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

[cclkramer]

Yep, it's paying off for the ones that failed and the ones that are going to fail in the future but probably not going to help the resale value of our Broncos down the road especially the ones built with AA's on them.

I was wondering the same thing. I ordered 2 broncos both with the 2.7. I received the 4 door with soft top. I was going to keep it until I received the 2 door hard top. I have been thinking I better sell before it's too late and they all start blowing. I cant stop thinking about what a joke this whole Bronco fiasco is turning out to be.

Sponsored

 

[mpeugeot]

I got my Bronco back today. Engine is Julian 21273 MB3E 6006AA. Took 31 hours total and everything seems to be ok. Still the only one that had a failure at my dealer. Not sure what I can ask from Ford as restitution since I purchased the maintenance plan and the extended warranty when I bought it.

So your replacement engine is only warrantied for only 24 months???

 

[mpeugeot]

To me, the smoking gun (or smoking engine?) is that we don't have dozens of reports of the 2.3L having the same problem. If the two engines have a similar, normal failure rate, we'd be able to tell. The forum is not THAT heavily biased to the 2.7L side.

I don't think it's justified for people to be paranoid that every 2.7L is a ticking bomb, but it's clear that, at least for a time, there was a higher incidence of engine failure that was unique to the 2.7L.

Actually, the smoking gun is that Ford published the fact that Lima plant employees identified the issue that was causing problems with reliability issues external to the plant that were being tracked.

 

[Bmadda]

So your replacement engine is only warrantied for only 24 months???

No that's only if it had been a customer pay job. Warranty repairs are warranteed by the the fact that the entire vehicle is still under warranty

 

[mpeugeot]

I'm having users who haven't seen a failure yet record their julian date and mileage. I made a histogram on those engine julian dates.

I think the thing I take from the small data set is that the 30 day gap in failures is likely due to a pause or reduction in engine production rather than "good parts" cycling in.

42 people have recorded their "good engines" vs. the 33 failures.

So were running 55% running/45% failed roughly... LOL! Who wants those odds?

I am still convinced that my Bronco is on borrowed time.

 

[VictoryLights]

So were running 55% running/45% failed roughly... LOL! Who wants those odds?

I am still convinced that my Bronco is on borrowed time.

Its probably closer to this than the estimates of 10000 2.7s delivered to this forum lol

 

[BroncocnorB]

Quick, before the stat experts arrive, so that is a failure rate of 79%, right? (33/42=79%).

No it’s 33/75 = 44%. Just sayin’

 

[phocion]

Actually, the smoking gun is that Ford published the fact that Lima plant employees identified the issue that was causing problems with reliability issues external to the plant that were being tracked.

I don't agree. We don't know if that is related in any way to these failures. In fact we have no way of knowing if the less "robust" Nano valves ever made it into customer engines. We also don't know that they are Bronco engines, as 2.7L F-150 engines are made at the same plant. I think it is a stretch to extrapolate a sentence from a corporate morale newsletter as a definitive explanation of why Bronco engines are blowing up.

 

[NotApplicable]

I don't agree. We don't know if that is related in any way to these failures. In fact we have no way of knowing if the less "robust" Nano valves ever made it into customer engines. We also don't know that they are Bronco engines, as 2.7L F-150 engines are made at the same plant. I think it is a stretch to extrapolate a sentence from a corporate morale newsletter as a definitive explanation of why Bronco engines are blowing up.

 

[BlueBronco]

I think the core info on this thread is good and useful, the conspiracies and made up 'facts' and rumors and paranoia could be edited out, which is why I only stop by here once in a while. Mine was built 21180, so just at the tail end of the first block. Am I worried? No. Not gonna not drive where I want. And if it blows it'll get fixed, no worries there either. But some info from Ford would be nice, though like any other big corporation enslaved to the stock price, we won't see that.

Agreed, my 2.7 BL has a 21274 build date so I have a vested interest here, but this thread reads like a bad, hyperbolic version of the telephone game where you need to sift through the rumors (Lima stopped building the 2.7's!!) the comical conclusion jumping, the my dealer said nonsense, the made up statistics, off topic derailments and a bit of entitlement (Zomg, Ford needs to buy me a satellite communicator and pay for my monthly data plan!1!! I mean, really?) to glean the truly useful bits and pieces of intel.

This valve drop is a concern but I am not going to live in fear over it nor not drive my Bronco because of it.

Keep up the good work @Lucchese

Edit. Dude expects Ford to pay for a satellite communicator, not a sat phone.

 

[Krazed]

This valve drop is a concern but I am not going to live in fear over it nor not drive my Bronco because of it.

I agree. I have a 2.7 with a date that's already had a failure. I've got just under 1800 miles on it and I'm planning a trip from Seattle to Palm Desert & Johnson Valley in April. If something happens, I'll deal with it, but I'm just going to keep driving it.

 

[International_George]

So your replacement engine is only warrantied for only 24 months???

I think that’s the generic warranty from the dealer, not Ford.

 

[JPye]

"...off topic derailments and a bit of entitlement (Zomg, Ford needs to buy me a sat phone!1!! I mean, really?) to glean the truly useful bits and pieces of intel."

So you complain about hyperbolic version of the telephone game and then follow up your own bit of hyperbole.

Garmin inReach uses Iridium’s worldwide coverage so you can send texts and emails from anywhere in the world. The plan determines how many text messages you can send and how detailed they are. It is not a Sat Phone, but you probably already know that if you have ever considered going anywhere off-road.

A basic plan costs $12/month. Not an unreasonable request considering the Bronco was build to be driven off-road.

https://discover.garmin.com/en-US/inreach/personal/#subscriptions

 

[Lucchese]

You don't think this Lima Newsletter is big ? isn't this first Ford confirmation of defective valves ? Before this we only had five rumor posts by Jay3630 back in Oct. And hundreds of blown engines w dropped valves, but still wondering if they were really caused by bad springs, or keepers, and so forth. Now we finally have Ford confirmation of bad valves - both design & materials -

January '22 - Lima Plant Newsletter - § Quality, page-1
- 'Nano valve supplier issue was resolved with more robust design and material changes at the supplier.'
- 'Supply base and design issues negatively impacted external quality indicators.'

. . Bronco completed 9/14 . . no idea engine build-date . . still sitting dirt/ice mountain . .

at your dealer service dept maybe someone will do you a favor - w last-8 digits of VIN they can lookup your engine ser#

 

[Carolina Jim]

Supply base and design issues negatively impacted external quality indicators

Yeah....I assume "external quality indicators" = Broncos towed back to dealers.

And the more I look at the failure date graphic below, the more I think the date void (which is July 2021) indicates that Lima was producing 2.7s for vehicles OTHER than Bronco. That is supported by VictoryLights' tracking of no-problem Broncos, which has an almost identical date void pattern.

So, it seems much more likely that ALL bronco 2.7s produced up until the 'fix-date' (December X?) are equally at-risk of needing a tow truck.

Sponsored