Ongoing General Automotive Thread 2.0

[Table 5]

Yeah, I gotta say I really like this thing. It's kind of what I was hoping the Defender would be like.

I'm sure it will have it's own Ford issues, but hey it's going directly up against a Jeep.

The only downside I see so far is the fact that the manual will only come with the 4-cylinder, not the 6. Not sure why manufacturers fail to realize that enthusiasts are the ones who buy manuals now, and they tend to want the big engine!

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

See, you say they're not competing against Toyota, but I wonder if Toyota looks at this, looks at the crazy used market for their last generation of FJs and thinks, "hmmmm..."

Anyway, after watching that video, I wholeheartedly agree: beards mandatory.

And none of this wimpy goatee or van dyke nonsense. Full beards only.

[81MC]

A small, turbocharged engine is a really poor choice for actual off-roading.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

See, you say they're not competing against Toyota, but I wonder if Toyota looks at this, looks at the crazy used market for their last generation of FJs and thinks, "hmmmm..."

I hope they do! Although hopefully a bit more J40, and less Tonka, this time around.

I do think this thing will indirectly be competing against the 4Runner/Tacoma to some extent, but the main target is clearly the Wrangler.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Yeah, I gotta say I really like this thing. It's kind of what I was hoping the Defender would be like.

I'm sure it will have it's own Ford issues, but hey it's going directly up against a Jeep.

The only downside I see so far is the fact that the manual will only come with the 4-cylinder, not the 6. Not sure why manufacturers fail to realize that enthusiasts are the ones who buy manuals now, and they tend to want the big engine!

I don't think Ford has a manual transmission that bolts up to their 6 cylinder ecoboost engines. They could surely make one but then again if it's something like the MT82 then you are better off with an automatic. The reality is that the 6 cylinder versions are going to be pricey and the higher the price the lower the manual transmission take rate. These decisions aren't made in a vacuum as manufacturers have plenty of evidence to know full well what sells and what doesn't.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by 81MC

A small, turbocharged engine is a really poor choice for actual off-roading.

Not disputing this claim, but I am curious. In the mid-90s to the mid 2000s when I'd offroad, the vehicle of choice was 80s Toyota pick-up trucks because of their ruggedness of course, but also the light weight four-cylinder. You don't need a ton of power for off roading because you always have the option of low gear. The joke with Chevs was they'd find the bottom of any mud pit because of their weight - they're like a rock harhar. But yeah, nobody offroaded with full-size V8 trucks and I gotta think that's still the case.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The reality is that the 6 cylinder versions are going to be pricey and the higher the price the lower the manual transmission take rate. These decisions aren't made in a vacuum as manufacturers have plenty of evidence to know full well what sells and what doesn't.

I'm not sure that is the case anymore. Manuals were typically bought because they were cheaper and had better fuel economy. They were the default of the poors. These days they don't offer better economy, and the only people who want a stick do so because of the driving engagement...ie. enthusiasts. I think those people fall into two camps...those who buy used, or those who will pay more to get the experience they want.

Porsche for one is starting to come to this realization that they can now start making more money off of manual drivers. In the new 911, the manual is no longer cheaper than the PDK, and you have to step up to the S to even get one. It's not a good thing that there is less choice, but I think we are entering an era where the manual is going to be seen as a luxury item you need to pay up for. So to me, it makes sense to pair them with the bigger engine, as that's something enthusiasts typically want too.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by 81MC

A small, turbocharged engine is a really poor choice for actual off-roading.

Depends if the intercooling is air to air or a coolant based heat exchanger. If it's a liquid cooled turbo it should be fine.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I'm not sure that is the case anymore. Manuals were typically bought because they were cheaper and had better fuel economy. They were the default of the poors. These days they don't offer better economy, and the only people who want a stick do so because of the driving engagement...ie. enthusiasts. I think those people fall into two camps...those who buy used, or those who will pay more to get the experience they want.

Porsche for one is starting to come to this realization that they can now start making more money off of manual drivers. In the new 911, the manual is no longer cheaper than the PDK, and you have to step up to the S to even get one. It's not a good thing that there is less choice, but I think we are entering an era where the manual is going to be seen as a luxury item you need to pay up for. So to me, it makes sense to pair them with the bigger engine, as that's something enthusiasts typically want too.

Yeah but we are talking about a Bronco here not a 911. A good portion of these are going to be grocery getters and female driven.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yeah but we are talking about a Bronco here not a 911. A good portion of these are going to be grocery getters and female driven.

Those customers will most likely go for the automatic anyway, so that's not really relevant.

