2025 Bronco Sport Gains Sasquatch Off-Road Package, New Tech, Features

[Montauk]

More and more what the Escape used to be.

Totally. I had an 01 escape and the 24 big bend bronco sport is for sure that escapes illegitimate offspring.

Sponsored

 

[fossil]

only thing I'm interested in is the HOSS 3.0 Bilstein shocks

 

[Scott Asheville]

I have a love-hate relationship with the Bronco Sport. I think the coolest thing about the BS is that it's only 174 inches long. That's two feet shorter than a Maverick - they cram a whole lot of functionality into 174 inches. But that 3 cylinder engine makes me cringe.

To get the 4 cylinder, I think you have to go up in trim to Badlands, and the Badlands base price for 2024 is $40,000 after delivery. I online-built a Bronco Sport equivalent to my XLT Maverick and I'm at $45,000. Before the 2025 price hikes. For a vehicle with a cheapo Maverick-class interior. Still, I guess it's better than the row of $70,000 Broncos lined up on my dealer's lot (I was there last week lot-browsing).

Every time I see a BS on the road, I remark to myself what a handsome vehicle it is - awesome grille. Then I remind myself that it probably has a 1.5 liter, 3 cylinder turbo and I go "Nah".

But then I see the pale yellow or robin egg blue Bronco Sport Heritage Editions, and I'm so sorely tempted to make a bad decision. Fortunately, my wife is about as likely to give up her loaded Volvo XC40 for a Bronco Sport (about the same price) as the sun is likely to rise in the West tomorrow morning.

 

[volksnuts]

We basically leave our Outer Banks BS in sport mode at all times
It’s not winning any races but it has a crazy small turning radius
Plus both my girls love that it’s “cute”

 

[eRock92]

I have a love-hate relationship with the Bronco Sport. I think the coolest thing about the BS is that it's only 174 inches long. That's two feet shorter than a Maverick - they cram a whole lot of functionality into 174 inches. But that 3 cylinder engine makes me cringe.

To get the 4 cylinder, I think you have to go up in trim to Badlands, and the Badlands base price for 2024 is $40,000 after delivery. I online-built a Bronco Sport equivalent to my XLT Maverick and I'm at $45,000. Before the 2025 price hikes. For a vehicle with a cheapo Maverick-class interior. Still, I guess it's better than the row of $70,000 Broncos lined up on my dealer's lot (I was there last week lot-browsing).

Every time I see a BS on the road, I remark to myself what a handsome vehicle it is - awesome grille. Then I remind myself that it probably has a 1.5 liter, 3 cylinder turbo and I go "Nah".

But then I see the pale yellow or robin egg blue Bronco Sport Heritage Editions, and I'm so sorely tempted to make a bad decision. Fortunately, my wife is about as likely to give up her loaded Volvo XC40 for a Bronco Sport (about the same price) as the sun is likely to rise in the West tomorrow morning.

I wouldn't be so harsh on the 1.5L Dragon engine. It's actually a really decent engine and good in most US terrain outside of probably the Rockies. My Escape has the 1.5L and has covered the east coast from LA to NH and around the Appalachian with no issues. On top of that, it has enough pep in its step to keep up with my DC area road rage. lol It's chugging along fine, and passed 100k miles a week ago.

Now would I go soft roading in my Escape? Absolutely not! That engine paired with that transmission and AWD system is meant for pavement and well compacted gravel roads. My car has cussed me out while driving on jobsites with loose dirt pathways, not to mention I have all-weather tires on which makes it harder.

 

[51mavhatter]

offer the 2.0 in the Big Bend and I'm a buyer

 

[Toddman45]

The broncos are so ugly and way overpriced, for what they charge they should all have v6s or a v8.

 

[Montana]

At around $45,000 and knowing the build quality is around what the Maverick is, hard pass for me. That's a lot of coin and opens up more options.

This right here.

It's great, but in 3 years a RAV4 will crush it's value and that's probably what ya shoulda got anyways lol.

And I wouldn't be surprised to see RAV4's get updates like this next gen either.

I've always kinda liked the Bronco's but I also see them a bit gaudy as most people use them as a statement and never actually use the damn things. There are sensible owners out there and I see them on the road too. You can tell because they are NOT the ones with huge tires on them lol. I rate the bigger versions up there with JEEPS that soccer moms took over.

I have a love-hate relationship with the Bronco Sport. I think the coolest thing about the BS is that it's only 174 inches long. That's two feet shorter than a Maverick - they cram a whole lot of functionality into 174 inches. But that 3 cylinder engine makes me cringe.

To get the 4 cylinder, I think you have to go up in trim to Badlands, and the Badlands base price for 2024 is $40,000 after delivery. I online-built a Bronco Sport equivalent to my XLT Maverick and I'm at $45,000. Before the 2025 price hikes. For a vehicle with a cheapo Maverick-class interior. Still, I guess it's better than the row of $70,000 Broncos lined up on my dealer's lot (I was there last week lot-browsing).

