Bronco/Bronco Sport: Move over, Jeep.

[Fiestig]

The dealer I bought my car from had an old restored Bronco on the showroom floor, with a V8 and a 4 speed. That little Tonka toy had my inner child wanting to go off-roading.

There were a crazy amount of 67'-69' broncos at car week last year. And they were going at a premium at auction. They are so fun to drive. I had a 67 that was beat to hell when I lived in ND. It was a blast. The only small 4x4 I loved as much was my 96 Geo Tracker with 29x10.50 thornbirds ... Yeah... I said it..lol. Hard to believe that was almost 25 years ago

 

[DoomsdayMelody]

Help me, I'm poor.

You’re on a Fiesta forum buddy, maybe we can do a group buy for some tires for you lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SrsBsns]

You’re on a Fiesta forum buddy, maybe we can do a group buy for some tires for you lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But really, I was putting Azenis on my M3 and that would always be close to 800 for the set installed. Not a crazy difference.

It would just hurt knowing that I could do all 4 wheels on the Fiesta twice for what it would take to change the Bronco's tires.

Always gotta pay to play.

 

[James1980]

I'm not buying one, but I dig it. A lot
If I were to get one it would without a doubt be with the 2.7l. I had that engine in my old F150 and its fantastic. That truck was every bit as quick as my new one and got much better MPG too. Only reason I upgraded to the 3.5 was for the towing. The wife and I are in the market for a Travel Trailer.

So if you guys are serious about getting a Bronco definitely give the 2.7 a look. You wont be disappointed

 

[Ford ST]

I'm not buying one, but I dig it. A lot
If I were to get one it would without a doubt be with the 2.7l. I had that engine in my old F150 and its fantastic. That truck was every bit as quick as my new one and got much better MPG too. Only reason I upgraded to the 3.5 was for the towing. The wife and I are in the market for a Travel Trailer.

So if you guys are serious about getting a Bronco definitely give the 2.7 a look. You wont be disappointed

I agree I have heard a lot of good things about that engine.

https://www.motorreviewer.com/engin...ne features the two,6.7L Power Stroke engines).

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

[slowcord]

Im digging the 2 door. Kind of want one but probably wont get one as a 3rd car is out of the question due to parking space limitations.

 

[DoomsdayMelody]

I agree I have heard a lot of good things about that engine.

https://www.motorreviewer.com/engin...ne features the two,6.7L Power Stroke engines).

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

I don’t see the point. The 2.3 has more torque than most will conceivably use and can be tuned to virtually the same power figures that the 2.7 has. Especially since both these motors appear to be detuned compared to where they are/were available elsewhere in Ford’s lineup. Unless you really want to brag about the 400 ft/lb threshold, the 2.3 will be the comparatively smart choice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[James1980]

You'll appreciate that extra torque when you're trying to spin 35" or larger tires. Not everyone wants to have to tune their engine to get more out of it. There is a lot to be said for a well performing stock engine.

That being said you are 100% correct that the 2.3 is an excellent choice and will do really well in that platform.

 

[Fiestig]

I can vouch for the 2.3 as stock. Extremely surprised with its towing capability. Even over the grapevine and head on 60mph gusts on the 5 from Bakersfield to Lost Hills. The drive itself was miserable. The 2.3 was so much better than expected. Keep in mind that the uhaul trailer alone is 2,210 lbs... No shit. It's stupid heavy. And then the FiST and Explorer were LOADED with parts.



Just curious to see what the engine option pricing will be

 

[Plainrt]

The two door is very tempting but they lost me at not offering the manual trans with the Sasquatch package. Way to go again ford......

 

[Ford ST]

I don’t see the point. The 2.3 has more torque than most will conceivably use and can be tuned to virtually the same power figures that the 2.7 has. Especially since both these motors appear to be detuned compared to where they are/were available elsewhere in Ford’s lineup. Unless you really want to brag about the 400 ft/lb threshold, the 2.3 will be the comparatively smart choice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Go look at the bronco sites. Those guys want the 2.7. A truck man doesn't want a 4-cylinder unless he's forced to. I'm just telling you the mindset. If it's not that much more money and based on what trim package it comes on the 2.7 is going to outsell that 4-cylinder all day I promise you.
https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/threads/2-3-ecoboost-vs-2-7-ecoboost-poll.1650/



I personally would choose the 2.7 I believe it is a more robust engine. The cylinder heads are made from the same material they make their diesel engines out of that engine was meant to be a very tough engine.

