New to Ford. Overall Bronco reliability and turbo engine expectations?

[SpursFan]

the 2.3 is a great engine don't let any carbon talk steer you away.

Sponsored

 

[aabsalon]

Tundra owner here and exactly my sentiments. Toyota is far too conservative for their own good. Their vehicles are RELIABLE. My Tundra has given me no trouble. It is as solid as it gets. But everything is relative. All my friends have Tesla's and the build quality is awful, it is like they dont know what a good paint job looks like on a car. I think coming from Toyota trucks, we may hit a middle ground. upgraded tech, great fuel economy and a highly capable vehicle.

Great fuel economy for a rig that has aerodynamics of a brick and weighs 2.5 tons.

 

[aabsalon]

The 2.3 is great too. Just those two details about the 2.7 I like from an engineering standpoint.

I wouldn’t hesitate to get the 2.3 if you’re concerned about reliability. It’s a proven engine and boosted sky high by the tuner scene without problems.

Like what others have said about it not having port injection, you can combat the carbon build up with injector cleaner occasionally and be diligent with the oil changes and it shouldn’t even cross your mind.

Can adding premium gas reduce the chances of carbon buildup on the 2.3 together with regular oil changes?

 

[Rogues Gambit]

I didn't get past 100k with my old EBM, but had no issues with the ragtop pony

Cover the weaklinks and stick with a reliable tuner if you're modding

 

[captchathis]

Can adding premium gas reduce the chances of carbon buildup on the 2.3 together with regular oil changes?

I want to say no, so those who know please correct me if I’m wrong.

Though sticking with top tier rated gas stations will definitely help which isn’t hard to do unless you live in rural areas.

 

[Bmadda]

Can adding premium gas reduce the chances of carbon buildup on the 2.3 together with regular oil changes?

The carbon intake yaya has NOTHING to do w/what fuel you use or...like alot of people think pcv gases that can be redirected into a "puke can" or whatever. Like the mazda "skyactiv" motors 2.3 turbo uses "Miller cycle". Basically has WAY too much intake duration on the cam, but since it's GDI and not port, and fly by wire throttle, who cares? We can manage such a crazy cam profile w/software and make it work. W/that gigantic amount of cam overlap we can (like mazda did) use an impossible (w/normal cam) compression ratio OR (like ford did) stuff the cylinders with a monster amount of boost from a turbo. Either solution gives ya one SCREAMIN 4cyl! but because under light loads it's constantly puking a bit of it's own combustion back into the intake you get these bricks of kingsford that build up on intake valves. It's really not the end of the world tho...not like the motor has to be ripped apart and all valves removed. There are solvents specifically for cleaning the valves, and they work for the most part. Worst Mazda skyactiv I ever saw I had to remove the intake manifold and soak the valves in the spray overnight. That car had 120k on it and the guy had never done anything to it. Maybe a shot of spray through the throttle body every 30k? It's a relatively minor maintenance to perform I think!

 

[Section8]

The carbon thing is a bit bothersome sounding, but with a bit extra in the routine maybe not so bad. I am used to a wide range of reliability in vehicles. Ironically my worst was my 93 Wrangler YJ, the entire transmission had to be rebuilt at 110k and I spent as much on engine issues as the car cost me. My best was my 94 Toyota Pickup, sold with 320k miles with nothing but routine maintenance on the engine. The damn thing was indestructible.

That's the standard I hold every car I own to. Anxious to see how Ford lives up.

 

[Spartan]

For makes good vehicles...remember the saying... "Built Ford Tough" ?

I have a '99 Explorer Sport with 212,000+ and just had it inspected by a local mechanic and he said it's one of the best Explorers he's seen at this age.

How you take care of a vehicle goes a long way also, which is why he said that.

 

[staxchips]

How good are they? Can they last 200k+ miles?

 

[RadMan24]

How good are they? Can they last 200k+ miles?

200,000 for a 4 cylinder with a turbo? That's a toss of a coin.

The problem is, after 200,000 miles, the 2.3L will have lower performance due to carbon deposits, and there's nothing you can do about it. Sure, you can do an invasive engine cleaning service, but for the most part, that 2.3L will suffer like any other direct injection engine. Valvoline sells a cleaning service, but who knows how effective it really is.

Hence why many included myself are undecided because you can't get the 2.7L with a manual. Maybe the manual doesn't have the torque strength to handle the engine. Regardless, the 2.7L does away with the carbon build up as it is port injection which sprays the additives (from premium or top fuel) on the valve intakes to keep them clean, preventing them from burning oil, creating carbon deposits, restricting airflow.

Durability wise, should be okay for 5+ years of owning. Turbo's are probably the long-tail story, I don't know how many Raptors with extensive miles and off-road usage have had problems to judge Ford's off-road turbo use durability. Toyota doesn't use turbo's for a reason, but many think they will going forward as reliability has improved.

The 2.3L with manual will be slightly inferior to the V6 offered by Wrangler, especially considering the weight of Bronco relative to Wrangler (~500 lbs using top trim options). Regardless, feel free to compare the Ranger and Wranger test drive to get a sense of the powertrain option (Bronco is heavier than both, but both Ranger and Wrangler are nearly the same weight full loaded, different aero of course).

 

[BroncoJay]

Tacoma owner here. My 17 has some quirks. I’d say the build quality is average at best. I Feel like Toyota got lazy with the third gen Tacoma.

I have a ‘17 tacoma and feel the same, I feel it is underpowered and has some body roll that hasn’t made me happy.. with that being said I still think Toyota makes the best mid size truck

 

[makatron]

I have a ‘17 tacoma and feel the same, I feel it is underpowered and has some body roll that hasn’t made me happy.. with that being said I still think Toyota makes the best mid size truck

Yeah that truck is called Toyota Hilux which sadly isn't available in north America.

 

[Big L 65]

Quality motor oil and 93 top tier fuel should keep these motors running for a long time

 

[jasonof2010]

I've owned two 2.0 and a 3.5 liter Ecoboost. I put 85,000 miles on my 2013 Focus ST before I had to trade it in after discovering it didn't fit two rear facing car seats very well. I traded it in on a Lincoln MKT with the 3.5, when I sold it to my SIL (who still has it) it had 155,000 miles on it with no issues and no maintenance other than oil changes. My 2018 Focus ST currently has 55,000 miles on it with no problems. I put 87 in all of them as well.

Previously I had a 2004 SVT Focus that gave me endless engine problems, I had a real love-hate relationship with that car, it was a blast to drive but it nearly soured me for life on Ford vehicles.

How good are they? Can they last 200k+ miles?

I know of at least one Focus ST that got traded in (and still running) at 327,000 miles.

 

[Bigmoose]

My previous vehicle was a 2013MY transverse with the 3.5 Ecoboost (1st Gen). While it made a bunch of power I had major repairs at 90k miles...stretched timing chains, locked up phasers, etc, to the tune of $3k. I changed oil frequently with amsoil as well. However, in 2014 ford updated all these parts for that engine which apparently fixed these issues. The versions offered on the bronco are second gen+ so I wouldn't worry about these issues.

Regarding carbon, I tried to scope my valves on my 3.5 and couldn't get a view of them because the intake runners were lined with heavy sludge which kept covering the camera. However, it seems to run fine.

After all this I'm still all for the Ecoboost, especially now since it's been improved since my 3.5. I will opt for the 2.7 though due to the port injection.

Sponsored