2.3L EcoBoost® I-4 Engine vs 2.7L EcoBoost® V6 Engine... not sure which one?

[Zulu7]

You don't get trail turn assist with the 2.3... but you do get roof racks & winch - hence the everglades.

and the 2.7 just sounds soo much better than the 2.3

No, you get Trail Turn Assist with 2.3L
You don't get Trail One-Pedal Driving

That extra sound is prob thru the stereo

Sponsored

 

[PrepVet]

You don't get trail turn assist with the 2.3... but you do get roof racks & winch - hence the everglades.

and the 2.7 just sounds soo much better than the 2.3

C'mon man, neither engine sounds good.

 

[USSCajun]

2.3=2door, light loads, no trailering.
2.7=Moar door, trailering, maxed out gear.

Both good engines. 2.3 has more hp/torque than my ‘22 4Runner.

 

[Felix808]

IMO the 2.7 was a no-budge option for me. You can absolutely feel the difference of approx. 30 hp/100 ft lb of torque.

Yep, for me it was all about 415 lbs. of Torq off the lot.
The Stage 1 is another level of happiness

 

[Eljohno]

Just got back from Super Cell in Colorado In a BD with a 2.3 and couldn't be more pleased. It did absolutely everything I needed to do. It took every trail I put it on right along side broncos with 2.7 and raptors with 3.0. These comparisons between 2.3 and 2.7's are idiotic! 30hp and 100 pounds of torque make no difference! 40 yrs ago if your 4x4 made 150hp you were lucky. And when you hear someone say oh the 2.7 sounds so much better, what are you talking about? Both the 2.3 and 2.7 sound like crap, you can't make either of them sound good, it's not possible!

 

[Derecho]

Big Bingo there.

I bought a red OBX Bronco in memory of a red 1978 Bronco that was the first car I drove as a teenager. I think that Gen2 Bronco had the 400, with a whopping 160 HP. With the accelerator buried, that beast maxed at 85 mph (but with no head wind)! Almost 14 seconds to get to 60 MPH. Maybe 11 MPG. A 2.3L Bronco would vastly outperform that '78.

The red OBX I have has the 2.7L - I simply wanted the more powerful engine. But from the specs and reviews I read, the 2.3L will not turn the Bronco into a slug bug.

Right, all these newer turbo technologies make it impossible to compare displacements with earlier engines. My old 4Runner has 3.0L w only 150hp. This 2.3L EcoBoost I-4 Bronco is by far the most powerful engine I've ever owned. It's my first "hot rod" ! !

 

[BroncMe]

2.3L is my choice for several reasons:

• It is lighter, thus leaving more room in the weight budget for cargo.
• Cheaper
• Better fuel economy (not that much better, but still better)
• Much easier to work on for the DIY home user
• It is available as a crate engine, therefore parts and aftermarket support is greater
• It is a much more common engine, thus more parts, knowledge, support, etc.
• Is the older engine, and therefore has seen more revisions/refinements.
• Alternator
  • On the 2.3L, the alternator is physically higher off the ground. Better for water fording.
  • On the 2.7L, the alternator is driven by a secondary belt without a tensioner that requires a special tool to swap & replace. (The 2.3L also has a secondary belt, but its used for the AC compressor which obviously isn't mission critical.)
• The oil pan on the 2.3L is metal, on the 2.7L it is plastic.
• It has a twin-scroll turbo, therefore less turbo lag
• It has a chain-driven oil pump... the 2.7L has a wet rubber belt
• It is physically smaller, therefore more room in the engine bay for aftermarket upgrades

And perhaps most importantly... it is available with the 7-spd manual. But honestly if I was buying automatic I would order the 2.3L anyway.

Excellent post from RagnarKan (as usual). But in the interest of giving different perspectives on engine choice, which I believe is the point of this thread, I chose the 2.7

(1) From personal experience, the GDI carbon buildup thing, Ford or others, is real and I don't like to deal with it. Had the new 2024 mustang 2.3 been around (added port fuel injection) this would have been the answer

(2) I was getting an AT anyway to get some of the trail-control bling and since I get my MT-rowing jollies elsewhere. Therefore the cost difference wasn't terrible

(3) The 2.7 seems to dip into the turbo far less heavily than the 2.3. That, and the tougher upper block composition (CGI vs aluminum) would seem to mean less stress and better durability, though I doubt failure would ever be an issue for either except maybe head gaskets. Side note, neither engine has turbo-lag by almost any definition

(4) The composite (plastic) oil pan of the 2.7 is a bad design weakness for a vehicle such as this, except that any threat would have to go through a steel skid plate that I would have regardless of engine, so that's that

 

[Felix808]

100 pounds of torque make no difference

Has to be the first time I've heard that Low end Toque is what gets it done.

 

[Eljohno]

Has to be the first time I've heard that Low end Toque is what gets it done.

You'll get there with or without that low end torque.

 

[Spiniker]

Interesting thanks! So the engine noise is quieter on the 2.7L V6 vs the 2.3L?

Yes ,the 2.7 is quieter imo. My brother has a 2019 ranger with 2.3 and is louder than my 2.7. Which he agrees with me. Also 2.7 is a very smooth running engine. As for
mileage i get around 24 or so In warm weather 60 +. In winter i get around 22 mpg.

 

[Felix808]

You'll get there with or without that low end torque.

Low end torque gives you a lot more control so you don't have to spin up the motor & go over obstacles at speed.

Speed & hopping kills drivelines.
YMMV

 

[Eljohno]

1966 Bronco with 170 inline 6 made around 90 hp and 146 ft lb of torque. The 289 V8 of the same year made about 200 hp and 282 ft lb of torque. The 1978 Bronco with the 351 V8 put out about 150 hp and 275 ft lb of torque.
The 2.3 on premium gas puts out 300 hp and 325 ft lb of torque. The 2.7 on premium gas puts out 330 hp and 415 ft lb of torque. I understand about speed and wheel hop, but 90 ft lb of torque is never going to be a factor 99% of the time. You will be better off picking good lines when you are wheeling then worrying about 90 ft lb of torque.

 

[JerryC]

Low end torque gives you a lot more control so you don't have to spin up the motor & go over obstacles at speed.

Speed & hopping kills drivelines.
YMMV

Crawler gear has entered the chat...

Kidding aside, what we don't know is what is the real torque difference between the 2.3 and 2.7 when using light throttle. Dyno numbers are at wide open throttle, and in these engines under full turbo boost.

 

[old goat]

Interesting thanks! So the engine noise is quieter on the 2.7L V6 vs the 2.3L?

no , it just sounds different. not quieter

 

[JT58Bronc]

Coming in late on this one but we have a 2 door Base Sasquatch with the 2.7. The 2.7 is amazing and for us it beats out the 2.3 in performance and MPG. We average 22.6 MPG in it and it's very fast for an SUV- like a hot rod. Maybe we drive slow cars, LOL. Granted we have a base 2 door- lightest weight and the largest engine. If I had to do it over I would for sure get the 2.7 in any trim.

Sponsored