Eddie “Bauwer” Edition: 1984 Ford Bronco II

Spelling errors always crack me up, especially when they are so close to the correct spelling. When I was a kid, my family used to make fun of my brother for his poor spelling (it was all in good fun, so no harm, no foul). When I read the title to this post and noticed that “Bauer” was spelled wrong, I laughed so hard that the people in the library that I was working in looked at me like I was insane. At any rate, this 1984 Ford Bronco II Eddie Bauer Edition is one of the few, nice clean examples left in existence today. Find it here on Hemmings in Belfast, Maine, with an asking price of $2,950.

Introduced in 1983, the Bronco II was Ford’s first compact SUV, and was manufactured in Louisville, Kentucky, in the same plant as the compact Ranger pickup truck that it was based on. Though nearly a foot shorter than the competing Chevrolet S-10 Blazer that was introduced a year earlier, Ford marketed the Bronco II as a “vehicle for men, single people, or young couples … almost like John Wayne vehicles … that gave people the sense that they could conquer anything …”. This particular Bronco II is a 1984 model, and features the Eddie Bauer trim package, which was available for the first time in 1984 (it should be noted that the Bronco II was the first Ford truck to feature the Eddie Bauer trim package). Eddie Bauer, a popular outdoor sportsman company based out of Seattle, Washington, was the first sportsman outfit to work specifically with an automotive company (in this case, Ford), and would later inspire other outdoors companies to follow suit. The Eddie Bauer edition added two-tone paint with tan paint being the bottom color, and featured a fender-mounted badge under the Bronco II badge and to the left of the bucking bronco logo. This particular truck looks resplendent in two-tone red and tan paint, and though faded, the paint is said to be original and in fair shape.

There are a couple of dents in the passenger side front fender, and the clear-coat is starting to fade, especially on the hood and fenders. On the positive end of things, the truck is equipped with a factory sunroof (currently blocked by a plywood roof rack), and the tires are brand new. The owner also sourced a NOS spare tire cover, and I must admit it adds an elegant flair to the two-tone paint job. I would ditch the plywood off of the roof rack, repair the right fender with paint-less dent repair, swap the tires for some Cooper Discoverer A/T3s, ditch the hubcap-looking thing in the middle of the grille (if you know what that is, feel free to explain in the comments section below) and the front-mounted license plate holder, and drive this truck as-is for a while before repainting it.

Since the Bronco II shared many components with the Ranger pickup it was based on, this Bronco II also shares the Ranger’s drivetrain: a 2.8L Cologne V6. Rated at 115 horsepower and 115 lb-ft of torque, the Cologne V6 features a two-barrel carburetor and is backed by a three-speed automatic and exclusively features four-wheel drive, which would be standard until 1986 (rear wheel drive would become standard beginning in 1987, with four-wheel drive optional). Mileage is listed at 36,385, but my guess is the odometer rolled over once. The truck is optioned with air conditioning, but the compressor is missing; a new one can be bought online ranging from $140 to roughly $230, but I’m sure one can be sourced at the local auto parts store. A new battery was recently installed, as was a new starter, spark plugs and wires. The engine compartment could use a nice cleaning and detailing, but otherwise looks to be in good shape.

According to the seller, the interior was recently subjected to a 200-hour restoration, with new carpet (complete with new hardware) and a new headliner installed. The seats look to be in great shape, as does the dash, the gauge cluster, the door panels, and the vinyl floor mats (everything looks new, but the seller does not confirm whether or not this is true). The oil, temperature and fuel gauges need new sending units, but everything else is said to work, and the sending units are said to be inexpensive. The seats are equipped with power lumbar support (probably only the front pair) and though I like the seat warmers, I would stash them away until the later part of the fall (I personally would not use this as a winter driver just so the body is not completely destroyed by the road salt, but that’s just me). Overall, this truck would make a nice daily driver, and with a few upgrades and replacement parts, would make a nice daily driver. What are your thoughts on this Eddie Bauer edition Bronco II?

Fast Finds

Comments

  1. flmikey

    This vehicle is the bargain of the week…I predict these Bronco II’s will dramatically increase in the future…love it!

  2. Miguel

    Did you mean 2.9L?

    This is one of those vehicles that if they go away forever, nobody would miss them.

    • DrinkinGasoline

      No….He meant 2.8L…VIN code (S). :)

    • Rodent

      Nope. ’84-85 used a 2.8L with a carburetor. Old people on Lark scooters will beat one in a drag race. The 2.9L EFI was introduced in1987.

      • DrinkinGasoline

        Thank You…sometimes I really miss that thumbs down button :(

      • karo

        2.9 came along in 1986 – that’s what I have in my Ranger – 140 horsepower!

    • DrinkinGasoline

      I disagree. The Bronco II is more in line with the original Bronco in size…not necessarily in power. There is a following for these as well as the Ranger along with numerous V8 conversion options. Have a look at The Ranger Station or Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums…You might change your opinion of, “nobody would miss them.”

      Like 1
  3. Francisco

    One way or another, this will make a nice daily driver. Syntax errors are just as funny as spelling errors.

  4. Miguel

    I had a really nice Ford Ranger 1986 model that ran perfectly and looked even better. The problem was, was that it wouldn’t pass smog. It maxed out the machine and I couldn’t find a mechanic that could tell me why.

    That was a real shame because it was really a pretty truck.

    I lost interest in the 2.9 after that.

  5. Todd Rouch

    No, he meant 2.8, I have an 1984 XLT, sitting in my front yard right now. Except mine is equipped with the 5-speed transmission, a much better option than the 3-speed automatic. Factory a/c, overhead console with a digital clock and a compass. Cruise control. Auto locking hubs. Very nice option for 1984.

