Jump to content
66-96 Ford Broncos - Early & Full Size
Sign in to follow this  
Krafty

Cars ? I see no Cars I see BRONCO's

Recommended Posts

I've noticed in some of the newer posts that our beloved trucks and suv's are being referred to as cars.

 

I don't know about you guys and gals, but I would never degrade my bronco to the point of calling it a car.

 

to me cars are as follows... 1 useless in the winter time.

 

2 no where near as spacious

 

and 3 not near as useful when it comes to moving large objects.

 

 

cars use snow tires, trucks use mud tires.

 

don't get me wrong cars serve their purpose, but frankly bronco's are not cars.

 

Bronco's deserve a much more awesome title, like OFUV, Off Road Utility Vehicle, any other suggestions ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That drives me insane, I bite my tongue on every one of the posts calling them cars. I have commented on it before in older posts a couple years ago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That Irritates the heck out of me. Bronco's should be known as BFUV(Best Fu*king Utility Vehichle).

There is something far worse than that.

Go into your local parts store and asking for windshield wipers or a switch/relay and they ask you what type of engine it has in it....

UGH! Morons....

 

92BM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That Irritates the heck out of me. Bronco's should be known as BFUV(Best Fu*king Utility Vehichle).

There is something far worse than that.

Go into your local parts store and asking for windshield wipers or a switch/relay and they ask you what type of engine it has in it....

UGH! Morons....

 

92BM

 

I forget how BIG my TRUCK really is until I park it next to what they call SUVs these days or when I can talk my wife into riding with me and having to send her a telagram in the passenger seat or I go to pull into a parking garage and can't because of the hight restriction...

 

Car indeed, hummmphhhhhhhhhhhh

 

JC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think even Ford Called them MPV (Multi Purpose Vehicle). I dont know about these guys but I never call my baby a Truck much less a car!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know someone that refers to Bronco's, Ramchargers, and K-5 Blazers as war wagons. I promptly told him it most certainly is NOT a wagon of any kind. And the last time I looked, it sure as hell doesn't say "RADIO FLYER" anywhere on the side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know someone that refers to Bronco's, Ramchargers, and K-5 Blazers as war wagons. I promptly told him it most certainly is NOT a wagon of any kind. And the last time I looked, it sure as hell doesn't say "RADIO FLYER" anywhere on the side.

 

 

Its worse when they call it a j**p.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think even Ford Called them MPV (Multi Purpose Vehicle). I dont know about these guys but I never call my baby a Truck much less a car!

 

I'm with you! The Bronco is defined by FORD as a MPV (Multi Purpose Vehicle), not a SUV or CAR or TRUCK :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, the j**p thing is the best. There is an early 70's Bronco here in town, done up pretty nice. Has a sticker across the windshield, "its not a f**ken J**p!!"

 

I call mine a Truck, but I can learn to live with MPV, mine is most definately used as an MPV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bs deleted

You can call it what you want, but it is NOT a wagon. Ford called it a MPV, so I am sticking with that. If you find that incorrect, don't ever call a 302 a 5.0 again, Mr Wizard, seeing how it is really a 4.9. And by your definition of a "wagon", that would put broncos and SUV's in the same class as vans. Have you ever thought of pullin that stick out and lightining up a bit? Edited by miesk5
Deleted spam comment by former member x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ford didnt name the gt500 shelby did and what really just pisses me off is when people say thats a nice blazer its not a frickin blazer its a ford bronco the bronco even came out first!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol easy there guys. no need to start yellin at each other. I've gotten the jeep and blazer names before, I just bite my tongue, the thing I find funny is that Jeeps are super popular for mudding and trails and stuff, but the truth of the matter is none of there platforms offer a drivetrain that is actually worth anything.

 

the common one is a 4 L inline 6cyl usually with a weak tranny.

