Ford's Bronco: Not So Global After All

by Matt Posky

Published: December 20th, 2018

Relaunching the Bronco is a no-brainer for North America. With credits like Longmire and the O.J. Simpson police chase under its belt, there is just too much buzz around the model not to bring it back. Unfortunately, the rest of the world doesn’t have the same rich history with the vehicle — leaving them in the lurch.

The 2020 Ford Bronco will be left-hand drive only, not a global sensation, according to Ford Australia.

“There’s nothing to announce. There are currently no plans in place for a right-hand drive Bronco,” Kay Hart, President and CEO of Ford Australia/New Zealand, told CarSales’ Down Under division.

That’s not to suggest it’ll never get there, though. Kay’s comments came at the launch of the new Ford Endura — which you’ve known for the last year as the second-generation Edge. Sometimes it takes a while for a vehicle to make the rounds and have its steering wheel re-glued to the opposing side, and this appears to be one of those instances.

Hart was asked to clarify if that meant Ford had no plans to introduce the Bronco and yet-to-be-named Bronco Jr. for the Aussie market. “Not currently,” she reiterated. “Clearly it’s going to be a great vehicle, but we are extremely happy with the performance of Ranger here.”

“That’s not to say we don’t continually look at other products within Ford, but Ranger is doing such a fantastic job here. We’re happy with the line-up as it stands, but that’s not to say we wouldn’t look to add to the range in future.”

While Ford might be happy with its current Aussie lineup, its consumers could be another story. The next Bronco seems like just the sort of thing they’d be into — something presenting itself as rugged and is ute adjacent. Unless the Bronco is a miserable failure in North America (unlikely), it seems like Ford would likely want to give it a shot on the Australian market eventually. Ford’s initial announcement even referred to the upcoming Bronco as a “global model.”

While former Ford engineering chief Raj Nair said the Bronco would not be a rebadged version of the Ranger-based Everest SUV, there may still be too much overlap between the two vehicles for the automaker to feel immediately comfortable throwing the Bronco into the mix right away. Australia and other right-hand drive regions will have to wait, regardless. If there truly is no plan for right-hand drive, it’ll take the company some time to get its ducks in row.

We’re sad for Australia but must admit it feels a little good that Ford’s launching a vehicle that, if only for a while, will be exclusively American — even if it’s based on a globetrotting pickup that we only just received.

[Image: Ford Motor Co.]

#Compliance #Ford #FordBronco #FordEverest #FordMotorCo #FordRanger #GlobalModels #RightHandDrive

Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments

Join the conversation

8 of 18 comments

Roberto Esponja on Dec 20, 2018

161 countries follow the right hand drive system. 75 countries drive on the left side of the road. I remember in the 1960's and 1970's, a whole bunch of countries switched from right-hand-drive to left, then the trend stopped. I do not desire to start a flame war here, but I do not understand why more and more countries do not do this switch. Right-hand-drive makes more sense, and is more intuitive and natural for the majority of the populace. Having all vehicles engineered and assembled with their steering systems on the left would also allow for cost reductions, as carmakers would not have to homologate for left-hand-drive, which trust me, is a PITA for them.

Like Reply
- See 5 previous
- Art Vandelay on Dec 20, 2018
  
  What is the population of RHD vs LHD nations? That is what matters. India is the largest RHD I can think of. China, The US, and most of Europe are LHD.
  
  Like
- Whynot on Dec 20, 2018
  
  Your post is very confusing to follow because you keep on switching between talking about right/left hand traffic and right/left hand drive and using the two interchangeably. You say RHD is more intuitive then say all steering systems should be on the left. Right hand traffic, drive on the right = left hand drive, steering wheel on left side (i.e. the US, continental Europe, China most of the rest of the world) Left hand traffic, drive on the left = right hand drive, steering wheel on right side (i.e. UK, Japan, and former UK colonies liek India and South Africa)
  
  Like
- Brn on Dec 20, 2018
  
  "Right-hand-drive makes more sense, and is more intuitive and natural for the majority of the populace." Why?
  
  Like
- Amca on Dec 20, 2018
  
  @Art Vandelay And have you ever seen the Indians drive? Insanity.
  
  Like
- Vulpine on Dec 21, 2018
  
  At one time, there was a logical reason for riding on the left side of the road; you wanted to keep your sword arm towards oncoming riders so you could effectively fight off bandits or enemies. With the vast majority of right-hand-drive countries having been British colonies, you can see why those few countries still use the left side of the road. The more sensible means and which most of the rest of the world has used is left-hand-drive, where you keep your shield towards your opposite. This reduces the risk of a combative clash and essentially has both travelers riding defensive rather than offensive.
  
  Like
- Brn on Dec 21, 2018
  
  @Vulpine Appreciate the explanation Vulpine. :)
  
  Like
Vulpine on Dec 21, 2018

Judging by that rendering, it looks like all they did was take a Jeep Renegade and put a different nose on it.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

