Sponsored

Is this partly why the Manual is not available for the 2.7L Engine?

OX1

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jim
Joined
May 25, 2017
Threads
45
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
1,299
Location
jackson nj
Vehicle(s)
59 Bird, 70, 74, 78, 79 Broncos, 84 LTD 331 w/Vortech, 86 Capri 5.0 turbo, 14 Stang GT, 17 Fusion Sport
Your Bronco Model
Undecided
The v-8 is possible, but Ford really has no incentive to develop a manual 2.7, how many more people would go and buy a mustang because of the change in base motor (and the accompanying price increase), that wouldn’t buy it with the option of 2.3 or v8? Not enough people to even come close to making up the r&d and tooling costs. Frankly, it’s a miracle that they are even offering manuals at all given how low the take-rate is from new car buyers.
Wait. For years on this board I and a couple others have been beat up about how much better a 2.7 ECO will be over a coyote. Take rate on mustang GT's (for latest data I could find) is still close to 50% for manuals (and 20% ish manuals on 2.3 ECO boost stangs) worldwide.

If an easily tuned 2.7 on a "base" GT could be bumped up from say 400/400 to 500/550 and be still be offered with a manual, you can't argue that many would not jump at that on a GT. (could help ford with emissions too). A higher end NA, larger displacement (maybe another Boss) could fill the gap higher up and would be welcome by those that wanted a larger displ road course motor they don't have to drop FI on, or rev to the moon.

Then you make the "base" bronco 2.3/auto only and charge more for the enthusiast, who wants a manual, and most likely would like the larger motor too. You could also leave the 2.3/auto as the base engine combo in the mustang. Those that want the absolute cheapest one, just to get in a mustang, won't care about the auto only trans.

The mustang and bronco buyers really don't count as far as who wants manuals these days. both sets of people have enough that want them, to make it worth it.
Sponsored

 

KH_59

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
Kevin
Joined
Jul 18, 2020
Threads
20
Messages
380
Reaction score
1,071
Location
pearland tx 77584
Vehicle(s)
F-150
Your Bronco Model
Base
You are probably right, just like the Coyote engine being too wide.
Although, Hennessey says he's gonna put supercharged Coyote's in there.....

(Their shop is about 65 miles from my place. Shop tours are suspended at the moment due to Covid, but when they start offering them again it would be fun to run over there and see if they have acquired a Bronco to start their design work.)

Ford Bronco Is this partly why the Manual is not available for the 2.7L Engine? 1609246604396
 

Imissmy1996bronco

Base
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
422
Reaction score
1,338
Location
Colorado
Vehicle(s)
2022 JLU Rubicon
Your Bronco Model
Base
Clubs
 
Wait. For years on this board I and a couple others have been beat up about how much better a 2.7 ECO will be over a coyote. Take rate on mustang GT's (for latest data I could find) is still close to 50% for manuals (and 20% ish manuals on 2.3 ECO boost stangs) worldwide.

If an easily tuned 2.7 on a "base" GT could be bumped up from say 400/400 to 500/550 and be still be offered with a manual, you can't argue that many would not jump at that on a GT. (could help ford with emissions too). A higher end NA, larger displacement (maybe another Boss) could fill the gap higher up and would be welcome by those that wanted a larger displ road course motor they don't have to drop FI on, or rev to the moon.

Then you make the "base" bronco 2.3/auto only and charge more for the enthusiast, who wants a manual, and most likely would like the larger motor too. You could also leave the 2.3/auto as the base engine combo in the mustang. Those that want the absolute cheapest one, just to get in a mustang, won't care about the auto only trans.

The mustang and bronco buyers really don't count as far as who wants manuals these days. both sets of people have enough that want them, to make it worth it.
If the 2.7 had ever been offered with a manual, I'd agree, but it never has, and was designed from the ground up to be a turbo engine paired only with auto transmissions.
The 2.3 (and the engine it was derived from) has always been been offered with a manual, so it was far cheaper for Ford to do the 2.3 as the base motor (a lot of mustang buyers still get the manual base motor too).

The goal of rolling out a new engine/trans combo is to attract customers who would not buy the vehicle otherwise. In the Bronco's case, most would be 2.7 manual buyers will still buy either a 2.3 manual or an auto, in the mustang case, most people who would buy a 2.7 manual mustang are still going to buy a mustang without it.

To justify development costs on a combo like that, they can't just have enough takers for that combination, they have to have enough takers who won't by the vehicle at all without that package to justify it. (The exception being halo packages, e.g. gt500).
 

