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

[TJconvert2.7]

Okay, for maybe the pettiest question on this forum:

is There going to be a stigma with the 2.3?

back in 03 I can remember being in stopped beach traffic in a topless 4cyl wrangler, and from a second floor bar balcony some random dude started heckling me asking if my Jeep got good gas mileage and shit.

I really think the 2.3 will be more than enough.
$1895 does seem like a good deal for an engine upgrade, but it is $31/mo. That’s a couple 30 racks of beer at Basket.

Is the 2.3 a/t going to have a stigma to it?

Sponsored

 

[Wanted33]

Okay, for maybe the pettiest question on this forum:

is There going to be a stigma with the 2.3?

back in 03 I can remember being in stopped beach traffic in a topless 4cyl wrangler, and from a second floor bar balcony some random dude started heckling me asking if my Jeep got good gas mileage and shit.

I really think the 2.3 will be more than enough.
$1895 does seem like a good deal for an engine upgrade, but it is $31/mo. That’s a couple 30 racks of beer at Basket.

Is the 2.3 a/t going to have a stigma to it?

The 2.3L will make you a fine engine. The one in my little Ranger is a breast in disguise. If someone says anything, just give the "little engine that could" full pedal. All they'll see is your license plate. I had all plans to go with the 2.3L, and be happy. But at my age this will probably be the last new vehicle I'll buy (probably), and I wanted the 2.7L just because.

 

[dejones64]

the 2.3L 4 cyl has more power than the 351 V8 that came in the Bronco 25 years ago

This is what I was going to say, especially with turbo.

I ordered a 2-dr Badlands with 2.3L Manual.

 

[linbackr99]

Okay, for maybe the pettiest question on this forum:

is There going to be a stigma with the 2.3?

back in 03 I can remember being in stopped beach traffic in a topless 4cyl wrangler, and from a second floor bar balcony some random dude started heckling me asking if my Jeep got good gas mileage and shit.

I really think the 2.3 will be more than enough.
$1895 does seem like a good deal for an engine upgrade, but it is $31/mo. That’s a couple 30 racks of beer at Basket.

Is the 2.3 a/t going to have a stigma to it?

IMO the 2.3 is an great plant. If I was not going with the Wildtrak I would 100% stick with the 2.3 . . . my son has a 19 Ranger 4x4 crew with the 2.3, 4" lift and 35's and it is more than enough . . . I drive the truck once a week to keep a few limes off the Raptor (60 miles round trip to work) and it has all kinds of get-up-and-go. What Ford - and others I'm sure - have done with these smaller engines is incredible and you can't go wrong as far as I am concerned!

 

[thecaptain]

Did enough research on both engines to come to the conclusion that both are good motors. The 2.3 has more than enough horsepower and torque to make it a good choice no matter the application. My mechanic runs the 2.3 in a Ranger, and he has had good things to say about it. Some of the early versions had head gasket issues, but those have apparently been ironed out to a large degree. Carbon deposits can be an issue, but regular maintenance should keep those problems to a minimum. Overall, the 2.3 gets good reviews.

That said, I ended up going with the 2.7, which is the second generation of the 2.7. Why? More torque. I also read somewhere that of all the Ford engines, the 2.7 has the fewest warranty claims. Normally, I take stuff like that on the internet with a grain of salt, but it dovetails with my other research on the engine, so I believe it. My mechanic also gave it the thumbs up -- says it's a good, solid engine. It's also got port injection rather than DI, which helps with carbon buildup.

Bottom line is that they're both good engines in general. It all depends on whether you want to spend the extra $$ to get the advantages of the 2.7 (bigger engine, more horses, more torque, port injection, etc.).

 

[GoldenKnight]

After buying a 4 cylinder Malibu in 2007 I've landed firmly in the bigger is always better camp. It's an underpowered turd and I hate it lol. Of course engines have come a long way since then even. Pretty sure it's only got like 169 HP

 

[11Bronco1776]

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?

If you arent going manual get the 2.7. I went manual so forced into the 2.3 It's a great engine per some of the video reviews at koh. However, if you're sticking auto it seems a no brainer almost to get the 2.7. That also has excellent remarks all around and the upcharge is minimal.

 

[Erock]

Thought the bra was the disguise...

 

[Wanted33]

It will see my local XPel installer for sure. That flat grill is gonna take a beating on the highway as we plan on some long road trips, and finding some back road and trails along the way.

 

[TJconvert2.7]

After buying a 4 cylinder Malibu in 2007 I've landed firmly in the bigger is always better camp. It's an underpowered turd and I hate it lol. Of course engines have come a long way since then even. Pretty sure it's only got like 169 HP

It’s really crazy the difference in engines from mid 2000s to ten years later. 04 mustang gt I think was 210hp, jump to 15 and it’s double?

* 210 didn’t sound right, 260 to 420 in ten years or less. Still impressive to me

 

[Onthegas]

I want the manual, so be the 2.3.

 

[Virtual-Chris]

It’s really crazy the difference in engines from mid 2000s to ten years later. 04 mustang gt I think was 210hp, jump to 15 and it’s double?

* 210 didn’t sound right, 260 to 420 in ten years or less. Still impressive to me

So true... I look back at some of the SUVs I've owned in the past and although the power seemed fine at the time, it's laughable by today's standards.

I had a 2001 BMW X5 4.4l v8 which I thought was a monster powerful vehicle and it had 280HP and 320FTLb of Torque. That's basically the same as the 2.3L Bronco!

At any rate, as good as the 2.3L is, the 2.7 seems like a tremendously good value.

 

[TJconvert2.7]

So true... I look back at some of the SUVs I've owned in the past and although the power seemed fine at the time, it's laughable by today's standards.

I had a 2001 BMW X5 4.4l v8 which I thought was a monster powerful vehicle and it had 280HP and 320FTLb of Torque. That's basically the same as the 2.3L Bronco!

At any rate, as good as the 2.3L is, the 2.7 seems like a tremendously good value.

I always wanted an x5, I’ll settle for knowing an ex owner is impressed with the power train in my bronco... if it ever comes

Sponsored