Bronco Forum - Full Size Ford Bronco Forum banner

41 - 60 of 62 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
Yes. It's a significantly more expensive vehicle, relative to the market as a whole.

If you ignore luxury models, new cars are basically the same price now as they were in the mid-'90s.
I was a little shocked at that so I went to the Bureau of Labor Statistics that calculates CPI data and sure enough the base price of new vehicle is only slightly higher today than it was in 1996... new trucks were a wee bit higher than new cars, but still; what a wild ride:


Still begs the question though: a 1996 F150 had a starting MSRP of $14,765. Today an F150 starts at $28,745. That's a heck of a lot more than the 4.6% that chart shows!

F350? $18,635 and $35,550, respectively.

How could that be? Well, in a nutshell, the Fed manipulates the number. "Hedonic Quality Adjustments" - apparently every year vehicles improve (reliability, durability, safety, fuel economy, maneuverability, speed, acceleration/deceleration, carrying capacity, and comfort or convenience) the CPI is adjusted for the improvement.

You can read more about it here: https://www.bls.gov/cpi/quality-adjustment/new-vehicles.pdf

Because adjustments like this are made to other items, like mobile phones, the CPI is actually artificially low.

Bottom line, if you are using inflation to justify ordering a 2021 Bronco, go right on ahead - it's likely even better than using CPI!

Now make sure you drive it hard and break it often once you get it. That way once all the "new model" kinks are worked out, the rest of us mere mortals can buy one too!
 

·
Registered
'92 Custom w/ '95 MAF 5.0, 33's, 4.10 LSD
Joined
·
2,328 Posts
I was a little shocked at that so I went to the Bureau of Labor Statistics that calculates CPI data and sure enough the base price of new vehicle is only slightly higher today than it was in 1996... new trucks were a wee bit higher than new cars, but still; what a wild ride:
You're not alone in being surprised by that, and like most economics topics, it's anything but a clear picture. I skimmed the PDF and didn't see it mentioned directly, but one of the contributing factors is how models gradually move up the range over their lifespan. For example, the Civic of today is basically the Accord of 20 years ago, and the new Ranger is probably a good comparison for '90s F150s.

Entry-level econoboxes haven't changed much in price during that period, which is the easiest way to see what's going on. They're just [often] not technically the same model as before, for the above reason.

I was told in the '05 range by a candid dealer that with prices flat, the manufacturers have to cut costs to maintain profits, and that's largely done by using cheaper and cheaper components. They've already automated so much, there's only so much that can be improved upon there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
You're not alone in being surprised by that, and like most economics topics, it's anything but a clear picture. I skimmed the PDF and didn't see it mentioned directly, but one of the contributing factors is how models gradually move up the range over their lifespan. For example, the Civic of today is basically the Accord of 20 years ago, and the new Ranger is probably a good comparison for '90s F150s.

Entry-level econoboxes haven't changed much in price during that period, which is the easiest way to see what's going on. They're just [often] not technically the same model as before, for the above reason.

I was told in the '05 range by a candid dealer that with prices flat, the manufacturers have to cut costs to maintain profits, and that's largely done by using cheaper and cheaper components. They've already automated so much, there's only so much that can be improved upon there.
Excellent points. I think you are spot on. I have heard insurance companies discuss all of the added electronics and safety equipment as well. Mobile phone integration and back-up cameras? Ha, we were just starting to trade-in our bag phones for cutting edge Nokia handhelds in '96!

I purchased my first new, off the dealer lot car in 1991. I was fortunate to have one of those candid sales guys. We were discussing longevity and he made a similar comment, that in order to reduce costs, cars were being built with a planned obsolescence of 75,000 miles - well... it was a Pontiac. Cars being built today certainly have a longer life expectancy (at least mechanically).

It's actually a testament to this community we keep so many FSB's on the road.

Let's hope the drive to reduce costs doesn't return us to those days.
 

·
Registered
'92 Custom w/ '95 MAF 5.0, 33's, 4.10 LSD
Joined
·
2,328 Posts
I purchased my first new, off the dealer lot car in 1991. I was fortunate to have one of those candid sales guys. We were discussing longevity and he made a similar comment, that in order to reduce costs, cars were being built with a planned obsolescence of 75,000 miles - well... it was a Pontiac.
Little did he know, the brand itself was planned obsolescence!
 

·
Premium Member
1986 Bronco, 351w, Edelbrock aluminum top end, Holley 600, 4" BDS lift, 35" Maxxis Razr's, stuff..
Joined
·
2,470 Posts
I posted a photo on here a ways back with the 21 next to a full size ford F150 (at least thats what I think it is) and they are basically the same size. In my opinion they have taken design cues from the early Bronco and made it bigger like our full sizes and given it a modern twist. Perhaps the best of both worlds? I love my old iron though and I don't think I'd ever pull the trigger on a 21 - maybe 5-10 years from now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
Little did he know, the brand itself was planned obsolescence!
True! ...and I've done it more than once. I owned a '72 Oldsmobile Cutless Convertible as well - but that was a much nicer car!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 92bronco_dude

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
Apparently trucks in general are getting to big... the Karen's are complaining and the cancel culture is coming for your truck. :facepalm

An article in today's Wall Street Journal (can't link from phone, but hit up DuckDuckGo for the title):

Pickup Trucks Are Getting Huge. Got a Problem With That?

...the author does...

 

·
Premium 4 Lyfe - Way Back Staff
'95 XLT: 5.8, MAF, E4OD, 4.56's, 6" on 33's
Joined
·
36,233 Posts
Sorry bud. I'd link it for you but it requires a sub to read. You should avoid that WSJ trash anyway. It's bad for your mental health. See anyone of hundreds of thousands of rage slobbering liberals to confirm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
Who gives a ****?

FSBs aren't particularly tall, wouldn't be hard for a vehicle with a lower floor and higher ceiling to acheive more cargo capacity. Remember FSBs have that giant step up right below the rear seat.



That's a K5 in onward.
The fact that anyone familiar with the FSBs or K5s would get it wrong is deeply disappointing. Next you're gonna tell me Hopper drives a Bronco in stranger things.
Side note: I'm 29 and watched Onward by myself.... and it was fucking fantastic. I now require one of my vehicles to have O for onward on the shifter.
when I was looking for broncos and 150s/250s, I was keeping my eyes out for any decent old econolines as well, that movie makes me want to get one....im almost 40.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
Apparently trucks in general are getting to big... the Karen's are complaining and the cancel culture is coming for your truck. :facepalm

An article in today's Wall Street Journal (can't link from phone, but hit up DuckDuckGo for the title):

Pickup Trucks Are Getting Huge. Got a Problem With That?

...the author does...

they are getting huge. my 2006 F-250 had a 6" lift. it is about 1" taller than a new F-250, both with FX4 packages,

It appears that the new Bronco is about 6" narrower in the body than the FSB, but right at about same overall width. and taller in some trims/options than the FSB.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,415 Posts
So many better New Ford trucks. I know someone who bought a 2020 Lariat Sport Super duty 6.7 CC SB in all black. Looks just like a xlt sport bronco.
 

·
Registered
1986 Eddie Bauer Bronco 5.0L AOD Full length headers, no cats annoying Flowmasters
Joined
·
92 Posts
I was looking at the Bronco "Sport" article in a Car & Driver article, which is Escape based platform according to the article.

So this new non Sport Bronco would be on an all new platform the Ford press release states. With it being built in Wayne Mi where the Ranger is build, it would hint towards being a Ranger based platform, with body on frame? It is aimed right at the Wrangler, and seems sized similarly. Sounds not full sized to me.


164957
 

·
FSM Lifetime
Joined
·
2,232 Posts
It is on the ranger platform and the ranger isn't a compact truck anymore. It's 90% the size of an F-150.

The new bronco is almost full-sized. The 2-door is a 4-seater so it's narrower and shorter, while the 4-door seats 5 and will be pretty close to full-size territory. Once the sasquatch Broncos are released with their stock 35" tires, us stock FSBrs will be looking up at them. At least we're still the widest :LOL:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,715 Posts
Excellent points. I think you are spot on. I have heard insurance companies discuss all of the added electronics and safety equipment as well. Mobile phone integration and back-up cameras? Ha, we were just starting to trade-in our bag phones for cutting edge Nokia handhelds in '96!

I purchased my first new, off the dealer lot car in 1991. I was fortunate to have one of those candid sales guys. We were discussing longevity and he made a similar comment, that in order to reduce costs, cars were being built with a planned obsolescence of 75,000 miles - well... it was a Pontiac. Cars being built today certainly have a longer life expectancy (at least mechanically).

It's actually a testament to this community we keep so many FSB's on the road.

