Was there ever one built by Ford?

[okie4570]

Why the Denver DSO, when it remained a Ford/Michigan truck? Empire Paint? Cool thread, bronco, and Marti.......thanks for sharing

 

[Classic 4x4]

Don't know specifically about Ford's SOP, but with other mfrs., it was common enough to yank a vehicle out of the normal production/distribution chain for a special project. Could be this was a "spec" Bronco built for the Denver DSO for distribution as dealer stock somewhere but then pulled for the special work.

 

[toddz69]

Nah....it doesn't look like a bank.....
Bank would have nice grass right?

Neat eb story though.

My thought is that it was a construction site/new building and they hadn't finished the landscaping/paving yet.

Todd Z.

 

[toddz69]

At that time the Bronco had a better power to weight ratio than all competitive vehicles. There wasn't a need for more power. Even if they thought it was needed it may have required potential drivetrain upgrades that Ford wasn't willing to invest in at that point. The D30 was eventually upgraded but other weak points were not.

That's my thinking too. The Blazer came out in '69 with a 350 and the competition heated up after that.

Folks have often wondered why Ford didn't offer a 351W, toploader 4 speed, or a NP435 in the Bronco. With sales always in the 20k range every year, it appears they just didn't want to make the investment.

Todd Z.

 

[Classic 4x4]

That's my thinking too. The Blazer came out in '69 with a 350 and the competition heated up after that.

Folks have often wondered why Ford didn't offer a 351W, toploader 4 speed, or a NP435 in the Bronco. With sales always in the 20k range every year, it appears they just didn't want to make the investment.

Todd Z.

Right... and notice how many more options and features they offered in the bigger Broncos starting in '78 when annual sales jumped into the 80-100,000 range.

There's a legitimate "build-it-and-they-will-come" argument for Ford upgrading the EB sooner than they did, but we have to remember they were playing a holding game in the SUV market after 1973. Early in the '70s, they had plans to follow the bigger SUV (Blazer) trend with a bigger Bronco in the mid '70s ('76 was one tentative date). The Middle-East-Inspired gas crunch put the kibosh on that for a few years and the EB went on life support. They didn't want to invest much money in it with a lot of money to spend on a new version but, grudgingly I think, they added what they had to to keep it alive until the big Bronco debuted.

 

[toddz69]

Don't know specifically about Ford's SOP, but with other mfrs., it was common enough to yank a vehicle out of the normal production/distribution chain for a special project. Could be this was a "spec" Bronco built for the Denver DSO for distribution as dealer stock somewhere but then pulled for the special work.

From a former KK staffer, this truck was built as a street performance variant that came as an idea from Bill Stroppe. Anecdotal - yes - from one person's memory.

And here's two shots of KK-built cars of a similar color. The Talladega was Bunkie Knudsen's personal car. Nothing like impressing the boss with yellow!

Todd Z.

 

[jckkys]

The only change needed to offer a 351w as an option, would have been a new oil pan with a 351 rear main girdle. The C4 needs no modification, top loader 4 speeds don't either. The prohibitive expense argument doesn't hold water. The NP435 is just a heavy duty 3 speed with a granny gear. Nobody at the time abused Broncos by rock crawling, so no need for a granny gear. The 4 speed OD top loader would have been a great option. The Mustangs were the big sellers in '69 so that's where the 351w made it's debut.
The photos remind me of my worst coulda shoulda. In the mid '90s I had an opportunity to buy consecutive SN '69 Torino Talladegas with ram air 428 CJs. The '70 version in the other photo turned out to be a failure in NASCAR races. Bunkie Knudsen was called Boss by his team, so Boss was the natural name for the new Mustang performance models.

 

[ntsqd]

Even in those days any change to a production part or assembly would first need to be proven to work, at least for as long as the warranty. So even if nothing else needed to change to fit the 351W there still would have been significant expense in proving that the combination would work and wouldn't bite Ford in the tush at some later date.

Don't think that is correct. The engine would easily fit, the Boss 302 is a 289/302 with 351 heads and isn't a big motor...

Just to clarify, you're talking 351C heads, not 351W heads, right? As badly compromised as the 351C head's exhaust ports are, they still stick out further than the W heads, making for a wider engine - even on a 302 block. I would expect exhaust fitment problems at the least.

