LS swapped Bronco

[edgeflyer]

2.7 is a fine motor and more powerful than a stock LS, but it turns my stomach for someone to put a chevy motor in a Ford.

Sponsored

 

[NCOBX]

2.7 is a fine motor and more powerful than a stock LS, but it turns my stomach for someone to put a chevy motor in a Ford.

In my experience the 2.7L is a pile, the LS would provide a more linear power band and be much more livable day to day than the 2.7L.
As far as a Chevrolet motor in a Ford, that’s on Ford for introducing these trucks with such craptacular engine choices best fit for communist China.

The 5.0L in its current form isn’t exactly getting accolades for reliability, while it is a physically large engine it does weigh less than the 2.7L which is a positive. The next option is the 7.3L which I think would compliment the Bronco perfectly. I mean the 7.3L is definitely the engine of choice for this truck. Problem is it’s aftermarket is nearly non existent at this point, and engines are scarce on the ground. Very little is known, there are units approaching 100k reliable miles at this very moment but there’s still little known.

I think the LS is a nice slap in the face to Ford for screwing up the engine choices on the Bronco.

 

[NCOBX]

Annnnd that's where you lost my interest. If you want a different engine, just admit it, that's fine. But the 2.7L and 2.3L are good engines

I have posted no less than 15 times across these forums my experience with the 2.7L. It may be a good engine for some but my experience left a bad taste in my mouth and I won’t be going back. The 2.3L has well documented Coking issues that shouldn’t be present on any engine in the year 2020. Both engines are terrible choices for an off-road vehicle, turbo power curve and low to the ground, hard to reach alternators are a recipe for disaster.

 

[edgeflyer]

Umm, have you never heard of the oil ring issues causing blow by, oil consumption and valve build up on the LS's?

Man, you may have in fact gotten a bad engine cause I can tell you aren't happy. Most haven't had your experience at all. The 2.7 will walk all over an LS. My big hang up is you should never ever put a chevy engine in a Ford. EVER!

 

[NCOBX]

Umm, have you never heard of the oil ring issues causing blow by, oil consumption and valve build up on the LS's?

Man, you may have in fact gotten a bad engine cause I can tell you aren't happy. Most haven't had your experience at all. The 2.7 will walk all over an LS. My big hang up is you should never ever put a chevy engine in a Ford. EVER!

I own and have owned multiple LS based engines including an LS3 now, after some teething issues at the introduction none of the issues you mentioned exist. I have over half a million miles behind LS variants and my experience has been near flawless, one truck broke 2 exhaust manifold bolts is the scope of issues over that time.

If you go to a restaurant and order the Sirloin and get bad food poisoning your going to be hesitant to go back, and your probably not going to order the Sirloin if you go back. That’s my feelings on the 2.7L.

The Bronco should have a V8 at introduction - there’s no sense in putting tiny china tax displacement engines in an iconic American vehicle. Not as bad as what GM did to the blazer but one huge screw up by GM doesn’t make Fords screwup acceptable either.

 

[edgeflyer]

The issues are well documented through many many years. People have even invented special oil just to circumvent the problem on this motor. This much oil consumption will cause tons of carbon build up and coking type scenereos. Catch cans are easy to install and the 2.7 has shown to be a great motor. The problem is you just want a V8 and are venting. The reality is the only benefit is sound. The 2.7 will eat a streatable LS's lunch. An LS will make what will be a beautifully handling 4x4 into a wallowing, nose heavy turd. Would be cool to see you do a V8 swap for the heck of it, but it would have to be a Coyote.

https://gmauthority.com/blog/2019/12/class-action-lawsuit-claims-gm-5-3l-v8-engines-burn-oil/amp/

 

[NCOBX]

The issues are well documented through many many years. People have even invented special oil just to circumvent the problem on this motor. This much oil consumption will cause tons of carbon build up and coking type scenereos. Catch cans are easy to install and the 2.7 has shown to be a great motor. The problem is you just want a V8 and are venting. The reality is the only benefit is sound. The 2.7 will eat a streatable LS's lunch. An LS will make what will be a beautifully handling 4x4 into a wallowing, nose heavy turd. Would be cool to see you do a V8 swap for the heck of it, but it would have to be a Coyote.

https://gmauthority.com/blog/2019/12/class-action-lawsuit-claims-gm-5-3l-v8-engines-burn-oil/amp/

The LS weighs less than the Coyote, and the Coyote weighs less than the 2.7L, so if anything swapping to a V8 would make the Bronco a more nimble lightweight truck. I think it’s pretty clear your just a fan of small engines.
The DoD AFM engines you linked to is specific to only that series of engines, the LS3, LQ4, LQ9, LS2, LM7, LM4 and vast majority of vehicles produced with these engines did not receive DoD AFM. Additionally most owners that did purchase that series disabled the feature and never had a hint of trouble.
I’ll stand by the LS engines, as I said, their reliability and versatility is unrivaled.

There is very little reason to prefer the small displacement engine over the more reasonably sized V8. In the real world your going to be getting better fuel economy, have better power throughout the rev range, and have better long term reliability with the V8. Doubly so for an engine going into an off-road vehicle.

 

[BeerForMyHorses]

You realize the same way you're defending the LS is the same way people defend the 2.3L/2.7L, right? You had one bad experience even though the majority don't. There's documented, albeit isolated, issues with the LS as well.

 

[NCOBX]

You realize the same way you're defending the LS is the same way people defend the 2.3L/2.7L, right?

Isn’t that an irrelevant point? There are two sides to every story. Would you have said the same thing about the redcoats in the revolutionary war?
I’m of the belief that the engines the Bronco is receiving have multiple issues that make them an Achilles heel on an off-road vehicle, issues that better engines do not exhibit.
Less than a V8 a N/A V6 engine with basic design changes to the alternator location would be a premium choice over the current options. Get far enough off the beaten path and the less parts that could possibly strand you - the better off you are.

