2.7L blown engine failure list . . 68 so far [Updated: December 13, 2022]

[DrBriGuy]

Let’s hope not!!

Trending that way based on experience of people with last several failures. There’s some discussion back in the thread about a “backorder”, production hold, or redesign, potentially all referencing the same situation. Engines for repairs and new builds potentially not forthcoming but people are watching that closely for updates.

Sponsored

 

[Snowdogyyz]

I’m sure it will be in the news if more, or a recall. Just wanted to give a little piece of mind to the other 39,569 folks that may be driving one. I’m just saying if it goes above those numbers most likely there is a major issue for sure. Right now it’s more or less normal failure rates. We will find out in due time. At least they are under warranty.

How do you know it’s normal failure rates?????

 

[Desert_6G]

Has anyone figured out what % of these reported blown engines represent the number of 6G members with the 2.7L? If it's like under 0.5% I wouldn't say it's as big of a issue as some people say. But 1% makes me concerned.

 

[DrBriGuy]

How do you know it’s normal failure rates?????

I’m not picking on anyone but I think we are making a mistake talking about failure rates. Rate is defined as units per time. Failure percentage is a fair definition for what we have been talking about.
number of engines per mile or per time are different ways to measure rate as well. Failure rate is probably pretty high. Failure percentage may seem normal when compared to other engine failures but that’s comparing apples to oranges since all the engines are low mileage.
This has been said over and over in this thread in different ways but I think this is what some are missing.

 

[DrBriGuy]

Redesign was a “my dealer said” thing. Unconfirmed as of yet I believe.

 

[Bonnie6G]

Redesign was a “my dealer said” thing. Unconfirmed as of yet I believe.

Yeah. The 2/7 build week group just got their emails with VINs so production is not on hold.

 

[22OBX]

How do you know it’s normal failure rates?????

Did you read my earlier post from a study of the best (least) engine failure rates from a research study? I said that could be used as guide if you were wondering what’s considered normal if you compare what we know against the engines with least amount of failure that I posted from the article. That’s all. The number most likely will continue to climb but so are the number of new broncos shipped with 2.7 so it will have to change dramatically for the percentages to continue to increase. Good grief, just forget I posted anything. I have no further comments on it. Was just tying to put it n perspective not discount the disappointment of those the have experienced failures. I hope you all get back on the road quick and this potential issue is remedied quick.

 

[Snowdogyyz]

Did you read my earlier post from a study of the best (least) engine failure rates from a research study? I said that could be used as guide if you were wondering what’s considered normal if you compare what we know against the engines with least amount of failure that I posted from the article. That’s all. The number most likely will continue to climb but so are the number of new broncos shipped with 2.7 so it will have to change dramatically for the percentages to continue to increase. Good grief, just forget I posted anything. I have no further comments on it. Was just tying to put it n perspective not discount the disappointment of those the have experienced failures. I hope you all get back on the road quick and this potential issue is remedied quick.

No one’s discounting your opinion. Just asking how anyone would know this is a normal failure rate. The 2.3 has 1-2 failures on the forum. The 2.7 has 31. To me that’s a glaring comparison. I know it’s probably 2 or 3 to 1 of 2.7 orders versus 2.3’s. But for awhile a lot of 2.3’s were being built so there’s got to be a few out there.
But again- we’re gathering data and this is what we have. I have two 2.7’s being built in February and based on the date range of current data, I’m not overly concerned. Unless the data starts increasing for later engine build dates…….

 

[navi]

I just was digging wondering if this was a major issue. 39,600 engines based on 72% of broncos being built with 2.7 . 31 known Issues equals 0.00078. Interestingly I came across this article, even though it’s old it can still be a guide.

According to a recent study in the UK, Audi and MINI are among the automakers with the most engine failures.

In a poll conducted by Warranty Direct , the company studied its claims data to compile the study, with Honda, Toyota, and Mercedes-Benz topping the lists of automakers with the most reliable engines. Honda had an engine failure of 0.29 percent, while Toyota came in second with 0.58 percent. Mercedes had one engine failure for every 119 engines, a failure rate of 0.84 percent.

For now rest easy. Ford .00078 failure is 1 every 1,277 engines.

That warranty direct study used data from their claims with engines of any age or mileage.
That's not comparable at all to the 2.7 failures which are blowing at 2k miles and a few months of age.

 

[DrBriGuy]

That warranty direct study used data from their claims with engines of any age or mileage.
That's not comparable at all to the 2.7 failures which are blowing at 2k miles and a few months of age.

Exactly the point that is being ignored or misunderstood!

 

[22OBX]

No one’s discounting your opinion. Just asking how anyone would know this is a normal failure rate. The 2.3 has 1-2 failures on the forum. The 2.7 has 31. To me that’s a glaring comparison. I know it’s probably 2 or 3 to 1 of 2.7 orders versus 2.3’s. But for awhile a lot of 2.3’s were being built so there’s got to be a few out there.
But again- we’re gathering data and this is what we have. I have two 2.7’s being built in February and based on the date range of current data, I’m not overly concerned. Unless the data starts increasing for later engine build dates…….

No worries. I know it’s a hot topic. I agree, based on a sheet I saw posted on 6g that looked to be an official Ford document the 2.7.s outnumber 2.3 about 3 to 1 so the numbers would typically be higher. Best of luck and hope it’s not widespread and hope I don’t get a bad apple either.

 

[Carolina Jim]

"what should Ford say?"

I have to believe IF Ford understood these failures to be associated with a particular component batch...or employee shift - they would be reaching out to similarly affected owners PRE-FAILURE to remedy the issue. So every day Ford remains silent I believe more strongly that either:

A. Ford doesn't have a clue...or
B. ALL Broncos are contaminated, and they don't want to make the swallow-hard decision to bite the bullet - hoping that variations in driving habits will allow them to skate on fixing the problem with many flawed units

 

[NotApplicable]

I have to believe IF Ford understood these failures to be associated with a particular component batch...or employee shift - they would be reaching out to similarly affected owners PRE-FAILURE to remedy the issue. So every day Ford remains silent I believe more strongly that either:

A. Ford doesn't have a clue...or
B. ALL Broncos are contaminated, and they don't want to make the swallow-hard decision to bite the bullet - hoping that variations in driving habits will allow them to skate on fixing the problem with many flawed units

I get where you’re going, but you forgot C. Still investigating and collecting data. Maybe that’s a variant of A?

 

[phocion]

There is no way the ratio of shipped 2.7Ls to 2.3Ls is 3:1 or even 2:1. Maybe not even 1:1.

2.7L has been a constraint the entire time. More 2.7Ls have been ordered, but that's a different story from what has actually shipped.

Sponsored