2.7L, or 2.3L. Help me make the right decision.

[Mattwings]

I never had the 2.3 or the 2.7 but I know the 3.5 ecoboost in my 2015 F-150 will run circles around the 351W in my 74' Bronco, even with the headers, 4 barrel, 4.11's and RV cam.
But that 3.5 doesn't sound near as good!

I have a 2.7, son has a 2.3 and I spent time in several 351 Broncos. We had two as a shop trucks and a good buddy of mine had one in college (he wrecked it, with me in it, at New Years)The reason most had carb, cam, exhaust mods? The motors stock were dogs! I really think people equate sound with performance The 2.3 will likely be better performance wise than any stock Bronco before it. I would go so far as guessing the 2.3 w/Sasquatch will perform instrumented tests better than any stock Bronco before it. I don’t think a stock Bronco ever came with 33s (31s being the biggest I remember) much less 35s. The 2.7 will perform much better than any stock Bronco. If you want to modify the new motors, for the same $ you can get more performance gain than any stock Bronco, up to where you can mod a V8 with a supercharger, turbo or insane displacement and compression increases. The one and significant downside is the exhaust note.

1978 Ford Bronco 5.8L V-8 (man. 4) .
Specs datasheet with technical data and performance data plus an analysis of the direct market competition of Ford Bronco 5.8L V-8 (man. 4) in 1978, the model with 3-door sport-utility wagon body and V-8 5766 cm3 / 351.9 cui, 116 kW / 158 PS / 156 hp (SAE net) of power, 355 Nm / 262 lb-ft of torque, 4-speed manual powertrain offered since October 1977 for North America U.S.. Specifications listing with the outside and inside dimensions, fuel economy, top speed, performance factory data and ProfessCars™ estimation: this Ford would accelerate 0-60 mph in 12.3 sec, 0-100 km/h in 13.3 sec and quarter mile time is 18.7 sec.

Sponsored

 

[Gamecock]

1978 Ford Bronco 5.8L V-8 (man. 4) .
Specs datasheet with technical data and performance data plus an analysis of the direct market competition of Ford Bronco 5.8L V-8 (man. 4) in 1978, the model with 3-door sport-utility wagon body and V-8 5766 cm3 / 351.9 cui, 116 kW / 158 PS / 156 hp (SAE net) of power, 355 Nm / 262 lb-ft of torque, 4-speed manual powertrain offered since October 1977 for North America U.S.. Specifications listing with the outside and inside dimensions, fuel economy, top speed, performance factory data and ProfessCars™ estimation: this Ford would accelerate 0-60 mph in 12.3 sec, 0-100 km/h in 13.3 sec and quarter mile time is 18.7 sec.

Wow, 0-60 in 12.3? That would have to be the slowest car or truck being sold today.....

 

[Username_not_found]

I have a 2.7, son has a 2.3 and I spent time in several 351 Broncos. We had two as a shop trucks and a good buddy of mine had one in college (he wrecked it, with me in it, at New Years)The reason most had carb, cam, exhaust mods? The motors stock were dogs! I really think people equate sound with performance The 2.3 will likely be better performance wise than any stock Bronco before it. I would go so far as guessing the 2.3 w/Sasquatch will perform instrumented tests better than any stock Bronco before it. I don’t think a stock Bronco ever came with 33s (31s being the biggest I remember) much less 35s. The 2.7 will perform much better than any stock Bronco. If you want to modify the new motors, for the same $ you can get more performance gain than any stock Bronco, up to where you can mod a V8 with a supercharger, turbo or insane displacement and compression increases. The one and significant downside is the exhaust note.

1978 Ford Bronco 5.8L V-8 (man. 4) .
Specs datasheet with technical data and performance data plus an analysis of the direct market competition of Ford Bronco 5.8L V-8 (man. 4) in 1978, the model with 3-door sport-utility wagon body and V-8 5766 cm3 / 351.9 cui, 116 kW / 158 PS / 156 hp (SAE net) of power, 355 Nm / 262 lb-ft of torque, 4-speed manual powertrain offered since October 1977 for North America U.S.. Specifications listing with the outside and inside dimensions, fuel economy, top speed, performance factory data and ProfessCars™ estimation: this Ford would accelerate 0-60 mph in 12.3 sec, 0-100 km/h in 13.3 sec and quarter mile time is 18.7 sec.

Going from a 2001 Impreza RS with the deep boxer growl, to an Abarth which is the best sounding 4 banger on the market by a lot, I am still not ready for the sad 2.3L Bronco noises.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Wow, 0-60 in 12.3? That would have to be the slowest car or truck being sold today.....

*60 was also 5 over any speed limit in the US in its day...

I think the 400 was an option too, might not add much speed (just a 351M with a half inch more stroke) but a lot more torque, pretty low in the powerband too. Dad had an '80 F-350 with one, man that thing would sing beautiful songs with the gooseneck...

Going from a 2001 Impreza RS with the deep boxer growl, to an Abarth which is the best sounding 4 banger on the market by a lot, I am still not ready for the sad 2.3L Bronco noises.

I like my 4cyl tractors but IMO both 4cyl and 6cyl automotive engines are generally best seen and not heard.

