Sponsored

2.3 w module = stock 2.7???

1970AMCAMX

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
Robert
Joined
Jul 22, 2021
Threads
17
Messages
739
Reaction score
1,665
Location
Titusville, FL
Vehicle(s)
F150, AMC AMX, DF Goblin
Your Bronco Model
Base
There's a 20lb difference between the two transmissions, not motors
2.3 Ecoboost:
  • Production Run: 2015 – Present
  • Cylinder Head Material: Aluminum
  • Cylinder Block Material: Aluminum
  • Configuration: Inline-4
  • Bore: 87.5 mm
  • Stroke: 94.0 mm
  • Valvetrain: DOHC four valves per cylinder
  • Displacement: 2.3 L (2264 cc)
  • Compression Ratio: 9.5
  • Weight: 418 lbs.
  • Maximum HP: 350 HP at 5,600 RPM
  • Maximum Torque: 350 lb-ft at 2,750 RPM
2.7 Ecoboost:
  • Production Run: 2015 – Present
  • Cylinder Head Material: Aluminum
  • Cylinder Block Material: Compacted Graphite Iron
  • Configuration: V6
  • Bore: 83.0 mm
  • Stroke: 83.0 mm
  • Valvetrain: DOHC four valves per cylinder
  • Displacement: 2.7 L (2694 cc)
  • Compression Ratio: 10.3
  • Weight: 440 lbs. (Dry)
  • Maximum HP: 330 HP at 5,000 – 5,750 RPM
  • Maximum Torque: 400 lb-ft at 3,000 – 3,250 RPM
Sponsored

 

SPITmadFIRE

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2021
Threads
15
Messages
1,169
Reaction score
2,357
Location
CA
Vehicle(s)
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
Clubs
 
2.3 Ecoboost:
  • Production Run: 2015 – Present
  • Cylinder Head Material: Aluminum
  • Cylinder Block Material: Aluminum
  • Configuration: Inline-4
  • Bore: 87.5 mm
  • Stroke: 94.0 mm
  • Valvetrain: DOHC four valves per cylinder
  • Displacement: 2.3 L (2264 cc)
  • Compression Ratio: 9.5
  • Weight: 418 lbs.
  • Maximum HP: 350 HP at 5,600 RPM
  • Maximum Torque: 350 lb-ft at 2,750 RPM
2.7 Ecoboost:
  • Production Run: 2015 – Present
  • Cylinder Head Material: Aluminum
  • Cylinder Block Material: Compacted Graphite Iron
  • Configuration: V6
  • Bore: 83.0 mm
  • Stroke: 83.0 mm
  • Valvetrain: DOHC four valves per cylinder
  • Displacement: 2.7 L (2694 cc)
  • Compression Ratio: 10.3
  • Weight: 440 lbs. (Dry)
  • Maximum HP: 330 HP at 5,000 – 5,750 RPM
  • Maximum Torque: 400 lb-ft at 3,000 – 3,250 RPM
These numbers themselves seem a bit confused — they’re quoting the Focus RS 2.3L configuration power numbers, not the config you’ll find in the bronco. I would assume they’re factoring in only the long blocks and not the turbos, various accessory belt components, etc. not only that, but notice the materials — all aluminum on the 2.3L, but the larger V6 block uses an iron block. There’s no way there’s only 22lbs difference between them in actuality.
 