As an owner of one DOZE-6110-A piston with the infamous broken skirt I can attest to just how badly misapplied a Boss 302 engine would be in a Bronco. What better place to lug an engine that absolutely never should be lugged?

 

[jckkys]

I agree. Ford's engineers weren't 15 yr. old adolescents who think in terms of what's cool. They would never be tempted to put a Boss 302 in an EB. There was an EB vender in Las Vegas who swore that the best swap for a Bronco was the high revving 351 Cleveland 4bbl. After hearing that, I couldn't believe anything he said.
With the 351w's success in the '69 Mustang and this apparent prototype 351 Bronco, also in '69, there were 8 more years to offer what is likely the best choice in EB engines. The decision to go with a shortened F150 called a Bronco in '78, was even more puzzling. The '78s were good vehicles but not a replacement for EBs. Ford's Blazer was a whole different class of truck, that could have been offered along with the EB. I remember fuel economy was a big issue in the '70s and the '78 was not the truck for high MPGs. Jeep didn't make the same mistake. CJ5s were made through '86.

 

[toddz69]

CJ5s were made through '86.

CJ7s were made through '86. CJ5s were discontinued after the '83 model year.

Todd Z.

 

[ared77]

Since I started this because of something I saw on my other favorite forum, here is the link in case you want to see all that has been said over on the Boss site -

http://www.boss302.com/smf/index.php?topic=73765.0


Very interesting!;D

 

[Viperwolf1]

The C4 needs no modification, top loader 4 speeds don't either.

Neither was available to fit to a D20 transfer case in '69. There were no C4 adapters back then and the 3 spd adapter doesn't just bolt up to a 4 spd. without modification. The 4 speed didn't have a shifter that would work in a Bronco and neither did the C4 in '69.

The 4 speed OD top loader would have been a great option.

Also didn't exist in '69.

The prohibitive expense argument doesn't hold water.

Someone has to identify the need for this stuff. Someone has to estimate costs. Someone has to design it. Someone has to prototype it. Someone has to test it. Someone has to approve it. Someone has to make changes to all the technical reference material. Someone has to manufacture it. Someone needs to train others to install it. Someone needs to market it.

None of those people works for free.

 

[Classic 4x4]

I The decision to go with a shortened F150 called a Bronco in '78, was even more puzzling. The '78s were good vehicles but not a replacement for EBs. Ford's Blazer was a whole different class of truck, that could have been offered along with the EB. I remember fuel economy was a big issue in the '70s and the '78 was not the truck for high MPGs. Jeep didn't make the same mistake. CJ5s were made through '86.

Not the least bit puzzling.

Ford wasn't out to build the world's best off road vehicle, they were out to build something large numbers of John and Jane Q. Public would buy. The Blazer proved to be that "Three Bears Just Right" size and it had everyone scrambling for parity. Sales of the big '78 Broncos trumped the previous year EB by more than four times. The EB was too small for most people in that day, which is one reason it didn't sell all that well (relative to other Ford products and the Blazer, or even the Scout, which had gained some ground). I have read bits and pieces of the internal sales and marketing documents from most of the companies selling SUVs and, in this era, bigger was the push. It was all about money and the way the Ford execs saw it, there wasn't money in the EB. In just two years, sales of big Broncos numbered 3/4 of the number of EB for the previous 11 years. Not making any judgements about what was the "better" product, just highlighting the motivations of FoMoCo. Making money. The market had evolved past the point where the EB was a viable big-numbers product with enough profit built in. The profit margin was helped by the fact that the EB was more or less a stand-alone in the lineup. The big Broncos shared a lot of parts and engineering with the light trucks, which lowered costs and increased profit margin.

The same evolution happened going from the two door SUV to the four-doors. Four doors in... two doors out!

Discussing Ford and Jeep in the same thread is really a waste. They were on totally different planes of existence. What worked for one, didn't for the other due to market bandwidth and corporate size/temprement. Jeep was fading fast and probably would have died with CJs as the flagship. But for the 4-door Cherokee XJ... which was a very big deal and sold in numbers Jeep had never before achieved... Jeep may well have died.

