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

[71to21-2DR]

Here is what I would say, and its advice I have always got. "You will never say, man I wish I had LESS horesepower." You will always be searching for more. And for $2,000 it will leave you with no regrets.

Nobody’s mentioned towing? That’s why I want the 2.7, Plus that’s what all the F1 50s have, and my friends that on them love that motor ! Also, I can’t understand why the F1 50 tows
a shit load of weight but these Broncos can’t tow anything. isn’t it Is it the same motor?

Sponsored

 

[Skeeterjack]

Go big or go home i always say. Unless you get the 2.3 and do a tune later.

 

[BigHoof]

Nobody’s mentioned towing? That’s why I want the 2.7, Plus that’s what all the F1 50s have, and my friends that on them love that motor ! Also, I can’t understand why the F1 50 tows
a shit load of weight but these Broncos can’t tow anything. isn’t it Is it the same motor?

It's the platform itself, not the motor, that is the limiting factor for towing in this case.

 

[smrpilot]

Youngin's, gotta love 'em. The "V" came into the auto world way back when Chevy came out with the 8 cylinder engine. The block was shaped in a "V" with 4 pistons on each side of the block. The term "inline", i.e. "inline 6" means the pistons form a straight line in the engine head. So, when using the vernacular of yesteryear I think the 2.3L should be called an "inline 4."

Don't forget about the Ford 292/312 "Y" block. Torquey for their day, good motors. There's still a pair of potholes in a old buddies neighborhood where I did a granny gear smokeshow 25 years ago.

 

[smrpilot]

I've had the 3.5l in my 2017 F150. It was pretty nice. Decent mileage and went good. I had a modded 2019 2.3l mustang. Intercooler, downpipe, Bov, exhaust, plugs, filter and custom tune that took a while to dial in... It was quick... 330rwhp, 395 rwtq. 10 speed. Was still decent on gas. Now I have a 2.3 Ranger..10 speed. Stock it was impressive. Got about 25 mpg.. pretty quick. Then I got the 2.5" level and 33's. Now it feels doggish and gets about 19mpg. Putting in sport feels a bit better. But the tires did have a big effect on the get up and go... And mpg. Thus knowing this I went for the 2.7. I think it'll get around the same mileage as a modded ranger. But feel better with the gearing and the big jump in TQ. I'd expect both motors to get around the same mileage when 33's+ figure into the power ratio. But the 2.7 to feel better while doing it.

@SnowBronco, what gears are in your Ranger?

 

[Wanted33]

Forgot something....the gifys!!

@618TRVLWILD My kinda woman Ash. Oops, should I have posted this............IDK.......oh what the hell. I gotta be me.

Oh yeeeeeeah, I started this thread. Y'all can post anything you want in any of my threads. Tain't no fun atall if the peanut gallery doesn't respond.

 

[SnowBronco]

@SnowBronco, what gears are in your Ranger?

Pretty sure it's 3.73. I'll have to look at the window sticker.

 

[Wanted33]

OP,
After 17 pages, has anyone convinced you what to get?

@RBF 1401, Tricia, many here have given some good advise, and suggestions in this thread. So, after much deliberation, hair pulling, gnashing of teeth, and several sleepless nights I went with the 2.7L. There is really no solid reasoning behind that decision as I'm quite sure both engines will do the job admirability. It was more because I just wanted the 2.7L than anything else.

 

[smrpilot]

Pretty sure it's 3.73. I'll have to look at the window sticker.

Thanks, that was what I was guessing too. Pretty tall gears once you start adding tire and wind drag. I think the 2.3 MT with the 4.7's behind it are going to be a different animal, and the Auto with 4.46's should have some good pep too. The 2.7 with the 4.7's (SAS) should flat out rip.

I did drive a 2.7 F150 XLT and a loaded 2.3 Ranger both with 3.73's to try and get a sense of the difference in power before I ordered. I felt they both made really good power with as apples to apples comparison as I could get. The 2.7 did make prettier turbo whiney noises and better sound overall, and of course more power, but really not that much. In the end, I really wanted the manual (I think) and that's what I ordered. I still have one foot over the fence on whether to call my dealer and tell him to change my order to a 2.7 SAS.

 

[BAUS67]

This is a discussion (forum) place. Not a "answer one guy's question" place. Discussion helps many others with similar questions, and offers many things to think about. Useless joke comments and Memes are what make this forum quite frustrating for someone not camped out here to just get likes for how funny they are. Most repliers with high post counts clutter up every thread so that a person seeking info has to spend much more time hunting for "information" and ignoring the "funny comment" posts.

 

[Montana Bronco]

I had a few hours to burn yesterday so I stopped in a local Ford dealer. Test drove both a 2.3 Ranger and a 2.7 F150 on the same 45 minute loop. Some 2 lane country roads, some 4 lane highway, some stoplight to stoplight city driving.

I honestly could not tell a difference at all between the 2.3 and the 2.7.

YMMV, but I would be happy with either engine.

 

[NotaVegetarian]

Ok sounds good. I keep hoping for a small diesel. But I’m probably all alone on that

 

[internationlriders]

Chiming is super late here but my two cents is that the 2.3 might leave a little bit to be wanted when doing steep technical off roading for that fatter, lower torque of the 2.7. As a comparison the Jeep with the 3.6 has plenty of low end torque climbing over obstacles but I personally found the 2L turbo in the Jeep made it more difficult to get over obstacles until the turbo spooled and then you would already be moving a bit faster than desired.

 

[Compta38]

Nobody ever said "man, I wish my car had less power"...

 

[Rivers90]

I would be happy with the 4 or the 6. Both have more power then what I drive now.

Sponsored