N8Mash

Black Diamond
Active Member
First Name
Nate
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
25
Reaction score
23
Location
Charleston, SC
Vehicle(s)
GTI
Your Bronco Model
Black Diamond
2.3 Ecoboost:
  • Production Run: 2015 – Present
  • Cylinder Head Material: Aluminum
  • Cylinder Block Material: Aluminum
  • Configuration: Inline-4
  • Bore: 87.5 mm
  • Stroke: 94.0 mm
  • Valvetrain: DOHC four valves per cylinder
  • Displacement: 2.3 L (2264 cc)
  • Compression Ratio: 9.5
  • Weight: 418 lbs.
  • Maximum HP: 350 HP at 5,600 RPM
  • Maximum Torque: 350 lb-ft at 2,750 RPM
2.7 Ecoboost:
  • Production Run: 2015 – Present
  • Cylinder Head Material: Aluminum
  • Cylinder Block Material: Compacted Graphite Iron
  • Configuration: V6
  • Bore: 83.0 mm
  • Stroke: 83.0 mm
  • Valvetrain: DOHC four valves per cylinder
  • Displacement: 2.7 L (2694 cc)
  • Compression Ratio: 10.3
  • Weight: 440 lbs. (Dry)
  • Maximum HP: 330 HP at 5,000 – 5,750 RPM
  • Maximum Torque: 400 lb-ft at 3,000 – 3,250 RPM
Thats damn impressive! 22 lbs for 2 extra cylinders?

What about fluid fills though? Oil, coolant? Is there an appreciable difference in capacities?

Also, I would think a second turbo and supporting equipment would add more weight as well.

Still, I'd ballpark it to be maybe ~60 lbs difference between the 2 drivetrains?
 

1970AMCAMX

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
Robert
Joined
Jul 22, 2021
Threads
17
Messages
739
Reaction score
1,665
Location
Titusville, FL
Vehicle(s)
F150, AMC AMX, DF Goblin
Your Bronco Model
Base
These numbers themselves seem a bit confused — they’re quoting the Focus RS 2.3L configuration power numbers, not the config you’ll find in the bronco. I would assume they’re factoring in only the long blocks and not the turbos, various accessory belt components, etc. not only that, but notice the materials — all aluminum on the 2.3L, but the larger V6 block uses an iron block. There’s no way there’s only 22lbs difference between them in actuality.


The designs are completely different: The 2.3 still has an exhaust manifold while the 2.7 the exhaust passages are in the heads without a manifold, V6 Crankshaft is shorter and also has a shorter stroke possibly making it lighter, etc.

I'm sure that there are some differences in the weight of the ancillaries between the two motors: V6 may have a larger radiator, Extra plumbing for the twin turbo setup, etc.

Even if there is a ~200 lb difference in total vehicle weight between 4 or 6, that is insignificant in a 4000+ lb vehicle.
 

Lowcountry Bronco

Heritage
Well-Known Member
First Name
William
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Threads
25
Messages
4,953
Reaction score
14,443
Location
South Carolina Lowcountry
Vehicle(s)
Ford Ranger and Toyota FJ Cruiser
Your Bronco Model
Heritage
Clubs
 

Sponsored

elseminoleguapo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Javier
Joined
Jul 26, 2020
Threads
13
Messages
268
Reaction score
803
Location
Miami
Vehicle(s)
Basesquatch
Your Bronco Model
Undecided
Clubs
 
Based on what I've read on the Panda module...it looks like the 2.3 version nets a HP increase of at least 8%. That puts it at 324hp. The stock 2.7 is rated at 330 HP. So for $600 or so the module turns the 2.3 into the 2.7 while giving you the option of manual or auto. Am I looking at that (somewhat) correctly???
In short, no. Peak power numbers don't tell the whole story or accurately reflect how you'll use the car day-to-day. The power band is a way more nuanced way of looking at how a car will perform on the street. While Panda's numbers look promising (especially if you're 7MT or bust), the power band on the 2.7 still looks better, IMO.

Panda 2.3 numbers:

Ford Bronco 2.3 w module = stock 2.7??? 1638480814360


2.7:

Ford Bronco 2.3 w module = stock 2.7??? 1638480851178


Panda 2.3 is peaking in power way later and not sustaining that power for very long. The 2.7 peaks at 4.5k RPM and hold it through 5.5k. I don't know about you, but if I had a 2.3 7MT, I don't see myself getting it to the 5.5k RPM range with any kind of regularity, but shifitng around 4.5k-ish for onramps and passing seems reasonable.

That said, is the 2.3 with the tune good enough to make you not miss the 2.7? Possible, but that's up to you.
 