 

but hey if some people wanna drive the city chick off road vehicles they can go right ahead. I think i'll stick to my 200 to 600 hp v8's and big 6's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh and as far as I knew the 302 is 5.0 liters of displacement, its the 300 6 that is the 4.9. a chev 350 is 5.7 liters, 429 is 7 liters, 460 is 7.7 liters

 

they call the 5.0 a 5.0 cause thats what it is, and it is the efi of the 302, the same as the 5.8 is the efi 351 W. they used the almost exact same blocks from the original inception of the 302 and 351 v8's to 96, thats why all the intake and exhaust parts match. there were some changes due to the additional sensors in the 87 to 96's but still basicly the same.

 

it was in 97 when they decided to switch things up by using new 4.6L (260 ci ?)and 5.4L (325 ci )v8 power plant platforms, hence the many issues and recalls in 97,98, and 99 to work out the bugs.

 

 

But hey I could be mistaken, nobody has all the answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol and a 125 cc motocross bike is really 124cc but let me put it like this, NOBODY CARES about the difference its close enough.

 

but hey this is supposed to be a light hearted fun post, this is just something for me to do since Im off work with a shattered thumb.

 

so Lighten up.

 

I wasn't referring to bronco's as jeeps, I was referring to Jeeps as jeeps as those small crappy beat up tj's yj's and so on that are over worked and under built. and over loved.

 

the ones that are actually worth something are the jeeps that people swap out better axles and heavier duty drive line parts.

 

if anyone here loves jeeps, sorry I don't mean to step on any toes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On pages 6-7 of the 'Ford Bronco Performance Portfolio 66-77' book, it lists one of the EB models as a station wagon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
95bb

I didn't say WHO named it that, and it doesn't matter. But if you prefer; the Ford 500 doesn't have a 500ci engine, either. It's just a name. But on the topic of this thread: "Jeep" isn't the correct name for Broncos.

 

Krafty

What 50joe was referring to is the actual precise displacement. If you calculate pi x (bore/2)^2 x stroke x cyls, then a 300I6 is actually 298.57696579717394938348962714688 ci = 4.8928 L, and a 302V8 is 301.59289474462015089241376479483 ci = 4.942222 L. And he seems to think that a difference of 1.15556% somehow means that the terms "MPV" and "wagon body" are mutually exclusive. They're not. MultiPurpose Vehicle is about as vague a description as I can imagine. It applies equally well to cars, bicycles, solar airplanes, dirigibles, & submarines; not just Broncos. Even the High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV ~ Hummvee ~ Hummer) can accurately be called an MPV.

 

And a 460ci is a 7.5L.

 

So what Steve!!! The fact is that according to FORD the BRONCO is a MPV. What would you like to call it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, the ford 500 not having a 500 engine has NOTHING to do with what I said. And SECONDLY STEVE 83, I NEVER SAID THAT THE 4.9 TO 5.0 BIT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT. If you are going to take my radio flyer joke, tear it apart, and make it to spec, i am going to do the same with the 5.0 to 4.9 bit just to prove a point. . I never said motor size has anything to do with wieght class, body type, or anything else. YOU DID. And for the record, I do NOT refer to my Bronco as a wagon, because it is built on a truck frame, from a truck power plant, and was sold by FORD as a truck. If you have such a problem with that, look on your little list, and find out what FO means. Not everyone on this site has the tools or the know how to test things to YOUR standards. Not every one knows the decimal system, has all the equipment needed to properly diagnose everything the way YOU want them too, nor the know how. I'm Sure this site was set up to help every one that needed it. From the kid that just bought one, to the techno nerd like yourself that feels he knows it all and has an underlying need to correct every one. Although yuor information IS helpful to many, take a step down OFF your soap box and join the rest of the world eienstien. Your "better than you " attituded is not only rude, but it is annoying too. I made a joke, YOU decided to pick it apart. And THAT, Sir, is what the stick in the ass comment was about. AND, fot the record, my registration calls my Bronco a "2DRTRK", NOT a wagon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...