    Like 1
    • Miguel

      You are right. The first two years has the 2.8 V6.

      Like 1
  6. PaulbZ3

    The chrome thing in the center of the grille looks like a Ford aluminum wheel plastic center lug nuts cover.

    I would ditch the front plate holder too but if your state requires front plates this trucks’ holder is bolted with the lower holes mounted in the place of the upper holes. Easy fix…

  7. boxdin

    I had heard of a guy who mentioned he had a bronco and the previous owners name was on it. He wanted to know how to remove the Eddie Bauer tags.

  8. Warren

    I may be wrong, but I bet the owner is a retired guy judging from the wheel center cover grille placement, the plywood rack and the Cougar hood ornament. I had an 87 with a 2.9 and the 5 speed manual. Fun to drive, but felt top heavy due to the narrow track.
    200 hour interior restoration?

  9. dan

    wow ! 200 hours restoring and they couldn’t spend 30 minutes to power wash the motor, lol

    • DrinkinGasoline

      If you put it into perspective….200 hours really isn’t that much time.

      • RS

        195 hours drinking beer and watching ‘the game’ on a portable TV or iPad… 5 hours vacuuming and doing a quick wash.
        “What are you DOING out there?”
        “Restoring the Bronco, okay?”

    • grant

      200 hours to restore the interior and the drivers seat bolster looks beat down and dirty. I call BS.

  10. KevinW

    I wonder if the plywood is part of the deal? You have a carport wherever you go.

    • Francisco

      If you flip over on a snow bank, you can have fun sliding down the hill.

  11. Ken Carney

    My nephew chose one of these as his first car. Both his grandfather and I warned him about making any sudden moves that could roll these things as
    they were VERY top heavy and a danger
    to anyone riding in one. Well, it wasn’t
    long before he laid it over on its side
    coming home from school. He wasn’t
    hurt and Dad and his friends at the
    restoration shop were able to put Humpty
    back together again. A few months later,
    Dad put him into a much safer ’94 Dodge
    deisel pick up that was harder to flip. That’s why I’d never own one.

  12. Don H

    A person needs to no how to drive what they are driving 🤔

    • grant

      A person should also KNOW which word is proper, too…

  13. Traner

    Here is a small excerpt from the Bronco II Wikipedia page… “Stability problems with Bronco II were noted during the design phase in 1981, as well as in the verification tests.For example, the J-turn test was canceled during the testing procedures by Ford officials “out of fear of killing or injuring one of its own drivers.” Engineering modifications were suggested, but Ford officials declined the modifications because they would have delayed the marketing of the new vehicles.”

    • Todd Zuercher

      I would like to see the source of the information for the Wikipedia entry – sounds like interesting reading.

      I interviewed the inventor of the Twin Traction Beam last month and he mentioned some internal turmoil at Ford on whether to use the TTB on the Bronco II and Ranger.

      • boxdin

        As written back then Dan Rivard (?) was the suspension guy for the B2.
        I bought a new 85 and knowing its limitations it handled pretty good.
        Its s fun truckster housewives can feel big in.

  14. sparkster

    i before e in diesel

    • RS

      i before e, and ‘no’ before ‘way’. I’ll never own another diesel stinkbox.

  15. Matt

    Being in Maine, I bet some floor patching was part of that 200 hrs…

    • RS

      My Ranger was about as loaded as you could get it back then only it had rubber mats instead of carpeting. (Had AC. dual tanks, cruise, tilt… yes they offered dual tanks on the long w/b Ranger.) I kept it so carefully to make sure it wouldn’t rust – but the rubber mats must have cracked and let water in beneath them where the only way out the moisture had was down through the floor. I was disgusted to find the floor rusting through – rubber mats, what a STUPID choice for floor covering.

  16. Tommy Brown

    This one is a bargain. I sold 3 Broncos and the most I sold my 1976 for was $2,500.00 all because it had disk brakes. The others were 1973, 74 with brake drums. These older Broncos are selling for a good price now days.

    • RS

      The older Broncos were based on actual trucks. This series of vehicle was pale in comparison.

  17. sparkster

    Had a 1983 Ford ranger company truck with manual drum brakes. What a pain to stop

    • RS

      Little tiny pedals on these, no good with big or unshod feet.

  18. Howard A Member

    I believe these were the king of roll overs, topped only by the Suzuki Samari. So much so, I read Ford cancelled the “J” turn in testing, for fear one of their drivers would get hurt. I don’t think they were any worse than any other short SUV, it was just required a different style of driving people weren’t used to. There were so many rollover’s,( one in every 500 resulted in a fatality) Geico stopped writing policies for them. The farm I live at, the guy has one of these as his “backwoods” 4×4. While I don’t care for the motor, never cared for any Ford V6, but even in it’s dilapidated form, it is a tough little bugger, starts in all weather, plows thru the snow. Good little trucks. Ford always made good trucks.

  19. RS

    I owned a Ford Ranger of that approximate vintage with the 2.8 V6. It was like the engine had a rubber crankshaft. Totally weak! The pollution equipment was a nightmare, it made the truck run poorly and did other odd things, and it was near impossible to work on under the hood because it was so crammed with hoses and wires and tubes. I don’t think I’d buy anything remotely like it for any significant amount of money.

Leave A Comment

RULES: No profanity, politics, or personal attacks.

Become a member to add images to your comments.

*

Notify me of new comments via email. Or subscribe without commenting.