2027 Bronco RTR revealed as part of 2027 model lineup

[HighVelocity]

Alright so picture this-

It’s a black bronco. Gonna take the arms and they’ll be….Black! And the coilovers are really gonna stand out because…they’ll be black too! Then of course if you have bypasses you want everyone to know. They’re normally chromed out but I paid extra to stick with the accent theme and….they’re black too.

Don't forget the black MOLLE panels filling in every empty space available.

Sponsored

 

[SierraBronco]

Don't forget the black MOLLE panels filling in every empty space available.

Bro. Now we’re cookin

 

[MJ12]

Agree. Do 35s fit and have no rub across the entire F&R, turn and bottoming envelope?

From the brief looking into I did, most people are adding1-2 inch perch collar to the front and adding 35s. You can zero out the shock positioning and the shocks will still be within parameters to operate to full capability, but some say it stiffened the front end slightly. I bought that thing for the motor and the suspension, so I really haven't had much interest in going up in tires or lift and mess with the original physics of the suspension just to make it look a little nicer... The performance of the truck is already very impressive straight out of the box it doesn't really NEED 35s...

 

[MayhemMike]

Don’t understand the “ won’t break the bank” statement when a price is never given.

 

[Beach_Bum]

Don’t understand the “ won’t break the bank” statement when a price is never given.

I think people are trying to convince themselves that it will be slotted into the old Black Diamond price point. Ford has never offered the HOSS 3.0 Fox shocks below the Badlands Sasquatch HOSS 3.0 option. With the SBD now optional on the Badlands, that entry point is an apples to apples comparison.

I'll hold to my supposition that it will be slotted between the Badlands Sasquatch HOSS 3.0 and Stroppe. Now the non Sasquatch RTR, might be a more affordable option, but it will still be north of $50k.

 

[SierraBronco]

I think people are trying to convince themselves that it will be slotted into the old Black Diamond price point. Ford has never offered the HOSS 3.0 Fox shocks below the Badlands Sasquatch HOSS 3.0 option. With the SBD now optional on the Badlands, that entry point is an apples to apples comparison.

I'll hold to my supposition that it will be slotted between the Badlands Sasquatch HOSS 3.0 and Stroppe. Now the non Sasquatch RTR, might be a more affordable option, but it will still be north of $50k.

Are you saying the Wildtrak was a higher trim package than the Badlands?

 

[Beach_Bum]

Are you saying the Wildtrak was a higher trim package than the Badlands?

Nope. Just cost more.

I'm not a fan of the computer intergrated SBD. Ford making it optional on the Badlands is just an effort to hold the price down. To be honest, most don't need it.

But the fact remains that every single limited edition has been based on a LUX Sasquatch Badlands.

 

[SierraBronco]

Nope. Just cost more.

I'm not a fan of the computer intergrated SBD. Ford making it optional on the Badlands is just an effort to hold the price down. To be honest, most don't need it.

But the fact remains that every single limited edition has been based on a LUX Sasquatch Badlands.

 

[KreeHBronco]

Always great to have more options! I am interested in the 2.3L tuning mentioned. I don't believe there are any existing software tuners on the market for the new 2.3L MPC engine. Hopefully, it will also benefit the 2.3L with a manual. Even the enhanced cooling fan sounds interesting.

 

[Draughon]

meh.

 

[mpeugeot]

Wow. Ford took a grill that rtr has been selling, wheels they are selling, and graphics and put it on an Everglades with a badlands suspension. What a waste.

Ya, but it's on 33's and has the RTR 4 banger... That alone is worth 25 HP.

 

[swamp2]

you can probably increase wheel travel by ... like 1/2” using 10” spacers.

Are you sure you would get so little from 10" spacers?

For a super rough, travel = r sin(θ) (r effective, theta effective, simple single swing arm) 1/2" seems way too small. It would be inches.

 

[HighVelocity]

Ya, but it's on 33's and has the RTR 4 banger... That alone is worth 25 HP.

The Mt. Dew glowstick green accents add 15HP as well.

This thing is becoming quite the performance beast.

 

[drbandkgb]

I told yall this in that other thread lol

 

[87-Z28]

Are you sure you would get so little from 10" spacers?

For a super rough, travel = r sin(θ) (r effective, theta effective, simple single swing arm) 1/2" seems way too small. It would be inches.

My original post was a satirical response and not meant to accurately assess the increased wheel travel due to wheel spacer size. A 2nd order effect at best. Fairly certain it would be small numbers.

Since you brought it up, it is interesting to quantify the actual value. I am going to add the wheel hub centerline location to the 3D kinematic motion when I get a chance. I now have a matlab program that automatically calculates the front IFS kinematics.


A basic analysis suggests small numbers.

assuming hub centerline location at zero offset more accurately defines wheel motion, as apposed to lower ball joint location.

lower ball joint motion is identical regardless of wheel hub location; ie, spacer length. Motion ratio is not affected by spacers but hub location is.

the additional wheel travel from wheel hub centerline location is only due to the knuckle orientation and the perpendicular distance from king pin axis to hub centerline (the cantilever length).

Assuming just the camber plane. if camber angle remains zero during entire LCA kinematic motion then there would be no additional wheel travel regardless of cantilever length to hub centerline. Spacer size could be infinite without any gains in wheel travel.

However this is not the case since camber angle varies throughout LCA motion; ie, knuckle orientation changes. For OEM control arms and knuckle, camber angle varies nonlinearly in an “elliptical” motion. Peak changes is no more than 3-4 degrees.

Assuming a max 3 degree camber angle change, the additional vertical wheel travel from a 10” cantilever length is; 10 sin(3) or about 1/2”. That is where my original number comes from. Granted the SAS configuration may have a cantilever 10” arm for the oem rims. So adding a 10” spacer adds another 1/2”. So maybe 1” additional wheel travel with a 10” spacer.

I will add this to matlab program and get an accurate number. But I don’t see how realistic 1-2” spacers can add more than fractions of an inch, <1/8 at best.

Sponsored