Sponsored

buzpro

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Binky
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Threads
40
Messages
1,702
Reaction score
2,298
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
Tacoma
Your Bronco Model
Outer Banks
Clubs
 
So far we have seen zero issues attributed to lack of oil or excess oil. Seems like a non-issue whether you add 7 qts or just keep it in the marks on the stick.
Once you fry your turbo you will see the importance of correct oil levels
Sponsored

 

Dragline

First Edition
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Threads
4
Messages
439
Reaction score
995
Location
NC
Vehicle(s)
GMC Yukon Denali, GMC Sierra 1500, Honda Civic, Chevy C3500
Your Bronco Model
First Edition
Once you fry your turbo you will see the importance of correct oil levels
How many turbos have been reported as fried so far?
 

broncorik

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Rob
Joined
Mar 7, 2020
Threads
51
Messages
1,761
Reaction score
2,349
Location
91320
Vehicle(s)
Bronco
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
How many turbos have been reported as fried so far?
Overfilling the crankcase on anything turboed could potentially create excess oil misting in the pcv system (among other bad things like aeration)...nothing bad would likely happen immediately but over time the turbos could suck oil and that would in turn create havoc on the vanes/in the intake/etc. The fun part will be for Ford to try and shoot down warranty claims if oil level is found to be "under" or "over" because as it is now the manual says 7 quart capacity but the stick reads full at 6...and with that direct contradiction, not sure which way they will go with (probably whichever way prevents them from paying for anything). Underfulling by a quart may potentially become an issue if the vehicle is at an extreme angle (nose down or side to side), or just overall in terms of time it takes for oil to need a change from degradation. Either way, it shouldn't be that tough for Ford to issue us all some factual information on whether we should fill to 7 and forget the stick/re-mark it OR fill to the max line and disregard the 7 (we can't have both...unless the Bronco is meant to have the oil checked at exactly 10 minutes after changing oil/starting/shutting off). If the 10 minute routine is the magic piece of the puzzle, then the manual should indicate "check oil ONLY at ten minutes" and not "before starting engine" (which could mean overnight/hours after changing oil). Sheeeesh what a PITA...but I guess we can add that to our concerns about losing an engine in a much quicker fashion...like dropping a valve...
 

SPITmadFIRE

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2021
Threads
15
Messages
1,169
Reaction score
2,357
Location
CA
Vehicle(s)
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
Clubs
 
searched the thread for 2.3L and only found one reference to the manual specifying 6.2 quarts for it — is this inaccurate as well, or was only the 2.7L manual misprinted?
 

buzpro

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Binky
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Threads
40
Messages
1,702
Reaction score
2,298
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
Tacoma
Your Bronco Model
Outer Banks
Clubs
 
How many turbos have been reported as fried so far?
obviously too early to tell on the Bronco .... but in general wrong oil levels wreck havoc on turbos
 

Sponsored

buzpro

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Binky
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Threads
40
Messages
1,702
Reaction score
2,298
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
Tacoma
Your Bronco Model
Outer Banks
Clubs
 
I have not in 2.5 years of development heard of any issues with the capacity being where it’s at. It’s been 7 quarts for the entire program and these vehicles were put through intense and rough abuse. Not only in the field but on a dyno. It’s fine.
changed my oil at 1600 miles and drained more than 7.5 liters out of my Bronco. That's 7.9 quarts at a minimum. So tell me how good that program is again please!

Ford Bronco Bronco Team Engineering Confirms 7.0 Quarts for 2.7L Engine Oil Change is Correct IMG-8020


