Small Utility - BabyB

Sherminiator

Active Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Aug 21, 2017
Threads
3
Messages
33
Reaction score
31
Location
CNJ
Vehicle(s)
Taurus SHO
To be clear, are you still claiming the 2 door Bronco will be over 180" long? I just can't see that happening with what we've seen and been told, and would love to know your source for that.
I have my sources-we'll see about the overall length with the 2 door-but I still stand by that the 4 door will be larger then the 1996 Bronco length wise.
 

Jalisurr

Active Member
First Name
Dave
Joined
Jun 21, 2019
Threads
1
Messages
34
Reaction score
43
Location
Vancouver,BC
Vehicle(s)
'97 Mitsubishi Pajero Evolution, '09 Corvette Z06, '08 ZX-6R
This is what I got for the 4 door. Taking all of this with a grain of salt as this is not the actual body.

Ford Bronco Sport Small Utility - BabyB Bronco 2 Door Dimensions
Awesome. Can you give us the center to center wheelbase as well?
 


JimmyDean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Threads
0
Messages
47
Reaction score
55
Location
Louisiana
Vehicle(s)
82 Bronco, 513 ci; 71 mach 1, 351C; 06 F-250, 6.0; 56 800, 172c.i. gas
No problem, see attached! If you guys need anything else let me know. I'm at work so I might not respond right away but I love doing this stuff.

Ford Bronco Sport Small Utility - BabyB Bronco 2 Door Dimensions
there has to be something wrong with your measurements, unless you are assuming that is a 29" tire on there?

Edit: it is likely that the 17" measurement is wrong. 17
rim is on the inside of the lip, whereas the outside of the lip you measured should be between 17.5-18"
 

BroncoMike

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Threads
2
Messages
97
Reaction score
195
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
'71 Bronco, '02 Excursion, '22 BS
I updated my post-maybe you you used your head-I was talking about the 4 door, not the two door models-maybe use your brain.
Well, that would be the reason I questioned it in the first place. Thank you for correcting your erroneous and misleading post. I was taking it on faith that you had some factual information, as you stated your case with authority. It is now clear that any trust in your knowledge was grossly misplaced.

Perhaps if you had used your brain when originally posting, you would have actually said what you meant and your assertions would have had some credibility. From your ballistic reaction to my simple interrogative, I would guess that you have immense difficulties admitting to even the simplest of mistakes and with human interaction in general - my condolences to the people who have to deal with you regularly.
 

Sherminiator

Active Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Aug 21, 2017
Threads
3
Messages
33
Reaction score
31
Location
CNJ
Vehicle(s)
Taurus SHO
there has to be something wrong with your measurements, unless you are assuming that is a 29" tire on there?

Edit: it is likely that the 17" measurement is wrong. 17
rim is on the inside of the lip, whereas the outside of the lip you measured should be between 17.5-18"
Overall tire size (going by the F-150 wheel that is mounted to it) is 31.6"
 

Sherminiator

Active Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Aug 21, 2017
Threads
3
Messages
33
Reaction score
31
Location
CNJ
Vehicle(s)
Taurus SHO
Perhaps if you had used your brain when originally posting, you would have actually said what you meant and your assertions would have had some credibility. From your ballistic reaction to my simple interrogative, I would guess that you have immense difficulties admitting to even the simplest of mistakes and with human interaction in general - my condolences to the people who have to deal with you regularly.
Nope, just don't deal with idiots on the internet that obviously can't deduce that I was speaking about the upper range of the size when it came to the 4 door model. I don't think anyone is expecting it to be that long with a 2 door product. sigh.
 

Dirty Bronco

Badlands
Member
First Name
Brad
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Threads
0
Messages
14
Reaction score
17
Location
Cleveland
Vehicle(s)
2015 Ford Explorer
there has to be something wrong with your measurements, unless you are assuming that is a 29" tire on there?

Edit: it is likely that the 17" measurement is wrong. 17
rim is on the inside of the lip, whereas the outside of the lip you measured should be between 17.5-18"
I used a program called Bluebeam for this. It's great for construction drawings that I use on a daily basis. However, the drawings are obviously complete perpendicular when I am measuring them.. this photo could be at a slight angle which yes... would throw things off slightly. I dimensioned the tires to be roughly 28 inches on first measurement. It's not going to be perfect but it will be close.
 


JimmyDean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Threads
0
Messages
47
Reaction score
55
Location
Louisiana
Vehicle(s)
82 Bronco, 513 ci; 71 mach 1, 351C; 06 F-250, 6.0; 56 800, 172c.i. gas
I used a program called Bluebeam for this. It's great for construction drawings that I use on a daily basis. However, the drawings are obviously complete perpendicular when I am measuring them.. this photo could be at a slight angle which yes... would throw things off slightly. I dimensioned the tires to be roughly 28 inches on first measurement. It's not going to be perfect but it will be close.
yeah I just went and did my own back of the napkin calc based off of some proportions and am getting a 28-30" tire as well, which would fit then with an approx. 105" wheelbase.
 

Dirty Bronco

Badlands
Member
First Name
Brad
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Threads
0
Messages
14
Reaction score
17
Location
Cleveland
Vehicle(s)
2015 Ford Explorer
So I rescaled it using the rim on the rear axle and now I think my eyes are starting to play tricks on me. The tire in the front seems to be bigger than the one in the back. Could just be the angle but they have different dimensions.

Anyways.. after re-calibrating to the back rim I found the following.

Overall length: 161 inches
Wheelbase: 110 inches
Tire Size on Front: 32 inches roughly
Tire Size on Back: 29 Inches roughly

:crazy:
 

Jalisurr

Active Member
First Name
Dave
Joined
Jun 21, 2019
Threads
1
Messages
34
Reaction score
43
Location
Vancouver,BC
Vehicle(s)
'97 Mitsubishi Pajero Evolution, '09 Corvette Z06, '08 ZX-6R
I believe the front and rear tires are different sizes in that side on shot, the front looks bigger than the rear. I wouldn't use those for scale.
 

Jalisurr

Active Member
First Name
Dave
Joined
Jun 21, 2019
Threads
1
Messages
34
Reaction score
43
Location
Vancouver,BC
Vehicle(s)
'97 Mitsubishi Pajero Evolution, '09 Corvette Z06, '08 ZX-6R
So I rescaled it using the rim on the rear axle and now I think my eyes are starting to play tricks on me. The tire in the front seems to be bigger than the one in the back. Could just be the angle but they have different dimensions.

Anyways.. after re-calibrating to the back rim I found the following.

Overall length: 161 inches
Wheelbase: 110 inches
Tire Size on Front: 32 inches roughly
Tire Size on Back: 29 Inches roughly

:crazy:
Yeah, these numbers look right to me. In line with the 4 door wrangler wheelbase of around 115"
 

JimmyDean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Threads
0
Messages
47
Reaction score
55
Location
Louisiana
Vehicle(s)
82 Bronco, 513 ci; 71 mach 1, 351C; 06 F-250, 6.0; 56 800, 172c.i. gas
Overall tire size (going by the F-150 wheel that is mounted to it) is 31.6"
that is not an F-150 wheel. that is a ranger wheel, different bolt pattern. The stock tire on it is a 30" (stock Ranger XLT rim)
Sponsored

 
 







Top