 

[B RON CO]

Hi, I am very skeptical of any official prototype or rare edition. Ford engineers are known to have there own unofficial toys and one off projects. Ford dealers sold many race parts like Boss 302s and SOHC engines for cars that you could never order it with. Unless there is a direct link to a factory order or project it is conjecture. Stroppe, Shelby, Holman Moody, etc. did there own things, with and without factory backing.

 

[jckkys]

The decision to drop the EB design was not required by the introduction of a Blazer type truck only the use of the name Bronco. The fact remains that the markets for each was different. EBs were pure utility 4x4s like the CJs. The '78 was an F150 wagon. Do you think Bronco IIs were a logical evolution? Some automotive writers offered pathetic arguments to that effect. Long before the death of the EB, the transmissions I mentioned were available. The output shafts and adapters aren't an obstacle to a corporation like Ford. Advance Adapters does it all the time. '69 was the 3rd yr. of production. EBs were made for 8 more years. The best improvements came after '69, and the options I suggested would have been cheap and easy. All, would have made more sense than a Boss 302. Isn't someone going to try to persuade me that a Boss 302 was a good fit in a an EB? After all, that was the main point of this thread and my posts. It seems nit picking irrelevant details is now the theme.
The CJ7 did succeed the CJ5 in '83 but both were the EB size truck. I test drove a CJ5, FJ40, Scout, and EB in '73. That was the kind of truck I wanted. Was I alone? No. So there was a market. That market now buys 4x4 Quad ATVs. Do you really think continuing an existent line was prohibitively expensive? The F series trucks are the best selling line Ford had or has. No surprise they sold well in a shortened 2 door wagon.

 

[Classic 4x4]

jckkys- We're not talking about how you wish it would have been, but the way it was.

Sure there was, and always will be, a small market for a SWB 4x4s. Whether a particular company's business plan includes, or should include, offering those types of vehicles is a decision based solely on profit. We know what the decisions were for Ford, Jeep, etc.

 

[69hurstsc]

Hi, I am very skeptical of any official prototype or rare edition. Ford engineers are known to have there own unofficial toys and one off projects. Ford dealers sold many race parts like Boss 302s and SOHC engines for cars that you could never order it with. Unless there is a direct link to a factory order or project it is conjecture. Stroppe, Shelby, Holman Moody, etc. did there own things, with and without factory backing.

This Randy Hernandez document should clear up any confusion as to whether it was an employee vehicle or engineering toy. If Fran is listing it with the other "accomplishments" as seen here, it's fairly transparent that the Bronco was beyond being a one-off or a play toy of an employee.

 

[half cab]

And the '92 Boss Bronco.

[/url]
image sharing[/IMG]

 

[toddz69]

Here's some follow-up on the Boss Bronco:

http://thecomercollection.com/garage/1969-ford-boss-bronco-prototype/

It's certainly come along nicely!

Todd Z.

 

[Prizefighter]

A Road and Track article on the Boss Bronco posted today:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/classic-cars/a32296/ford-boss-bronco/

"This GT350-Powered 1969 Bronco Prototype Was Ford's Idea of a Performance Truck. Meet the Boss Bronco.

The one that caught our eye was the bright yellow 1969 Bronco with "BOSS BRONCO" decals on its front fenders. Flared fenders, big tires, and a hood scoop are not uncommon on early Broncos but on this one they have special significance. This very truck was Ford's prototype for a proposed high-performance Bronco in 1969. Built at the legendary Ford skunk works Kar-Kraft for Ford boss "Bunkie" Knudsen it has a slew of wicked modifications like a 351 CID engine swiped from a 1969 GT350 and 4.11:1 limited slip differentials on both ends. Unfortunately when Lee Iacocca fired Bunkie Knudsen in late 1969 the Boss Bronco concept was no more, and this prototype put on a list of vehicles to be destroyed. But then Kar-Kraft was shut down and it is thought that is when the Boss Bronco escaped. It was discovered in 2016 completely intact and in remarkable original condition. Of course it came as no surprise that the new owner is R&T's own vintage car expert Colin Comer. Maybe we'll see a "Shopping With Colin" story on this one soon to get the story behind its discovery..."