The New "Old" Ford Bronco

Yah it'll be a 2.7L turbo in a 4 door for me if I decide on one. The off road capabilities will almost certainly be more than I'll ever ask or have a need for. I've been clunking around the mountains and woods for hunting and fishing in these last 30 plus years with a 4x4 pickup that offered 4 hi and lo and that was it. Managed to do just fine. Might be fun and make it even easier to have these options, but they're certainly not required.

No, it won't tow a lot either. But then my wife and I have arrived at the conclusion we won't be buying a camper and touring the country in retirement using it. We may tour the country by vehicle but it will be in her Lexus and an Airbnb or hotel will be our lodging. We neither want to maintain a camper nor do I want to be bothered with towing it.

If anything it may be snowmobiles or UTVs we haul and the Bronco can handle that just fine. In the end I guess I'm really not sure why I'm thinking of this outside of I just think they look cool, thought it was a fun drive too (and a little less vehicle to drive isn't so bad) and it'll still handle the off roading I do still.
Fair. Manual is kinda non-negotiable for me in anything with less than 500hp, so that made the decision easy. But there's a lot to be said for an auto for just cruising around and I do think the 2.7 is a better engine, especially in a larger, heavier 4 door.

I have no doubt it'll do the off roading you describe without even a hint of difficulty. As I say, typical SUV stuff, no issues. Even over landing, no issues. If you want to do some serious rock crawling on a challenging trail, you might start to see it struggle vs the Jeep, but it's more capable than your average 4x4 pick up truck, that's for sure.

I think the 2.7 will be just fine for a bit of light duty towing as well. Perhaps not the absolute best tool for the job, but if it's just a snowmobile every couple months or so, I doubt you'd have any difficulties.
 
Here you go Bob your next Outback Shissan:

IMG_4086.jpeg


It’s got a hatch on top so you can pop up with your 35 Wailing and pop one of them prized trophy Camels you guys are always bragging about! One hump? Or two? Do you score them by the circumference of the hump or from the butt hole to the ears?
 
“Had a 2000 LC and it was literally the best vehicle I’ve owned in 60+ years including several BMWs (5s, 6s, 1985 grey market M6 etc.) V10 diesel Touareg, several high end Mercedes cars and SUVs. New is nice but paid-for is nicer.”

100% agree!!
My first Landcruiser was a 1993 and then gave that to my niece when I got a 2003.
That’s my daughter’s now and every time I drive it or work on it I wonder what the hell is wrong with me and why I don’t just buy another of the same vintage with as few miles as I can find. Her’s has only 180K now and all we’ve done is brakes, one starter (which stupidly is in the ‘V’ under the intake manifold) and regular maintenance.

All the SUV one could ever want or need and now rather cheap to maintain.
 
@Cheesehead
It amazes this old fella that the newer smaller engines combined with all the technology are out performing the old bigger displacement engines.
To me I doest seem right getting a little 2 litre motor to put out more horsepower than an older 3 litre.
I just wonder how these smaller motors will last when putt to the towing test like I do in Australia.
Just doesn't seem right to me. My wife's new Hyundai 2 litre diesel puts out 400 Nm of torque.
My old school Nissan 4x4 2.7 litre diesel only gets 300Nm. The marvels of modern technology.
Bob
I think it is fair to be a little nervous about the longevity of some of the newer engine technology, especially with some of the reliability issues that we have seen discussed in this thread. However, most of what is used in these turbocharged, direct injection gas engines is not that new. Turbos for example have been in widespread use on diesel engines for the better part of 40 years, and no one questions the longevity of diesels. Diesel engines also have much higher compression ratios, cylinder pressures, and exhaust temps. Even the least proven technology in these EcoBoost and similar engines, the high-pressure direct injection, operates at a much lower, by a factor of 10, pressure than the direct injection of a diesel engine. I believe the key to longevity is to design the engines much like how diesel engines are designed. For example, the 2.7 EcoBoost uses forged internals, water-cooled turbochargers, and even an engine block made of compacted graphite iron like many modern diesel engines. Case in point: the 3.5 ecoboost was an existing gas engine that Ford engineers revised to add turbos and direct injection, while the 2.7 ecoboost was a clean-sheet design. The 2.7 is the most reliable engine in the F-150, while the 3.5 is the least reliable.
 