DHH

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Threads
0
Messages
60
Reaction score
103
Location
Here
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger
Your Bronco Model
Undecided
The reasons are multi-fasceted:

  • Auto-stop/start is a PITA (we used Forscan to disable this, which cost $200)
  • take-off from a stop is notchy
  • take-off from a stop while on a incline can randomly have a stomach-lurching roll-back
  • mostly incapable of compression braking as it will simply hold 9th gear as you slow down, pushing 100% of braking force to the brakes (this can have some long-term issues when hauling a load, or maxed out and you start getting brake fade)
  • Why am I rolling at 25 mph in 9th gear?
  • If you change the dash display to show the gear you can watch it "hunt" for ways to make you dislike the torque curve of the vehicle (rolling starts in 5th, having to downshift 4 gears to give acceleration, merging on the freeway in 7th)
  • It's singleminded goal in life is to maximize fuel economy in all situations..... In a vehicle that is essentially exempt from tailpipe emissions and puts out about 3x more pollutants than any car in a developed nation, that 1 mpg improvement while polluting 300% more seems a misguided intention.
  • Watch it's gear selection while towing (manually setting the truck to tow mode and trailer sway control) and it's a bit better, but you would be better served with a manual and paying attention to what the F you're doing.
  • This is a transmission which performs better (assuming your only goal with a truck isn't fuel economy... Because if your only goal was fuel economy.... YOU BOUGHT A F-ING TRUCK FOR FUEL ECONOMY???) in manual mode but having 10 gears so close together is semi-truck territory and unnecessary in a production vehicle.

    Ultimately it's a perfectly adequate automatic for what 90% of people buy automatics for. To push a pedal and have magic happen so they don't have to pay attention to anything or understand gearing/load/speed/situation.
Personally, I don't really notice any of these issues.
Auto stop/start is not specific to this transmission. It's a big topic on Ranger5g, but I really don't see what all the fuss is about. I agree it's mildly annoying when in heavy stop & go traffic and it's going off/on every 5 seconds, but I just pull it into Sport mode for those times.
I've never noticed my Ranger being "notchy" at take-off and never had it roll backwards on a hill.
Compression braking is awesome when in tow mode. Far better than my old 2014 Sierra. Don't have to be towing to use it. I've been putting it in tow mode every time I come back from skiing and I rarely have to brake coming down the hill
I have rarely seen my truck hunt for gears. Of course it does on occasion, but only for a second or two. I've had far more issues trying to find the right gear with my manuals, than this auto does.
I'm an old school manual & big V8 guy, but I have been nothing but impressed by 2.3 & 10sp auto. Granted, this is the 1st 4cyl I've owned since 1978, so if I had more experience with them, maybe I wouldn't be so impressed, but I went in expecting to hate the drivetrain and ended loving it.
 
Last edited:

Rick Astley

Raptor
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2020
Threads
70
Messages
5,019
Reaction score
18,563
Location
Up Doug's ass
Vehicle(s)
d
Your Bronco Model
Raptor
Personally, I don't really notice any of these issues.
Auto stop/start is not specific to this transmission. It's a big topic on Ranger5g, but I really don't see what all the fuss is about. I agree it's mildly annoying when in heavy stop & go traffic and it's going off/on every 5 seconds, but I just pull it into Sport mode for those times.
I've never noticed my Ranger being "notchy" at take-off and never had it roll backwards on a hill.
Compression braking is awesome when in tow mode. Far better than my old 2014 Sierra. Don't have to be towing to use it. I've been putting it in tow mode every time I come back from skiing and I rarely have to brake coming down the hill
I have rarely seen my truck hunt for gears. Of course it does on occasion, but only for a second or two. I've had far more issues trying to find the right gear with my manuals, than this auto does.
I'm an old school manual & big V8 guy, but I have been nothing but impressed by 2.3 & 10sp auto. Granted, this is the 1st 4cyl I've owned since 1978, so if I had more experience with them, maybe I wouldn't be so impressed, but I went in expecting to hate the drivetrain and ended loving it.
Hey, if it works for you! I'm the only one in our group who doesn't like the 10spd AT in Ranger. The others using this Ranger, however, haven't driven a manual transmission car in the past decade, and have zero track time or even an understanding of proper driving/shifting/load management/throttle-brake applications beyond drivers training and experience on public roadways (which is akin to meeting the lowest possible requirement).

Since your location is listed as "here" one can't make any guesses about your uses of the Ranger. Here in the Seattle area, stop/start has a number of nasty drawbacks with inner-city driving that increase the potential for danger.

Tow/haul does have some wear/cooling drawbacks for using it frequently. Ford doesn't provide an adequate water pressure and temp gauge to monitor this so it's anybody's guess what's really happening there. We also don't know what sort of PSI buildup is happening in the drivetrain to use tow/haul. That being said, it does cover over a number of issues with the transmission. Almost makes you wonder what the goal is when the base use is so terrible!

