an EARLY Bronco (they were substantially smaller).

 

[4x4junkie]

To do much better in stock form, you'll need a Wrangler, CJ, Willys, etc. Or an EARLY Bronco (they were substantially smaller).

I think more specifics are needed before I could agree here...
A stock BII (provided it has the D35 up front) will easily leave a stock YJ Wrangler with its stiff leafsprung suspension behind, however a TJ Wrangler would probably keep up with it somewhat better.
The BII is wider (more stable) than both the CJ and Willys (assuming you're speaking of the Willys CJ-2, CJ-3a and similar).
The early Bronco is barely smaller than a BII (92" wheelbase, same width) although I still don't think they turn as sharp.


As for the fullsize Bronco... I think what's better will depend on where you plan to take it.
A std-cab Ranger or a Bronco II should be better on trails due to it being smaller and narrower. Plus with the Ranger being lighter, it's 4.0L V6 will move it around nearly as well as the V8 does the Bronco. A 4.0L is also nearly plug-n-play on a '89-'90 BII too (it'll really move quick in that).
The fullsize would likely be better if you plan on mud-bogging it though.

Also, don't forget about Explorers... The 1st gen ones ('91-'94) make formidable wheelers too.