Let's hope the drive to reduce costs doesn't return us to those days.
Pontiacs weren't bad per say, especially the brand engineered ones, just forgettable. In fact some were developed along with Toyota. People can claim planned lifespans all they want, but any vehicle built since the 90s barring stupid design flaws should be good for 200k on basic maintenance easy. IMHO mechanical reliability hasn't changed all that much since then, the biggest difference is the way they build bodies and interiors.
The issues we have today are the result of engineers trying to get as much as they can out of a design while making it lighter and more efficient. The result is more stress on any given component. Hondas and toyotas have had issues with engines burning oil due to low friction piston rings chosen for fuel efficiency.

Apparently trucks in general are getting to big... the Karen's are complaining and the cancel culture is coming for your truck. :facepalm

An article in today's Wall Street Journal (can't link from phone, but hit up DuckDuckGo for the title):

Pickup Trucks Are Getting Huge. Got a Problem With That?

...the author does...



I don't disagree. Trucks really are getting bigger. My dad just picked up a 17 colorado. It sits taller than the trailblazer, is bigger than the trailblazer, but has a smaller interior and windows than a Trailblazer. Supposedly this is a mid size truck. The trailblazer is a mid size SUV. What used to be a fullsize is now a mid size. I also think it's stupid how many people are buying trucks just to use them as glorified minivans. But it's a free country, and if gas prices go up those trucks will flood the market and small cars will become worth gold again. The colorado is just big enough for what we need, I talked my dad out of a Ram 1500, I had one of those once. ONCE! Besides being unreliable it was a god damn boat and an nightmare to maneuver.

when I was looking for broncos and 150s/250s, I was keeping my eyes out for any decent old econolines as well, that movie makes me want to get one....im almost 40.
I went to look at some dude's gutters (his soffit and fascia were falling down) and he had a sweet 79 1 ton GMC van he bought new. sadly it had been sitting in that spot for years with a bad trans and was rotted to hell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
Pontiacs weren't bad per say, especially the brand engineered ones, just forgettable.
Unfortunately a 1990 cross platform J-body. Those LT2 4-bangers were notorious for warping heads. Mine went at just over 60K... not bad looking, comfortable, decent driving, bot a POS all the same.

As for car sizes, Netflix just released Season 2 of The Umbrella Academy set in the early 60’s. Now those were large vehicles. 1960 Impala? Freakin door must be 1-1/2’ to 2’ thick!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
Apparently trucks in general are getting to big... the Karen's are complaining and the cancel culture is coming for your truck. :facepalm

An article in today's Wall Street Journal (can't link from phone, but hit up DuckDuckGo for the title):

Pickup Trucks Are Getting Huge. Got a Problem With That?

...the author does...

Opinion piece from Breitbart:

Nolte: Now They Want to Cancel Our Pickup Trucks

Nolte: Now They Want to Cancel Our Pickup Trucks

"Too beaucoup, too beaucoup..."
 

·
FSM Lifetime
Joined
·
2,232 Posts
I posted a photo on here a ways back with the 21 next to a full size ford F150 (at least thats what I think it is) and they are basically the same size. In my opinion they have taken design cues from the early Bronco and made it bigger like our full sizes and given it a modern twist. Perhaps the best of both worlds? I love my old iron though and I don't think I'd ever pull the trigger on a 21 - maybe 5-10 years from now.
The only problem is they're so fat and bloated from safety equipment that you lose valuable interior space despite being bigger on the outside. The 2-door is only 4 seats and the belt line is obnoxiously high.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,715 Posts
Opinion piece from Breitbart:

Nolte: Now They Want to Cancel Our Pickup Trucks

Nolte: Now They Want to Cancel Our Pickup Trucks

"Too beaucoup, too beaucoup..."
Holy **** was that article cringy. I'm here to talk shit about new vehicle models, not listen to a 13 year old whine about something some idiot said about pickups.
The only problem is they're so fat and bloated from safety equipment that you lose valuable interior space despite being bigger on the outside. The 2-door is only 4 seats and the belt line is obnoxiously high.
That's also why pillars have gotten so big and visibility so poor. They're worried about protecting the occupants in a collision and sacrifice visibility to do so.
 

·
Registered
79 bronco ranger XLT 4 speed manual with a stock 351m
Joined
·
14 Posts
Fullsize came from the fact that our broncos were based on the fullsize trucks of the day. So if the new bronco was based off an f150, then it would be fullsize.

To me it looks the size of the most recent toyota FJ cruisers... Not full sized.
Lord, I hate these new broncos. Every day im in the truck with the kids i point to fj's, jeep wranglers, kia suvs, and mini vans as the "NEW BRONCOS." The joke is wearing thin on them, but i dont care.
 
41 - 60 of 62 Posts
Top