"Hunting gears": A better explanation would be that it is not "hunting". It's programming tells it exactly what gear it should be in at all times. If possible, that would be 9th or 10th gear..... You can observe this by changing the display attributes on the dash. Taking off from a roll in 2nd, then shifting to 4th, 6th and then 9th before you're at 35 mph (I am discounting the gears that the dash display quickly races past as it's obvious without a dual-clutch setup those gears are not being employed for drive).

The 2.3 is a great motor in Ranger, no doubt. And it's going to be friken amazing in Bronco with a proper MT so you don't have to play games to get it to not suck. It isn't a rocket ship, it shouldn't take 8 different setting changes to operate the truck without it's transmission sucking (tow/haul, disable start/stop, sport mode, pretending it's a manual via the "+/-", etc) when driving around town without a load.
 

Sponsored

DHH

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Threads
0
Messages
60
Reaction score
103
Location
Here
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger
Your Bronco Model
Undecided
Well I'm north of you, across the border, so our driving environment is fairly similar.
What is it about stop/start that you feel increases the danger? The only thing I can think of is that you feel there is a delay before you can take off, but I don't find that a problem because it starts instantly. The real danger is the delayed throttle response, which all manufactures incorporate. My wife's Mercedes was horrible and dangerous. You could literally count a couple seconds before it responded. (I sure miss cable throttles).

Sport mode eliminates the gear selection issue that you don't like and any PSI buildup that happens because of tow/haul mode will also happen in a manual.

I admit, the auto isn't perfect, but I never found a manual to be either. I never had enough gear selection when towing up a hill with a manual.
I think the the auto does a great job. If you want to go for ultimate mpg, leave it in drive and putt around. If you like a more spirited drive, put it in sport mode. If you're in mountain territory put it in tow/haul mode. I don't see having choices in my driving preference as a detriment to the automatic.
I'm not hating on the manual. I love manuals and if it was still the days of 3-4spd autos, or if I lived in the country, a manual would be my first choice. With the newer autos, I just prefer it in a truck or SUV. I'm tired of pushing a clutch in city traffic.
 

OX1

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jim
Joined
May 25, 2017
Threads
45
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
1,299
Location
jackson nj
Vehicle(s)
59 Bird, 70, 74, 78, 79 Broncos, 84 LTD 331 w/Vortech, 86 Capri 5.0 turbo, 14 Stang GT, 17 Fusion Sport
Your Bronco Model
Undecided
If the 2.7 had ever been offered with a manual, I'd agree, but it never has, and was designed from the ground up to be a turbo engine paired only with auto transmissions.
It's a shame that a pilot bearing could not fit in a 2.7 crank

2.7%20ECO.png


And a crime that the 2.7 crank bolt pattern, flex plate, and bell housing bolt patterns don't look almost identical to the 3.5 ECO.

2.7%20ECO.jpg


3.5%20ECO.png



Would be cool if only a 3.7 flywheel and clutch assembly bolted up to a 3.5 ECO.

3.7%20CLUTCH%20FLYWHEEL%20on%203.5%20ECO.jpg


And wouldn't it be neat if the same company that made the 3.7 trans, also made the new Bronco 7 speed.

3.7%20Getrag.jpg


https://www.thedrive.com/news/32417...d-bronco-will-get-a-seven-speed-manual-report

And even neater if that trans could handle more than 310 Ft-lbs

21%20Bronco%207%20Speed.jpg


I mean if even one person had peaked a little but of interest in it, you know maybe some new bronco buyers.

https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/thre...anual-transmission-with-v6-2-7-ecoboost.1843/

And done something crazy like start a petition that 12,000 people might sign.

https://www.change.org/p/ford-offer...ual-transmission-for-all-packages?signed=true

But I guess you are right, the parts are completely different, would never fit up, couldn't handle the torque, and no one has made a peep about wanting one. Thanks for clearing that up.........
 

The Pope

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
John
Joined
Sep 9, 2019
Threads
12
Messages
719
Reaction score
1,612
Location
NC
Vehicle(s)
1977 F250/2007 Mercury Mariner/2014 Infiniti Q60x/2011 Kawasaki C14
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
In the Bronco's case, most would be 2.7 manual buyers will still buy either a 2.3 manual or an auto, in the mustang case, most people who would buy a 2.7 manual mustang are still going to buy a mustang without it.
I for one, don't fit within your assessment.

As long as the 2.3L is Direct Injection Only, I Will Not Buy It.... PERIOD!

I also want a MT.......

so if FoMoCo wants any $$$ from me, they will need to either Add Port Injection to the 2.3L or offer the 2.7L/MT.
 

