2023 Ranger Raptor 3.0L EB V6 Confirmed - Hello Warthog!

Td66

Wildtrak
Well-Known Member
First Name
Brad
Joined
May 5, 2021
Messages
123
Reaction score
246
Location
Calhoun, Louisiana
Vehicle(s)
Toyota 4 runner, 2 Mazda 3s
Bronco
Wildtrak
Clubs
 
I was unaware the 2.7 makes 316 stock whp. I can see how the torque gains are possible as I had a 2.5 WRX tune 415. I would consider 50/100 to be more reasonable until long term testing could prove otherwise. Also, take into consideration, I am just an amateur who will leave tuning the new Bronco up to the professionals. I may slap on a few after market parts in my garage, but I no longer want to log or change mappings.
Advertisement

 

GrayGhostDog

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2020
Messages
74
Reaction score
57
Location
New York
Vehicle(s)
F150 Raptor
Bronco
Badlands
Obviously you will get more gains on e30-e85 but these gains on a stock turbo vehicle are fairly common with a tune.

1620765908241.png


1620765915113.png


1620765924565.png
Those graphs do not address what I mentioned in my comments(engine internals/transmission/fuel eco)... I personally have several printouts like this over the years... probably buried in a storage container. I'll start off with this... the vehicle(s) above appear to be tuned for 93 octane, where as the stock program may be adaptable and can take as low as 87 octane. My present vehicle can take between 87 to 91 octane(or is it 93 octane? I can't recall, but that's what I use anyway). I prefer to keep this ability just in case there is a situation that premium fuel is not available. Next is durability and reliability... unless you are capable of keeping track of tuned vehicles vs. stock, you will most likely not know of any issues. It's why when I'm checking things online I take it with a grain of salt. A lot of dishonest individuals out there... and that includes tuners... and manufacturers, for that matter.

I don't tune anymore... or CAI's... throttle bodies... headers... etc. ... especially a daily driver and one that I plan on taking off the beaten path. The hp/tq numbers on these Bronco powerplants are more than I was expecting and respectable, as is for me. When you get your rig tuned keep us posted.
 

lobbs611

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
1,572
Reaction score
4,460
Location
Independence, MO
Vehicle(s)
19 Cherokee Trailhawk
Bronco
Badlands
Clubs
 
We already know the Warthog will be “ wider”, so it only makes sense the extra width is to accommodate a larger motor. The 3.0 won’t be available in the current Bronco platform due to chassis size.
tenor (13).gif


The 3.0L motor is the same physical size as the 2.7L. They are based on the same engine block with the difference being completely internal for a larger bore. The Warthog isn't wider in the way you are imagining. The width between the fenders will be identical to the other Broncos. The extra width will be added from the fenders out to cover the longer travel suspension that will push the wheels/tires further out.
 

lobbs611

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
1,572
Reaction score
4,460
Location
Independence, MO
Vehicle(s)
19 Cherokee Trailhawk
Bronco
Badlands
Clubs
 
But for real though the Ranger Raptor has my curiosity piqued. If the Bronco keeps getting pushed back and for whatever reasons they don't have nearly the issues with getting the Ranger up to speed to where they both look likely to be in nearly the same window...I could make cases with going for either one.
 

BOT_ROCKET

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Tyler
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
74
Location
Omaha
Vehicle(s)
17 Fusion Sport, 90 Fox 5.0 Lx Hatch, 99 Honda
Bronco
Badlands
We already know the Warthog will be “ wider”, so it only makes sense the extra width is to accommodate a larger motor. The 3.0 won’t be available in the current Bronco platform due to chassis size.
I'm sure I'm not the first to say this, but...

The 3.0L is the same size as the 2.7L that is already in it. It's the same engine, slightly bored and stroked, and the turbos are reamed out a bit to fit bigger compressor wheels.

Just fyi, for anyone that has a 2.7, you can plop on 3.0 turbos for big gains.
 
