2.7L going to be surprisingly quick?

[BroncoBoi]

Found an article on the latest Ford Transit van from CarAndDriver. You can see that article here. If you scroll down to the specs, it states that it has the 3.5 ecoboost, which I know is a significantly different engine, but it’s rated at the same numbers for HP and torque in this application as the 2.7L for the bronco. This also states that the van weighs almost 6000 pounds, which is much more than the heaviest bronco. It made it 0-60 in 6.7 seconds?! I’m feeling pretty excited about the 2.7L for the bronco.

Sponsored

 

[mneblett]

TFL Trucks did some drag races before and after tuning, between an F-150 2.7 and an F-150 5.0L Coyote V8.

The 2.7 beat the 5 liter.

 

[BroncoBoi]

I think paying the $1895 for the 2.7L is an absolute steal, provided you want the 10 speed automatic.

 

[Kayak_Nick]

Found an article on the latest Ford Transit van from CarAndDriver. You can see that article here. If you scroll down to the specs, it states that it has the 3.5 ecoboost, which I know is a significantly different engine, but it’s rated at the same numbers for HP and torque in this application as the 2.7L for the bronco. This also states that the van weighs almost 6000 pounds, which is much more than the heaviest bronco. It made it 0-60 in 6.7 seconds?! I’m feeling pretty excited about the 2.7L for the bronco.

Not trying to be snarky, but comparing 2 cars with different weights, engines and final drive ratios and trying to corollate to a 0-60 number...not great science.

 

[BroncoBoi]

Not trying to be snarky, but comparing 2 cars with different weights, engines and final drive ratios and trying to corollate to a 0-60 number...not great science.

Oh 100%! Just excited to have something that should be almost as fast as my focus ST, but WAY more capable.

 

[Overland_A51]

I have the 2.7 in my 18 F-150, to me it’s an amazing engine. Plenty of power and performs very well on, off road and pulling a trailer.

 

[Lowcountry Bronco]

I don't think it's a surprise, it'll be very quick. Lots of hp and torque, twin turbo and short gearing, mix that with a short wheelbase and high riding suspension means some drivers are going to be in trouble before they know it.

 

[Mustang_75_99]

I’ve ridden in a couple F150s with the 2.7 and they are pretty quick for a truck. One buddy likes his newer 2.7 over his old 3.5 Eco.

 

[BroncoBoi]

I’ve ridden in a couple F150 with the 2.7 and they are pretty quick for a truck. One buddy likes his newer 2.7 over his old 3.5 Eco.

Interesting. Are the trucks basically the same outside of the engines?

 

[Mustang_75_99]

Interesting. Are the trucks basically the same outside of the engines?

Gearing can make a big difference, but I believe he had the same gearing in both trucks. I haven’t heard f150 with a complaint with the 2.7 and guys I personally know have come from a 5.0 or 3.5 to the 2.7l.

 

[AcesandEights]

I don't know how quick it is, sounds like it's not going to be here until summer.

 

[Beach_Bum]

I think paying the $1895 for the 2.7L is an absolute steal, provided you want the 10 speed automatic.

I agree that it is a bargain. But lately, I have been thinking of sticking with the 2.3L for my particular use case. I'm getting the 2-dr with rear seat delete and won't be towing. I'm also a very conservative driver. In the 17 years that I've had my Jeep, I can say with certainty that I've never had it over 3500 rpms. I'm a notorious slow-poke even being chided for being in Grandpa Gear even though I'm not a grandpa. I want to get the 2.7L if only for the better resale, but I feel that it will likely be wasted and unnecessary.

 

[BroncoBoi]

I agree that it is a bargain. But lately, I have been thinking of sticking with the 2.3L for my particular use case. I'm getting the 2-dr with rear seat delete and won't be towing. I'm also a very conservative driver. In the 17 years that I've had my Jeep, I can say with certainty that I've never had it over 3500 rpms. I'm a notorious slow-poke even being chided for being in Grandpa Gear even though I'm not a grandpa. I want to get the 2.7L if only for the better resale, but I feel that it will likely be wasted and unnecessary.

In that use case I agree that just the 2.3L will be fine. It will most likely get better gas mileage, and if anything breaks you’ll almost definitely have more room under the hood to fix it. For my use case I’ll be super happy with the 2.7L ?

 

[csj]

Plus the current notion is performance parts will probably be available for the Bronco 2.7, maybe including a factory upgrade. Supposedly with the 2.7 its relatively easy to improve the performance.

 

[Mustang_75_99]

I agree that it is a bargain. But lately, I have been thinking of sticking with the 2.3L for my particular use case. I'm getting the 2-dr with rear seat delete and won't be towing. I'm also a very conservative driver. In the 17 years that I've had my Jeep, I can say with certainty that I've never had it over 3500 rpms. I'm a notorious slow-poke even being chided for being in Grandpa Gear even though I'm not a grandpa. I want to get the 2.7L if only for the better resale, but I feel that it will likely be wasted and unnecessary.

We have a 17 Explorer with the 2.3l, it is plenty! It is not gonna win any races but has plenty of power to pass. I have also pulled my 18 foot boat with it. In sport mode it really comes alive for being a small engine in a big vehicle.

Seriously, my 1997 F150 with 4.6 had just over 210 hp and just under 300 ft/lbs not sure why people are concerned that something with around 300 in both hp and torque isn’t gonna be enough.

But I am getting the 2.7...because it is a steal of an upgrade!

Sponsored