2.3L reliability

[Irish#1]

Im gonna order a 2 door base. I wanna stay as cheap as i can get it which means staying with the 2.3 and manual. I want a manual but know nothing about the 2.3 and its long term reliability. Please give me any info you can on this 2.3 motor to help me decide whether to stay with it or bump up to 2.7

Sponsored

 

[Zinn]

The 2.3 is direct injected only which means over time the intake manifold will get caked with gunk and need to be cleaned out or power will start to fade. Not a huge problem but definitely a bit higher maintenance. It can be somewhat avoided or slowed down by using a catch can.

The 2.7L is port + direct injected so that gunk mixes into fuel and gets burned away, leaving a cleaner intake manifold and increasing longevity of the injectors etc.

I think overall the 2.7L would be a more reliable engine but not probably a huge difference.

(Wasn't clear from your post but note that bumping up to the 2.7L engine means you also have to get the auto transmission. There is no stick for 2.7 offered)

 

[Blksn955.o]

They have been putting them in mustangs for several years and getting good numbers out of them and it has been in several other model lines as well. You beat on something and treated/maintained it like crap it is not going to last as long as something that was even beat on but taken care of.

You see so many people drive like complete garbage. I mean that in that if/when you see someone actually accelerate you see black carbon smoke out of a non-diesel or someone who is ho humming it in the merge lane for a highway on ramp trying to merge into 60-75mph traffic doing 45. I bet they have more buildup from not putting the motor threw its paces now and again.

 

[aabsalon]

I am getting the 2.3 Auto, four-door Badlands. It is a good engine on the Ranger and it can be tuned.

 

[Pcpacker]

Personally I am worried but going to buy anyway. Hoping they have worked out a few kinks.

 

[BE_]

2.3 is trash.

this post was made by the 2.7 gang

 

[Irish#1]

iIwas reading a thread in the Ranger forum that people are having issues with gas in the oil , some with very few miles. ive had two f 150s with the 2.7 one (2016)had too have heads replaced at 8k miles. The other had the 10 speed in it which is ok but when going slow on dirt roads, forest roads etc seemed to not wanna climb hills unless u mashed the gas. The 6 sped was perfect for the 2.7.

 

[Irish#1]

They have been putting them in mustangs for several years and getting good numbers out of them and it has been in several other model lines as well. You beat on something and treated/maintained it like crap it is not going to last as long as something that was even beat on but taken care of.

You see so many people drive like complete garbage. I mean that in that if/when you see someone actually accelerate you see black carbon smoke out of a non-diesel or someone who is ho humming it in the merge lane for a highway on ramp trying to merge into 60-75mph traffic doing 45. I bet they have more buildup from not putting the motor threw its paces now and again.

 

[tyrobronco]

The other had the 10 speed in it which is ok but when going slow on dirt roads, forest roads etc seemed to not wanna climb hills unless u mashed the gas. The 6 sped was perfect for the 2.7.

I'm curious how much of the lag was the rearend? What gears were you running? The Bronco will likely run higher gears than your F150.

 

[Irish#1]

I don't beat on my vehicles and i don't put a lot of miles on em. Only had 65 k on my 10 yr old Titan when i sold it. I drive my vehicles easy and usually do the speed limit. Here in the Colorado mtns speeds are 25 to 60 so not a lot of oppurtunity to blow the carbon out except on my annual trip to Missouri for deer hunting. Does not putting a lot of miles on a turbo engine cause problems?

 

[Irish#1]

I'm curious how much of the lag was the rearend? What gears were you running? The Bronco will likely run higher gears than your F150.

 

[Irish#1]

3.55 It also liked to really slam into lower gear when going down steep hills here in Colorado. Probably just nit picking the 10 speed coming from the 6 speed.

 

[BroncoST]

Ford makes some damn good turbo 4s. I had a focus st running on an e30 blend for 3+ years with a 2.0. Now I'm running e30 on my 1.6 for about the same time. I could easily swap a turbo and reliably make 370hp to the ground all day. 2.3 in the mustang has been running strong from what I've read. I'll be going with the 2.7 though just cause it's a bigger vehicle and I would like the most power potential.

 

[Covfefe]

2.3’s like to go ecoBOOM on the mustangs

 

[pan-y-cerveza]

2.3’s like to go ecoBOOM on the mustangs

Is it really that prevelant though? And we're those cars driven by knuckleheads? My neighbour bangs on his and had no issues. Anecdotal evidence obviously much like every trashed 2.3 is anecdotal but I dont see it as a true issue.

Sponsored