Gladiator vs Bronco.

[dcmdon]

And I’m not sure how relevant this really is but I’ve been looking for a small SUV so I don’t log so many miles on my gladiator and in my research I have discovered that apparently a lot of the turbos have direct injection and this puts a great deal of pressure and over the long run carbon buildup on the valves pistons leading to premature failure of the motors and I don’t know if this would apply to a typical we 60s are mostly tiny little four-cylinder 1.5 to 2.0 LIters for that reason alone I’d be reluctant to go with anything that’s turbo especially for an off-road vehicle where you’re going to suck in a lot of dirt or do you have a really good filter or not perhaps someone more educated than I regarding this Ken comment I watched a video the other day of the new bronco it’s the big one versus the Rubicon andGoing up a rocky trail the Rubicon kept all four wheels on the ground but the bronco kept lifting one of the rear Wheels

The bronco uses a combination of port fuel injection and direct injection precisely to avoid carbon build up on the valves. This is the way that the industry seems to be going.

Direct injection is too good from an efficiency perspective to give up, but it needs to be helped with port injection to keep the valves clean.

You are misinformed that a lot of turbos have direct injection. A lot of engines in general have direct injection, regardless of whether they are turbocharged or not. All suffer from carbon build up on the intake valves if they don't also have port injection.

So in summary, your desire to avoid an engine with direct injection (when not supplemented with port injection) is reasonable. But this has nothing to do with whether an engine is turbocharged or not.

Sponsored

 

[Haley]

Stopped by Bell Rd. Ford today to have a look at their demo 4dr soft top Big Bend. I had originally reserved that trim, but made some changes after buying my Gladiator - moved up to OBX, dropped SAS package, added lux.

Anyway, funny story - they had three delivered this week. Someone backed the demo into a charging station, and another, an owned vehicle, into another car on the lot.

My quick thoughts -
Pros: more room in the front seats. I'm 6'7" and it was roomy compared to the Gladiator. Back seats about the same. Street view about the same. Plenty of head room. I liked the body style, but not much more than the Gladiator. No leaks from the soft top. Tech was pretty good overall. Interior quality about the same as my Gladiator in terms of plastic and cloth feel/quality.

Cons: not much room in the way back, comparable to my previous Rav4. I hated the manual. Not a fan of the short throw, so I'm glad I reserved an automatic. The climate/wipers/lights were a little tricky to figure out.

Test drove it and it was comparable to the Gladiator, maybe a touch rougher than my Mojave.

My reservation won't come up for a while, but it'll be a tough call. If I had to decide today I'd probably lean towards the Gladiator.

 

[FrankFrqnkFrank]

Hehhehheh

 

[Benbean66]

Saw this one in Exton last night. Pretty nice looking IMO. I like all the little touches, like places to mount ditch lights and windshield light bars, built in.

 

[Trauma PA]

Stopped by Bell Rd. Ford today to have a look at their demo 4dr soft top Big Bend. I had originally reserved that trim, but made some changes after buying my Gladiator - moved up to OBX, dropped SAS package, added lux.

Anyway, funny story - they had three delivered this week. Someone backed the demo into a charging station, and another, an owned vehicle, into another car on the lot.

My quick thoughts -
Pros: more room in the front seats. I'm 6'7" and it was roomy compared to the Gladiator. Back seats about the same. Street view about the same. Plenty of head room. I liked the body style, but not much more than the Gladiator. No leaks from the soft top. Tech was pretty good overall. Interior quality about the same as my Gladiator in terms of plastic and cloth feel/quality.

Cons: not much room in the way back, comparable to my previous Rav4. I hated the manual. Not a fan of the short throw, so I'm glad I reserved an automatic. The climate/wipers/lights were a little tricky to figure out.

Test drove it and it was comparable to the Gladiator, maybe a touch rougher than my Mojave.

My reservation won't come up for a while, but it'll be a tough call. If I had to decide today I'd probably lean towards the Gladiator.

So for you, you will be deciding on which one to keep or will you be adding the Bronco to the Gladiator?

