Ford Ranger and Bronco Coming back! Crosses fingers
- Thread starter TeamWild
- Start date
4x4junkie
Explorer
Fixed that for you.
I certainly can't argue visibility out of an FJC was dismal at best, but had it been more accessible to the aftermarket, I'm sure someone might've been able to address those issues. The IFS OTOH, was a FAR bigger impediment to anyone wanting to do modifications to the vehicle. Unless your head's been in the sand, you should be well aware the JK is a vehicle modified by very many of it's owners (and is also bought for the rugged outdoorsy go-anywhere image it portrays by people who don't intend to modify it). The FJC sold one (1) unit for every 10 JKs sold. That right there should tell you something, especially considering the quality level (and reliability) of the FJC was about 1000% better.
Again, totally different market.
Your argument would make sense in absence of a 4-door option. I never once said Ford should not also offer a 4-door version. It would be stupid of them to not when like I said the 4-door JK outsells the 2-door. My point is if a "Bronco" is to not fail in the market that is: offroad-capable vehicles for the outdoor enthusiast (which the JK is the only real player in currently), it must have simple beam axles, cannot lack the option for a manual trans, has to have a removable top (even if it's just from the front seatbacks back) and (most importantly), has to be readily accessible to the aftermarket for things like suspension & axle kits, armored body panels, bolt-on-able bumpers (OE bumpers not all heavily integrated into the bodywork), easily-trimmable/replaceable fenders (flares), and so forth. The FJC I recall did offer a manual trans (and the bumpers weren't too heavily integrated into the body), but Toyota missed the mark everywhere else, and is why it failed.
I think you're the first person I've heard relate "Ford Bronco" and "OJ" in a few years.
I think far more people think: "Rugged offroad-capable vehicle that will take you anywhere" when they hear "Ford Bronco".
You are correct, many people do buy JKs because "it's a Jeep". But there are also lots of people who don't buy JKs because "it's a Jeep" (myself included). Ford could sweep up nearly that entire market segment if they had something that appealed to JK-abstainers who refuse to plunk down $30K+ on a new vehicle that is no more (or even less) reliable than the old heap they currently own, and/or don't wish to be any part of the Jeep clique.
east_tn_81
Adventurer
I know I don't think of OJ when I think of the Bronco. I think of the 2 I had and how even in stock for they are beast. I think about how easy it was to modify them and all the crap I put them through.
justcuz
Explorer
Fixed that for you.
I certainly can't argue visibility out of an FJC was dismal at best, but had it been more accessible to the aftermarket, I'm sure someone might've been able to address those issues. The IFS OTOH, was a FAR bigger impediment to anyone wanting to do modifications to the vehicle. Unless your head's been in the sand, you should be well aware the JK is a vehicle modified by very many of it's owners (and is also bought for the rugged outdoorsy go-anywhere image it portrays by people who don't intend to modify it). The FJC sold one (1) unit for every 10 JKs sold. That right there should tell you something, especially considering the quality level (and reliability) of the FJC was about 1000% better.
Again, totally different market.
Your argument would make sense in absence of a 4-door option. I never once said Ford should not also offer a 4-door version. It would be stupid of them to not when like I said the 4-door JK outsells the 2-door. My point is if a "Bronco" is to not fail in the market that is: offroad-capable vehicles for the outdoor enthusiast (which the JK is the only real player in currently), it must have simple beam axles, cannot lack the option for a manual trans, has to have a removable top (even if it's just from the front seatbacks back) and (most importantly), has to be readily accessible to the aftermarket for things like suspension & axle kits, armored body panels, bolt-on-able bumpers (OE bumpers not all heavily integrated into the bodywork), easily-trimmable/replaceable fenders (flares), and so forth. The FJC I recall did offer a manual trans (and the bumpers weren't too heavily integrated into the body), but Toyota missed the mark everywhere else, and is why it failed.
I think you're the first person I've heard relate "Ford Bronco" and "OJ" in a few years.
I think far more people think: "Rugged offroad-capable vehicle that will take you anywhere" when they hear "Ford Bronco".
You are correct, many people do buy JKs because "it's a Jeep". But there are also lots of people who don't buy JKs because "it's a Jeep" (myself included). Ford could sweep up nearly that entire market segment if they had something that appealed to JK-abstainers who refuse to plunk down $30K+ on a new vehicle that is no more (or even less) reliable than the old heap they currently own, and/or don't wish to be any part of the Jeep clique.
Junkie,
While I agree with you in theory, if you look at it from a manufacturers standpoint, it does not make economic sense to build a new 2 door SUV. Each and every SUV that was or started as a 2 door was eclipsed and outsold by its 4 door version. Starting with the Wagoneer 2 door, revised as the Chrokee, which later introduced a 4 door version, Bronco/Expedition, Blazer/Tahoe, BroncoII/Explorer and on and on. Even in the foriegn market with Monteros, Troopers, Patrols, et. al. Even though the 2 doors sell in greater numbers than here, I believe the 4 doors still carry the majority of sales.
I am not anti 2 door SUV by any means, (I own a flat fender Jeep and a 1992 full size Blazer) I am just pointing out the reality of the market, the fact that manufacturers run on a slimmer profit margin than in the past, cannot absorb a failed product as easily as before and purchasers prefer a 4 door.