OP
OP
theguda

theguda

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2020
Threads
59
Messages
271
Reaction score
993
Location
IN
Vehicle(s)
2013 Ford F-150
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
Clubs
 
In short, no. Peak power numbers don't tell the whole story or accurately reflect how you'll use the car day-to-day. The power band is a way more nuanced way of looking at how a car will perform on the street. While Panda's numbers look promising (especially if you're 7MT or bust), the power band on the 2.7 still looks better, IMO.

Panda 2.3 numbers:

Ford Bronco 2.3 w module = stock 2.7??? 1638480851178


2.7:

Ford Bronco 2.3 w module = stock 2.7??? 1638480851178


Panda 2.3 is peaking in power way later and not sustaining that power for very long. The 2.7 peaks at 4.5k RPM and hold it through 5.5k. I don't know about you, but if I had a 2.3 7MT, I don't see myself getting it to the 5.5k RPM range with any kind of regularity, but shifitng around 4.5k-ish for onramps and passing seems reasonable.

That said, is the 2.3 with the tune good enough to make you not miss the 2.7? Possible, but that's up to you.
What's you opinion on the 2.7 module?
 

elseminoleguapo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Javier
Joined
Jul 26, 2020
Threads
13
Messages
268
Reaction score
803
Location
Miami
Vehicle(s)
Basesquatch
Your Bronco Model
Undecided
Clubs
 
What's you opinion on the 2.7 module?
I'm a Grangetober reservation holder, so I'm not seriously in the market for any tune right now. I don't know enough about Panda or tuning turbo engines to comment one way or another on their product and quality.

I am generally skeptical of the claim that you can remove the module without the dealer ever knowing and not affecting your warranty. I've heard similar claims about ECU tunes, and personally know people that have been caught. The mechanism might be different, but whenever a company the size of most small tuners outsmart Ford, it's always a question of how long can they do it for?

As it stands, I don't see much benefit in going aftermarket today vs. waiting for Ford to release their own tune and seeing how it stacks up.
 

ColoradoGuy

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Aug 6, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
2,015
Reaction score
7,319
Location
Colorado
Vehicle(s)
'21 4DR Badlands and a couple of Acuras
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
Clubs
 
Well, that does it. You talked me into getting the performance pack for my 2.7L.
 

DrewBronc21

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2020
Threads
14
Messages
1,849
Reaction score
3,735
Location
New York
Vehicle(s)
2011 Subaru STi, 2018 Camry Hybrid
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
But one could argue over the lifetime of the vehicle it’s not worth it to run the 4banger under more strain
You could argue that but plenty of very strained 2.3 Ecos out there in mustangs, focuses and Mazdas doing well. I’ve had some highly strained Subaru 4 bangers running like tops for many years as well.

and at the same time there’s stock 2.7s spewing coolant so who knows. I personally would rather have a manual over the slightly bigger 2.7 and will modify it knowing it’s not without risk
 

Sponsored

navi

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
Navi
Joined
Feb 15, 2021
Threads
5
Messages
531
Reaction score
835
Location
CA
Vehicle(s)
73 Bronco
Your Bronco Model
Base
You could argue that but plenty of very strained 2.3 Ecos out there in mustangs, focuses and Mazdas doing well. I’ve had some highly strained Subaru 4 bangers running like tops for many years as well.

and at the same time there’s stock 2.7s spewing coolant so who knows. I personally would rather have a manual over the slightly bigger 2.7 and will modify it knowing it’s not without risk
I think a ford tech mentioned here that a lot of those mustang eco's end up failing at 60-80k miles. And that is a much lighter vehicle.

The coolant spewing is a result of Ford copying BMW's dumb idea of forgoing clamps for push in hoses. Not related to the motor at all.
 

VictoryLights

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Threads
31
Messages
1,758
Reaction score
4,160
Location
Pittsburgh
Vehicle(s)
2018 Honda Pilot
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
Clubs
 
I can’t imagine risking my powertrain warranty by tuning a brand new vehicle.
 
 


Top