I think it is fair to be a little nervous about the longevity of some of the newer engine technology, especially with some of the reliability issues that we have seen discussed in this thread. However, most of what is used in these turbocharged, direct injection gas engines is not that new. Turbos for example have been in widespread use on diesel engines for the better part of 40 years, and no one questions the longevity of diesels. Diesel engines also have much higher compression ratios, cylinder pressures, and exhaust temps. Even the least proven technology in these EcoBoost and similar engines, the high-pressure direct injection, operates at a much lower, by a factor of 10, pressure than the direct injection of a diesel engine. I believe the key to longevity is to design the engines much like how diesel engines are designed. For example, the 2.7 EcoBoost uses forged internals, water-cooled turbochargers, and even an engine block made of compacted graphite iron like many modern diesel engines. Case in point: the 3.5 ecoboost was an existing gas engine that Ford engineers revised to add turbos and direct injection, while the 2.7 ecoboost was a clean-sheet design. The 2.7 is the most reliable engine in the F-150, while the 3.5 is the least reliable.
I'd agree with what you state here.

I think the big advancement in reliability of small displacement, high specific output turbo engines is that these days they're designed from the ground up to be that way. It's no longer the case that manufacturers are designing a NA engine with a specific output of roughly 70hp/L then 5-10 years later slapping a turbo on it for the new model year, bumping specific output to 100+hp/L, upgrading stuff as best they can without fundamentally changing the architecture and hoping the reliability isn't hurt too much.

If you build for turbo from the start, you end up with a better engine, and really, you should expect pretty much the same reliability as the lazy old low-tune NA engine which was also designed that way. Especially in 2024 when these companies have had 30 odd years to test and observe what works and what doesn't in the real world, in millions of different cars across hundreds of applications.

My only concerns now with a new turbo is that it's new, and that there might be some basic troubleshooting from first model year to second whilst they gather that end user reliability data and fix any minor flaws they missed during development and testing. I'd have the same concern with a new NA engine, if anyone was making one.

On the Bronco specifically, I think it's a good thing that even if the model is new, the drive train is all 'out of the box', proven stuff from other models. You avoid that 'first gen' issues problem there at least.

I also find it reassuring to see a new architecture being released in various states of tune from the get go, assuming the model I'm buying isn't the most aggressive version. The 3.0L V6 Ecoboost in the Bronco Raptor (same engine, just bored, stroked and fettled) is putting out 420hp, which reassures me that the normal 2.7L Bronco at 330hp from the same basic engine is probably pretty under stressed for what the architecture can actually do. Even the 2.3L Ecoboost is chucking out 350HP in the Focus RS, which makes me think that the 300HP 2.3L Bronco variant is probably fairly safe.
 
We agree. Nice looking. Works great! American legends. I’ve had my best luck with Fords and the 243!

It figures you’d be driving a rice burner! Did you take out the drivers seat and sit on a lounge chair to fit in that “model” of what a real truck might look like?

I know, your Hibachi engine can run on soy sauce and peanut oil in a pinch! Tough to get that smell out isn’t it?!

View attachment 640311
@NIGHTHAWK
That's the beauty of my rice burner if we have a fuel shortage I can pull up at any Chinese takeaway and fill it with with old peanut oil and soy sauce and have a good meal while waiting. Then start it up and drive off.
Try that with your ford it would size up at the thought.
It may be smaller but it has enough room to stretch my legs out while driving.
In Australia those big fords, Silverado and Rams are hopeless in the bush as a lot of tracks aren't wide enough for them.
Sorry but I will stick with my NISSAN.
IF you have had your best luck with a ford and a 243 you must be very unlucky. Ha Ha ha Ha Ha.
Bob
 
Here you go Bob your next Outback Shissan:

