I suspect it would surprise more than a few people. Maybe not a V8 Challenger, but I bet it would give a few "sports cars" a run for their money. It's a relatively light vehicle for the amount of power available, especially if you're using premium fuel.
It definitely is light... my Challenger was like 1000 lbs heavier. ? I am running premium... just had my first fillup and will be tracking the MPG performance just to satisfy my curiousity even though I really don't care. This purchase was to satisfy the craving for a vehicle that could perform in all conditions while being aesthetically pleasing. ?
My understanding is all the trims are just awd. The only read difference is a dual clutch rear diff and a water cooled vs air cooled power takeoff unit. No real transfer in any bronco sport or a low range.
these are no small differences, to be sure. The locking rear differential alone puts the Badlands on a completely different level of capabilities. They have different suspensions. There are additional GOAT driving modes, including rock crawl, which is similar to a true low range gear. Don’t underestimate the cooling systems. There are numerous examples of the nonBadlands transmissions overheating and shutting down. You don’t hear that of the Badlands. There is a reason why Ford only invites the Badlands model for the Bronco Off Road events and not any of the other BS trims. These models really can’t be compared to each other.They share sheet metal and design. But they are very different vehicles.
I haven't heard about transmissions overheating. Power transfer units, yes, but not transmissions. There have also been a few reported cases of overheating the PTU in a Badlands, but the people involved acknowledge they were driving like idiots.
While it's true there isn't an actual "granny" gear, the 2.0L makes significantly more torque than the 1.5L, and torque is the coin of the realm when you're off road. This is also why a locking rear diff is so important. The Bronco Sport is a unibody design, which severely limits suspension articulation. Less suspension articulation means greater change in the amount of weight on each wheel, which affects traction. In situations where one wheel on each axle loses traction, the system attempts to get power to the wheels that do have traction by applying the brakes on the wheels that are slipping. Using brakes to attenuate engine power reduces the amount of torque available. A locking rear diff allows a 50-50 split of the torque going to the rear axle with no reduction in available torque. And don't forget, the Badlands starts out with a great deal more torque to begin. All-in-all, in some situations you can get far more torque to the ground with a Badlands, and that's a significant advantage when off road.
To be honest with the low 1st gear ratio and the amount of low-end torque the 2.0 makes, I am pretty the low range gear won't be missed much unless in a really serious situation. Would I rather have it? Yes, but not so sure needed with the flexibility this motor has.
I have a Big Bend with just about everything on it. The two things mine does not have is the tow package and moonroof. The extra safety add-ons for road trips are great! I fully understand the pull of the Badlands, but as many said, for a daily driver with road trips I would go with the loaded Big Bend.
For me it just boils down to wanting the 2.0L engine in a vehicle loaded with options as a daily driver.
I'm curious... why the trade?
Just going out on a limb here, but guessing it's because he has a chance to trade out the Big Bend for a Badlands....
