Manual & 2.3 Ecoboost

J_Meh_Cray_D

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jeffrey
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
137
Reaction score
296
Location
North Carolina
Vehicle(s)
2017 Silverado Crew Cab
Clubs
 
I haven’t driven many MTs, and am pretty set on going with the 2.3L MT for fun. But man, test drove the 2.7 in an f-150 and it was NICE... this coming from a 5.3L v-8 Chevy guy





Advertisement

 

Broncogoat

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
lynn
Joined
Sep 28, 2020
Messages
90
Reaction score
67
Location
OH
Vehicle(s)
Sport Trac
Clubs
 
I'm interested in the manual with the 2.3 but I hope it's not a dog. My 1997 Wrangler is an old machine with a tractor engine that has only 180 HP (5 speed manual) and is such a slug for daily driving with the high HP even eco cars out there today. I get run over in it all the time But I do love the manual in it.

My 1970 Bronco with a modified 302 and only a 3 speed manual was fast machine though. If the 2.3 is somewhere in between (more towards the 302) the two it might be just fine. I'm still leaning on the 2.7 at this moment. Wish we could test drive to help us make the decision!
Bronco is a heavy beast 1,000lbs heavier than a mustang and if your going sasquatch you'll have some heavy wheels to turn. Drive a 4 banger jeep then a V6 jeep probably be about equal.
 

BrentC

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Brent
Joined
Oct 3, 2020
Messages
435
Reaction score
935
Location
Calgary, Alberta
Vehicle(s)
2019 F150 Sport, 2018 Jeep Compass
I believe it adjusts boost, timing and other factors in a computer map.

Other tunes include an air intake, larger downpipe and larger exhaust in combination with a tune to push more air in and through the engine. You also have to add more fuel too.

I think I've seen large numbers like 500hp from this 2.3. Obviously this would be a huge hit in MPG.

Ford wants to balance reliability, economy and power together. You're sacrificing one or the other.
You can get other features added to your tune if a/m, such as flat-foot shifting (FFS), launch control with several launch rpms pre-configured, front shutter grill locked in the open position etc. You can log your motor’s performance in most a/m tuners and send this data to the shop, who then adjust your tune to be specific for your engine and driving habits.

With my 2013 Focus ST I had an awesome Stage 1 tune built by FStune using a Cobb Accessport. I stopped the mods with only the software tweaks because it woke the engine up safely and met all my expectations. I didn’t need any more...
 

dcmdon

Well-Known Member
First Name
Don
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
181
Reaction score
244
Location
Metro-West Boston
Vehicle(s)
.
One thing to keep in mind when it comes to fuel economy is that its mainly affected by how much power your vehicle takes to run down the road and NOT how much power the engine can make.

A 6 cylinder version of a given vehicle and a 4 cylinder version don't get different fuel economy because the 6 makes more power. They get different fuel economy because the 6 has more internal friction that must be overcome.

An example of my first point involves 2 totally different vehicles. Back in the early 2000s I had an original Mitsubishi Montero. The square blocky one It was a pretty big vehicle, tall and long. It had a 145 hp engine in it. I used to get 16 mpg with it.

A co-worker had a Corvette. It had something like 380 hp. He got 23 mpg overall and on the highway at a steady 70ish, saw over 30 mpg.

The difference was that my 145 hp engine had to make something like 50 hp just to drive at 60 mph. His 380 hp engine had to make something like 30 hp just to drive down the road. So he got better fuel economy despite having 2.5x the power.

The other thing is that in a fast car like the corvette, you can't really get on it on the street for long enough to really affect fuel economy. Floor it for 5 seconds and you are going 100.
 
Last edited:

dcmdon

Well-Known Member
First Name
Don
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
181
Reaction score
244
Location
Metro-West Boston
Vehicle(s)
.
Tuned vs not tuned versions of a given engine.

Someone above mentioned that a 500 hp version of the 2.3 probably gets bad fuel economy.

This is generally incorrect. If driven the same way, a stock 2.3 will generally get worse fuel economy than a tuned engine will. This is because. tuned engine will run more aggressive ignition advance and leaner A:F ratios at cruise, both of which make theegine more thermodynamically efficient.

Stock tunes often run rich because the extra fuel coming out of the exhaust helps the catalytic converter light up and heat up faster. This is necessary to pass cold start emission requirements.

Also stock tunes dump extra fuel under high boost / high load conditions to prevent detonation. A custom tune will run a bit leaner at high boost to get more power. With the side benefit of better efficiency.

I don't know all the tuning companies out there, but I do know that GearHead Tuning retains the factory knock sensor that pulls timing and/or boost when it detects knock. So if you are running a 93 octane tune and get some bad gas, it won't hurt the engine.

I hope this helps. I'm relatively new to the Bronco, I've got a reservation but waiting until I drive it before I decide. But I have played with turbo engines since my dad bought a rare 1977 Saab 99 turbo from a friend who ran the Saab US race (rally) shop out of Orange CT.

We've come a long way from rigging up windshield washer pumps as water injection and bleed valves to adjust boost.
 

