Bronco vs Jeep Wrangler mega thread

[rockadile]

Name another convertible SUV being sold in the United States today. Does that vehicle have side curtain airbags? Did it roll over on an arbitrary crash test?

I'll save you the research. There is no other convertible SUV sold in America today. And the Bronco hasn't been tested yet, so everything is speculation when comparing them.

I bet the Murano convertible had them before it was discontinued.

Sponsored

 

[jeepingib]

You said that it was the only SUV that didn't have them. I was trying to point out that there hasn't been a vehicle like the Wrangler. And the Wrangler is easily the safest convertible SUV sold today. As it's the only one! A deposit does not really count as we are about a year away from seeing any Broncos on the street. And while it is extremely unlikely that the Bronco will do worse on crash tests than the Wrangler as that was the bench mark that they were trying to beat. But in reality we don't know as it hasn't been tested.

 

[Kyanche]

My biggest gripe I think, is the steering. It's obvious that its a thing. FCA knows it, journalists know it, and Jeep keeps saying its a feature not a bug.

I haven't had the issue with my JL and I'm glad I'm not the only one who seems to have "okay steering" but I still ripped FCA a new one when I was given a long survey recently about how I felt about the wrangler. The way their dealers treat people with steering issues on this forum is ridiculous.

 

[Oilburner]

... And while it is extremely unlikely that the Bronco will do worse on crash tests than the Wrangler as that was the bench mark that they were trying to beat. But in reality we don't know as it hasn't been tested.

I dunno, man, the lack of the cross bar above/behind the front seats seems like would really take strength away from the structure, especially in a side-impact. Are these air bags supposed to be a substitute?

 

[Boatbuilder88]

Are there any forum members who are open to IFS on the Wrangler? They both have their advantages, with better daily driver capability being a huge one for IFS. Given that like Jeeps, the vast majority of Broncos will rarely if ever be used as an off road vehicle, IFS will be an advantage. No death wobble.

When Jeep was planning the JL there was an uproar on the JK forums that they better not go to IFS. Even when the JL first came out some thought it was heresy that Jeep had put in a conventional door stop.

The fear is that once Jeep starts putting IFS on Wranglers, eventually it will make its way to the entire lineup. Including Rubicons.

Jeep's job is to maximize return on investment for shareholders. Not cater to the 0.001% of folks who would make optimum use of a SFA Jeep. The train has left the station. The next Wrangler redesign (a long way off in 2028?) will have IFS.

 

[jeepingib]

I dunno, man, the lack of the cross bar above/behind the front seats seems like would really take strength away from the structure, especially in a side-impact. Are these air bags supposed to be a substitute?

Good point. It will be interesting to see how it does. I would imagine that the engineers had the Wrangler in mind when designing it, and the safety features. It's a historic soft target for the Wrangler, because most owners are willing to compromise certain safety aspects in order to have a vehicle that can do what a Wrangler does.

 

[jeepingib]

Jeep's job is to maximize return on investment for shareholders. Not cater to the 0.001% of folks who would make optimum use of a SFA Jeep. The train has left the station. The next Wrangler redesign (a long way off in 2028?) will have IFS.

Time will tell. If the Bronco sells well, then things could possibly change. Or not. Part of what sells the Wrangler is that SFA.

 

[aldo98229]

Jeep's job is to maximize return on investment for shareholders. Not cater to the 0.001% of folks who would make optimum use of a SFA Jeep. The train has left the station. The next Wrangler redesign (a long way off in 2028?) will have IFS.

Incorrect. Jeep’s job is to build vehicles people want to buy, and pay pretty penny for them.

If you all you want is to maximize the return on your investment, there are much better stocks out there than FCA.

 

[Boatbuilder88]

I don't know. Were they a hit? I think I saw them less than I did the absurd Dragon Edition and I know dealerships had such a hard time getting rid of those, they had to really eat shit on them to get them off the lot.

Dragon Edition... OMG, I just fell off my chair. That special edition was so stupid.

 

[Boatbuilder88]

Jeep's job is to maximize return on investment for shareholders. Not cater to the 0.001% of folks who would make optimum use of a SFA Jeep. The train has left the station. The next Wrangler redesign (a long way off in 2028?) will have IFS.

Incorrect. Jeep’s job is to build vehicles people want to buy, and pay pretty penny for them.

If you all you want is to maximize the return on your investment, there are much better stocks out there than FCA.

It's 100% correct. (I'm a former corporate finance guy.) Companies will chose to invest in a project - in this case, a new vehicle - that provides maximum return on invested capital. It doesn't matter what Jeep charges for a Wrangler (even if it is a "pretty penny") if the profit margins are not sufficient.

Your second statement about better outside investments than FCA stock may very well be true, but that does not impact Jeep management's decisions on how to invest in internal projects. These are two different decisions.

 

[aldo98229]

It's 100% correct. (I'm a former corporate finance guy.) Companies will chose to invest in a project - in this case, a new vehicle - that provides maximum return on invested capital. It doesn't matter what Jeep charges for a Wrangler (even if it is a "pretty penny") if the profit margins are not sufficient.

Your second statement about better outside investments than FCA stock may very well be true, but that does not impact Jeep management's decisions on how to invest in internal projects. These are two different decisions.

The problem with that assessment is that it cynically assumes that all that matters in automaking is maximizing investment. If that were true, Wrangler wouldn't exist.

Ford went through great lengths to justify internally bringing back Bronco. I assure you "investment maximization" did not appear among the top 5 reasons.

 

[Whisky19]

What many are not taking into account is the number of folks that will hold out in anticipation of Jeeps next move. They are very smart in putting out teasers etc at this stage. Marketing 101 dictates that this will intensify for the next year up until the first Bronco hits the pavement. The psychology behind this is very rudimentary. Buyers will postpone high ticket purchases if they feel the model they take possession on will fall short of newer updated ones. Happens all the time with everything from Flat Screens to IPhones. Point is, don’t take all those initial deposits at face value.

 

[jeepingib]

It's 100% correct. (I'm a former corporate finance guy.) Companies will chose to invest in a project - in this case, a new vehicle - that provides maximum return on invested capital. It doesn't matter what Jeep charges for a Wrangler (even if it is a "pretty penny") if the profit margins are not sufficient.

Your second statement about better outside investments than FCA stock may very well be true, but that does not impact Jeep management's decisions on how to invest in internal projects. These are two different decisions.

You are completely forgetting that the market drives the concept. If it was only about maximum return on investment we would be stuck with 4 cyl econo boxes that are dirt cheap to build. The Wrangler exists because there is a market for a vehicle like it. Ford is betting that the market will also support a vehicle that is very nearly like it. There will be some people who go to the Bronco, but there will be people who will continue to buy the Wrangler as well. To say that because the Bronco exists the next Wrangler will have IFS is ludicrous.

Sponsored