Just test drove a 2 Door WT ... Eh! Some disappointing discoveries.

[indio22]

It was that bad?!? Really??? Wow... that sounds like RAV4 power. Although, if you do the math, it really is RAV4 power. The RAV4 has 205 HP and weighs 3370 lbs; a heavy 4 door Bronco weighs 5100 lbs and has 320 HP. (BTW - RAV4 0-60 is probably about 8.7 seconds).

Simple ratio would suggest that the 4 door Bronco is around 51% heavier... and 51% more HP would be 310 HP. So, that's not completely unexpected performance based on the numbers and the weight of a 4 door; but, this is a two door and should be significantly lighter with correspondingly more gallop.

The F150 curb weight is listed at 4,021 to 5,014 lbs. Similar to the new Bronco range. I drove in an F150 and the owner was hitting the throttle and showing me the power of the 2.7 turbo V6. It had plenty of power in my opinion.

Watching people's driving habits though, maybe I should not be surprising power expectations vary between different people. In daily driving, I watch people hitting the throttle between stoplights, like they are at a dragstrip, and also have stock in Midas brake shop. So maybe what one person considers power, another person with different driving style considers anemic?

Sponsored

 

[da_jokker]

Drove a two door with the 2.7 on Saturday. Very disappointing. Very slow. Likely cancelling my order.

Felt like 200 hp rather than 320+.

If you are not being a smart ass, then I find this interesting. I wasn't disappointed in a "this engine isn't going to cut it" way. I was more disappointed in just a "eh, so that's what it feels like" way.

Thus my post about folks thinking of the heavier and larger tire trims with just the 2.3.

But even I'll admit canceling is a bit extreme. You're not going to get anything with that much off-road capability that does much more.

When I test drove a Wrangler 2.0 a few weeks back, the engine was sluggish from the start, but once you got into the throttle and above 3K, it actually pulled pretty strong. Another reason I was surprised with the 2.7 lack of wow factor.

 

[Grey Goose]

If you are not being a smart ass, then I find this interesting. I wasn't disappointed in a "this engine isn't going to cut it" way. I was more disappointed in just a "eh, so that's what it feels like" way.

Thus my post about folks thinking of the heavier and larger tire trims with just the 2.3.

But even I'll admit canceling is a bit extreme. You're not going to get anything with that much off-road capability that does much more.

When I test drove a Wrangler 2.0 a few weeks back, the engine was sluggish from the start, but once you got into the throttle and above 3K, it actually pulled pretty strong. Another reason I was surprised with the 2.7 lack of wow factor.

I was not being a smart ass. Truly that disappointed. Looked great tho.

 

[mpeugeot]

The F150 curb weight is listed at 4,021 to 5,014 lbs. Similar to the new Bronco range. I drove in an F150 and the owner was hitting the throttle and showing me the power of the 2.7 turbo V6. It had plenty of power in my opinion.

So maybe what one person considers power, another person with different driving style considers anemic?

Well, given that my current DD is an F-150 that weighs roughly 5100 lbs without the liftgate (5600 lbs with the lift gate) and has a 3.5 Ecoboost (with over 230k); the one thing that I do know is that my F-150 is quick for a truck, even without any special tuning... but with a 93 octane tune flashed, it becomes very quick - like tires start spinning at 20 MPH despite the 500 lb Tommylift over the tail.

Granted the 2011 3.5 Ecoboost was rated 365 HP and 420 ft/lbs of torque stock; but on premium the 2.7 is supposed to be making 325 HP and 415 ft/lbs of torque. A two door Bronco on premium gas should be faster than my F-150. I haven't timed 0-60 in my F-150, but I would be shocked if it was north of 8 seconds (with the factory tune) - but apparently the Bronco is around 8.7 seconds 0-60.

However, people are feeling that something is up. I want to see some dyno numbers, because I know that the 2.7 can lay down some serious power.

 

[Silver-Bolt]

Interesting comparison.

