Anyone Regret not Getting the Bronco Sport ?

[Deleted member 37952]

Resurrecting this old thread but after nearly 8 months of ownership, I am starting to think I should have shopped more and maybe a truck wasn’t really the best fit for me.

The truck bed definitely has its perks but I keep finding myself wishing for 2 things:

1. more secure waterproof storage
2. A bed/roof rack for camping accessories

Now, those are things I could easily add to the Mav and I’ve been shopping them quite a bit ever since I bought the truck but there doesn’t seem to be any perfect solutions for the combo of a tonneau and bed rack and anything that would be close enough is crazy expensive for my budget, either because the parts themselves are expensive or it starts a cascade of things I have to replace/upgrade to make it all work.

I’m not sure a Bronco Sport would have been my choice as I was looking for something with a hybrid electric drivetrain but I can’t shake the feeling that I might have been happier in the long run with an SUV/Crossover with a factory roof rack.

But on the bright side, at least my recycling and wet fishing waders can go in the bed guilt free of what it will do to my interior.

Sponsored

 

[Solaryellow]

My wife loved her 1988 Bronco II and the 15 years of reliable service it provided, so when the new Bronco Sport hit the lots we took a look. She was not impressed, nothing specific, just overall didn't do it for her.

The 1.5 liter 3 cylinder engine in the Bronco Sport was a deal breaker for me. It motivated me to buy the 2.0 EcoBlast Maverick, just in case Ford was tempted to go with the cheaper 1.5 engine in the future. We have not regretted buying the Maverick.

The Bronco II was a fun and versatile SUV's back in the day and I have yet to meet an owner who didn't enjoy it. One of my good friend's father owned one when we were 16 and driving, it was a blast. Nothing overly fancy but very functional.

The only way I would have considered a BS was if you could have purchased a fairly unloaded model with the 2.0 comparable with the same Maverick pricewise. Even now when I look online, either people are holding onto the ones with the 2.0L or Ford didn't make a huge number.

 

[Jah.]

Never interested . not as funtional / utilitarian as the Mav . plus probably would have cost more .

 

[BlueOval1954]

I wanted a truck that drove like a car. The Maverick filled the want.

 

[Mikeske]

I had several different requirements for my Maverick and the since I already had a CUV in my Equinox and found I had outgrown its utility and needed some more utility. I had a large pickup before so the shortcomings of the CUV were very apparent. I wanted something that drove like my Equinox but had more utility with a bed in the back. That is the primary reason I did not even glance at the Bronco Sport as I only had my eyes on smaller pickups.

 

[Fcnrwy]

No, I had owned Rangers before... So, I wanted a "Ranger" replacement...

If I had owned a...

Bronco II, a Ford Ranger "without" the box...

Maybe...

Jerry

 

[Scott Asheville]

The killer for me was the horribly overstressed 1.5L, 3 cylinder turbo that equips most Bronco Sport trims. You have to go up to the $40,000 range to get the 2 liter.

That said, I secretly like the Bronco Sport. It packs a lot of functionality into 174" of length. It's a tall, comfortable vehicle. It looks good going down the road.

I like the real Bronco 2 door even more. That's the same 174" and it's a beast. Alas, it's a beast optimized for off road, which means it's not really a great daily driver. I wish Ford would release a 2-door, 2-seat Bronco Sport with a bed in back, and the 2 liter engine. That would be a hot little truck that's genuinely little. Or make it a BEV so that we have a big frunk.

 

[Tbone289]

The killer for me was the horribly overstressed 1.5L, 3 cylinder turbo that equips most Bronco Sport trims. You have to go up to the $40,000 range to get the 2 liter.

This is a really good point. It seems to me that, in comparison, the Maverick offers much more value for the money. With the money I've spent on exactly the Maverick I wanted plus all the accessories I've added for my needs, all I can get in a Bronco Sport is a base model with a 1.5L Ecoboost and a 2,200 lb tow limit. The only advantage I see with a base BS over my Maverick is a bit better off-road capability, but that's only because it has a shorter wheelbase.

I'm not thrilled with the Bronco Sport styling either. The Maverick has a cleaner, less gimicky style that I believe will age more gracefully.

 

[Milwrdfan]

Loved the Bronco II when I was growing up. Really liked the styling and higher seating position, but yet on a smaller frame. Then I finally bought an earlier model (2003) Escape, which has a similar styling to the Bronco II. Loved that Escape, but eventually a rear wheel well and shock mount rusted out so it had to go. The new style Escapes are just generic bleah, with no design style.

I'd been considering a Bronco Sport for our daughter out of college as a good vehicle for her out on the east coast for visibility and ease of parking with a smaller maneuverable vehicle. But couldn't justify the cost to get the features we wanted. We ended up with a Subaru Crosstrek which had the features and mileage, though it sits pretty close to the ground.

Sponsored