More Initial Impressions with slightly different perspective

[RedHotFuzz]

I know, I know, it's all about the capability and they are not directed towards the same consumers, but I really don't want to be paying 70k for Ford Escape quality materials... maybe I expected too much...

This is always the peril of going up-trim. Ultimately the top-of-the-line trim is of equivalent quality to the entry-level trim, despite the huge price gap. You're not getting upgraded plastics on that thing no matter how many expensive package upgrades you select.

Conversely you could always buy the entry-level trim on a more expensive vehicle to get all the quality materials, but then you don't get all the gadgets and doo-dads.

As I mentioned before, I just wish the Big 3 would figure out how to offer me a VW-quality interior at VW/Big 3 prices. Domestic auto interiors have always been a major turn-off to me (hence the reason my 2016 Durango is the only domestic I've owned since I was 16). At least with the Bronco they kept the design simple and the lines clean, questionable plastics notwithstanding.

Sponsored

 

[ehssey]

That’s a bit unreasonable, your more concerned about material quality over off-road capability. You are searching the wrong segment of vehicles.

You may get Ford Escape quality materials on the Bronco but you get Ford Escape off-road ability with the Defender. I see no way possible to compare a BoF SUV to a unibody crossover on off-road capability.

This is ridiculous. Why is it unreasonable for someone to expect a certain level of material quality when spending a large amount of money? The inside and the capability are part of the entire package, regardless of the intended use. If the inside quality isn’t up to par for any given person, that’s their prerogative. To be so flippant about it is pure assumption and ignorant posturing.

 

[BenB007]

looks like your two examples are cars that are $20K more? Doesn't seem a fair comparison, but maybe I am just confused once again.

If you are talking about the part where I pointed out that capability and luxury are not mutually exclusive, I think my point stands and the cars to which I referred accommodate both. Price has nothing to do with that statement.

If you are talking about economies of scale where I did not mention any comparisons, other than the iPhone, it's just my opinion that the big three are in a race to the bottom to become the Walmart brand of vehicles. Doesn't mean they suck, it just means they are focused on quantity over quality and aren't really set up to build cars of the same quality as their European and Asian competitors. Feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[BenB007]

That’s a bit unreasonable, your more concerned about material quality over off-road capability. You are searching the wrong segment of vehicles.

You may get Ford Escape quality materials on the Bronco but you get Ford Escape off-road ability with the Defender. I see no way possible to compare a BoF SUV to a unibody crossover on off-road capability.

This seems a little ridiculous to me. Firstly, if the vehicle doesn't have quality materials, it's going to fall apart pretty quickly (especially in some of the conditions Ford is touting). Secondly, there is no indication whatsoever that the Bronco is any more capable off-road than the Defender. Perhaps it can be. Perhaps it should be. It has features like removable roof and a wide variety of off-road aftermarket accessories that are lacking on the Defender. But comparing a Defender to an Escape is just plain silly.

 

[mattyzx3]

looks like your two examples are cars that are $20K more? Doesn't seem a fair comparison, but maybe I am just confused once again.

Defender 90 is same price as OBX 2.7 Lux.

 

[NurseA.J]

Hey Amy! I don't know what will be there! I'm hoping for a Big Bend Velocity Blue 4DR, which is what I ordered through Granger!! I'm scheduled at the Villa Park event on April 24th!! Sal

Hi Sal! I’m registered to both Chicago events but looking at my schedule I’ll be attending the tinkey park one only unfortunately. I have noticed that the link refers to it as “meet the bronco family” so I’m definitely hoping for multiple big Broncos. Your build sounds fantastic! I went 2-door Badlands in Rapid Red with the 2.7!

 

[Rick Astley]

Agreed. When I look at it critically, I'm not really getting all that much more in my $48k BD. At least not $20k more. Of course, if many of us weren't buying the $48k+ models, Ford wouldn't be able to afford to sell a $28k model anyway.

Once you spec out parts and labor, Badlands has a very real business case for being so expensive over base.

At least when I looked at the 210 front axle, front and rear lockers, suspension, auto sway bar disco, mild-use bash plates and gearing changes, BL was a rather compelling argument. In fact, it priced barely over BD once you tart BD up to BL, not discounting the reduced lighting/option content.*


*All of this was assuming 2.3/MT and not including sasquatch because not only is that the combination I'm most excited for, but it's what was going to be on my build even if there was a 2.7/MT option. I don't find a compelling argument for the cost of the auto trans or engine upgrade considering the purpose of the vehicle.

 

[NCOBX]

This seems a little ridiculous to me. Firstly, if the vehicle doesn't have quality materials, it's going to fall apart pretty quickly (especially in some of the conditions Ford is touting). Secondly, there is no indication whatsoever that the Bronco is any more capable off-road than the Defender. Perhaps it can be. Perhaps it should be. It has features like removable roof and a wide variety of off-road aftermarket accessories that are lacking on the Defender. But comparing a Defender to an Escape is just plain silly.

