Suddenly, a Ford Bronco Raptor Enters the Realm of Possibility

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Ford’s 2019 Ranger might be new to the U.S., but the model’s uninterrupted existence in overseas markets means those customers get first dibs on the brawny Raptor variant. This assumes North Americans eventually get their hands on the wide-track, off-road Ranger model, and it’s a reasonable assumption.

As for the reborn Ford Bronco, a Ranger platform-mate slated for U.S. production in 2019, the existence of a beastly Ranger Raptor is enough to generate the faintest of hopes for a wilder SUV. Now, thanks to comments made to an Australian publication, those dreams don’t seem nearly as crazy.

Speaking to Drive, Ford Performance head engineer Jamal Hameedi remarked on the possibility of doing to Ford’s overseas Everest what it did to the Ranger.

The Everest, like the upcoming Bronco, is a midsize SUV built on the Ranger’s T6 frame. The SUV’s rear suspension — a coil-sprung solid axle with a Watt’s link — is similar to that of the Raptor, which ditches the stock Ranger’s rear leaf springs. It’s not a total carryover, but the two vehicles share enough similarities to make an Everest Raptor worth talking about.

And talk, Hameedi did.

“There’s no reason [we wouldn’t do an Everest Raptor],” he said. “The first F-150 Raptor was way beyond our wildest dreams in terms of success, and that success spawned a Ranger Raptor. So to do an SUV is a little more difficult because you have to figure out how to deal with the rear suspension. In the form of a bodyside outer it’s not just a box outer [and that] poses a unique challenge in how you package that.”

The most obvious difference between the Ranger and its Raptor sibling is the added width. The Raptor’s body stretches nearly a foot wider, with a track increased — front and rear — by nearly 6 inches. Frame modifications became necessary. While stretching the skin of an SUV over a much wider track would pose its own challenges, it’s an idea Ford of Australia doesn’t dismiss out of hand.

“Long term it would make sense if you look at the fact that passenger vehicles were overtaken by SUVs this [2017] year,” said Ford Australia product communications manager Damion Smy. “There’s definitely a case for more performance oriented or at least more sports styled SUVs in the future.”

It’s still a longshot, and who knows what Ford’s American crew feels its customers deserve, but faint hopes don’t need much fuel to stay alive. We now have a Ford Edge ST, with an Explorer version on the way. The future, at least at the Blue Oval, seems dependent on crossovers and SUVs, some of them with added performance cred.

Is a butchier Bronco too much to ask?

[Images: Ford]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 17 comments
  • Mikeg216 Mikeg216 on Feb 16, 2018

    Just use the expedition.. Put in the 5.0..and all the tricks from the raptor and bam!

  • Big Al from Oz Big Al from Oz on Feb 16, 2018

    With the shorter wheelbase and wider stance an Everest/Bronco "Raptor" would be fast in the desert, buggy like. If there is a Bronco Raptor it will be expensive. I did read many comments on how the Bronco should have really sharp pricing. But, many comments on this site are from tight asses that don't seem to want to pay much for anything, even road infrastructure, then blame everyone else but their tight ass selves for cheap imports in the US. The Bronco will be an expensive vehicle compared to the old Bronco, and a Raptor Bronco will be quite expensive.

  • MaintenanceCosts Nobody here seems to acknowledge that there are multiple use cases for cars.Some people spend all their time driving all over the country and need every mile and minute of time savings. ICE cars are better for them right now.Some people only drive locally and fly when they travel. For them, there's probably a range number that works, and they don't really need more. For the uses for which we use our EV, that would be around 150 miles. The other thing about a low range requirement is it can make 120V charging viable. If you don't drive more than an average of about 40 miles/day, you can probably get enough electrons through a wall outlet. We spent over two years charging our Bolt only through 120V, while our house was getting rebuilt, and never had an issue.Those are extremes. There are all sorts of use cases in between, which probably represent the majority of drivers. For some users, what's needed is more range. But I think for most users, what's needed is better charging. Retrofit apartment garages like Tim's with 240V outlets at every spot. Install more L3 chargers in supermarket parking lots and alongside gas stations. Make chargers that work like Tesla Superchargers as ubiquitous as gas stations, and EV charging will not be an issue for most users.
  • MaintenanceCosts I don't have an opinion on whether any one plant unionizing is the right answer, but the employees sure need to have the right to organize. Unions or the credible threat of unionization are the only thing, history has proven, that can keep employers honest. Without it, we've seen over and over, the employers have complete power over the workers and feel free to exploit the workers however they see fit. (And don't tell me "oh, the workers can just leave" - in an oligopolistic industry, working conditions quickly converge, and there's not another employer right around the corner.)
  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh [h3]Wake me up when it is a 1989 635Csi with a M88/3[/h3]
  • BrandX "I can charge using the 240V outlets, sure, but it’s slow."No it's not. That's what all home chargers use - 240V.
  • Jalop1991 does the odometer represent itself in an analog fashion? Will the numbers roll slowly and stop wherever, or do they just blink to the next number like any old boring modern car?
Next