 

[crashmtb]

Laughs in CAN Bus

 

[edgeflyer]

The LS weighs less than the Coyote, and the Coyote weighs less than the 2.7L, so if anything swapping to a V8 would make the Bronco a more nimble lightweight truck. I think it’s pretty clear your just a fan of small engines.
The DoD AFM engines you linked to is specific to only that series of engines, the LS3, LQ4, LQ9, LS2, LM7, LM4 and vast majority of vehicles produced with these engines did not receive DoD AFM. Additionally most owners that did purchase that series disabled the feature and never had a hint of trouble.
I’ll stand by the LS engines, as I said, their reliability and versatility is unrivaled.

There is very little reason to prefer the small displacement engine over the more reasonably sized V8. In the real world your going to be getting better fuel economy, have better power throughout the rev range, and have better long term reliability with the V8. Doubly so for an engine going into an off-road vehicle.

LS is significantly heavier than the 2.7 or Coyote, unless you run the aluminum car motor, which would go against you theory of linear power band, big torque with the high rev cam and valve train setup. I like small motors when they have outputs like the Ecoboost's. I also like V8's, but in the right application.

LS's are good motors, but don't belong in a Ford. Only reason people swap chevy small block in other brands is cost.

If your statement about preferring big motors is true, then manufacturers wouldn't have to resort to small displacement turbo motors across their lineups to meet the stringent National Fuel Economy Standards. R&D for these new technologies is crazy expensive and would not be needed if it weren't for EPA guidelines. You will never get the same cruising economy feeding 8 holes as opposed to 4 or 6 in motors designed for the same class. This is why Chevy has the selective cylinder kill function on their V8's. Diesels are trending the same way. If you statements are true about big motors, why would the manufacturers subject themselves to the R&D costs, bad press and warranty costs of the small diesel blocks with high boost pressures, EGR systems failures and Def problems. Because to meet EPA specs, they go to smaller motors and to win the HP wars, they run them on the edge.

I'm not anti V8 by any stretch of the imagination. I just wanted to clear some misunderstandings up for ya.

 

[EcobeastRyan]

I’d rather have a barra swap than a ls swap

 

[NCOBX]

LS is significantly heavier than the 2.7 or Coyote, unless you run the aluminum car motor, which would go against you theory of linear power band, big torque with the high rev cam and valve train setup. I like small motors when they have outputs like the Ecoboost's. I also like V8's, but in the right application.

LS's are good motors, but don't belong in a Ford. Only reason people swap chevy small block in other brands is cost.

If your statement about preferring big motors is true, then manufacturers wouldn't have to resort to small displacement turbo motors across their lineups to meet the stringent National Fuel Economy Standards. R&D for these new technologies is crazy expensive and would not be needed if it weren't for EPA guidelines. You will never get the same cruising economy feeding 8 holes as opposed to 4 or 6 in motors designed for the same class. This is why Chevy has the selective cylinder kill function on their V8's. Diesels are trending the same way. If you statements are true about big motors, why would the manufacturers subject themselves to the R&D costs, bad press and warranty costs of the small diesel blocks with high boost pressures, EGR systems failures and Def problems. Because to meet EPA specs, they go to smaller motors and to win the HP wars, they run them on the edge.

I'm not anti V8 by any stretch of the imagination. I just wanted to clear some misunderstandings up for ya.

https://www.enginelabs.com/engine-t...s-coyote-budget-shootout-coyote-dyno-results/

The LS is the lightest of the 3.

Manufacturers choose to go smaller, they could simply lump in the fines with the larger engine into vehicle costs. However adding high pressure fuel pumps, multiple turboz, intercooler, associated plumbing, using timing belts over chains/sprockets, using half baked DI setups, putting alternators low down on an offroad all create a lot of chances to make more money ofrepairs.

But additionally to your point, manufacturers are making these changes due to government forces, I don’t see consumers clamoring to have increasingly smaller engines, in fact in most segments where engines have gotten smaller there’s been a similar decrease in uptake of said vehicles. These aren’t consumer driven demands, if they were manufacturers would offer a V8 in everything this side of a Miata. So Ford telling us we can’t have a V8 Bronco is ford saying they’re not committed to giving consumers everything they are willing to pay for.

The reason to use an LS over a Coyote is a significantly larger aftermarket sourcing(and related lower costs) and community, a large number of series, compact packaging, high efficiency, and simpler nature of design.

I also think it’s a nice slap in the face back at Ford for being so blind to market demands that they overlook the most important attribute that actually says “Bronco”.

 

[edgeflyer]

That's the car version of the LS with a peakier power band. What you didn't want right?

To your point, here are direct quotes from Ford about why they went small:

In a once unthinkable turnabout, Ford Motor Co. is bragging about how it now makes some of the smallest car engines in the industry. This is coming from a company that once made its money selling big, powerful trucks, SUVs and the Mustang muscle car.

Ford’s race to smaller engines represents a trend in the industry as all automakers woo fuel-conscious consumers and work to meet increasingly stringent fuel-economy standards, said Jesse Toprak, an analyst at TrueCar, an auto price information company.

“We believe that we are going to pay more for energy going forward and that fuel efficiency is the top reason to buy. That is going on all around the world now,” said Alan Mulally, Ford’s chief executive, in an interview with The Times this week.

Mulally said that Ford’s strategy of making powerful but smaller engines is part of the automaker’s goal to “increase the fuel efficiency every year forever.”

If I has as much distain as you had for a product, I wouldn't bash it on a forum with half truths, I'd move on. This world has enough negativity. This is a place where we come to have fun.

 

[frinesi2]

I'd rather put an M113K in it.

Sponsored