#notyet but I’ve never opened it either.
That doesn't make sense. It's as if you are implying that if the top is painted then it isn't intended to go off road. If the paint was the barrier to going or not going off road, then Ford shouldn't offer any paint. Broncos should only come in primer to that fallacy.
It doesn’t have to make sense to you. It is what it is. A painted roof is objectively, irrefutably less utilitarian and instead pretty. That’s the obvious compromise here. But, of course, facts don’t matter to people clinging to an idea.
This argument is about definitions.....
Nope.
24 2.7 wildtraks 13k no issues but I keep a good ceramic coating on it. The bronco looks and drives as good as day one.
Ford couldn't make a viable case to bring the Bronco back if not for the mall crawlers. Based on Jeep executive estimates, 85-90% of owners use these vehicles as mall crawlers.
It's a different construction, different plant, different supplier. It's an entirely different product made to fit an existing package.Yeah I mean the MIC top probably slightly more utilitarian. For instance maintenance, like waxing and taking care of the paint, etc. MIC is basic, nothing fancy, just wash it with a sponge. But the MIC tops all seem to crack sooner or later so you could make an argument for the painted tops.
You could also make an argument that white tops are more utilitarian because these keep the temperatures from the sun lower in the cab.
It's great Ford gives us things like this to debate
Back to the OP question, have been eyeing the painted tops to see if they will develop cracks too. Not sure if they are just painting over a MIC top or it's altogether different construction.
Yes 100%, it's almost completely all about image and a reflection of one's chosen personality. I would say that the majority of sasquatch bronco owners will never even use the diff locks or see much more than a gravel road.