2017-2020 Raptor SCREW: 450hp, 5500 lbs, 35" tires, 4.10 gears. 0-60 5.7-5.8. 12.22 pounds per hp.

2021 Bronco 4-door: 320hp, 5100 lbs, 35" tires, 4.70 gears. 0-60 ?. 15.93 pounds per hp.

Both transmission have the same ratios. That is 3.7 extra pounds per hp that the Bronco needs to move. The 4.70 gears will help some. Betting the official 0-60 will be in the low 7 second range.

 

[Stitches1974]

Well, given that my current DD is an F-150 that weighs roughly 5100 lbs without the liftgate (5600 lbs with the lift gate) and has a 3.5 Ecoboost (with over 230k); the one thing that I do know is that my F-150 is quick for a truck, even without any special tuning... but with a 93 octane tune flashed, it becomes very quick - like tires start spinning at 20 MPH despite the 500 lb Tommylift over the tail.

Granted the 2011 3.5 Ecoboost was rated 365 HP and 420 ft/lbs of torque stock; but on premium the 2.7 is supposed to be making 325 HP and 415 ft/lbs of torque. A two door Bronco on premium gas should be faster than my F-150. I haven't timed 0-60 in my F-150, but I would be shocked if it was north of 8 seconds (with the factory tune) - but apparently the Bronco is around 8.7 seconds 0-60.

However, people are feeling that something is up. I want to see some dyno numbers, because I know that the 2.7 can lay down some serious power.

Interesting comparison.

2017-2020 Raptor SCREW: 450hp, 5500 lbs, 35" tires, 4.10 gears. 0-60 5.7-5.8. 12.22 pounds per hp.

2021 Bronco 4-door: 320hp, 5100 lbs, 35" tires, 4.70 gears. 0-60 ?. 15.93 pounds per hp.

Both transmission have the same ratios. That is 3.7 extra pounds per hp that the Bronco needs to move. The 4.70 gears will help some. Betting the official 0-60 will be in the low 7 second range.

It's not an apples to apples comparison, but gives you a general Idea of what the 2.7 is capable of, stock, and tuned.

 

[R1Bronco]

Out of All the reviews online that I have seen,this is the first one to complain about the power....Take that for what it's worth....

 

[JT58Bronc]

Interesting reads. Stereo and the power of the engines mostly are the comments. I could care less about the stereo. I went with base, 2 door and 2.7 with Sas. I wanted the lightest configuration with the most power- although still went with Sas for the 35" tires.

I am hoping it's not sluggish. I test drive an F150 with the 2.7 a little over a year ago and it felt pretty peppy. I also drove a Ranger and it felt only adequate. I am hoping for sure it will be peppier and faster than my current 2 vehicles- my 2019 Silverado LD with the 5.3- I get economy cars blasting around me in it. It's heavy and slow. And my 97 Wrangler is light but has only 180 HP. Due to the Bronco taking so long I'm modding the Jeep- adding a header to hopefully help it along in a modern world where 200 HP is the "norm" for even economy cars.

So the Bronco better be quicker than my Silverado- which it's replacing. I know the F150 was, so hopefully the Bronco is too.

 

[indio22]

Interesting reads. Stereo and the power of the engines mostly are the comments. I could care less about the stereo. I went with base, 2 door and 2.7 with Sas. I wanted the lightest configuration with the most power- although still went with Sas for the 35" tires.

I am hoping it's not sluggish. I test drive an F150 with the 2.7 a little over a year ago and it felt pretty peppy. I also drove a Ranger and it felt only adequate. I am hoping for sure it will be peppier and faster than my current 2 vehicles- my 2019 Silverado LD with the 5.3- I get economy cars blasting around me in it. It's heavy and slow. And my 97 Wrangler is light but has only 180 HP. Due to the Bronco taking so long I'm modding the Jeep- adding a header to hopefully help it along in a modern world where 200 HP is the "norm" for even economy cars.