It doesn't matter whether we are talking Ford, Subaru, or Porsche...enthusiasts tend to want the best engine/transmission combos available. Manual buyers are a tiny percentage anyway...you might as well give them what they really want, they will create hype around your car, and you'll make more money doing so.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Not disputing this claim, but I am curious. In the mid-90s to the mid 2000s when I'd offroad, the vehicle of choice was 80s Toyota pick-up trucks because of their ruggedness of course, but also the light weight four-cylinder.

I assume you mean compared to a V8 since the 20R/22R is about the heaviest 4 cylinder engine ever made.

[Nufy]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Not disputing this claim, but I am curious. In the mid-90s to the mid 2000s when I'd offroad, the vehicle of choice was 80s Toyota pick-up trucks because of their ruggedness of course, but also the light weight four-cylinder. You don't need a ton of power for off roading because you always have the option of low gear. The joke with Chevs was they'd find the bottom of any mud pit because of their weight - they're like a rock harhar. But yeah, nobody offroaded with full-size V8 trucks and I gotta think that's still the case.

A popular mod was also to swap in a chev small block when the 4 cylinder exploded.

[81MC]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Not disputing this claim, but I am curious. In the mid-90s to the mid 2000s when I'd offroad, the vehicle of choice was 80s Toyota pick-up trucks because of their ruggedness of course, but also the light weight four-cylinder. You don't need a ton of power for off roading because you always have the option of low gear. The joke with Chevs was they'd find the bottom of any mud pit because of their weight - they're like a rock harhar. But yeah, nobody offroaded with full-size V8 trucks and I gotta think that's still the case.

For me, it’s the power delivery. I would take a 5 spd 120hp NA 4banger over the turbo’d variants I’ve drove (granted, not a lot).

A 2.3L pushing a 4000lbs brick up a muddy hill is gutless. And then the turbo finally spools, your tires break traction, the brutal ESP/TC kicks in and cuts your power. Just a poor driving experience overall. I would trade peak HP numbers for a reasonable torque curve all day long if I was actually really working off-road.

But, it’ll sure sell people on those flat dirt roads I suppose.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Those customers will most likely go for the automatic anyway, so that's not really relevant.

It doesn't matter whether we are talking Ford, Subaru, or Porsche...enthusiasts tend to want the best engine/transmission combos available. Manual buyers are a tiny percentage anyway...you might as well give them what they really want, they will create hype around your car, and you'll make more money doing so.

I read elsewhere that Ford doesn't have a manual transmission already developed to pair with the larger engine. Presumably some calculations were done on the cost/benefit of developing that for the Bronco and Ford decided it wasn't worthwhile.

The "manual transmissions in all cars" crowd is vocal in online discussions, but the sales figures bear out that they just don't put their money where their mouth is.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by 81MC

For me, it’s the power delivery. I would take a 5 spd 120hp NA 4banger over the turbo’d variants I’ve drove (granted, not a lot).

A 2.3L pushing a 4000lbs brick up a muddy hill is gutless. And then the turbo finally spools, your tires break traction, the brutal ESP/TC kicks in and cuts your power. Just a poor driving experience overall. I would trade peak HP numbers for a reasonable torque curve all day long if I was actually really working off-road.

But, it’ll sure sell people on those flat dirt roads I suppose.

I disagree. In low gear, you're going to be in the turbo like instantly.

[burn_this_city]

That's 80/90s turbo mentality. I wouldn't buy a newer vehicle without turbo or supercharging today, especially considering we live at altitude. Turbo lag is essentially a thing of the past now.

[Fuzz]

The biggest issues with turbos these days is the complexity/cost of repairs vs NA. Now, that depends a bit on the manufacturer, but it is certianly more things to go wrong. That, and they sound like a Dyson.

[81MC]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

That's 80/90s turbo mentality. I wouldn't buy a newer vehicle without turbo or supercharging today, especially considering we live at altitude. Turbo lag is essentially a thing of the past now.

Sequential systems help, but every turbocharged Ford I’ve driven since 2015 has turbolag that would exclude it from ownership. Maybe the newest iteration is better?

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by 81MC

Sequential systems help, but every turbocharged Ford I’ve driven since 2015 has turbolag that would exclude it from ownership. Maybe the newest iteration is better?

My 2016 F-150 with the twin turbo Ecoboost has 0 turbo lag. It's faster than the 5.0 V8 Coyote.

[dammage79]

Not a Ford guy at all and Bronco make me think about turning to the dark side. Well that and the Ford GT, but thats like an impossible thing.