View attachment 640313

It’s got a hatch on top so you can pop up with your 35 Wailing and pop one of them prized trophy Camels you guys are always bragging about! One hump? Or two? Do you score them by the circumference of the hump or from the butt hole to the ears?
@NIGHTHAWK
Very funny
I'm trying for a three hump camel just to be different.
I will stay faithful to my Nissan and Whelen. Both are like a good wife. Honest, reliable and do all that is asked of them without issue and easy to get along with. Neither may be the prettiest but beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
I will let you have your 243 Ford . Overrated, big and when the going gets rough they go home crying. They sure look pretty on the black top but put them in some serious 4x4 situation and they can't hack the pace.
Bob
 
@Cheesehead
It amazes this old fella that the newer smaller engines combined with all the technology are out performing the old bigger displacement engines.
To me I doest seem right getting a little 2 litre motor to put out more horsepower than an older 3 litre.
I just wonder how these smaller motors will last when putt to the towing test like I do in Australia.
Just doesn't seem right to me. My wife's new Hyundai 2 litre diesel puts out 400 Nm of torque.
My old school Nissan 4x4 2.7 litre diesel only gets 300Nm. The marvels of modern technology.
Bob
Lucky dog! We can't get that stuff here in the US...
 
I'd agree with what you state here.

I think the big advancement in reliability of small displacement, high specific output turbo engines is that these days they're designed from the ground up to be that way. It's no longer the case that manufacturers are designing a NA engine with a specific output of roughly 70hp/L then 5-10 years later slapping a turbo on it for the new model year, bumping specific output to 100+hp/L, upgrading stuff as best they can without fundamentally changing the architecture and hoping the reliability isn't hurt too much.

If you build for turbo from the start, you end up with a better engine, and really, you should expect pretty much the same reliability as the lazy old low-tune NA engine which was also designed that way. Especially in 2024 when these companies have had 30 odd years to test and observe what works and what doesn't in the real world, in millions of different cars across hundreds of applications.

My only concerns now with a new turbo is that it's new, and that there might be some basic troubleshooting from first model year to second whilst they gather that end user reliability data and fix any minor flaws they missed during development and testing. I'd have the same concern with a new NA engine, if anyone was making one.

On the Bronco specifically, I think it's a good thing that even if the model is new, the drive train is all 'out of the box', proven stuff from other models. You avoid that 'first gen' issues problem there at least.

I also find it reassuring to see a new architecture being released in various states of tune from the get go, assuming the model I'm buying isn't the most aggressive version. The 3.0L V6 Ecoboost in the Bronco Raptor (same engine, just bored, stroked and fettled) is putting out 420hp, which reassures me that the normal 2.7L Bronco at 330hp from the same basic engine is probably pretty under stressed for what the architecture can actually do. Even the 2.3L Ecoboost is chucking out 350HP in the Focus RS, which makes me think that the 300HP 2.3L Bronco variant is probably fairly safe.
Ok, I've just retired from 25 years in the car business and I'll share a few thoughts...
Modern engines and drivetrains are indeed at the pinnacle of combustion engineering.
Having said that, be advised that the ONLY goal in their design is fuel economy. Every other parameter falls to the side except fuel economy. Every decision during design is is tested against the alter of CAFE.

Do you know that the EcoBoost engines in the F150 have plastic engine oil pans? The engine oil drain plug is a disposable plastic, half/turn to lock, one time use, shit show? Indeed, most external parts are now plastic including, but not limited to, valve covers, intake manifold, thermostat housing, oil pans,(both engine and auto transmission), oil dipsticks,etc. In addition, both oil pump and timing belts now run wet by design. Wet as in oil soaked, by design. What can go wrong?
Many of you already know this, and the younger among us, accept it without note.

Here's a little advice, try "I Do Cars" on YouTube. Look for the engine you're considering and watch the host tear down, and comment on the engine. I learn something ever time I watch this channel.

Sorry for the rant
 
Ok, I've just retired from 25 years in the car business and I'll share a few thoughts...
Modern engines and drivetrains are indeed at the pinnacle of combustion engineering.
Having said that, be advised that the ONLY goal in their design is fuel economy. Every other parameter falls to the side except fuel economy. Every decision during design is is tested against the alter of CAFE.

