New Ford Bronco revealed!

[Mike N]

I'd hate to try and spin 34" or larger tires with a 90 something cubic inch gas engine, hairdryer equipped or not. That would get poor mileage and probably burn itself up in no time.

Too bad they don't offer a diesel in that..... power, ecnomy and reliability in one package.

 

[Downunderwonder]

I'd hate to try and spin 34" or larger tires with a 90 something cubic inch gas engine, hairdryer equipped or not. That would get poor mileage and probably burn itself up in no time.

Too bad they don't offer a diesel in that..... power, ecnomy and reliability in one package.

7 speed box should be flexible enough no?

 

[Honkey tonk]

I'd hate to try and spin 34" or larger tires with a 90 something cubic inch gas engine, hairdryer equipped or not. That would get poor mileage and probably burn itself up in no time.

Too bad they don't offer a diesel in that..... power, ecnomy and reliability in one package.

400 ft lbs of compressed torque with the eco 6 . Some legit grunt that will easily push 34s along

 

[mikeoso]

Well, yeah...but one year ago I bought what will probably be the last vehicle I ever need. Happy with this one.

 

[Downunderwonder]

People put the big wheels on Hiluxes making 4th gear gets almost as tall as 5th was. Less than ideal but not off putting.

 

[Mike N]

400 ft lbs of compressed torque with the eco 6 . Some legit grunt that will easily push 34s along

That's the 6 cylinder producing 400 ft/lbs, not the 4 cylinder.

You know some knucklehead is going to shove 36's on the 4 banger model and wonder why it's a turd.....

 

[Mike N]

7 speed box should be flexible enough no?

No idea.

Surprised that they didn't stick the 10 speed in it from the newer F150.

 

[Honkey tonk]

No idea.

Surprised that they didn't stick the 10 speed in it from the newer F150.

Pretty sure it's the same as the f150

 

[Honkey tonk]

No idea.

Surprised that they didn't stick the 10 speed in it from the newer F150.

That's the 6 cylinder producing 400 ft/lbs, not the 4 cylinder.

You know some knucklehead is going to shove 36's on the 4 banger model and wonder why it's a turd.....

I'm big fan of the TJ , the sport model has way less grunt than the little new ford 4 bangers
I'd love love love to have an LJ with one of those ford 4 bangers on 38s

 

[Funky Ghost]

I like it. Who cares if it looks a bit like a Scout. It did back in the day too.

The Element looks like it used a Bronco as a base line... if it was designed by a skinny jean wearing sock head with ironic glasses. Oh..... yeah, right.

 

[neurotictim]

I mean, the 4 cylinder with the wheezy makes 310 lb-ft, so not exactly a slouch. 50 more than the V6 equipped JL Wranglers, and 15 more than the turby 4 bangers. A lot will depend on curb weight.

And it does come equipped with the 10 speed auto from the Ranger/F150/Expedition, if you opt for anything other than the 4 cylinder. That part seems like a mistake to me - their top tier Sasquatch won't have a manual option. But that's also true for the Wrangler - only the 3.6 V6 gets a manual transmission, while the turbo 4 and diesel don't have that option. Also a good time to point out that there's a 68,000 vehicle recall of the Ford 10 speed transmission - hopefully they've ironed out that issue before letting one of these off the lot and into the mud.

Still seems very much like an apples-to-apples race. I'm hopeful that the Bronco succeeds beyond Ford's biggest dreams - hopefully proving that the market could bear a similar offering from Toyota, perhaps a next-gen FJ or complete redesign of the beloved 4Runner.

 

[Downunderwonder]

I thought the modern trend on zip zip zip transmissions was to improve the fuel economy.

 

[Mike N]

I mean, the 4 cylinder with the wheezy makes 310 lb-ft, so not exactly a slouch. 50 more than the V6 equipped JL Wranglers, and 15 more than the turby 4 bangers. A lot will depend on curb weight.

And it does come equipped with the 10 speed auto from the Ranger/F150/Expedition, if you opt for anything other than the 4 cylinder. That part seems like a mistake to me - their top tier Sasquatch won't have a manual option. But that's also true for the Wrangler - only the 3.6 V6 gets a manual transmission, while the turbo 4 and diesel don't have that option. Also a good time to point out that there's a 68,000 vehicle recall of the Ford 10 speed transmission - hopefully they've ironed out that issue before letting one of these off the lot and into the mud.

Still seems very much like an apples-to-apples race. I'm hopeful that the Bronco succeeds beyond Ford's biggest dreams - hopefully proving that the market could bear a similar offering from Toyota, perhaps a next-gen FJ or complete redesign of the beloved 4Runner.

Nothing wrong with 310 ft/lbs or torque, but where in the rpm range is it? Most gas powered 4 cylinders don't make peak torque at a low rpm, which is what you really need for a truck application.

 

[Downunderwonder]

The focus of the 7 speed might be low range gears?

 

[Lackey]

Nothing wrong with 310 ft/lbs or torque, but where in the rpm range is it? Most gas powered 4 cylinders don't make peak torque at a low rpm, which is what you really need for a truck application.

It's probably peak quite low in the Rev range, that's where small turbos put it.

 

[neurotictim]

Agreed with @Lackey - small turbos tend to spool lower in the RPM band. My bet is that the lowest of the low gears (the "C" on the stick) will have plenty of grunt. That being said, I've been wheeling for a while now and no one has complained if they've gotta give it a little more gas, generally speaking. It's all about that synergy between left and right foot.

As far as fuel economy, you can bet that 7th gear is essentially useless unless you're cruising at a relatively high speed - giving the right ratio to meet EPA requirements. If I had to make a guess, it's the same formula used in the C7 Corvette - super cruise gear to hit those MPGs.

I would expect real-world efficiency numbers to be significantly lower than the "rated" figure, but that's true for most cars anymore.