Every time I see a BS on the road, I remark to myself what a handsome vehicle it is - awesome grille. Then I remind myself that it probably has a 1.5 liter, 3 cylinder turbo and I go "Nah".

But then I see the pale yellow or robin egg blue Bronco Sport Heritage Editions, and I'm so sorely tempted to make a bad decision. Fortunately, my wife is about as likely to give up her loaded Volvo XC40 for a Bronco Sport (about the same price) as the sun is likely to rise in the West tomorrow morning.

Yea that 1.5L is a slap in the face. Weak sauce. I almost pulled the trigger on one years ago because it was white with a very cool tan/heather grey interior but then I realized it was a 1.5L Bronco and I chuckled away into the sunset.

 

[Scupking]

This right here.

It's great, but in 3 years a RAV4 will crush it's value and that's probably what ya shoulda got anyways lol.

And I wouldn't be surprised to see RAV4's get updates like this next gen either.

I've always kinda liked the Bronco's but I also see them a bit gaudy as most people use them as a statement and never actually use the damn things. There are sensible owners out there and I see them on the road too. You can tell because they are NOT the ones with huge tires on them lol. I rate the bigger versions up there with JEEPS that soccer moms took over.



Yea that 1.5L is a slap in the face. Weak sauce. I almost pulled the trigger on one years ago because it was white with a very cool tan/heather grey interior but then I realized it was a 1.5L Bronco and I chuckled away into the sunset.

Nothing wrong with the 1.5L.. My wife has a 23 Big Bend. She has put over 20k miles on it in just over a year. Has plenty of power and actually sounds good. I think it sounds better than most 4 cylinders.

 

[Montana]

Nothing wrong with the 1.5L.. My wife has a 23 Big Bend. She has put over 20k miles on it in just over a year. Has plenty of power and actually sounds good. I think it sounds better than most 4 cylinders.

Honestly I'm still shocked I bought a DI Turbo Ecoboost at all.

 

[Onceforall]

The 1.5l is an awesome engine. It pulled 80mph Utah freeways like a champ...climbed 13,000ft Wheeler Peak in Nevada...all the time 30mpg.

Ya know, it also shuts off a cylinder at highway speeds...literally only needs 2cylinders. And stays in low rpm grunt modes like a good diesel. You guys dissing that engine don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Montana]

The 1.5l is an awesome engine. It pulled 80mph Utah freeways like a champ...climbed 13,000ft Wheeler Peak in Nevada...all the time 30mpg.

Ya know, it also shuts off a cylinder at highway speeds...literally only needs 2cylinders. And stays in low rpm grunt modes like a good diesel. You guys dissing that engine don't know what you are talking about.

Your butt dyno is a conflicting source to what most reports (and other butt dynos) say.

181 hp vs 242hp in the 2.0's.

So so so many people saying it's gutless and underpowered. Literally all over bronco forums, reddit, reports and reviews. Is it good enough for most people? Sure. But it's still weak sauce. And I noticed it when I test drove. That's just my two cents on it anyways and from the research I did it seems like most agree or at least acknowledge it being underwhelming in comparison to the other engines you get.

 

[Onceforall]

Your butt dyno is a conflicting source to what most reports (and other butt dynos) say.

181 hp vs 242hp in the 2.0's.

So so so many people saying it's gutless and underpowered. Literally all over bronco forums, reddit, reports and reviews. Is it good enough for most people? Sure. But it's still weak sauce. And I noticed it when I test drove. That's just my two cents on it anyways and from the research I did it seems like most agree or at least acknowledge it being underwhelming in comparison to the other engines you get.

It's more than adequate for anything needed in the USA. It really pulls like a V-8 when it gets into its power band 4k+ rpm. I've only done that a couple times, sort of a gee whiz moment what can this little engine do.

Just what are you expecting it to do? It's not going to be a tow vehicle, so if that's your game, it is the wrong engine. But the BS was never intended to pull heavy loads. It's superior to the hybrid Mav in terms of performance. It's really not productive to have that continual "need more horsepower" discussion, especially when that hp is way up there near the useless and rarely reached redline. Every trucker and farmer knows it is torque that is most useful, and the 1.5l is commendable and capable.

 

[Montana]

Just what are you expecting it to do?

Ask the BS owners making the reports what they expected? I noticed it as well as the cylinder cutoff, same as the GM's that have that which I also drove and noticed it happening, and that was part of the reason I didn't get one.

You mentioned towing on that engine not being it's strong suite? Odd, since so much of it's torque is in the low end you'd think it would do well there. And people are not buying a Hybrid Mavs for it's performance like they are the turbo'd 2.0's, so I don't really understand the comparison there either, or how the 1.5L out performs what the AC 2.5L was designed to do. On that topic, we also know the 2.5L retains it's towing capacity in the Mavericks, so seems like a solution to the miss of the 1.5L in the BS. As others in this thread have already mentioned, it's strange they are not offering Hybrids yet, which for most cases in the BS would make more sense than the 1.5L if the goal is efficiency.

I agree though, it's commendable. It just never belonged in the BS.

Sponsored