Do you know that the EcoBoost engines in the F150 have plastic engine oil pans? The engine oil drain plug is a disposable plastic, half/turn to lock, one time use, shit show? Indeed, most external parts are now plastic including, but not limited to, valve covers, intake manifold, thermostat housing, oil pans,(both engine and auto transmission), oil dipsticks,etc. In addition, both oil pump and timing belts now run wet by design. Wet as in oil soaked, by design. What can go wrong?
Many of you already know this, and the younger among us, accept it without note.

Here's a little advice, try "I Do Cars" on YouTube. Look for the engine you're considering and watch the host tear down, and comment on the engine. I learn something ever time I watch this channel.

Sorry for the rant
It's a fair point. CAFE ratings are incredibly important, as seems to be 'making more power than the outgoing model', and 'minimizing NVH'. Some of the decisions to achieve that, such as wet timing belts just to gain 0.01mpg and slightly reduce noise in operation don't seem like a good call from a reliability perspective. Neither do some of the cost cutting measures like plastic oil pans.

And yet, despite that, they do hold up. Far better than the cars of the past. I started driving in 2013. As with basically every new driver in the UK, my first car was a cheap, mid 2000's hatchback, bought second hand with lots of miles. A 2004 Vauxhall Corsa with 80,000 on the clock in my case. My mother and I went halves on the purchase and we paid less than GBP3000 for it.

I did 100k miles in that crappy Corsa from 2013-2016. I only ever opened the hood to check oil (it never burnt any) and top off washer fluid. Other maintenance? Tires, brake pads, brake fluid when I cooked it on a track day. That's it.

My friends who didn't care about cars had similar 2000's models from VW, Ford, Renault, Toyota, Hyundai, and didn't even do that much maintenance. Between the 10-15 people who spring to mind, we probably did around 1 million miles. None of us ever had any mechanical issues. At all.

Since those days, I've bought four more modern cars from four different manufacturers (BMW, VW, Dodge, Subaru), three motorbikes (all Yamaha), and done another 150k miles. All of them have been totally reliable. No issues whatsoever. But then, they're modern cars and bikes, that's the expectation.

If I ever buy a car and it does have even the slightest hint of mechanical issues, the car will be sold and chances are, the brand is dead to me. My father had an old Freelander which had some minor electrical gremlins and now I'm very distrustful of Land Rovers as an example.

I don't think it's a surprise that my generation is completely mechanically inept. We never had reason to learn. Things simply don't break. I have friends who take their car in for a service once a year and have NEVER opened the hood in their entire life. That simply wasn't possible 30-40 years ago.

I contrast this to my one friend at college who ran a 'classic'. A 1979 Mini Cooper. That 70's car was temperamental. My friend spent time fiddling with carbs. It didn't start when it was cold out. It burnt oil. It fouled spark plugs. It had electrical issues. From what I understand from my father and grandfather, those were the facts of life on all cars in the 70's and 80's. Things needed a bit of TLC, it was normal to need to crack open the hood and check on stuff every now and again.

These days that's totally unacceptable to the mainstream consumer base. Advances in reliability have enabled that, and I think it's pretty amazing really, especially when you think how much complexity they've added during that period, the performance that those engines offer, the amount of stupid crap they have to make them do for emissions, fuel efficiency, and to meet consumer expectations around smoothness and power.
 
My old Jeep Rubicon. It was very capable off road. Geared low. Just felt underpowered and I wasn’t using it the way I thought I would. Some kid just out of High School had to have it, so I parted with it. I’d like to replace it. The diesel option sounds good and I may go that route. There are a few around with low miles. Otherwise, it may be a new Bronco (2 Door).

IMG_4120.jpeg

IMG_4123.jpeg

IMG_4124.jpeg

IMG_4121.jpeg

IMG_4122.jpeg
 
It's a fair point. CAFE ratings are incredibly important, as seems to be 'making more power than the outgoing model', and 'minimizing NVH'. Some of the decisions to achieve that, such as wet timing belts just to gain 0.01mpg and slightly reduce noise in operation don't seem like a good call from a reliability perspective. Neither do some of the cost cutting measures like plastic oil pans.