That's why I believe we will not see a competitor to the 2 door Wrangler. Other manufacturers look at Jeep and realize even their own 4 door outsells their 2 door. Why try to crack a market that barely exists any more?
I am going to close my commentary with this; I bet we see an IFS front Wrangler before we ever see any other 2 door SUV introduced in the U.S. I seriously doubt if one did get introduced, it would have 2 beam axles and be lucky to have a manual trans and removable top.
Last edited:
Well, there is at least ONE 2-door SUV that could return to the US market.
I hesitate to mention it because it's the subject of much debate on it's own and we don't even know what the new one will look like yet, but allegedly the next gen Defender will return to the US. Someday. Eventually. Maybe.
I hesitate to mention it because it's the subject of much debate on it's own and we don't even know what the new one will look like yet, but allegedly the next gen Defender will return to the US. Someday. Eventually. Maybe.
Clutch
<---Pass
Believe that vehicle is almost here. The diesel Colorado/Canyon.
I have read it is aimed at the Suby OB market....those who are outgrowing said vehicle, don't want a fullsize truck, but still want decent mileage.
4x4junkie
Explorer
I am looking at it from a manufacturer's standpoint. It would be hardly any additional work for Ford (or anyone else for that matter) to offer a legitimate 4-door JK competitor also as a 2-door (I suspect ~90% would simply be handling/crashworthiness tests, etc., not the actual designing of the vehicle itself).
The JK (the sole vehicle currently in this market) sold over 175,000 units in 2014 (and is well on-track to exceed that for 2015)... From what I see on roads & trails around me, some 20-25% of them are sold as 2-doors. How that "barely exists" is beyond me... But I will digress, not being a car manufacturer this wouldn't be the first time I've been completely stumped by them. I guess we'll have to see if FCA decides to drop the 2-door variant of the Wrangler when it's redesigned for 2018 or whenever (I'd be very surprised if they do).
Mark my words though... The day the Wrangler goes IFS will be the day the brand disappears.
If you think prices on used Wranglers are absurd now, wait 'till new ones pop up with IFS.
FLoffroad1
Observer
For a company like Ford, 175,000 is nothing/ barely exists. I don't see how R&D for a legitimate JK competitor is hardly anything; companies always do tons of testing and R&D for new models, regardless how simple it would be, and that costs money.
In 2014, Ford sold ~306,212 Escapes and ~180,339 Explorers. Let's say, for the sake of argument (biasing in favour of this Ford JK-fighter idea), that 30% of JK buyers are "Jeep people" and will only buy Wranglers, then let's say of that 70% who are willing to look elsewhere, 70% would think a "Ford Bronco" sounds just a cool/hip/popular as a "Jeep." In that overestimated scenario, Ford could sell maybe 80-100k units per year.
Now granted, the Flex exists and it's never sold more than 40k units per year, and the Expedition sells less than 80k units since 2008. However, the Flex has never been considered a success (I dunno why they even keep building them) and the Expedition is in many ways a modded F150, so it's easier to build / stock parts for.
Maybe, a US Ford Everest could be a cheap solution, but a US Ford Everest wouldn't really be competition for a JK. Also, Ford's current NA market plan is, to a degree, trying to cut down on models so that it's easier/cheaper to stock parts and build cars. That was part of their reason for taking away the Ranger in the first place.
Last edited:
justcuz
Explorer
The day the Wrangler goes IFS will not spell the end of the brand. It will lose its hard core base customers, but it won't die. Two reasons why, 1. Virtually everything else is IFS in it class/size and 2. Jeeps IFS design is not an A arm design. It is very similar to the split live axle first installed in Wagoneers and the engineering drawings look very similar for the new version. In fact Fords TTB may have been inspired by the original Wagoneers IFS.
AFBronco235
Crew Chief
IMO, the only advantage a solid front axle holds over IFS is that its simpler to lift and not because it performs any better. The TTB system ford used was just as strong, but provided a smoother ride at higher speeds and just as much flex once the sway bar was removed.
4x4junkie
Explorer
You're not including in that what I had mentioned a couple earlier posts ago though.
I've talked with friends about this subject at great lengths around the campfire... There does seem to be a significant number of people out there who aren't buying JKs for any number of reasons, but would be inclined to buy a new (legit) Bronco.
Which I think is all that holds the brand above water currently. Take that away... What is left? All I see are a bunch of ho-hum car-based/unibody SUVs who's buyers could easily flock to any one of the many other (better quality) brands of that type of vehicle that are available.
Ford's TTB may have been a damn good & sturdy IFS, but people still to this day regularly shun it simply because they aren't familiar with it (it does not matter that it's as good as a solid axle, similar cost to lift, or can provide the same articulation). Trying to educate a bunch of skeptics that a new IFS of any type is a great thing will be a lot harder than simply providing them with what sells... (I know, I've only been trying to inform people about the Ford IFS for some 2½ decades now... there are a great very many people out there that can never be convinced something other than a solid axle will ever work effectively offroad).
Seems we could go on forever & ever about this... I guess we just need to sit back and wait to see where this market evolves.