Why Bronco Should Return as a Wrangler Fighter

Seth Parks
by Seth Parks

Is there a self-respecting automotive enthusiast alive, myself included, who wouldn’t love to see Ford resurrect the Bronco? Answer: Absolutely, the fun loving folks in Auburn Hills.

Ford may not need to develop a new Bronco, but it absolutely should. And it should use the Jeep Wrangler as its benchmark.

The Wrangler nameplate is so robust that it survived the under-funded ineptitude of AMC, the lean independent years, the cost cutting Cerberus era, and even the culture-challenged Mercedes decade. Wrangler transcends traditional logic of automotive success. It’s not fuel efficient, space efficient, quiet, comfortable or even particularly reliable, yet it thrives thanks to the enduring emotional connection consumers experience with it.

Consider the Wrangler’s track record: When total car sales dipped 39 percent between 2005 and 2009, Wrangler sales rose 6 percent. Since then, Wrangler sales have increased 160 percent while the industry is up 67 percent. If Wrangler were a mutual fund it would have crushed the Dow on the way down and on the way back up.

Despite all the love, the Wrangler is all alone. Others have tried (Samurai/Tracker/FJ Cruiser/Xterra) but none had the brand, legacy and/or form factor that a new Bronco could enjoy. We love the Wrangler like few other vehicles, in much the same way we could love a new Bronco.

We can thank recent growth in the compact/mid-size pickup segment for the Bronco opportunity because, without the investment in a new Ranger, a Bronco resurrection would not be viable (see Ford May Bring Ranger Back To US in 2018). Moreover, a new Bronco would supplement the Ranger in filling the void at the Michigan Truck Plant left by the departing C-Max/Focus. This idea is not new, but what form should the new Bronco take?

There has been discussion of Ford reissuing the Bronco using the T6 Ranger-based Everest (see Let’s Break Down The Ford Ranger and Bronco Rumors, Shall We?). As the logic goes, the rumored loss of Explorer’s D4 platform mates (MKS/ MKT/Flex/Taurus) will transform today’s Explorer into a scale-challenged orphan ready for replacement by a modified Everest. However, Explorer exited the recession with strength, posting double digit growth in each of the last six years and is on pace to move 270k units this year. It may not be nearing its pre-recession glory of 400k annual units, but it justifies itself without platform siblings. Replacing the current unibody, FWD-biased Explorer with a RWD, body-on-frame Everest and all the associated packaging and dynamic challenges that decision brings would be a mistake. Grand Cherokee proves there is room in the mid-size SUV segment for a real off-roader, but Ford should let 4Runner, Grand Cherokee and the new Discovery compete for these rare buyers. The real opportunity is in targeting the peerless Wrangler. Purists rejoice: That means an open-top Bronco, but if Ford wants to do it right it has much to learn from Wrangler.

One of the biggest factors driving Wrangler’s growth over the last decade has been the introduction of the four-door Unlimited in 2007, with a take-rate of 70 percent. Purists may bemoan a four-door Bronco, but without one the Bronco cannot generate the sales volume necessary to justify itself. A two-door only Bronco would end up joining other promising-but-dead products like Excursion and T-Bird. The new Bronco must be an off-road capable, open-top, emotive, fun machine offered in two- and four-door wheelbases.

How many Broncos can Ford sell and how much will it cost to develop? Wrangler is on pace to move 230k units this year. Based on FCA’s continuing investment in Wrangler, the automaker clearly sees a bright future in the nameplate. Ford can expect a mix of Wrangler conquest and new sales. Can Ford wrestle away 10 percent of Wrangler’s market and find another 25k takers a year? Almost certainly. If Bronco development cost — not shared with the new Ranger — reaches $1.5b and the Bronco lifecycle is eight years, Ford will have 400k units over which to amortize the development cost. That equates to about $3,800 per unit, an economic decision roughly equivalent to the Expedition/Navigator twins that attracted Ford’s investment based on combined sales of 42k to 57k units in each of the last seven years.

Will it cannibalize other Ford nameplates and what about CAFE? An uncompromising Bronco, as described here, has only one competitor so the cannibalization question is essentially moot. As for CAFE, absolutely a new Bronco would have a detrimental impact, but these vehicles would achieve a “light truck” classification, thus diminishing their regulatory impact. For a more complete discussion of CAFE I recommend Derek Kreindler’s excellent article, How CAFE Killed Compact Trucks And Station Wagons.

Developing a Bronco to battle Wrangler in its private niche is a sound business decision that almost every enthusiast can get behind. Ford, please resurrect one of the most storied nameplates in automobiledom, and aim it at the Wrangler. Do so, and the only losers will be Ford product managers who are not compensated like Wall Street fund managers.

Seth Parks
Seth Parks

Twenty year auto industry professional. Currently CEO at Turbo International, the premier American manufacturer of OEM replacement turbochargers for the global aftermarket.

More by Seth Parks

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 88 comments
  • AngeloD AngeloD on Sep 18, 2015

    Ford of Brazil already builds a Wrangler fighter: the Troller T4. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/06/04/ford-troller-t-brazil-suv/9891621/

    • NMGOM NMGOM on Sep 18, 2015

      Angelo - - - If Ford believed it would be competitive with Wrangler, it would be here already. I personally would like to see the Troller be imported to America, regardless of where it's made; but, in my view, it would not be a "Wrangler fighter". And now, Jeep has some of the Troller's function covered, with the Renegade at one end, and the 4-door Unlimited at the other. What would Troller compete on? Price? The 2-door soft-top Wrangler already starts at $24K, and that's hard to beat. ==================

  • Frylock350 Frylock350 on Sep 18, 2015

    Ford already sells a four door Bronco, its called Expedition. The Bronco, like the K5 Blazer was a full-size two-door SUV; built on the half-ton truck chassis. The K5 and Bronco both were replaced by the Tahoe and Expedition.

    • Bball40dtw Bball40dtw on Sep 18, 2015

      The Expedition that replaced it was two feet longer and had a foot longer wheelbase. What I want is a full size Bronco that has the SuperCab doors. Basically a SWB F150 with a cab and better rear seats. CAFE makes it so it will never happen.

  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
Next