Jump to content
  • Custom Search


mackinaw

Kumar Galhotra on Bronco DNA

Recommended Posts

Well the Navigator and Aviator designs makes me smile too, so I’m optimistic they will get the Bronco right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure who picked the old Bronco footage to use in this video but whoever it was I think they really missed the boat. I didn't see a single photo or anything of the original Bronco and from everything I have read the new Bronco will have more of the design language from the original than it will from the '80s and '90s full size models that were shown in this video. My guess is that they couldn't find any footage of the original Bronco so they just used stuff from the later, full size versions because that's all they could find. Either that or they have no clue. Lazy journalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts exactly.  They showed the under-wraps Bronco teaser, which clearly shows the first-gen Bronco influence, then clutter the rest of the interview with footage of The OJ-era Bronco.  Yes, lazy journalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be very interesting to see what heritage features make it into the final product. 

 

The first generation Bronco went out of production before GenX was driving, and the big Bronco went out of production before the Millenials started. The big Bronco was made in far greater numbers and was experienced by far more of these target demographics before the Early version became the go-to ride of wannabe outdoorsy Hollywood douchebags.

 

So they will probably try to get at least a few big Bronco cues into the design, perhaps the roll-down rear window and the angle of the glass at the front of the rear side windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RPF said:

It will be very interesting to see what heritage features make it into the final product. 

 

The first generation Bronco went out of production before GenX was driving, and the big Bronco went out of production before the Millenials started. The big Bronco was made in far greater numbers and was experienced by far more of these target demographics before the Early version became the go-to ride of wannabe outdoorsy Hollywood douchebags.

 

So they will probably try to get at least a few big Bronco cues into the design, perhaps the roll-down rear window and the angle of the glass at the front of the rear side windows.

Haven't heard anything about a roll down rear window, but it's a swing gate and not a drop down like the old one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Haven't heard anything about a roll down rear window, but it's a swing gate and not a drop down like the old one. 

Now that's a strange design decision...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, RPF said:

Now that's a strange design decision...

It's because the spare tire mounts directly to the tailgate like the Jeep Wrangler and not on a swinging arm like it used to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, from the pictures we knew it had an exterior spare. Going with Wrangler heritage instead of Bronco heritage is the strange part. All Broncos had a tailgate. But I'm guessing that the larger rear opening and parts were cheaper than the swing away carrier combined with a tailgate.

 

Edit: It's not a decision I'm happy about. Loved sitting on the tailgate of the SJ Cherokee and 4th Gen Bronco my dad had while I was growing up prepping for fishing trips and the like. Sitting on the inside of a Wrangler cargo area just isn't the same.

Edited by RPF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RPF said:

Well, from the pictures we knew it had an exterior spare. Going with Wrangler heritage instead of Bronco heritage is the strange part. All Broncos had a tailgate. But I'm guessing that the larger rear opening and parts were cheaper than the swing away carrier combined with a tailgate.

Actually there's probably regulatory reasons for it rather than heritage and financial if I had to guess. If nothing else to make a tailgate work without removing the tire it would require a rather large cutout of the bumper and I don't think it would fly with the regulators, and that's not to mention the moving parts (hinges and whatnot) could be reused from Ranger or F-series could be used for it. It's more expensive for them to develop a swing gate IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Actually there's probably regulatory reasons for it rather than heritage and financial if I had to guess. If nothing else to make a tailgate work without removing the tire it would require a rather large cutout of the bumper and I don't think it would fly with the regulators, and that's not to mention the moving parts (hinges and whatnot) could be reused from Ranger or F-series could be used for it. It's more expensive for them to develop a swing gate IMO. 

Yeah, basically the point I was trying to make, the swing gate itself is more complicated and expensive, but easier to make compliant and build than the tailgate plus a swing out tire carrier. It's a bummer for my nostalgia and the way I'd like to use the new one, but I can see why the decision was made.