And yet, despite that, they do hold up. Far better than the cars of the past. I started driving in 2013. As with basically every new driver in the UK, my first car was a cheap, mid 2000's hatchback, bought second hand with lots of miles. A 2004 Vauxhall Corsa with 80,000 on the clock in my case. My mother and I went halves on the purchase and we paid less than GBP3000 for it.

I did 100k miles in that crappy Corsa from 2013-2016. I only ever opened the hood to check oil (it never burnt any) and top off washer fluid. Other maintenance? Tires, brake pads, brake fluid when I cooked it on a track day. That's it.

My friends who didn't care about cars had similar 2000's models from VW, Ford, Renault, Toyota, Hyundai, and didn't even do that much maintenance. Between the 10-15 people who spring to mind, we probably did around 1 million miles. None of us ever had any mechanical issues. At all.

Since those days, I've bought four more modern cars from four different manufacturers (BMW, VW, Dodge, Subaru), three motorbikes (all Yamaha), and done another 150k miles. All of them have been totally reliable. No issues whatsoever. But then, they're modern cars and bikes, that's the expectation.

If I ever buy a car and it does have even the slightest hint of mechanical issues, the car will be sold and chances are, the brand is dead to me. My father had an old Freelander which had some minor electrical gremlins and now I'm very distrustful of Land Rovers as an example.

I don't think it's a surprise that my generation is completely mechanically inept. We never had reason to learn. Things simply don't break. I have friends who take their car in for a service once a year and have NEVER opened the hood in their entire life. That simply wasn't possible 30-40 years ago.

I contrast this to my one friend at college who ran a 'classic'. A 1979 Mini Cooper. That 70's car was temperamental. My friend spent time fiddling with carbs. It didn't start when it was cold out. It burnt oil. It fouled spark plugs. It had electrical issues. From what I understand from my father and grandfather, those were the facts of life on all cars in the 70's and 80's. Things needed a bit of TLC, it was normal to need to crack open the hood and check on stuff every now and again.

These days that's totally unacceptable to the mainstream consumer base. Advances in reliability have enabled that, and I think it's pretty amazing really, especially when you think how much complexity they've added during that period, the performance that those engines offer, the amount of stupid crap they have to make them do for emissions, fuel efficiency, and to meet consumer expectations around smoothness and power.

Agreed, compared to any other vehicle out there, some that need monthly or even daily maintenance , modern cars and trucks just keep on amazing me. If you don’t have an issue in the first six months, a new car is likely to be almost care free for the next 5 years. (Absent abuse of course)
 
View attachment 640739View attachment 640740
I took these pictures over the weekend. The truck is very nice and looks incredible.

The price is in red. Pretty affordable, but might not include floor mats.

It won't be a Raptor for me, not at that price, but they offer a lot of vehicle for sure. The 2025 order guide came out yesterday. While the Heritage Limited Edition is no longer available (and I didn't want to spend the money on that one anyway), the plainer Heritage Edition will be and also in the Robin's Egg blue with white top and white wheels. It screams of throwback styling.

I drove a Tacoma last night just for giggles. The power of that 2.4L 4 cylinder Turbo is quite impressive, but it's on road manners are not as nice as the Bronco. And according to the dealer, you get what they get, Toyota is not accepting orders.

So this is boiling down to a 2025 Heritage or maybe a 2024 Wildtrak if a crazy good deal can be made that makes me look past that throwback look.
 
So my 2012 Toyota Tundra has some 176,500 miles on it now. Runs like a champ. No mechanical repairs ever needed barring brake pads/shoes and of course tires. I've no reason to be rid of this truck, just getting the feeling to get something new.

The new Broncos with their throw back stying have caught my eye. I had one a couple of weeks ago in that baby blue color with the white top and white wheels......man that was pretty. I went so far as to even test drive one this past weekend. With the big mud tires on it the vehicle is a bit loud at highway speed. This is not a truck to make long road trips in if it can be avoided. But the ride was very smooth. It is designed to eat up the bumps and holes with little effort. I could see myself in one of these. But it would end a fairly long streak of Tundra ownership and a very long streak of owning a pickup, some 33 straight years now.

I was wondering if any of you have one of these new Broncos and if so what your experiences have been?