Ford Bronco Bronco Team Engineering Confirms 7.0 Quarts for 2.7L Engine Oil Change is Correct IMG-8021
 

broncorik

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Rob
Joined
Mar 7, 2020
Threads
51
Messages
1,761
Reaction score
2,349
Location
91320
Vehicle(s)
Bronco
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
I have not in 2.5 years of development heard of any issues with the capacity being where it’s at. It’s been 7 quarts for the entire program and these vehicles were put through intense and rough abuse. Not only in the field but on a dyno. It’s fine.
If the program has been in development 2.5 years hasn't that been plenty of time to also develop and include an accurate dipstick? Or was the Bronco (and only the Bronco) designed to "feature" an oil level from the factory that is halfway up the twist on the dipstick (well above the max mark cautioned against in the manual)? I doubt that anyone on the forum is concerned about the Bronco being able to FIT 7 quarts in the pan...we are just asking why Ford has opted to not include a dipstick that can accurately MEASURE our oil level (with 7 quarts in the pan). As noted by several members, some service departments at Ford dealers have advised to use the marks on the stick, and not the listed capacity...and others just add the 7 quarts...so, for clarification, WHAT is fine? Dumping in 7 quarts during the oil change (and disregarding the stick entirely)? If so, couldn't Ford and the development team have added a scribe in the tool kit and told owners to use it to scratch a new line in the dipstick approximately 1/2" above the max mark cautioned against in the manual (yes that was a satirical response because clearly we should not have to be creating our own dipstick oil level indicators...or should we)? Otherwise, how exactly does an owner or person at a gas station or dealer know when the oil has dropped between changes enough to add more oil (the typical reason a dipstick exists...or should every Bronco 2.7 owner skip checking the oil level after a change)?

If anyone knows anyone at Ford (in engineering) who can clarify (and update the manual or get us accurate dipsticks if needed), it would be most appreciated. Or is having an accurate dipstick a pipe dream on a car that can cost upwards of 60k? Maybe Ford just needs a couple more years of development to figure out how to do that...
 

buzpro

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Binky
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Threads
40
Messages
1,702
Reaction score
2,298
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
Tacoma
Your Bronco Model
Outer Banks
Clubs
 
Not good enough for you quite clearly but the Bronco program I think was quite outstanding.




I am not in that department specifically but I did the field and dyno testing. Yes 7 quarts is fine. You have two options. Measure to the dipstick or measure to the specified amount. It’s clear that currently the dipstick may be inaccurate I don’t argue this since the team increased overall capacity by adding a quart, requiring a shorter dipstick, the pan is vaguely larger but just about the same size as the F-150, it’s never been a dilemma internally but something either changed or was missed on this. However 7 quarts is the spec and will not be changed, I’ve confirmed this with every single area in Ford that determines it. All I’ve heard is that an oil check procedure re-write is about the farthest this will go.

The dipstick range is 1 quart from the low to full marks. The start of the twist would be roughly around a half quart high, possibly a smidge more but not much. Again, like measuring extracted oil with generic tubs, this is definitely not scientific but roughly from my personal experience working at Ford, on this engine platform for 9 years now, that’s generally a good basis.
so if its 7 quartz then how did i get close to 8 quarts drained? some folks are saying they only got 6 quarts drained !!
are you aware of ANYONE in that department that can address this oil dip stick issue?

As @broncorik has tried to question, the oil dip stick is meant for measuring, isnt it?
 

BroncoRob_Reignited

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Rob
Joined
Oct 18, 2020
Threads
4
Messages
125
Reaction score
284
Location
GA
Vehicle(s)
2018 m240i Convertible, 2021 Bronco (pending)
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
Clubs
 
...Gut tells me engineering spec'd 7qt after the indicator was designed/approved and no one caught it. Anyway, they are "officially" aware of it and looking into it.
Have you heard anything more on this issue? Seems odd that others aren't being more vocal that the accuracy of the dip stick is in question...
 

broncorik

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Rob
Joined
Mar 7, 2020
Threads
51
Messages
1,761
Reaction score
2,349
Location
91320
Vehicle(s)
Bronco
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
Not good enough for you quite clearly but the Bronco program I think was quite outstanding.




I am not in that department specifically but I did the field and dyno testing. Yes 7 quarts is fine. You have two options. Measure to the dipstick or measure to the specified amount. It’s clear that currently the dipstick may be inaccurate I don’t argue this since the team increased overall capacity by adding a quart, requiring a shorter dipstick, the pan is vaguely larger but just about the same size as the F-150, it’s never been a dilemma internally but something either changed or was missed on this. However 7 quarts is the spec and will not be changed, I’ve confirmed this with every single area in Ford that determines it. All I’ve heard is that an oil check procedure re-write is about the farthest this will go.

The dipstick range is 1 quart from the low to full marks. The start of the twist would be roughly around a half quart high, possibly a smidge more but not much. Again, like measuring extracted oil with generic tubs, this is definitely not scientific but roughly from my personal experience working at Ford, on this engine platform for 9 years now, that’s generally a good basis.
"Good enough" (IMHO) from a manufacturer should mean addressing a detail as important as the end user's ability to accurately check oil level. At 7 quarts, my stick reads to the MIDDLE of the twist...which is about the same distance from the max mark as it is from the low mark to the add mark. That coincides roughly with what you shared (so yes about a half quart to the START of the twist...full quart to the MIDDLE). That being sorted out, if a "rewrite of the oil check procedure" is the ONLY solution Ford offers, they are even less concerned about quality control than many of us imagined. If I (as a mechanic) am frustrated checking my own oil due to an inaccurate stick, imagine all the non-mechanics who rely on lube techs at dealer x and xyz lube to check oil levels and to add/maintain the proper amount. Many owners rarely if ever even open their hoods or turn wrenches, which is to be expected, but new cars are supposed to be designed with at least some degree of accuracy so that whoever maintains them has a reference point. Ford can certainly send us a big sticker (to save money) that says "please disregard the manual and add 7 quarts," but unless they send new sticks, how will those who maintain the vehicles MONITOR oil usage? By measuring how far the oil is from somewhere in the middle of the twist and then estimating when it is time to add? Not gonna happen at most places/for most people. If Ford at least lets us know we need to re-index the stick, that would be better than nothing.

As for the new pan, which is supposedly "more capable for off road adventures," that claim is doubtful. First, regardless of the 7 quart capacity, the oil level for some reason is now much higher than it is on the F150 (if you compare the F150 2.7 dipstick to the Bronco 2.7 stick, note that the FULL level on the F150 stick is much lower than even the actual incorrect MAX mark on the Bronco). That means the Bronco oil level, especially as high as ours is, is much closer to rotating components. When the Bronco is climbing or descending, oil can potentially aerate as it contacts the crank assembly. Second, if Ford wanted to make the pan more off road worthy, they would have simply added baffles and/or a windage tray...which would keep oil in the sump during even extreme angles. As is, when reviewing the pictures of the "improved" pan, it appears as though someone thought it would be cool to produce a pan that simply holds another quart. Without a windage tray or baffles, that extra quart makes little difference especially at angles at which the sump is angles upward. For those of you who don't wrench much or go in depth into oiling characteristics, having no baffle in a 7 quart pan is about as effective for off roading as it would be to have a 64 oz drink versus a 48 oz drink but having a straw that reaches only 1 inch into either cup of liquid...the end result is that if you tip either the 64 or 48 oz drink too far, you will suck nothing but air.

All that aside, can't Ford at least publicly acknowledge their dipstick blunder and offer their "solution?" I won't hold my breath for a baffled pan or a windage tray because that design would cost them a couple of dollars more per pan...and we know they wouldn't want that...so most folks would be wise to go with an extended warranty in case issues arise down the road.
 
Last edited:

Sponsored

buzpro

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Binky
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Threads
40
Messages
1,702
Reaction score
2,298
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
Tacoma
Your Bronco Model
Outer Banks
Clubs
 
"Good enough" (IMHO) from a manufacturer should mean addressing a detail as important as the end user's ability to accurately check oil level. At 7 quarts, my stick reads to the MIDDLE of the twist...which is about the same distance from the max mark as it is from the low mark to the add mark. That coincides roughly with what you shared (so yes about a half quart to the START of the twist...full quart to the MIDDLE). That being sorted out, if a "rewrite of the oil check procedure" is the ONLY solution Ford offers, they are even less concerned about quality control than many of us imagined. If I (as a mechanic) am frustrated checking my own oil due to an inaccurate stick, imagine all the non-mechanics who rely on lube techs at dealer x and xyz lube to check oil levels and to add/maintain the proper amount. Many owners rarely if ever even open their hoods or turn wrenches, which is to be expected, but new cars are supposed to be designed with at least some degree of accuracy so that whoever maintains them has a reference point. Ford can certainly send us a big sticker (to save money) that says "please disregard the manual and add 7 quarts," but unless they send new sticks, how will those who maintain the vehicles MONITOR oil usage? By measuring how far the oil is from somewhere in the middle of the twist and then estimating when it is time to add? Not gonna happen at most places/for most people. If Ford at least let's us know we need to re-index the stick, that would be better than nothing.

As for the new pan, which is supposedly "more capable for off road adventures," that claim is doubtful. First, regardless of the 7 quart capacity, the oil level for some reason is now much higher than it is on the F150 (if you compare the F150 2.7 dipstick to the Bronco 2.7 stick, note that the FULL level on the F150 stick is much lower than even the actual incorrect MAX mark on the Bronco). That means the Bronco oil level, especially as high as ours is, is much closer to rotating components. When the Bronco is climbing or descending, oil can potentially aerate as it contacts the crank assembly. Second, if Ford wanted to make the pan more off road worthy, they would have simply added baffles and/or a windage tray...which would keep oil in the sump during even extreme angles. As is, when reviewing the pictures of the "improved" pan, it appears as though someone thought it would be cool to produce a pan that simply holds another quart. Without a windage tray or baffles, that extra quart makes little difference especially at angles at which the sump is angles upward. For those of you who don't wrench much or go in depth into oiling characteristics, having no baffle in a 7 quart pan is about as effective for off roading as it would be to have a 64 oz drink versus a 48 oz drink but having a straw that reaches only 1 inch into the liquid...the end result is that if you tip your drink too far, you suck nothing but air.

All that aside, can't Ford at least publicly acknowledge their dipstick blunder and offer their "solution?" I won't hold my breath for a baffled pan or a windage tray because they would cost them a couple of dollars more per pan...and we know they wouldn't want that...so most folks would be wise to go with an extended warranty in case issues arise down the road.
I AGREE with %100 of what you said .... maybe if Jeep got a hold of this issue or Consumer Reports or a few car magazine Ford would actually do something about it!
 
OP
OP
flip

flip

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Base Sponsor (Level 1)
First Name
Phil
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Threads
41
Messages
4,242
Reaction score
14,103
Location
IN
Website
www.ruxerparts.com
Vehicle(s)
Fords
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
Clubs
 
Have you heard anything more on this issue? Seems odd that others aren't being more vocal that the accuracy of the dip stick is in question...
Nope. Not saying they aren't doing anything, just nothing public in the form of a SSM/TSB or info from my FSE.
 

Dragline

First Edition
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Threads
4
Messages
439
Reaction score
995
Location
NC
Vehicle(s)
GMC Yukon Denali, GMC Sierra 1500, Honda Civic, Chevy C3500
Your Bronco Model
First Edition
You keep throwing around the term baffle however this pan isn't designed like pans that would actually benefit from that, Explorer/Aviator 3.0 requires that since the pan itself is an inch deep. On Bronco there's a sufficient depth and shape (shelved) that inherently keeps the oil from vacating the pickup area. Using your drink analogy, the main of the sump is more of a 1 gallon jug with the straw (pickup) sitting just off the bottom. I would be impressed to see anyone cavitate the oil supply off-roading, I certainly have never seen, experience, or heard of this happening yet through development or with customers.

As far as windage, that's kind of built into the skirt stiffener not the oil pans. On the 3.0 Nano in Explorer/Aviator, the skirt stiffener ends up behaving like a sump and has baffles because of the flat nature of the micro pan contributing to free oil movement. On Bronco/F-150 it's skeletonized in a way that mitigates crankcase windage.

Skirt stiffener might be new for those that are still new to the Nano platform. The engine block only consists of enough material to create cylinders for pistons and journals for the crank. The skirt stiffener adds the rest of the body to the engine. I've attached a picture to show what I'm referring to.

Ford Bronco Bronco Team Engineering Confirms 7.0 Quarts for 2.7L Engine Oil Change is Correct IMG-8021
Standing by for "put the engine in the trash can" comments...😂
 

da_jokker

Wildtrak
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2020
Threads
124
Messages
6,143
Reaction score
7,012
Location
California
Vehicle(s)
Jeep Wrangler JKUR
Your Bronco Model
Wildtrak
Clubs
 
So... Say you have an issue with the engine/turbo and Ford wants to verify your oil level for warranty. Will they...

1) Pull the dipstick and verify using the Max line? Of course this will be problematic since we have a established letting the vehicle sit for an extended time will cause the oil to register higher on the stick than the 10-25 minute window (not to mention your vehicle probably can't be started So guaranteed it's been sitting for a while)

2) Drain your oil and measure how much foil was actually in it. Of course this means a free oil change for you since they're not going to put the old oil back in.


My point being is that I doubt Ford is going to measure how much oil comes out of your engine. So they're either going to go by the max line, OR there must be some sort of internal TSB telling the text to ignore the max line and look at the "middle of the twist"?
 

broncorik

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Rob
Joined
Mar 7, 2020
Threads
51
Messages
1,761
Reaction score
2,349
Location
91320
Vehicle(s)
Bronco
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
You keep throwing around the term baffle however this pan isn't designed like pans that would actually benefit from that, Explorer/Aviator 3.0 requires that since the pan itself is an inch deep. On Bronco there's a sufficient depth and shape (shelved) that inherently keeps the oil from vacating the pickup area. Using your drink analogy, the main of the sump is more of a 1 gallon jug with the straw (pickup) sitting just off the bottom. I would be impressed to see anyone cavitate the oil supply off-roading, I certainly have never seen, experience, or heard of this happening yet through development or with customers.

As far as windage, that's kind of built into the skirt stiffener not the oil pans. On the 3.0 Nano in Explorer/Aviator, the skirt stiffener ends up behaving like a sump and has baffles because of the flat nature of the micro pan contributing to free oil movement. On Bronco/F-150 it's skeletonized in a way that mitigates crankcase windage.

Skirt stiffener might be new for those that are still new to the Nano platform. The engine block only consists of enough material to create cylinders for pistons and journals for the crank. The skirt stiffener adds the rest of the body to the engine. I've attached a picture to show what I'm referring to.

Ford Bronco Bronco Team Engineering Confirms 7.0 Quarts for 2.7L Engine Oil Change is Correct IMG-8021
Thanks for the explanation and that diagram...I had no access to that information until you shared it. Much of my wrenching has been on building motors that are much simpler in terms of oiling systems, and they did benefit from a windage tray especially during 1/4 mile passes and hard launches. From the diagram, it appears that the stiffener could effectively control oil slosh fore and aft, but not prevent it from traveling upward like a windage tray could/does on other applications. For the Bronco, did Ford decide to add an additional quart capacity over concerns of possible starvation under extreme angles (even with the stiffener)? From what I have been able to gather via part numbers, the F150 and Bronco 2.7s have the same block and valve covers, correct? The dipsticks, which are different PNs, reside in the valve cover...so I am under the impression that the distance from the seating area of the dipstick on either the Bronco or the F150 to the oil level should be relatively similar...but the F150 stick is significantly longer, which in turn results in the distance from the oil level on the F150 to the block being much lower. And with the Bronco oil level being much closer to the rotating components, that is a concern because under extreme angles, even with the stiffener, the oil is much more likely to aerate (unless my understanding is flawed which is entirely possible because I have not had the opportunity to tear down or build a 2.7). If the 2.7s are identical in the F150 and the Bronco are the same from the pan up, why the different oil levels/dipsticks? Something is wonky because even if the Bronco pan was designed to hold 10 quarts Ford should have been able to use the same dipsticks as the F150s because the overall oil level (from the surface of the oil to the rotating components) should be the same, shouldn't it?
Sponsored

 
 


Top