Anyone care about the new Bronco?
- Thread starter LandCruiser
- Start date
I love it on paper. I'll consider it down the road on its 2nd or 3rd model year assuming the following:
- it's as capable on-road as it is off-road. Something the Wranglers have always lacked. I have 2 littles ones, a wife, and a house so I like the fact that the 4runner is spacious and rides fairly composed along with offering decent tow rating and excellent cargo space.
- it gets decent fuel economy (21-24mpg average). Shouldn't be too hard to beat the 17mpg i'm getting in my 4runner with a more modern drivetrain.
- it proves to be relatively reliable, and has better safety ratings than the 11yo 5th gen. I've had great luck with the 2 Ford vehicles i've owned and tend to take care of my vehicles.
I'd also like to see what Toyota does with the next gen 4runner as well before trading in my 2020.
- it's as capable on-road as it is off-road. Something the Wranglers have always lacked. I have 2 littles ones, a wife, and a house so I like the fact that the 4runner is spacious and rides fairly composed along with offering decent tow rating and excellent cargo space.
- it gets decent fuel economy (21-24mpg average). Shouldn't be too hard to beat the 17mpg i'm getting in my 4runner with a more modern drivetrain.
- it proves to be relatively reliable, and has better safety ratings than the 11yo 5th gen. I've had great luck with the 2 Ford vehicles i've owned and tend to take care of my vehicles.
I'd also like to see what Toyota does with the next gen 4runner as well before trading in my 2020.
Maverickpixel
New member
im just glad the major brands are taking some risks with their autos, its been to vanilla the past decade
Gamma Ray
Banned
Well, considering how Land Rovers and Jeeps have problems standing to begin with, I'd say the 4Runner fares quite well and the Bronco is looking likely that it won't stumble over in a drunken stupor after a couple model years.
4rnrGunner
New member
The new bronco just does not appeal to me aesthetically. I have never been a fan of a modern retro look. Engine wise I am not a fan of the newer turbo stuff. The power and torque is there but the reason it there is simply to give power to an otherwise weak engine. Over time these engines will fail. Factory seals and plastic components under high pressure equal failure in my opinion. I am sure under extreme maintenance they will probably be okay but still think these will not be 200k+ engines. If they put a normal engine like the coyote V8 I think the setup would be a monster or even a diesel without all the government regulation stuff.
Honestly I think you will see a lot of mall crawler broncos than actually on the trail.
Honestly I think you will see a lot of mall crawler broncos than actually on the trail.
Jetboy
New member
The new Defender is a unibody crossover in "defender" skin. It's closest comparable vehicle is probably a Jeep GC or maybe a Subaru Forester or Rav4 Adventure. I'm not sure it's really in the same class as a Wrangler/Bronco or even a 4Runner or Land Cruiser. I don't think there's all that much to compare.
Thai
Elite Member
Huh?! Did you even read up on the Defender?? Or do you just assume a lot of stuff and run with it?
Defender and RAV4/Forester? Just because it is a unibody? Do RAV4 and Forester have LO range and rear locker? Skidplates? Over 35" water fording?
The Defender is very capable...what are you talking about?! Approach, departure, breakover angles are top notch (38 approach, 40 departure, 31 breakover). Water fording is class-leading (35.4"), easily on par with Bronco. Ground clearance 11.5". Low range. Rear locker. CRAWL and MTS like dodads. Towing capacity 8200 lbs.
The unibody itself is claimed to be strongest ever created. So, it can take punishment.
I would bet that a Defender will easily keep up with Wrangler / Bronco not named Rubicon and Sasquash...i would even bet with the right tires, it would be able to keep up with those too.
My only criticisms of Defender are the lack of side protection (sliders) and the horrible reliability/durability. But then again, the lack of reliability & durability can be said about Jeeps and Fords.
Last edited:
Jetboy
New member
Did you just copy and paste LR's marketing nonsense?
It's the standard LR unibody platform with new skin. Yes it can max out the IFS/IRS height and get to 11" under the skids with 1" of suspension down travel. yay...