 

I think there will be a few more decisions like this that will piss off the "purists". My predictions as to the big ones:

 

  1. IFS: Some purists will be pissed off about this, but the Bronco was IFS longer than it was SFA and it will be necessary to beat the Wrangler in ride and NVH, not to mention the Raptor version will require it. Off road, IFS is superior to SFA in all but rock crawling type usage. My take: Let Jeep take that market, be better at everything else.
  2. No V8: As long as we get a V6, preferably Nano-family EB (and just the 2.3L EB like the initial Ranger), it should do just fine.
  3. 4-door: No way this doesn't get built as a 4-door, Wrangler Unlimited sales vs the 2-door model show where the market is now. The JK Wrangler Unlimited pissed off the Jeep guys, for all of about a day and then they got over it. Same thing will happen with the Bronco. A 2-door would be nice, and hopefully its still makes it but I'd rather have the 2-door cost-cut from the program than overall quality elsewhere, power under the hood, and a Raptor version.
  4. Removable roof: This will probably be the big one. I expect some form of power BAMR or manual removable panels like Jeep Renegade "to let the air in", not a removable rear roof section. Cue the bitching-and-moaning!  

Overall, unless they totally F it up with too much Steelcase cost cutting or 4-cylinder only power under the hood, I'll be buying one of these. If they have a Raptor version, make that two. This product and F-Series is where my memories have always been with Ford, not cars or their other SUV's even though I've owned some of those as well. Needless to say I just knocked on wood and have my fingers crossed that this one meets all of our heady expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

I've probably said way more than I should have 

i think you're doing just fine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, RPF said:

 

  1. IFS: Some purists will be pissed off about this, but the Bronco was IFS longer than it was SFA and it will be necessary to beat the Wrangler in ride and NVH, not to mention the Raptor version will require it. Off road, IFS is superior to SFA in all but rock crawling type usage. My take: Let Jeep take that market, be better at everything else.
  2. No V8: As long as we get a V6, preferably Nano-family EB (and just the 2.3L EB like the initial Ranger), it should do just fine.
  3. 4-door: No way this doesn't get built as a 4-door, Wrangler Unlimited sales vs the 2-door model show where the market is now. The JK Wrangler Unlimited pissed off the Jeep guys, for all of about a day and then they got over it. Same thing will happen with the Bronco. A 2-door would be nice, and hopefully its still makes it but I'd rather have the 2-door cost-cut from the program than overall quality elsewhere, power under the hood, and a Raptor version.
  4. Removable roof: This will probably be the big one. I expect some form of power BAMR or manual removable panels like Jeep Renegade "to let the air in", not a removable rear roof section. Cue the bitching-and-moaning!  

I can't figure out how to break up quotes like I used to do so I'll address all of your concerns numerically 

1. @jpd80 knows more about the drivetrain aspect than I do so maybe he can correct me if I'm wrong here. I'm pretty sure the Bronco is getting a solid front axle. Again, don't quote me on that for sure, I don't know much about the powertrain planning. 

2. I'm getting really damn tired of the no V8 crowd bitching and moaning. Most of them are stuck in the past and that has grown tiresome to me. Grow up and STFU

3.Ford already announced it will be both a 2-door and 4-door. I don't expect many, if any 2-doors to be built initially (similar to what's going on with the Ranger Supercab) until a decent inventory of 4-doors is built up. 

4. This won't happen for regulatory reasons. Jeep can get away with it because the Wrangler has been in production long enough to grandfather past the change in regulation that made it harder for a removable roof. Had the Bronco never died they would be able to Keep it. Wrangler having a roll cage certainly helps and the Bronco will have that to a degree but the top won't be 1 piece. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mackinaw said:

i think you're doing just fine. 

Not if someone high up has figured out who I am and doesn't want me blathering :hysterical:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

4. This won't happen for regulatory reasons. Jeep can get away with it because the Wrangler has been in production long enough to grandfather past the change in regulation that made it harder for a removable roof. 