So the Bronco better be quicker than my Silverado- which it's replacing. I know the F150 was, so hopefully the Bronco is too.

I've got a '98 TJ. How would you rate your '97 TJ power (assuming it has the 4.0L), compared to the Ranger 2.3L you drove?

 

[mpeugeot]

It's not an apples to apples comparison, but gives you a general Idea of what the 2.7 is capable of, stock, and tuned.

That video does make the point that I was making about the 3.5 Ecoboost (which at the wheel stock made 270 HP and 245 ft/lb of torque and tuned made 454 HP and 411 ft/lbs at 5800 RPM) where tuning shaved off 2 seconds of 0-60 time.

Now, I don't think that the tune in my setup is picking up 180 HP at 5800 RPM, but I would bet on an increase of 100-120 HP at the wheel with ease. Stock the F-150 3.5 was 6.32 0-60 and the 2.7 was 6.15 0-60 stock. Tuned the 2.7 ran a 4.83 0-60 and the 3.5 ran a 4.36 0-60. This is as heavy as a two door Bronco; something isn't right.

Someone please, please put a Bronco 2.7 on the dyno!

 

[JT58Bronc]

I've got a '98 TJ. How would you rate your '97 TJ power (assuming it has the 4.0L), compared to the Ranger 2.3L you drove?

I have the 4.0L, 5 speed manual. It's rated at only 180 HP and around 225 FT Lbs torque stock. I have custom intake with K & N filter and Banks CAT back exhaust and run 31" tires on it, otherwise it is stock. The Ranger for sure has more useable power and is faster. It also has a 10 speed transmission versus only 5 gears the Wrangler has. But the manual transmission in the Wrangler makes it fun to drive. The Ranger would be great if they offered it with a manual transmission.

 

[Moabbob]

We test drove a 2.3 two door Sasquatch. It seemed fine for around town, but I ordered a 2.7 expecting to need passing power on two lane roads. We have a 200 series land Cruiser with less torque but more HP it weighs more but its fine on the road. We also have a VW Golf R which is much faster and handles better, but it really sucks at rock crawling.
Different arrows for different targets.

 

[Panaran]

The engine is detuned for the break in period so that would explain the lack of power.

Has this been officially stated by Ford? I've see a few posts that mentioned a break in period, but nothing official. Just wondering if I should expect the engine to be dogshit when I pick up....if that ever happens.

 

[Bronco mama]

Any Jeep owners that have experience with the bronco’s sound system? Curious how they compare being both vehicle lose the speakers in the door concept...

Jeep gal her. I have a 2dr wrangler jl and have test drove the new bronco and was not impressed with the radio in the new bronco. But the radio in my Jeep is factory so it’s sucks too. I am in the process of upgrading my Jeep sound system. And next summer upgrading my new bronco radio. Because it’s worse than a factory Jeep radio. I heard the radio in the bronco lux package and alpine in the Jeep’s and decided to just save my money and upgrade to a system that’s better and cheaper. But that’s just MY opinion

 

[Stitches1974]

That video does make the point that I was making about the 3.5 Ecoboost (which at the wheel stock made 270 HP and 245 ft/lb of torque and tuned made 454 HP and 411 ft/lbs at 5800 RPM) where tuning shaved off 2 seconds of 0-60 time.

Now, I don't think that the tune in my setup is picking up 180 HP at 5800 RPM, but I would bet on an increase of 100-120 HP at the wheel with ease. Stock the F-150 3.5 was 6.32 0-60 and the 2.7 was 6.15 0-60 stock. Tuned the 2.7 ran a 4.83 0-60 and the 3.5 ran a 4.36 0-60. This is as heavy as a two door Bronco; something isn't right.

Someone please, please put a Bronco 2.7 on the dyno!

I wish I could have driven the Bronco I had hands on with this morning, but the dealer wasn't allowing any test drives.

Sponsored