 

[2fast4u]

I think the only thing worth looking at the 2.3L is the MPG. But I think they will both be within 2 mpg of each other. If that's do and it's only 1-2 mpg. Then it's 2.7L all the way

 

[BroncoZ]

It's very simple. If you want manual, get the 2.3. If you want auto, get the 2.7. If you're getting the auto, there's no real reason to get the 2.3. The 2.7 is a superior engine in every way. It also just adds $30 to your monthly payment. I think a 2dr would do great with a 2.3 manual and a 4dr with the 2.7 auto.

 

[jxc]

2.7 twin turbo - twice as much to go wrong. - 2.3 for me.

 

[gentlemanbronco]

I think it really depends how much you value acceleration and speed as a daily driver. Personally I haul ass everywhere most of the time so I really really want the 2.7....
If its not really a concern of yours, I'd say stick with the 2.3

 

[Xploit]

I need some guidance folks. My old mind keeps telling me the 2.3L engine is too small for a 4 door OBX w/10 spd auto. I'm old school (and just old also), and the thought that there's no replacement for displacement is ingrained in my way of thinking. If you can help me out here I would certainly be thankful. Do I need the 2.7L, or will the smaller 2.3L be fine?

These days most new cars haul ass. For me the 2.3 is fine. The only way I would go bigger is if it just came that way, like if I went Wildtrak to get the high package, then fine. I just decided this morning on sticking with the BB, SASQ, SIG LIGHTS and MID PKG. Was going to do the WT with HIGH PKG.. and getting the high pkg was the only reason why. I wanted the bigger screen. I decided its not that important though, so the BB is my choice.

 

[Broncomputer]

Here's my 2 cents:

If I could get the 2.7 with manual I probably would have.

That being said I don't have a choice, so 2.3 it is.

However I'm not bummed about the 2.3. It seems to have plenty power. At it's slowest it would be 0-60 in 7 seconds, which is around average. But with gearing and weight you're probably looking comfortably in the 6 second range.

Plus you have the option for a tune if needed.

 

[Big Boss]

Here's my 2 cents:

If I could get the 2.7 with manual I probably would have.

That being said I don't have a choice, so 2.3 it is.

However I'm not bummed about the 2.3. It seems to have plenty power. At it's slowest it would be 0-60 in 7 seconds, which is around average. But with gearing and weight you're probably looking comfortably in the 6 second range.

Plus you have the option for a tune if needed.

This ^

And also as I drove in to work this morning I thought to myself, since I got rid of my mustang, when was the last time I even went WOT. When I had my mustang it was alot more often lol, every vehicle since it's a rare occasion so I don't think I will be missing out on the extra power. I know it has more than enough to get out of its own way and pass easily so 2.3 it is. Would I like the 2.7 yeah, but I have other options that are more important to me

 

[Wanted33]

These days most new cars haul ass. For me the 2.3 is fine. The only way I would go bigger is if it just came that way, like if I went Wildtrak to get the high package, then fine. I just decided this morning on sticking with the BB, SASQ, SIG LIGHTS and MID PKG. Was going to do the WT with HIGH PKG.. and getting the high pkg was the only reason why. I wanted the bigger screen. I decided its not that important though, so the BB is my choice.

Good luck with that my friend. I've told myself "that's it, I'm not changing my mind again" at least a half dozen times. And dang-it, I changed it again today. This Bronco has got to be the hardest vehicle I've ever special ordered. I'll get through it for sure, but I may need therapy and medication after it's over.

 

[Wanted33]

This ^

And also as I drove in to work this morning I thought to myself, since I got rid of my mustang, when was the last time I even went WOT. When I had my mustang it was alot more often lol, every vehicle since it's a rare occasion so I don't think I will be missing out on the extra power. I know it has more than enough to get out of its own way and pass easily so 2.3 it is. Would I like the 2.7 yeah, but I have other options that are more important to me

BB, the right side of my mind (the logical side) tells me that all of the time, but then the left side (the side that causes me to do stupid things) says, noooooo go big or go home you weenie.

Sadly I may have gotten older, but the kid in me still lurks up there........Damnit.

 

[Broncomputer]

This ^

And also as I drove in to work this morning I thought to myself, since I got rid of my mustang, when was the last time I even went WOT. When I had my mustang it was alot more often lol, every vehicle since it's a rare occasion so I don't think I will be missing out on the extra power. I know it has more than enough to get out of its own way and pass easily so 2.3 it is. Would I like the 2.7 yeah, but I have other options that are more important to me

Yeah I got WOT in my Prius all the time, but that's because it's slow as hell.

It's almost dangerous how slow it is. I have to remind myself that I can't merge as quick or do certain things.

That being said I'm not buying the Bronco and driving it like a hot-hatch. As you say, as long as it's not slow to pass, and go up grades fine, then I think that's fine.

 

[Xploit]

Good luck with that my friend. I've told myself "that's it, I'm not changing my mind again" at least a half dozen times. And dang-it, I changed it again today. This Bronco has got to be the hardest vehicle I've ever special ordered. I'll get through it for sure, but I may need therapy and medication after it's over.

You are right about that, but I am finally at peace with my build. The only thing I am really walking away from is the huge screen. It's a bronco and I will leave the big screens to the teslas of the world.

Sponsored