Pittguy

Well-Known Member
First Name
mike
Joined
Oct 21, 2020
Messages
1,399
Reaction score
1,866
Location
Pittsburgh pa
Vehicle(s)
03 cobra. F250
Detonation is detonation, yes the computer will pull timing to save engine. But the the occurrence still happened. Many early tuners have destroyed these engines trying to one up another tuner, make more cash. Ford has put the time testing into their tunes and although very conservative compared to other tuners, the longevity is there. Yesceven ford lost some.. False knocks happen due to many factors like something making contact under hood, exhaust touching other structure,improper knock sensor torqued. A turbo engine has many things that can effect its performance. Give it the highest octane you can find is a good start.
 

Rollerstud98

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Christian
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
586
Reaction score
1,028
Location
Airdrie
Vehicle(s)
2015 Nissan Titan
Clubs
 
Looking forward to my personal 2.3T/7MT/2D. We'll be using my Bronco to develop a Borla cat-back since that's what I do here in CA. Share your thoughts on what you guys would like to have.
As minimal as possible drone with a nice burble on deceleration.
 

Rick Astley

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Rick
Joined
Jul 24, 2020
Messages
2,778
Reaction score
11,123
Location
Seattle, WA
Vehicle(s)
'51 Chevy Fleetline, '61 Ford Thunderbird
Bronco is a heavy beast 1,000lbs heavier than a mustang and if your going sasquatch you'll have some heavy wheels to turn. Drive a 4 banger jeep then a V6 jeep probably be about equal.
I've done a 2,500 mile trip using our '19 Ranger with almost 700 lbs in the bed and 3,800 lbs being towed, plus two adults putting about 400 lbs of human and gear in the cab.

With the truck weighing 4,150 lbs, that puts us a tick over 9,000 lbs.

The truck did just fine over mountain passes, plenty of power to get up to 70 mph freeway speeds and you could barely tell it was towing anything.

Bronco maxes out at about 4,450 curb weight. Now, i'm not the most educated man, but even if we put the same human weight in Bronco, you aren't getting to 9,000 lbs with it.

So, without armchair quarterbacking this, who here that has actually DRIVEN a loaded Ranger is of the opinion the 2.3 ecoboost in it was incapable of the task or overly taxed while doing it?

Anecdotal evidence isn't the best evidence we've got here, but it's a fair shite better than some of the guesswork i've seen by folks on these forums regarding the 2.3.
 

AcesandEights

Badlands
Banned
Banned
First Name
Ace!
Joined
Nov 19, 2020
Messages
1,235
Reaction score
2,435
Location
Oregon
Vehicle(s)
DR650
Can't wait to shift gears. Not looking forward to turbo replacements.
 

Rick Astley

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Rick
Joined
Jul 24, 2020
Messages
2,778
Reaction score
11,123
Location
Seattle, WA
Vehicle(s)
'51 Chevy Fleetline, '61 Ford Thunderbird
Can't wait to shift gears. Not looking forward to turbo repairs.
Well the good news is that the 2.7 has a colorful history of turbo failures outside of warranty. And there are two turbos on that motor. It's not a guaranteed failure, but turbos are wear items and the F150 forums has enough folks needing them replaced right around the time warranty goes away to be a talking point.

I'm looking forward to having fewer turbo replacements both in frequency and volume with the 2.3 (y)
 

SoDak1623

Badlands
New Member
First Name
Cole
Joined
Aug 25, 2020
Messages
4
Reaction score
5
Location
South Dakota
Vehicle(s)
1996 F150, 2004 Focus ZTS
I'm excited for my manual 2.3 badlands. The 2.3 will have more horsepower and the same torque as the 351 in my 96 F150 while weighing half as much up front, so I'm sure it will be plenty. Add a tune and it will be more than I need. Plus the torque is still down low, 3k or less. That'll work compared to the 3.6 in a jeep that makes peak torque at 4500+.
 

AlvinT

Base
Member
First Name
Alvin
Joined
Apr 12, 2021
Messages
7
Reaction score
22
Location
Ventura CA
Vehicle(s)
04VW R32
Personally I want a zero drone and slight growl on acceleration. The decel burble would also be nice.
Same for me... I want mine to be (only slightly) louder than stock at WOT and have a cool, understated tip appearance. Please share what you'd like see in your 2.3L Bronco.

We've developed 2.3 Ecoboost exhaust systems for the Ranger, Focus RS, and Mustang. The Ecoboost engine sound is not terrific and is very different in the cabin for each of these vehicles due to engine power rating, RPM, AT or MT transmission, and interior cabin space. It takes time to develop a vehicle-specific muffler that adds sound but doesn't magnify cabin resonance (aka drone) at cruising speed. I can say we tested over 20 versions for the Ecoboost Raptor (some just sounded horrible), F-150 Ecoboost (2.7 and 3.5L), and Fiesta 1.5L and Focus 2.0L.

Borla has experience creating many turbo engine exhaust systems and I believe we have the best sounding exhausts for the Ecoboost engines. This experience will help us create an awesome exhaust for the new Bronco!
 

Advertisement







 
BuiltRight


Advertisement
Top