2.7L CAST IRON BLOCK - WHY?

RAB123

Active Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
43
Reaction score
16
Location
Goose Bay
Vehicle(s)
2006 RUBICON , 1980 BLAZER , OWNED LIKE 4 OF THE ORIGINAL BRONCOS
Bronco
Undecided
is there a 3.0 eco boost ?
Advertisement

 

Laminar

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
713
Reaction score
1,843
Location
Iowa
Vehicle(s)
Cougar
Bronco
Black Diamond
I wonder if they'll use this architecture when they redesign the 3.5 sometime soon.
I'd be surprised if they redesigned the 3.5. The 3.0 already makes more power than any 3.5 outside of the Raptor and Ford GT. And its more rugged construction gives it much more room overhead. The 3.5 is limited by its open deck and aluminum block, where the Nano has the structure to handle a lot more abuse.

Most manufacturers seem to have converged on the TT 3.0 as a good displacement - BMW B58, Nissan VR30DDTT, Cadillac LGY, Acura's rumored 3.0TT.
 

securitysix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Messages
448
Reaction score
841
Location
Oklahoma
Vehicle(s)
2011 Toyota Tundra
Bronco
Undecided
Clubs
 
I'd be surprised if they redesigned the 3.5. The 3.0 already makes more power than any 3.5 outside of the Raptor and Ford GT. And its more rugged construction gives it much more room overhead. The 3.5 is limited by its open deck and aluminum block, where the Nano has the structure to handle a lot more abuse.

Most manufacturers seem to have converged on the TT 3.0 as a good displacement - BMW B58, Nissan VR30DDTT, Cadillac LGY, Acura's rumored 3.0TT.
Sounds to me like they should redesign the 3.5 to use the same architecture as the 2.7/3.0, just scaled up. A 3.5L Nano style EcoBoost would be a screamer, I'm sure.

Plus, Ford seems to have a thing for boring and stroking engines to get more displacement, a la the 2.0/2.3 and the 2.7/3.0. If they did the same with the 3.5, we could see a 3.8L EcoBoost, and that'd probably be a monster.
 

Laminar

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
713
Reaction score
1,843
Location
Iowa
Vehicle(s)
Cougar
Bronco
Black Diamond
Sounds to me like they should redesign the 3.5 to use the same architecture as the 2.7/3.0, just scaled up. A 3.5L Nano style EcoBoost would be a screamer, I'm sure.

Plus, Ford seems to have a thing for boring and stroking engines to get more displacement, a la the 2.0/2.3 and the 2.7/3.0. If they did the same with the 3.5, we could see a 3.8L EcoBoost, and that'd probably be a monster.
That'd be the 3.7 Cyclone, and was available in the Mustang, some Lincolns, and police Explorers.

Is there a big power increase ?
The 2.7's best factory rating is 335hp/380tq.

In the Lincolns the 3.0 is rated 400hp/400tq, in the Explorer/Aviator it's 400hp/415tq.
 

securitysix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Messages
448
Reaction score
841
Location
Oklahoma
Vehicle(s)
2011 Toyota Tundra
Bronco
Undecided
Clubs
 
That'd be the 3.7 Cyclone, and was available in the Mustang, some Lincolns, and police Explorers.
Sort of, but not really. I mean, you're correct that the 3.7 Cyclone was just a bored and stroked 3.5 Duratec, but that overlooks my main point.

You said "The 3.5 is limited by its open deck and aluminum block, where the Nano has the structure to handle a lot more abuse."

I'm saying that they should build a nano structured engine with 3.5L of displacement, and they could bore and stroke it to 3.8L of displacement.

It would get rid of the open deck and aluminum block, and it would be designed for turbos from the get go, rather than having them added as an afterthought.

But they also just recently updated the existing 3.5L EcoBoost to add port injection, so I don't see them revisiting this displacement anytime soon.

The 2.7's best factory rating is 335hp/380tq.
Depends on how you define "best," I think.

The 2.7 is rated 325/400 in the F150. That's quite a bit more torque for a bit less horsepower.
 

Big L 65

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Oliver
Joined
Jul 28, 2020
Messages
228
Reaction score
317
Location
Northport NY
Vehicle(s)
Chevy
Bronco
Outer Banks
I just hope the new 2.7 ecoboost don’t have that internal water pump like fords 3.5 V6 have
 

Joker352

Big Bend
Well-Known Member
First Name
J
Joined
Jul 26, 2020
Messages
45
Reaction score
91
Location
Washington
Vehicle(s)
'98 Toyota Tacoma
Bronco
Big Bend
Clubs
 
I just hope the new 2.7 ecoboost don’t have that internal water pump like fords 3.5 V6 have
This got me curious, so I looked up a '19 F150 with the 2.7 via Identifix and from what I'm seeing there, it doesn't appear to have a timing driven water pump (That's what I'm assuming you mean by 'internal water pump'). Looks like a traditional bolt on assembly, but who knows! Maybe something has changed. Or maybe I'm just ignorant of a completely newer version of the 2.7, I'm not above being corrected.

2.7 water pump 2.png


2.7 water pump.png
 

Stampede.Offroad

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
2,195
Reaction score
3,881
Location
SD
Vehicle(s)
junk
Bronco
Badlands
... "The 3.5 is limited by its open deck and aluminum block, where the Nano has the structure to handle a lot more abuse."

I'm saying that they should build a nano structured engine with 3.5L of displacement, and they could bore and stroke it to 3.8L of displacement.
...
I'd be much more excited to see two more cylinders added to a 2.7. That 3.6L V8 CGI block designed to handle boost would bring more to the table, and more consumer interest, than simply scaling up the V6 in volume I would think.
 

SouthernBronco6g

First Edition
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2020
Messages
78
Reaction score
93
Location
Georgia
Vehicle(s)
Mustang
Bronco
First Edition
That'd be the 3.7 Cyclone, and was available in the Mustang, some Lincolns, and police Explorers.



The 2.7's best factory rating is 335hp/380tq.

In the Lincolns the 3.0 is rated 400hp/400tq, in the Explorer/Aviator it's 400hp/415tq.
Except the 3.7 Cyclone in the Mustang Rwd is different then in the fwd/transverse drivetrain cars.

For one the 3.7 Cyclone in the rwd mustang uses and external water pump, different intake manifolds design along with some other differences. Super dependable motor even when modded.

Think of the 3.7 Cyclone fwd/transverse motor as a bored out 3.5 NA version.
 

Laminar

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
713
Reaction score
1,843
Location
Iowa
Vehicle(s)
Cougar
Bronco
Black Diamond
Except the 3.7 Cyclone in the Mustang Rwd is different then in the fwd/transverse drivetrain cars.

For one the 3.7 Cyclone in the rwd mustang uses and external water pump, different intake manifolds design along with some other differences. Super dependable motor even when modded.

Think of the 3.7 Cyclone fwd/transverse motor as a bored out 3.5 NA version.
What else is different? Obviously the accessory drive and intake manifold would be different in a transverse vs. longitudinal orientation.

In the Mustang, it was a 10.5:1 compression 3.76 bore x 3.41 stroke 60 degree V6 making 305hp and 280tq.

In the transverse applications, it was a 10.5:1 compression 3.76 bore x 3.41 stroke 60 degree V6 making 300hp and 277tq.

They use the same head gaskets, crank, cylinder heads, camshafts, etc.

The block casting is different to allow for the different mounting orientation. Why do you think it's a different engine?
 
Advertisement

 
Diode Dynamics
Advertisement
Top