I'd love to take your bet on the defender keeping up with a wrangler or bronco. In fact - I'll find a bronco or wrangler and we can make it happen if you can bring a Defender. We'll meet at the Rubicon. It'll be fun. I'm only half kidding. If you actually can find a Defender that someone will bring to the Rubicon - I'm sure at least one of my friends will buy a Bronco and let me borrow it or come along for the ride. Even just in my 4Runner. It'll get real interesting real fast for the Defender... A bronco on 35's vs a Defender. Lol. The defender is far closer to a Forester than a Bronco. Unless you mean the Bronco Sport. In that case - yeah, Bronco sport and Defender are very similar.
Last edited:
Thai
Elite Member
Which part do you think is not true due to marketing? Angles? Wading depth?
According to LR, Defender unibody is stronger than all other LR models.
Now, i understand if you compare Defender to Jeep GC but Forester? Come on dude...that's silly.
Defender crawl ratio is 56.6:1. Pretty good...for a Forester competition!
Ramp Travel Index is projected around 500 for 110 model and 560 for 90 model. Is that not competitive with 4runner?
Remember, Defender has cross-linking shocks to improve articulation.
Stock vs. stock, the Defender will outperform my LC in off-roading.
Now, how long it will last or if things fall apart on the trail...that i cannot defend Defender on.
Last edited:
Jetboy
New member
Which part do you think is not true due to marketing? Angles? Wading depth?
Now, i understand if you compare Defender to Jeep GC but Forester? Come on dude.
Defender crawl ratio is 56.6:1. Pretty good...for a Forester competition!
Ramp Travel Index is projected around 500 for 110 model and 560 for 90 model. Is that not competitive with 4runner?
Remember, Defender has cross-linking shocks to improve articulation.
Stock vs. stock, the Defender will outperform my LC in off-roading.
Now, how long it will last or if things fall apart on the trail...that i cannot defend Defender on.
I don't think the angles are as important as you do. I think there is a LOT more to making a good off road capable vehicle than just the angle from the tire to the bumper. For example - what is the ground clearance to the lowest point on the suspension (LR measures the highest)? What is the actual belly clearance height? - that's more important in most cases than the breakover angle. Similarly - what's the bumper clearance for a step up - ie what's the tallest rock ledge you can actually approach before hitting the bumpers? Typically more important than approach angle. If anyone ever does take the LR off road in challenging terrain we'll find out. So far I'm not aware of anyone anywhere demonstrating any example of that in the new LR. And it's extremely rare to see a LR product of any type out in the wild on a trail. I don't think I've literally ever once seen one on a trail. I see more Pinzguaers than LRs. Not exaggerating. And they're pretty rare.
Take the sheet metal off - and yes, the Defender will look a lot more like a Forester than it will a Bronco. In fact - put some air-over coilovers on the Forester and they're probably very close to a dead even match-up off road. You can max out the height on the Forester too. The LR Defender has a has the same suspension as the discovery. So around 480 on a 20* ramp is probably about what you'd expect. In stock form it's okay. But that's also basically the limit of what you'll ever get. It's maxed out.
I rarely ever see a 4Runner on a trail with stock suspension. The stock suspension is basically just a placeholder for what the customers put on after they buy it. Even stock the 4Runner will score higher on the RTI ramp. Remember you have to compare the same ramp angles. But with just the easy common aftermarket shocks most everyone ends up with, the gap ends up being pretty big between the two. Probably 50% more articulation in a 4Runner is common. - and that's ignoring the weight distribution benefits of the rear solid axle. The difference is pretty significant when you add those up.
I'm sure the LR is better on the highway. It probably has a lower COG and more creature comforts.
Last edited:
Thai
Elite Member
Edmunds measured RTI on LR4 and got 560. 4runner with KDSS got 584. Defender suspension will likely be better than LR4 in flexing.
Last edited:
Jetboy
New member
Last edited:
Thai
Elite Member
Looks impressive...
And? Did it get stuck there?
So, you’re saying that approaching a rock ledge, LR Defender has less clearance than 4runner?
BTW, there are plenty of off-road videos of Defender off-road on Youtube.
You make it sound like Rubicon trail is what determines off-road cred. Ridiculous.