"This engine “plays much bigger than it is,” editor Bob Gritzinger writes on his scoresheet."


https://www.wardsauto.com/engines/2018-winner-ford-f-150-27l-ecoboost-twin-turbo-v-6

We can agree to disagree it's okay.


Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

[TyphoonFiST]

I am stupid excited about the Bronco. MSRP isn't as high as I thought it would be.

I might be in the market for one soon.

Well you would be silly to think that they are going to charge MSRP. It will be just like the Focus RS 10k over MSRP for the first couple years. Then I'd buy one when its slightly used and save yourself the Skrilla!

 

[SrsBsns]

Well you would be silly to think that they are going to charge MSRP. It will be just like the Focus RS 10k over MSRP for the first couple years. Then I'd buy one when its slightly used and save yourself the Skrilla!

Yeah, exactly. I'm not in a rush to get one. It would be nice to wait at least a year or so and then pick a used one up.

 

[DoomsdayMelody]

Go look at the bronco sites. Those guys want the 2.7. A truck man doesn't want a 4-cylinder unless he's forced to. I'm just telling you the mindset. If it's not that much more money and based on what trim package it comes on the 2.7 is going to outsell that 4-cylinder all day I promise you.
https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/threads/2-3-ecoboost-vs-2-7-ecoboost-poll.1650/



I personally would choose the 2.7 I believe it is a more robust engine. The cylinder heads are made from the same material they make their diesel engines out of that engine was meant to be a very tough engine.

"This engine “plays much bigger than it is,” editor Bob Gritzinger writes on his scoresheet."


https://www.wardsauto.com/engines/2018-winner-ford-f-150-27l-ecoboost-twin-turbo-v-6

We can agree to disagree it's okay.


Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

I know the mindset, I grew up believing the S197 GT500 was the best car in the world, and thoroughly embracing the whole “no replacement for displacement” saying. Used to be “truck guys” wouldn’t consider anything with less than 8 cylinders, but as you’ve aptly pointed out they’re agreeable as long as the engine is potent enough. I know the 2.7 is a fine motor, I just think that since the 2.3 already plays in similar power thresholds that it would’ve made a lot more sense for ford to offer the he 3.5 EB as the optional motor. It will all come down to pricing, the optional transfer case is going to make torque a non issue for either motor, but I think if ford wants more than $500 for the 2.7 it’d be a stupid option to pay for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fiestig]

I think most people would have the 2.7 by choice as long as there is a manual option with it. Not sure that is much of an arguement in general. But not everyone will be able to afford the 2.7 option depending out what the optional cost is.

Interesting

• Base
  • Two-door: $29,995
  • Four-door: $34,695
• Big Bend
  • Two-door: $34,880
  • Four-door: $37,375
• Black Diamond
  • Two-door: $37,545
  • Four-door: $40,040
• Outer Banks
  • Two-door: $40,450
  • Four-door: $42,945
• Badlands
  • Two-door: $43,590
  • Four-door: $46,085
• Wildtrak
  • Two-door: $50,370
  • Four-door: $52,865
• First Edition
  • Two-door: $60,800
  • Four-door: $64,995

Has full promo vid. I quite like the interior
https://www.autoblog.com/2020/07/14/2021-ford-bronco-pricing/

 

[allpurposeben]

I think most people would have the 2.7 by choice as long as there is a manual option with it. Not sure that is much of an arguement in general. But not everyone will be able to afford the 2.7 option depending out what the optional cost is.

2.7 is auto only.

 

[powermatt]

The main reason they did the 2.7 and not the 3.5 is because the 3.5 is coming in the inevitable Raptor version. Probably for 2022.

 

[TyphoonFiST]

2.7L have had alot of problems with their oil pans leaking...FYI. in all ferd vehicles that utilize that particular engine. Ask me how I know...

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

 

[DoomsdayMelody]

The main reason they did the 2.7 and not the 3.5 is because the 3.5 is coming in the inevitable Raptor version. Probably for 2022.

Last I checked them have a non raptor 3.5 F150...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[James1980]

2.7L have had alot of problems with their oil pans leaking...FYI. in all ferd vehicles that utilize that particular engine. Ask me how I know...

Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

They resolved it by ditching the silly plastic oil pan and going back to aluminum. That being said my plastic pan never leaked a drop.