What? Your talking about the new defender correct?
It’s not just less capable it is significantly less capable, your not going to turn a unibody car chassis with IRS into an off-road vehicle. Full stop. Removable roof and accessories have nothing to do with off-road capability - it’s the fact you can’t put decent sized tires on it, it cannot be lifted in the manner the Bronco can, it cannot have the approach or departure angles of the Bronco, and it cannot withstand long term off-road abuse. The minivan like low floor should be hint enough on the design priorities.

 

[NCOBX]

This is ridiculous. Why is it unreasonable for someone to expect a certain level of material quality when spending a large amount of money? The inside and the capability are part of the entire package, regardless of the intended use. If the inside quality isn’t up to par for any given person, that’s their prerogative. To be so flippant about it is pure assumption and ignorant posturing.

It’s hardly unreasonable to expect decent interior but let’s not cross compare vehicles of two completely separate classes - we could just as easily compare a Mitsubishi Mirage or a RR Ghost if vehicle classes can be cross compared.

Try going on a Ford Ranger Forum and complaining about the interior quality comparatively to that off a X7 if we are having a free for all here.

The Bronco has two direct competitors - the Wrangler and the 4Runner, comparatively speaking the Broncos quality is par if not above average of it’s competitors.

 

[Wanted33]

When I first saw a picture of the Bronco I thought it looked huge compared to my Jeep. But then I realized that when driving the Jeep all I see is the hood as the fenders are below the hood. With the Bronco the hood, and fenders are the same height. After a little look/see the Bronco is something like 3 inches wider, but most of that is because of the mirror design. I think it's all kinda like an optical illusion. My garage was built in 1927, so it looks like I'm going to have to fold in the mirrors to get that Bronco in there beside my Ranger.

Also, in my mind material feel is quite relative. My Ranger, which is the next to lowest trim level (STX) feels fine to me, but I'm sure others may feel different.

 

[Old Guy]

If you are talking about the part where I pointed out that capability and luxury are not mutually exclusive, I think my point stands and the cars to which I referred accommodate both. Price has nothing to do with that statement.

If you are talking about economies of scale where I did not mention any comparisons, other than the iPhone, it's just my opinion that the big three are in a race to the bottom to become the Walmart brand of vehicles. Doesn't mean they suck, it just means they are focused on quantity over quality and aren't really set up to build cars of the same quality as their European and Asian competitors. Feel free to prove me wrong.

Well, I don't think I am out to prove you wrong, that seems unimportant to either of us. I would say that instead of saying the quality is less, they are aiming at a different demographic. I am also not sure, quality is the word, but maybe fit in and finish?

I think price is very much in in the discussion when you come to capability and luxury. I think it is built for an intended purpose and consumer demographic.

Like the saying goes on many things.............inexpensive, luxurious, capable. pick two.

Not trying to ruffle your feathers, just seemed an interesting discussion. Seems my thoughts, caused more stir than I imagined.

Cheers.

 

[Old Guy]

Defender 90 is same price as OBX 2.7 Lux.

Interesting, but then again, apples to apples, the 90 comes with a 4cylinder at the base price. Seems we can only compare base to base on models, otherwise, we get to pick an choose what makes one look cheaper? I only show the OBX as $43k in 2dr with 6cyl?

 

[ScrunchFace]

As more information becomes available and people’s personal experiences are shared, I’m considering the Gen3 Raptor more and more.

I don’t think I could deal with such a cheap feel, rattling parts, and overall underwhelming fit and finish.

After I see and experience it in person, if the interior feels too cheap, I may end up getting the new Raptor and hold out until (if?) the Bronco feels a bit higher quality.

This is extremely disappointing

 

[BenB007]

What? Your talking about the new defender correct?
It’s not just less capable it is significantly less capable, your not going to turn a unibody car chassis with IRS into an off-road vehicle. Full stop. Removable roof and accessories have nothing to do with off-road capability - it’s the fact you can’t put decent sized tires on it, it cannot be lifted in the manner the Bronco can, it cannot have the approach or departure angles of the Bronco, and it cannot withstand long term off-road abuse. The minivan like low floor should be hint enough on the design priorities.

Both the Defender and the squatched Badland's have a ground clearance of 11.5 inches in the four door. Defender has a higher departure angle of 40 degrees compared to the Bronco's 37 degrees. Bronco best the Defender in approach angle of 43.2 degrees vs 38. Defender bests the Bronco in wading depth with 35 inches vs 33.5 inches and breakover angle of 28 degrees vs 26.3. Bronco does have bigger tires and of course the solid rear axle. So, your point about angles isn't really valid but your points regarding tires and axles are. I'd also give a nod to the Bronco's trail turn assists.

Of course, on both vehicles, that assumes that everything is working as it should. I'd be more inclined to trust the Bronco in the most extreme conditions but let's not get carried away. The Defender has its place too and these things have not been tested head to head as far as I know.

Sponsored