 

[P.Lo]

Wrangler vs Bronco........... i get it, and to each his own.
but
Gladiator vs Bronco, makes no sense what so ever.
The Gladiator is a truck........ the Bronco is a mid-size SUV.
TWO TOTALLY DIFFERENT VEHICLES!!!!!

 

[Haley]

So for you, you will be deciding on which one to keep or will you be adding the Bronco to the Gladiator?

Deciding which to keep.

 

[JTPatriot]

Hope this hasn't been posted already but I like this video.

 

[dcmdon]

Hope this hasn't been posted already but I like this video.

Its interesting.

Just be aware that
1) This is the base engine. +$1600 gets you a twin turbo V6 with 30 more hp and 100 more ft-lbs of torque.
2) They ran it on regular gas, which gives up 25hp (!!!). 275 hp vs300 hp.
3) A conservative, safe tune, with engine warranty, for $600 gets you upwards of 350 hp from the base engine.

I'd like to see this done with a V6 running premium fuel.

 

[bleda2002]

Car and drivers 2 door acceleration numbers are up and they're fairly unimpressive.

0-60
2.3 2 door manual 7.0
2.7 2 door FE 6.3

For comparison by them
2.0 JLU Sahara 6.4
3.6 jlu Rubicon 7.4

I'm disappointed as the engines were something I was hoping could get me over that goofy hood. At least the steering and handling is supposed to be excellent according to them, light years better than the jeep (as expected given the way better ifs and rack and pinion).

Now I'm wondering who will win the race to either make a bronco truck or a gladiator with ifs and rack and pinion. Whoever does that will be getting my next business as the solid axle is more something I live with than need for Florida off roading. Yes I know the bronco is the next ranger but a ranger isn't a bronco or a gladiator in terms of open air freedom or capabilities.

 

[FrankFrqnkFrank]

Car and drivers 2 door acceleration numbers are up and they're fairly unimpressive.

0-60
2.3 2 door manual 7.0
2.7 2 door FE 6.3

For comparison by them
2.0 JLU Sahara 6.4
3.6 jlu Rubicon 7.4

I'm disappointed as the engines were something I was hoping could get me over that goofy hood. At least the steering and handling is supposed to be excellent according to them, light years better than the jeep (as expected given the way better ifs and rack and pinion).

Now I'm wondering who will win the race to either make a bronco truck or a gladiator with ifs and rack and pinion. Whoever does that will be getting my next business as the solid axle is more something I live with than need for Florida off roading. Yes I know the bronco is the next ranger but a ranger isn't a bronco or a gladiator in terms of open air freedom or capabilities.

To get the 2.7 liter time down a couple of tenths C&D started in 2nd gear. And to get that 2.3 time C&D dropped the clutch with the engine revving at 5k.

my takeaway is that stock in the real world on pavement there isn’t much of a difference.

 

[dcmdon]

To get the 2.7 liter time down a couple of tenths C&D started in 2nd gear. And to get that 2.3 time C&D dropped the clutch with the engine revving at 5k.

my takeaway is that stock in the real world on pavement there isn’t much of a difference.

What quarter mile times don't show is around town pull.

When you are actually racing something you rev it to redline. Most of the time around town you don't do that.

The fact that the Bronco V6 makes 400 ft lbs of torque compared to the pentastar's 260 ft lbs means you don't need to rev it to get decent acceleration.

Just like the Jeep's diesel actually has less power than the pentastar. And the diesel is no faster when you rev the pentastar. But arund town the diesel is more responsive.

I really wish that car mags would publish 10-60 mph times to eliminate the actual launch. The reality is that none of us launch cars like they do in magazines. At least none of us who plan to keep the car beyond warranty. And if the car isa standard, the 10-60 needs to be done with the clutch fully engaged.

One other thing.

I have actually driven both a new Bronco with the turbo v6 and a Gladiator with a pentastar.
Its not even close. The Bronco pulls much better.

That's not to say the Gladiator is slow. But you just have to flog it to make it go. That means either putting your foot to the floor or putting it in manual and holding gears until 5000 rpm.