Jetboy
New member
For comparison
There are many places that would determine off-road credibility. The rubicon is the gold standard. There's literally a Wrangler named after it. It's the gold standard because it's not that hard, but hard enough to separate the impostors. That's all. But we can find another comparably technically difficult trail. It's just the easy and obvious reference point. Much like the Nordschleife is to street car performance.
Compared to most 4Runners ready to go play in the dirt - yeah, they have a LOT more front clearance. If you know anyone who has one - I'm happy to compare on the trail to my 4runner. Plenty of rock ledges in Moab we can find out in the real world which one will drag first. My 4Runner is mildly built and probably very comparable to most 4Runners people use for off road travel. Nothing "hardcore" about it.
I'd love to see someone figure out how to get a Defender up Gold Bar Rim ledge with the front bumper still attached. I mean - it has a great approach angle right?
Last edited:
Thai
Elite Member
For comparison
There are many places that would determine off-road credibility. The rubicon is the gold standard. There's literally a Wrangler named after it. It's the gold standard because it's not that hard, but hard enough to separate the impostors. That's all. But we can find another comparably technically difficult trail. It's just the easy and obvious reference point. Much like the Nordschleife is to street car performance.
Compared to most 4Runners ready to go play in the dirt - yeah, they have a LOT more front clearance. If you know anyone who has one - I'm happy to compare on the trail to my 4runner. Plenty of rock ledges in Moab we can find out in the real world which one will drag first. My 4Runner is mildly built and probably very comparable to most 4Runners people use for off road travel.
It is stock vs. stock. You can’t have “mildly built” vs. stock.
So, you’re telling me that a STOCK 4runner fresh off dealer lot has MORE clearances than a stock LR Defender? The ONLY place where i would give you is ground clearance (pumpkin vs. suspension arms).
Thai
Elite Member
Good video of Defender: Wheeling brand new Defender @ Chinaman Gulch, CO - YouTube
Jetboy
New member
That depends. Do you want the full Defender suspension travel? If so - yes, to get full travel the Defender sits low. I think lower than a Rav4. If you mean at full suspension height - then it depends where you measure, but the LR probably has a higher diff skid height.
vs
You tell me which one you want to approach an obstacle with.
Just for fun. Which looks more like the LR? IMO the second one is a heck of a lot closer.
I would compare what exists in the real world. When you have two vehicles - one that can be modified cheaply and easily and one that can't - you absolutely can compare how people in the real world use them. The same way that IMO a Jeep wrangler that can bolt on 35's and everyone does that - then you should probably consider that as the real standard setup. For people who want a capable vehicle in more challenging terrain - it does matter. For people who don't - probably doesn't matter.
Last edited:
Thai
Elite Member
That depends. Do you want the full Defender suspension travel? If so - yes, to get full travel the Defender sits low. I think lower than a Rav4. If you mean at full suspension height - then it depends where you measure, but the LR probably has a higher diff skid height.
vs
You tell me which one you want to approach an obstacle with.
Just for fun. Which looks more like the LR? IMO the second one is a heck of a lot closer.
I would compare what exists in the real world. When you have two vehicles - one that can be modified cheaply and easily and one that can't - you absolutely can compare how people in the real world use them. The same way that IMO a Jeep wrangler that can bolt on 35's and everyone does that - then you should probably consider that as the real standard setup. For people who want a capable vehicle in more challenging terrain - it does matter. For people who don't - probably doesn't matter.
Nice selective picture. Pick one that is lowest setting.
Why not show picture of butt? (Departure angle)
I am pretty sure LR Defender at HI setting is higher than 4runner at pretty much every vantage point except at control arms near wheels.
Last edited:
Jetboy
New member
Nice selective picture. Pick one that is lowest setting.
Why not show picture of butt? (Departure angle)
I am pretty sure LR Defender at HI setting is higher than 4runner at pretty much every vantage point except at control arms near wheels.
Show me. I can't find any pictures. But I'd say there's zero chance the bumper and front clip is higher. Or the rear bumper. But either way - prove me wrong. Show me a picture.
This is the closest I can find at max height - but not a straight front pic so its harder to compare.
I'm not sure I'd want to pull up to a parking curb without being pretty careful.
Last edited:
