Engine 2.3l or 2.7l? Is the upgrade worth it?

[Broncosandboxers]

Hey guys,

I wanted your opinion on the 2 engine choices. I am leaning towards to the 2.7l for more power, etc.

Haven't driven the 2, does anyone have some 1st hand experience with the different engines?

Looking at a Badlands 2.7l and keeping it stock.

Any advice would be awesome. Thanks!!!

Sponsored

 

[Go_Galt]

I've driven both, and if you're an automatic buyer, IMO there's no reason to consider the 2.3 (provided the upcharge isn't a financial hardship).

 

[zombie]

Without even driving it, I know I would have went for the 2.7L if it was available with a manual... more is better, right?

 

[RagnarKon]

I've driven both. I'm getting the 2.3L because it's the only option with a manual transmission.

The 2.7L seems a little slower "off the line", but once it gets moving it moves. I'm not sure why it is so slow from 0 mph... but both Broncos I've driven with the 2.7L had the same problem... so I'm guessing it has to do with how the computer is programmed. They probably changed the parameters on the turbos or did something with the transmission for better fuel mileage.

The 2.3L much quicker off the line and has plenty of power, but you can absolutely tell it doesn't have quite the "oomph" as the 2.7L. It still is very capable, just not quite the 2.7L-level of capability.

If you intend to do a lot of towing then I'd definitely get the 2.7L. If the Bronco is going to be your daily commuter, then I'd probably get the 2.3L just for slightly better gas mileage. But if none of those apply and you have the money to get the 2.7L... then why not?

 

[DrewBronc21]

Without even driving it, I know I would have went for the 2.7L if it was available with a manual... more is better, right?

Same here. Manual more important to me than the bigger engine(which isn’t much bigger) I would have paid a premium for manual Sasquatch 2.7

 

[HoosierDaddy]

I have all of 90 miles experience on my 2dr Base manual.
I haven't railed on it yet, but I did a few "spirited" acceleration runs.
I have no complaints yet, power-wise.
Interstate acceleration will NOT be an issue, this thing LOVES 3rd gear, it really allows it to pull ... hard.

The one thing that is maddening, idling, the exhaust sounds weak af.

It is not.

 

[Go_Galt]

The 2.7L seems a little slower "off the line", but once it gets moving it moves.

I noticed this. My theory was that it's electronically limiting boost and pulling timing when in first gear, in order to protect the transmission and/or driveline.

 

[BlazinGTO]

Be aware, you are going to get some biased opinions here and people justifying their own build. I've driven neither but went with the 2.7 Badlands. 2.3 was not even a consideration. Coming from fast cars, there's no way I'd be happy with the smaller engine. I didn't want to regret the choice later. I will really enjoy that big torque difference.

Everyone's version of "fast" or "adequate power" is different. You will see lots of people saying the 4 cyl has plenty of power. I highly doubt I would have the same opinion. The manual 4 is slower than the auto as well. But yes I'm sure it's adequate. If only the 2.3 had a better mileage savings over the 2.7 it would have a better case.

I'll second the opinion of 2.7 if you are getting the auto trans. It's crazy to get the 2.3 if you can afford the 2.7

 

[BlazinGTO]

I noticed this. My theory was that it's electronically limiting boost and pulling timing when in first gear, in order to protect the transmission and/or driveline.

Something like that is most definitely happening. I've read that a faster 0-60 in the 2.7 was achieved starting in 2nd gear. The review chalking it up to, what appeared to be, torque limiting in first gear and the time saved in the 1-2 shift.

 

[Frankie945]

If your thinking about it get the 2.7 the 2.3 has the power curve of a light switch.

 

[MayhemMike]

I would add the 2.3 to the 2.7 and have a 5.0 . Yeah, I want a V8.

 

[RagnarKon]

I would add the 2.3 to the 2.7 and have a 5.0 . Yeah, I want a V8.

Would be sweet but ain't gonna happen.

We'll see a V8 in the F-150 Raptor before we ever saw it in the Bronco. And since Ford went through the trouble of completely re-engineering the F-150 Raptor exhaust setup so that it sounds more like a V8 without actually putting in a V8 in the truck... basically tells us all we need to know about how Ford views the V8.

BUT... shouldn't be long before someone decides to do an Coyote engine swap on their Bronco. It'll be on YouTube within the next 2-3 years I bet.

 

[Rayder]

Depends on what you want and what you're used to. I test drove a 4 door sas with the 2.3 and it by no means slow as some people say. A Subaru Crosstrek with a 10s+ 0-60 is slow, the 2.3 even with Sas is just fine. You are never going to be thrilled by the acceleration, that's for sure, but it's also not dangerously slow like some vehicles. It's perfectly adequate but nothing more than that. I will say if you like to go 80+mph on the freeway it starts to eat fuel at an exponentialy greater rate. I drove a 4 Wildtrack on the same stretch of freeway and got 2 mpg better with that going 80mph.

 

[flatlander40]

Depends on what you want and what you're used to. I test drove a 4 door sas with the 2.3 and it by no means slow as some people say. A Subaru Crosstrek with a 10s+ 0-60 is slow, the 2.3 even with Sas is just fine. You are never going to be thrilled by the acceleration, that's for sure, but it's also not dangerously slow like some vehicles. It's perfectly adequate but nothing more than that. I will say if you like to go 80+mph on the freeway it starts to eat fuel at an exponentialy greater rate. I drove a 4 Wildtrack on the same stretch of freeway and got 2 mpg better with that going 80mph.

Out of curiosity, what model SAS did you drive?

Sponsored