FreedMike Not surprisingly, I have some ideas. What Cadillac needs, I think, is a statement. They don’t really have an identity. They’re trying a statement car with the Celestiq, and while that’s the right idea, it has the wrong styling and a really wrong price tag. So, here’s a first step: instead of a sedan, do a huge, fast, capable and ridiculously smooth and quiet electric touring coupe. If you want an example of what I’m thinking of, check out the magnificent Rolls-Royce Spectre. But this Cadillac coupe would be uniquely American, it’d be named “Eldorado,” and it’d be a lot cheaper than the $450,000 Spectre – call it a buck twenty-five, with a range of bespoke options for prospective buyers that would make each one somewhat unique. Make it 220 inches long, on the same platform as the Celestiq, give it retro ‘60s styling (or you could do a ‘50s or ‘70s throwback, I suppose), and at least 700 horsepower, standard. Why electric? It’s the ultimate throwback to ‘60s powertrains: effortlessly fast, smooth, and quiet, but with a ton more horsepower. It’s the perfect drivetrain for a dignified touring coupe. In fact, I’d skip any mention of environmental responsibility in this car’s marketing – sell it on how it drives, period.  How many would they sell? Not many. But the point of the exercise is to do something that will turn heads and show people what this brand can do.  Second step: give the lineup a mix of electric and gas models, and make Cadillac gas engines bespoke to the brand. If they need to use generic GM engine designs, fine – take those engines and massage them thoroughly into something special to Cadillac, with specific tuning and output. No Cadillac should leave the factory with an engine straight out of a Malibu or a four-banger Silverado. Third step: a complete line-wide interior redo. Stop the cheapness that’s all over the current sedans and crossovers. Just stop it. Use the Lyriq as a blueprint – it’s a big improvement over the current crop and a good first step. I’d also say Cadillac has a good blend of screen-controlled and switch-controlled user interfaces; don’t give into the haptic-touch and wall-to-wall screen thing. (On the subject of Caddy interiors – as much as I bag on the Celestiq, check out the interior on that thing. Wow.)Fourth step: Blackwing All The Things – some gas, others electric. And keep the electric/gas mix so buyers have a choice.Fifth step: be patient. That’s not easy, but if they’re doing a brand reset, it’ll take time. 
NJRide So if GM was serious about selling this why no updates for so long? Or make something truly unique instead of something that looked like a downmarket Altima?
Kmars2009 I rented one last fall while visiting Ohio. Not a bad car...but not a great car either. I think it needs a new version. But CUVs are King... unfortunately!
Ajla Remember when Cadillac introduced an entirely new V8 and proceeded to install it in only 800 cars before cancelling everything?
Bouzouki Cadillac (aka GM!!) made so many mistakes over the past 40 years, right up to today, one could make a MBA course of it. Others have alluded to them, there is not enough room for me to recite them in a flowing, cohesive manner.Cadillac today is literally a tarted-up Chevrolet. They are nice cars, and the "aura" of the Cadillac name still works on several (mostly female) consumers who are not car enthusiasts.The CT4 and CT5 offer superlative ride and handling, and even performance--but, it is wrapped in sheet metal that (at least I think) looks awful, with (still) sub-par interiors. They are niche cars. They are the last gasp of the Alpha platform--which I have been told by people close to it, was meant to be a Pontiac "BMW 3-series". The bankruptcy killed Pontiac, but the Alpha had been mostly engineered, so it was "Cadillac-ized" with the new "edgy" CTS styling.Most Cadillacs sold are crossovers. The most profitable "Cadillac" is the Escalade (note that GM never jack up the name on THAT!).The question posed here is rather irrelevant. NO ONE has "a blank check", because GM (any company or corporation) does not have bottomless resources.Better styling, and superlative "performance" (by that, I mean being among the best in noise, harshness, handling, performance, reliablity, quality) would cost a lot of money.Post-bankruptcy GM actually tried. No one here mentioned GM's effort to do just that: the "Omega" platform, aka CT6.The (horribly misnamed) CT6 was actually a credible Mercedes/Lexus competitor. I'm sure it cost GM a fortune to develop (the platform was unique, not shared with any other car. The top-of-the-line ORIGINAL Blackwing V8 was also unique, expensive, and ultimately...very few were sold. All of this is a LOT of money).I used to know the sales numbers, and my sense was the CT6 sold about HALF the units GM projected. More importantly, it sold about half to two thirds the volume of the S-Class (which cost a lot more in 201x)Many of your fixed cost are predicated on volume. One way to improve your business case (if the right people want to get the Green Light) is to inflate your projected volumes. This lowers the unit cost for seats, mufflers, control arms, etc, and makes the vehicle more profitable--on paper.Suppliers tool up to make the number of parts the carmaker projects. However, if the volume is less than expected, the automaker has to make up the difference.So, unfortunately, not only was the CT6 an expensive car to build, but Cadillac's weak "brand equity" limited how much GM could charge (and these were still pricey cars in 2016-18, a "base" car was ).Other than the name, the "Omega" could have marked the starting point for Cadillac to once again be the standard of the world. Other than the awful name (Fleetwood, Elegante, Paramount, even ParAMOUR would be better), and offering the basest car with a FOUR cylinder turbo on the base car (incredibly moronic!), it was very good car and a CREDIBLE Mercedes S-Class/Lexus LS400 alternative. While I cannot know if the novel aluminum body was worth the cost (very expensive and complex to build), the bragging rights were legit--a LARGE car that was lighter, but had good body rigidity. No surprise, the interior was not the best, but the gap with the big boys was as close as GM has done in the luxury sphere.Mary Barra decided that profits today and tomorrow were more important than gambling on profits in 2025 and later. Having sunk a TON of money, and even done a mid-cycle enhancement, complete with the new Blackwing engine (which copied BMW with the twin turbos nestled in the "V"!), in fall 2018 GM announced it was discontinuing the car, and closing the assembly plant it was built in. (And so you know, building different platforms on the same line is very challenging and considerably less efficient in terms of capital and labor costs than the same platform, or better yet, the same model).So now, GM is anticipating that, as the car market "goes electric" (if you can call it that--more like the Federal Government and EU and even China PUSHING electric cars), they can make electric Cadillacs that are "prestige". The Cadillac Celestique is the opening salvo--$340,000. We will see how it works out.