Search results

I call my f-150 the Bismarck ?

Huh, that’s actually really cool and should make swaps easier. For an oem though, a lot more of the engineering is going to be in software, emissions, manufacturing, & certification changes (escalating in cost likely in that order), The costs are still there, and the business case still isn’t...

If the 2.7 had ever been offered with a manual, I'd agree, but it never has, and was designed from the ground up to be a turbo engine paired only with auto transmissions. The 2.3 (and the engine it was derived from) has always been been offered with a manual, so it was far cheaper for Ford to...

But the number who won’t buy the 2.3 manual or the 2.7 auto instead of a 2.7 manual is pretty small, and it is a lot cheaper and easier for Ford to do the 2.3 manual than a 2.7 manual

The v-8 is possible, but Ford really has no incentive to develop a manual 2.7, how many more people would go and buy a mustang because of the change in base motor (and the accompanying price increase), that wouldn’t buy it with the option of 2.3 or v8? Not enough people to even come close to...

My build went up only about $1,000, so for now I’m planning on sticking With the 2.7. At this point, without any other price increases, the only reason I’d go with the 2.3 would be gas mileage (if it’s significantly better), because that 16.9 gallon tank in the 2 door is too small. (Hoping...

I tend to look at this the other way around. As a basequatch buyer, what other suv can I get for around $40k with all of the following: 35 inch tires axles geared for them front and rear lockers a removable hardtop and doors turbocharged engine (forced induction is almost necessary in the...

I’m sure the people who really want that combo would pay for it, but realize, the 2.7 has never been offered with a manual, so Ford has non-insignificant engineering and manufacturing changes to make to the engine, and would need to design a separate manual transmission housing in addition to a...

Can confirm, the front passenger seat does not fold flat, only the rear passenger seats (and there is still that step left). As for the headrests being removable, I suspect they are on the front, but not the rear, but I’m just making a (slightly) educated guess.

For Ford though, that’s not the question, it is undoubtedly easier for them to manufacture the manual 2.3 than the 2.7, so the question becomes how many people will refuse to buy the Bronco at all due to the 2.7 manual not being available (as opposed to those who will still buy a 2.3 manual or...

It is still a good bit cheaper when you factor in all the things that come standard with the bronco in that (comparing 2 door since that's what I'm getting) things like free ford pass connect, wireless Android auto and Apple carplay, a bigger screen, auto transmission (since required for sas...

It was definitely bigger than a 2 door jeep, and it had an actually usable cargo space. Good bit smaller than the full size broncos though, space wise it is clear it’s built on a mid size frame. I’d put it at similar to a Ranger for overall interior space, maybe somewhat bigger. As for...

I think a no option rubicon is actually closer to the basequatch, the base bronco has a good bit of tech by itself, and then front and rear lockers with an upgraded stronger front axle, the only way I can see to get these options to keep is the rubicon. (Though the basequatch is missing out on...

FYI, as of this morning it is looking like Sasquatch for a base 4 door is 5,790, so the same as pre-update. (Still has the increased base price though)

I wasn’t allowed to sit in it, but it didn’t seem any worse than my f-150. (It was a badlands model, so sitting on 33s)

True, but I’m debating whether I want to spend $40k on my 2dr basequatch, or knock the almost $1900 off it and go with the 2.3. (I’m also really hoping for mpg ratings before all options are locked in)

That would definitely be interesting. I know for some people the 2.7 takes precedence over sasquatch, but I’d rather keep Sasquatch and lose the 2.7 for my purposes.

Can confirm though, it’s pretty awesome in person.

This has been my concern, and part of why I’m eager to be a MY21 buyer.

Until today I was set on 2.7 and auto, but the recent B&P change makes me somewhat concerned about staying in budget on that, so I may end up knocking it down to the 2.3 and auto. (Also, if there is like a 3 mpg difference between the two, I’d take the better one, gotta stretch the 16.9 gallon...