Imissmy1996bronco

Base
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
422
Reaction score
1,338
Location
Colorado
Vehicle(s)
2022 JLU Rubicon
Your Bronco Model
Base
Clubs
 
It's a shame that a pilot bearing could not fit in a 2.7 crank

2.7%20ECO.png


And a crime that the 2.7 crank bolt pattern, flex plate, and bell housing bolt patterns don't look almost identical to the 3.5 ECO.

2.7%20ECO.jpg


3.5%20ECO.png



Would be cool if only a 3.7 flywheel and clutch assembly bolted up to a 3.5 ECO.

3.7%20CLUTCH%20FLYWHEEL%20on%203.5%20ECO.jpg


And wouldn't it be neat if the same company that made the 3.7 trans, also made the new Bronco 7 speed.

3.7%20Getrag.jpg


https://www.thedrive.com/news/32417...d-bronco-will-get-a-seven-speed-manual-report

And even neater if that trans could handle more than 310 Ft-lbs

21%20Bronco%207%20Speed.jpg


I mean if even one person had peaked a little but of interest in it, you know maybe some new bronco buyers.

https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/thre...anual-transmission-with-v6-2-7-ecoboost.1843/

And done something crazy like start a petition that 12,000 people might sign.

https://www.change.org/p/ford-offer...ual-transmission-for-all-packages?signed=true

But I guess you are right, the parts are completely different, would never fit up, couldn't handle the torque, and no one has made a peep about wanting one. Thanks for clearing that up.........
Huh, that’s actually really cool and should make swaps easier. For an oem though, a lot more of the engineering is going to be in software, emissions, manufacturing, & certification changes (escalating in cost likely in that order), The costs are still there, and the business case still isn’t, if it was profitable to do so I bet They would’ve done so already.

Also, they would need. a new transmission housing, as the new manual trans has the bellhousing integral to the case, and the old v6 is no longer offered with a manual anywhere in Ford's line up. (Plus they would need to move to one of the beefier transmissions, as I suspect a 42 lb-ft safety margin before hitting the the torque rating isn't enough from an oem perspective).

I for one, don't fit within your assessment.

As long as the 2.3L is Direct Injection Only, I Will Not Buy It.... PERIOD!

I also want a MT.......

so if FoMoCo wants any $$$ from me, they will need to either Add Port Injection to the 2.3L or offer the 2.7L/MT.
Iirc, the 2.3 actually times the injection so that the spray hits the back of the valves, so as long as you are using a Ford tune, carbon caking shouldn’t be an issue. More power to ya though for knowing what you want and sticking to it, if more people were like you Ford would probably reconsider.
 
Last edited:

BlueOvalBandit

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Kenneth
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
738
Reaction score
2,454
Location
Anaheim, CA
Vehicle(s)
Tacoma
Your Bronco Model
Badlands
How about Ford giving us the 300 Straight 6 engine with a non-Chinese 7 spd manual? I will take less HP and TQ for its straight-forward construction and reliability. Just saying.
Twin turbo straight 6 with peak torque around the 1800-2200 rpm range...

6gRCnAr.gif
 

Sponsored

Fordmanbob

Wildtrak
Well-Known Member
First Name
Bob
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Threads
26
Messages
785
Reaction score
756
Location
KS
Vehicle(s)
2018 F150 4x4 supercrew, 2006 F350 4x4 superc.
Your Bronco Model
Wildtrak
actually the demand is there, but the american model of selling cars is different from other countries where stick shift is more prevalent.

in america, ordering a vehicle to spec is rare and folks/dealers want to make a deal on what's in stock.

other countries (japan and germany come to mind), it's customary to order the vehicle to your spec and wait for it to be built. (and the driver's ed test is done with a stick shift)

in this scenario, dealers want to sell something that any fool can drive out of their on-hand stock, and with the lack of driver's ed here in the states, most people can't drive a stick. so, the dealer will only stock automatics ....
You also have to remember that people, for the most part don't want to wait on a "special order" vehicle. They want to go to the dealership.....pick out a car/truck that will fit their needs, (or come as close as possible) find out what their payment is going to be, buy the vehicle and drive home. Like me... most people have probably only ever "ordered" a vehicle once before. We have ordered this Bronco because it has drawn us to it. Most have anticipated this for 26 years. An....alternative to Jeep.
 

RimrockPaul

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
Paul
Joined
Apr 19, 2021
Threads
3
Messages
266
Reaction score
318
Location
Rimrock AZ
Vehicle(s)
2021 Ford F250
Your Bronco Model
Base
I've had 3 10 speeds. 2.7,3.5 and 6.7. Good on highway. Funky in 4 low steep stuff like I go for work. I ordered base with stick.
I go places you wouldn't believe.
Sponsored

 
 


Top