I've sat in one that I was going to drive, it belonged to a friend. It was so tiny, I could not physically operate it. Another negative is they have a terrible reliability track record already. Also, they are incredibly expensive for the quality of what you are actually getting. Lastly, their depreciation is pretty darned stiff so you gotta enjoy throwing money into a hole as if you're buying a boat.

An alternative? The Toyota FJ Cruiser. They were made 2007-2014. The original MSRP on them was around $30k. They were so good, with that famous Toyota v6 engine, a manual differential that is bulletproof when you want to engage four wheel drive on occasion, and they are built as chassis-on-frame just like the 4runner. Oh, and their wheelbase is shorter so they tend to be ideal offroad vehicles. Their nickname is "Jeep recovery vehicle".

The bad news is they haven't made them in ten years. The worse news is a zero miles on it 2014 can sell for over $70,000. For a 2012-2014 era one with 30,000-70,000 original miles, you can expect to pay $28,000-$42,000.

Yep, they cost more than original MSRP, sometimes double. But they are bulletproof, easy to work on, they go 400,000 miles, and they appreciate in value if driven little and maintained well.

it's the closest vehicle the USA has ever had to the Land Cruiser Pickup sold in Africa and Asia.
 
Just a point of differentiation. The overall reliability and ratings of the Toyota FJ was far higher than the Ford Bronco from the onset. The quality of the FJ some ten years later has increased as their bulletproof nature has been documented over many years on the road. The Ford Bronco continues to have new negative issues coming to light and they don't appear to be vehicles that will "go the distance".

I've owned 8 Jeeps in my life. My perspective on their current year lineup is "run away". Stellantis has destroyed a storied brand that used to have great reputation. My three Grand Cherokees from the 1990s went 300,000-400,000+ miles. My 2004 went a mere 124,000 mies. My 2008 Jeep Commander started to develop loads of issues at only 72,000 miles, EVEN THOUGH it had a forever power train warranty. Run away from modern Jeeps. They keep getting worse, unless you're willing to spend five-figures on modifications to bring up their reliability.


Screenshot 2024-10-16 at 11.31.37 AM.png
Screenshot 2024-10-16 at 11.31.07 AM.png
 
@NIGHTHAWK
That's the beauty of my rice burner if we have a fuel shortage I can pull up at any Chinese takeaway and fill it with with old peanut oil and soy sauce and have a good meal while waiting. Then start it up and drive off.
Try that with your ford it would size up at the thought.
It may be smaller but it has enough room to stretch my legs out while driving.
In Australia those big fords, Silverado and Rams are hopeless in the bush as a lot of tracks aren't wide enough for them.
Sorry but I will stick with my NISSAN.
IF you have had your best luck with a ford and a 243 you must be very unlucky. Ha Ha ha Ha Ha.
Bob
You two are just too funny and very entertaining !!!!
 

Forum statistics

Threads
57,909
Messages
1,242,749
Members
102,300
Latest member
joe laws
 

 

 

Latest profile posts

Grz63 wrote on Werty's profile.
(cont'd)
Rockies museum,
CM Russel museum and lewis and Clark interpretative center
Horseback riding in Summer star ranch
Charlo bison range and Garnet ghost town
Flathead lake, road to the sun and hiking in Glacier NP
and back to SLC (via Ogden and Logan)
Grz63 wrote on Werty's profile.
Good Morning,
I plan to visit MT next Sept.
May I ask you to give me your comments; do I forget something ? are my choices worthy ? Thank you in advance
Philippe (France)

Start in Billings, Then visit little big horn battlefield,
MT grizzly encounter,
a hot springs (do you have good spots ?)
Looking to buy a 375 H&H or .416 Rem Mag if anyone has anything they want to let go of
Erling Søvik wrote on dankykang's profile.
Nice Z, 1975 ?
Tintin wrote on JNevada's profile.
Hi Jay,

Hope you're well.

I'm headed your way in January.

Attending SHOT Show has been a long time bucket list item for me.

Finally made it happen and I'm headed to Vegas.

I know you're some distance from Vegas - but would be keen to catch up if it works out.

Have a good one.

Mark
 
Top