This makes no sense.  What cars in continuous production have avoided airbags or seat belts?  It doesn’t work that way. 

Explain the Gladiator...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, sullynd said:

This makes no sense.  What cars in continuous production have avoided airbags or seat belts?  It doesn’t work that way. 

Explain the Gladiator...

I'm just repeating what was told to me by an engineer friend of mine who works for Roush and done work with both FCA and Ford. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes me a little sad that the Bronco will have a swing gate. I drop my rear gate on my 94 all the time, laying back to do all types of things 🙂, & the normal stuff like just sitting. But something like that wont kill my interest in it.

- 27yo millennial in a big Bronco.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having a drop gate makes sense though. Ford would have to develop a swing for the tire and then another for the drop gate.

Thats overly complex and a waste of resources.

As for the Wrangler/Gladiator...if you want more safety, put on bars.

My sister got hit in her 87 Wrangler back in the day. Hardly had any damage thanks to the bars. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well how "complex" or expensive is it to design a drop gate and swing arm...? It isn't some new complex engineering being implemented. Ford has been building drop gates for decades, and the ranger platform which it will be built upon will have a drop gate as well... And a swing arm is a fairly simple thing.

Edited by Willwll313wll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

I've probably said way more than I should have 

not enough...ive got your back....lol....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, sullynd said:

This makes no sense.  What cars in continuous production have avoided airbags or seat belts?  It doesn’t work that way. 

Explain the Gladiator...

going out on a limb here, but I would say the Gladiator IS just a jeep with a bed tacked on the back...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, RPF said:

Yeah, basically the point I was trying to make, the swing gate itself is more complicated and expensive, but easier to make compliant and build than the tailgate plus a swing out tire carrier. It's a bummer for my nostalgia and the way I'd like to use the new one, but I can see why the decision was made.

 

I think there will be a few more decisions like this that will piss off the "purists". My predictions as to the big ones:

 

  1. IFS: Some purists will be pissed off about this, but the Bronco was IFS longer than it was SFA and it will be necessary to beat the Wrangler in ride and NVH, not to mention the Raptor version will require it. Off road, IFS is superior to SFA in all but rock crawling type usage. My take: Let Jeep take that market, be better at everything else.
  2. No V8: As long as we get a V6, preferably Nano-family EB (and just the 2.3L EB like the initial Ranger), it should do just fine.
  3. 4-door: No way this doesn't get built as a 4-door, Wrangler Unlimited sales vs the 2-door model show where the market is now. The JK Wrangler Unlimited pissed off the Jeep guys, for all of about a day and then they got over it. Same thing will happen with the Bronco. A 2-door would be nice, and hopefully its still makes it but I'd rather have the 2-door cost-cut from the program than overall quality elsewhere, power under the hood, and a Raptor version.
  4. Removable roof: This will probably be the big one. I expect some form of power BAMR or manual removable panels like Jeep Renegade "to let the air in", not a removable rear roof section. Cue the bitching-and-moaning!  

Overall, unless they totally F it up with too much Steelcase cost cutting or 4-cylinder only power under the hood, I'll be buying one of these. If they have a Raptor version, make that two. This product and F-Series is where my memories have always been with Ford, not cars or their other SUV's even though I've owned some of those as well. Needless to say I just knocked on wood and have my fingers crossed that this one meets all of our heady expectations.

I was told a SFA will be a available option ( don't k ow from the factory or aftermarket )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ausrutherford said:

Not having a drop gate makes sense though. Ford would have to develop a swing for the tire and then another for the drop gate.

Thats overly complex and a waste of resources.

I'd wager that a swinging gate vs a drop gate is a wash on the complexity. Engineering a swing for the tire isn't zero cost, but it's not exactly a moon shot, either.

Obviously, Ford thought there were better ways of investing their development dollars, but "overly complex" is overstating it, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×