4 cylinder 4 door? Really?

[OX1]

Not in my experience. Rear main on at least on of my 302s went so bad the motor seized. Good news, repaired it and it ran fine afterwards, but still left me stranded. Cars are just much more reliable now than they were 10, 20 or 30 years ago. It is harder to work on them in your garage and there are certainly designs and mechanical issues that are bad on occasion and cause expensive or catastrophic failures at times, but that has happened, regardless of the manufacturer or decade. I don't see the 2.3 being any less mechanically durable than an "old school" 302 or 351 (btw, the 351M and 400 derivative were often plagued with mechanical issues as well).

351m/400's run for years with literally ZERO oil pressure @ idle. C6's runs for quite some time with some water in them (been there done that, with strawberry milkshakes common back the mudding days), new tran's are all finicky many times (even brand new), if EXACT correct oil is not changed out, often.

Your in LALA land if you think a 2.3 ECO is going to be running just fine, basically doing almost nothing to it, 42 years from now, like my 79.

2.7 Fusions have a mysterious shutdown problem. No codes, no record of it at all in PCM. Nothing comes up in live data, or any modules outside of the PCM either, several of us (myself included) and several dealers have checked. Mine did it twice last month, but hadn't done it in over a year and a half. As I said, if you get a bad one, you are screwed.

Sponsored

 

[swanjonson]

I’m in New England. Any modern engine SHOULD outlast the body.

That is the truth. Just sold my '07 FJ. Mechanics were solid. Frame, as solid as Swiss cheese can be.

 

[toughtoaster]

I ordered a 4 door 4 cylinder 7MT Badlands so I’ll let y’all know how it goes. I’m thinking the 4.7 rear gears will make pushing it around not that big of an issue due to mechanical advantage and what not. Let’s hope I don’t have to eat crow.

 

[niknailor]

Oh good, glad to see this thread's still alive and kicking

EDIT: Please stop feeding the trolls, my dudes.

 

[OX1]

Oh good, glad to see this thread's still alive and kicking

You could have 10 more of these, UGH!!! If I wanted to know, I'd tell her

https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/threads/what-does-your-wife-think-of-the-new-bronco.3584/

 

[VoltageDrop]

Ford's newest 4-door vehicle has a zero-cylinder. That must be sooooo slow

 

[Rogues Gambit]

Oh good, glad to see this thread's still alive and kicking

EDIT: Please stop feeding the trolls, my dudes.

This the thread that never ends~
It goes going on and on, my friends~

 

[niknailor]

Your in LALA land if you think a 2.3 ECO is going to be running just fine, basically doing almost nothing to it, 42 years from now, like my 79.

You could have 10 more of these, UGH!!! If I wanted to know, I'd tell her

https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/threads/what-does-your-wife-think-of-the-new-bronco.3584/

This the thread that never ends~
It goes going on and on, my friends~

Some people...started FUDing it not knowing what it was...
And they'll just keep on FUDing it forever just because~

 

[Username_not_found]

Boy good thing I don't respect this forum's consensus opinions at all; otherwise you all would probably have me feeling bad about getting a 4 door, non-squatched, 2.3L, auto. I'll enjoy driving my underpowered, lifted Ford Flex schoolbus for 20,000 miles until the engine blows while simultaneously I get t-boned for not having enough power to clear an intersection fast enough.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I really don't care for working on newer vehicles. For ease of repair if there is a direction to make it easier they generally (IMO) go in the opposite direction as much as they can.

That is one of the reasons I went 2.3. It is like a friggin 1940's tractor engine with the intake is just slapped on the side but no exhaust manifold. Only real difference is the spark plugs and coils are in a neat row down the center and manifold gaskets will never blow out. No DOHC V6 or V8 shoehorned in there.

While IMO it isn't super ideal for a DIY friendly rig for not ever even seeing one in real life I think the Bronco is probably going to be about as good as as an SUV is going to get at least from Ford.

I like my old 302, she has done right by me. Very easy to modify into whatever you want. Although it is swapped into a small engine bay it was never intended for it is still pleasantly polite to service/repair while being caveman crude to troubleshoot. Gets decent mileage too, on par with most new midsizes lol.

 

[Butzy]

Oh good, glad to see this thread's still alive and kicking

EDIT: Please stop feeding the trolls, my dudes.

My man, you don’t have to look or reply.

 

[DrewBronc21]

I agree % people keep saying horsepower and torque.....blah blah blah. The old 289s and 302s are way stronger and more durable than any modern engine. The components are stronger. Just because an engine can put up high numbers on a dyno, doesn't make it a durable engine. I personally wanted a 2.7L mansquatch but that combo isn't available as we all know. I settled for a black diamond with smaller wheels because I want the manual transmission but want to limit the stress to this little engine.

plenty of old 100 hp gutless lifted Toyotas On 35s or bigger out there running for 30 years. I’m sure the little 2.3 will do just fine even when squatched

 

[timhood]

People have a very romantic view of older cars.

This. People forget that rebuilding an engine was a regular thing and that a car with 100K miles was ready for the scrap heap. So many cars had replacement engines. I remember when the auto parts stores would prominently offer rebuilt engine swaps. I've never worn out an engine in any vehicle I've ever owned, including the ones that were handed down to kids. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 cylinders--no difference.

 

[noahr]

The Bronco looks big and heavy - even as a 2 door - is anyone actually interested in the 4 cylinder in the 4 door?

I just don't see a turbo 4 cylinder holding up for 100k plus miles. I actually love 4 cylinders as I'm not concerned about horsepower and speed, and more interested in economy and so when I saw you could only get a 7 speed with the 4 cylinder I didn't think I'd want the V6 anyway.

Even though I'm only interested in the 2 door, now I'm second guessing if the 2.3 turbo is enough. With the ergonomics and all the off-road running gear I'd bet that the fuel economy between the 4 and 6 cylinders won't be a tipping point one way or another.

I'm really hoping between now and December Ford decides to offer the V6 with a manual transmission - I can't imagine its and engineering issue. Only thing I can think is with a manual trans there would be no point in the GOAT modes so it's more of a marketing issue.

I'd like a Base 2door, V6, 7 speed, 'squatch, with the LED headlamps.

If I have to get an automatic to get the V6 then I do want the GOAT modes and then I'm looking at a Wildtrack? Or a badlands (which I don't think comes with the V6)?

Dude this engine and transmission powers the freaking ranger truck you will be fine and all broncos have led headlights, i see why they didn't put signature lights on all trims but it still kinda stinks

 

[TJconvert2.7]

The 2.7L does zero to 60 quicker than a 2005 Porsche Boxster.

so, there’s that.

Also faster than a Ferrari 308, as quick as an 88 328

The 2.7L bronco is faster than an 80s vette.

Sponsored