 

[bleda2002]

To get the 2.7 liter time down a couple of tenths C&D started in 2nd gear. And to get that 2.3 time C&D dropped the clutch with the engine revving at 5k.

my takeaway is that stock in the real world on pavement there isn’t much of a difference.

That was my takeaway too. It was even 2 door broncos against 4 door wranglers.

Overall the broncos aren't the speedy bruisers people expected them to be, they aren't even really faster than comparable wranglers by any truly appreciable measure.

That said I'd still have to seriously consider a bronco truck since it would be so much better on road and still a convertible.

Car and driver actually showed the 0-20 and the splits. The 2.0 wrangler was the quickest off the line to 20. The butt Dyno loves torque but that doesn't actually mean you're going any quicker. Quarter mile times they were all in the mid 15 second range as well.

 

[FrankFrqnkFrank]

When I had a modestly improved ‘06 Mustang living in an area with a lot of exotic cars, I would win most of light-to-light races due mostly to tires and gear selection. Billet lower control arms also helped. A surprising number of the other drivers were in awe thinking the Mustang would continue to beat them if the race were longer. Truth was after 60 mph they would all start to crush my humble car. But the next red light would prevent the higher speed and that knowledge.

 

[Willpower1]

The escape is a front wheel drive based vehicle with unibody construction.
The Ranger is a rear drive based body on frame construction.

Totally different vehicles. If there is one thing that I've learned over the years its that wet and snow performance are probably 80% tires. you may have just suffered from a poor choice of tires by Ford on the Escape.

My wife's Miata was about as bad in the rain and snow as you could imagine a car could be. (light with relatively wide tires and rear wheel drive) When the OEM tires wore out, I went on tire rack.com and researched all season tires for it. The results were dramatic. Dry performance was reduced, but that didn't really matter to her, but the car was rock solid in the rain after that.

The new Bronco is based on the next generation Ranger. Body of frame. Rear/4 wheel drive setup.
The base Bronco, like the base Wrangler and Gladiator comes with essentially car tires. So it will not be anything special in the mud or the snow. It goes up from there.



I'm not a "Jeep Guy". I'm a car / truck guy. I like all of them as long as they are interesting.

The thing that the Bronco brings to the table is on-road manners equivalent to any other IFS Body on Frame SUV (4 runner, Tahoe, Expedition) with the off road abilities of a Wrangler and removable top/doors.

Its an appealing compromise. There are a lot of people just based on this and the JL forum, who wanted a vehicle with removable top and doors and because of that, tolerate the way these vehicles drive on the street.

I have to respectfully but strongly disagree with your last sentence there. Just out of curiosity, what do you drive? Have you even driven a JL or JT? I’m not a jeep fanboy by any means, and in my 58 years have owned some pretty damn cool, IMO, cars and trucks. Still own some, including two FJs that I bought new. I love the FJs, they’re great little trucks and dead reliable, but Buddy, they are BLOWN AWAY in nearly every measurable or subjective way by the JL Rubicon and JT Mojave. There is absolutely no comparison in ride, handling, or off road prowess. I had to drive my 2010 FJ over the weekend, and the Mojave right after. The Mojave makes the FJ seem 30 years old, not 11, and my FJ is in excellent condition with 85k miles. So, I dont know what the heck you can be talking about that people have to “tolerate the way these vehicles drive on the street”. That just is in no remote way an accurate thing to say about modern jeep wranglers or gladiators. Sure they USED to ride like wagons and handle like boats, but those days are LONG gone. And I say that as a person who has, just in the last 20 years, owned Fords, Chevrolets, Toyotas, Hondas, Subarus, Dodges, and Jeeps. Just drove a round trip 800 miles in a 2021 Rubicon Rubicon with three passengers and we were all quite comfortable the entire trip, not sore and stiff when we stopped because the seats are very good. Several times the passengers remarked about how comfortable the Jeep is, and since I drove the entire time, I can attest to the handling and ride. I thoroughly enjoyed the drive. The FJ has IFS. The Mojave is of course solid axle, as is the JL Rubicon. But there’s no comparison. The Jeeps are in a different league in every respect except fuel economy that I can think of, and they’re damn close on that.

Sponsored