Last edited:

BOT_ROCKET

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Tyler
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
74
Location
Omaha
Vehicle(s)
17 Fusion Sport, 90 Fox 5.0 Lx Hatch, 99 Honda
Bronco
Badlands
Those graphs do not address what I mentioned in my comments(engine internals/transmission/fuel eco)... I personally have several printouts like this over the years... probably buried in a storage container. I'll start off with this... the vehicle(s) above appear to be tuned for 93 octane, where as the stock program may be adaptable and can take as low as 87 octane. My present vehicle can take between 87 to 91 octane(or is it 93 octane? I can't recall, but that's what I use anyway). I prefer to keep this ability just in case there is a situation that premium fuel is not available.
A tuned ecoboost can run a lower octane as well. It does it the same way a stock tune does. It detects knock, then backs the timing off to a safe point. It's called the Octane Adjust Ratio (OAR) or Learned Octane Ratio (LOR).
 

GrayGhostDog

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2020
Messages
74
Reaction score
57
Location
New York
Vehicle(s)
F150 Raptor
Bronco
Badlands
A tuned ecoboost can run a lower octane as well. It does it the same way a stock tune does. It detects knock, then backs the timing off to a safe point. It's called the Octane Adjust Ratio (OAR) or Learned Octane Ratio (LOR).
I'm not going to say I do not believe you, but I will respectfully say that I would need confirmation of that. I can only go on my experiences with tuning and the last vehicle I performed tunes to(about 10 years ago... both on rollers and via e-mail/canned) did not retain the OEM's octane adaptability. I also should mention that I do not have personal experience with Ecoboost tuning, although my present vehicle has the 3.5 H.O. ... and is serving me well, as is. I have nothing against tuning, but it is not for me anymore and find my money better spent in other areas.
 

BOT_ROCKET

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Tyler
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
74
Location
Omaha
Vehicle(s)
17 Fusion Sport, 90 Fox 5.0 Lx Hatch, 99 Honda
Bronco
Badlands
I'm not going to say I do not believe you, but I will respectfully say that I would need confirmation of that. I can only go on my experiences with tuning and the last vehicle I performed tunes to(about 10 years ago... both on rollers and via e-mail/canned) did not retain the OEM's octane adaptability. I also should mention that I do not have personal experience with Ecoboost tuning, although my present vehicle has the 3.5 H.O. ... and is serving me well, as is. I have nothing against tuning, but it is not for me anymore and find my money better spent in other areas.
I doubt you would want to run 85 if you're on a 93 tune, but I know there are a lot of safety measures in place that make tuning a lot less likely to grenade an engine (which is why email tunes are possible now).

I leave my tuner plugged in so I can use it as a gauge. One of my gauges I have displayed is the OAR so I can monitor if I get a bad tank of gas. The OAR has a range of -1 to +1. I don't know what happens if it drops below the minimum value, though.

If you're happy with how fast your vehicle is, it doesn't make any difference to me if you choose not to tune, though. I just wanted to share the knowledge that I've learned from being a tuning guinea pig for two different tuners and having a growing interest in starting to tune myself.
 

GrayGhostDog

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2020
Messages
74
Reaction score
57
Location
New York
Vehicle(s)
F150 Raptor
Bronco
Badlands
I doubt you would want to run 85 if you're on a 93 tune, but I know there are a lot of safety measures in place that make tuning a lot less likely to grenade an engine (which is why email tunes are possible now).

I leave my tuner plugged in so I can use it as a gauge. One of my gauges I have displayed is the OAR so I can monitor if I get a bad tank of gas. The OAR has a range of -1 to +1. I don't know what happens if it drops below the minimum value, though.

If you're happy with how fast your vehicle is, it doesn't make any difference to me if you choose not to tune, though. I just wanted to share the knowledge that I've learned from being a tuning guinea pig for two different tuners and having a growing interest in starting to tune myself.
I'm one that does appreciate the shared knowledge, but I am not new to tuning. Email tunes have been a thing for quite a bit now. You were stating that tuning today has the ability to mimic the adaptable octane rate capability of a stock tune... if that's the case, then that's a great thing and I would surely investigate. I can only go by my experiences and findings, so once I tuned for a specific octane rating(as high as say 93) that was the minimum I was required to use. I do not know the OAR spread between 87 to 93 octane or the ramifications of using lower rated gas on a specific tune. For all I know, the vehicle could probably run decently on fuel rated at 87... from my understanding at that time was once the new programming was installed, the vehicle did not retain its octane adaptability and they were incapable of creating similar feature...

I could also be wrong here, but Ford Performance does have calibration kits for a few vehicles and I would like to clarify what their warranty is covering @ 3yrs/36k miles... powertrain? If that's the case, that appears to be a REDUCTION from the original powertrain warranty of some vehicles. I'm sure there are a few tuners out there that include guarantees and warranties on their calibrations, but what about others?
 

BOT_ROCKET

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Tyler
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
74
Location
Omaha
Vehicle(s)
17 Fusion Sport, 90 Fox 5.0 Lx Hatch, 99 Honda
Bronco
Badlands
I'm one that does appreciate the shared knowledge, but I am not new to tuning. Email tunes have been a thing for quite a bit now. You were stating that tuning today has the ability to mimic the adaptable octane rate capability of a stock tune... if that's the case, then that's a great thing and I would surely investigate. I can only go by my experiences and findings, so once I tuned for a specific octane rating(as high as say 93) that was the minimum I was required to use. I do not know the OAR spread between 87 to 93 octane or the ramifications of using lower rated gas on a specific tune. For all I know, the vehicle could probably run decently on fuel rated at 87... from my understanding at that time was once the new programming was installed, the vehicle did not retain its octane adaptability and they were incapable of creating similar feature...

I could also be wrong here, but Ford Performance does have calibration kits for a few vehicles and I would like to clarify what their warranty is covering @ 3yrs/36k miles... powertrain? If that's the case, that appears to be a REDUCTION from the original powertrain warranty of some vehicles. I'm sure there are a few tuners out there that include guarantees and warranties on their calibrations, but what about others?
I don't know if it can "mimic" the factory flexibility, nor do I know how flexible it is. I know I can run 91 in my 93 tune without concern. My point was merely that running a lower octane than what the tune is targeted at doesn't have the same catastrophic consequences it once did in the past. I still return to stock for long road trips, though.
 

ekim

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Aug 16, 2020
Messages
148
Reaction score
399
Location
NJ
Vehicle(s)
Jeep TJ, Ford Excursion
Bronco
Badlands
It's reasonable to desire a bit of longevity out of an engine and transmission combination of around five to ten years.
I would say 20+ years for a well maintained rig!!!

I have 2000 Jeep, 2002 Excursion, 2007 Odyssey, 2005 Accord. If I thought the new Bronco was going to need major surgery in 5-10 years then I'd just buy a Jeep....
 

Sgt Beavis

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Rick
Joined
Jul 14, 2020
Messages
124
Reaction score
227
Location
Colorado
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ford Raptor, 2018 Jeep Wrangler Sport S.
Bronco
Badlands
I'm sure I'm not the first to say this, but...

The 3.0L is the same size as the 2.7L that is already in it. It's the same engine, slightly bored and stroked, and the turbos are reamed out a bit to fit bigger compressor wheels.

Just fyi, for anyone that has a 2.7, you can plop on 3.0 turbos for big gains.
I got a bit of a laugh when I read his statement on width.

Anyways, the 3L EB is intriguing. Also, I wonder if the Ranger Raptor will be more of a baja style truck like it's bigger brother or will it be more attuned to overlanding or trail running like the current Ranger Raptor. Either way, It's going to be a little harder to decide between this and the Warthog.
 

BOT_ROCKET

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Tyler
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
74
Location
Omaha
Vehicle(s)
17 Fusion Sport, 90 Fox 5.0 Lx Hatch, 99 Honda
Bronco
Badlands
I got a bit of a laugh when I read his statement on width.

Anyways, the 3L EB is intriguing. Also, I wonder if the Ranger Raptor will be more of a baja style truck like it's bigger brother or will it be more attuned to overlanding or trail running like the current Ranger Raptor. Either way, It's going to be a little harder to decide between this and the Warthog.
I agree. If they put a 3.0 in the Ranger, that'll make it a lot harder for me to chose. It'll probably come down to whether I care more about the bed or the bigger back seats.
 

Raptor911

Wildtrak
Well-Known Member
First Name
Raptor911
Joined
Jun 17, 2020
Messages
2,929
Reaction score
7,195
Location
Broadlands, VA
Vehicle(s)
2021 Code Orange Raptor
Bronco
Wildtrak
Answer this question, the 3.0 is based on the 2.7 yet why did Ford not give the 3.0 port injection?

GRRRRR!
 
Advertisement

 
Advertisement
Top