- Thread starter
- #1
I am still on the fence and waiting till more information comes out.... but since thats weeks and months away, might as well keep speculating...
2.3 PROs:
Manual Transmission (and the gear ratios that come with it.)
Metal oil pan
Fumoto compatible
2.3 CONs:
Direct injection
Aluminum block
Oil filter location (based on the Ranger.)
2.7 PROs:
More HP & torque
CGI block
Port injection
Trail turn assist (and the other things that are only available with they auto trans.)
2.7 CONs:
No available manual transmission.
Plastic oil pan (based on other applications)
TBD:
plastic oil pan composite strength unknown
MPG - Based on the 2.3 in the Ranger and the 2.7 in the F-150 it looks like MPG between the two engines will be about 1-2 MPG difference, which I would mark as a major CON for the 2.3/PRO for the 2.7.
Initial purchase price - if upgrading to the 2.7 is in the 3% of the overall purchase range again I'd put that as a CON for the 2.3/PRO for the 2.7
Normally choosing a smaller engine is purely an economical choice - Cheaper purchase price, better MPG and cheaper insurance bill - but with available information so far, that doesn't appear to be the case here.
Right now, as much as I want that manual, I'm leaning toward the 2.7. If the MPG/purchase price is better than I predict with the 2.3 I'll tip the other way.
2.3 PROs:
Manual Transmission (and the gear ratios that come with it.)
Metal oil pan
Fumoto compatible
2.3 CONs:
Direct injection
Aluminum block
Oil filter location (based on the Ranger.)
2.7 PROs:
More HP & torque
CGI block
Port injection
Trail turn assist (and the other things that are only available with they auto trans.)
2.7 CONs:
No available manual transmission.
Plastic oil pan (based on other applications)
TBD:
plastic oil pan composite strength unknown
MPG - Based on the 2.3 in the Ranger and the 2.7 in the F-150 it looks like MPG between the two engines will be about 1-2 MPG difference, which I would mark as a major CON for the 2.3/PRO for the 2.7.
Initial purchase price - if upgrading to the 2.7 is in the 3% of the overall purchase range again I'd put that as a CON for the 2.3/PRO for the 2.7
Normally choosing a smaller engine is purely an economical choice - Cheaper purchase price, better MPG and cheaper insurance bill - but with available information so far, that doesn't appear to be the case here.
Right now, as much as I want that manual, I'm leaning toward the 2.7. If the MPG/purchase price is better than I predict with the 2.3 I'll tip the other way.
Sponsored
Last edited: