Not a gear head so explain to me 2.3 vs 2.7 . . .

[dpav02]

The other thing to consider is some other options you might be interested in.

For instance, I believe "Trail Control" can only come with the 10-speed and the Trail One Pedal Drive you can only get that with the 2.7L

So in order to have both, you'd have to have the 2.7L (which comes with the 10-speed).

Sponsored

 

[securitysix]

Toyota’s 4.0l may be OHC but there’s no high pressure fueling DI system so that’s about as close to simple as what’s available.

That's true, and Toyota's 4.0L is considered to be pretty much bulletproof, but I've seen a lot of complaints about it being "weak," "underpowered," or "a dog."

I've only driven one vehicle with Toyota's 4.0L, and that was a friend's FJ Cruiser. Even though I was pulling a trailer (fairly light one, though), it seemed to have plenty of power to me, and I drive a Tundra with a 4.6L V-8 daily. Is it a V-8? No. But I think the claims that it's underpowered are unfounded.

 

[TNcoupe]

Are you able to park in a garage? That really takes the chill out. I had a similar commute for a few years. I wore gloves, hat, and a coat in my car to work and then took them off when I got there. The heater was useless.

He lives in Ringgold, GA, we only have 2 weeks of winter around here. Now the remote start for AC in July and August is a wise choice.

 

[TNcoupe]

Actually it shares more parts with the RS than the Mustang and being slightly different to both.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-shows/detroit-auto-show/a15840269/ford-focus-rs-ranger-engine/

Share head gaskets with the RS???

 

[Zinn]

Actually I did just that today. Ranger lariat super crew. 2.3l but with the auto. And with an auto the engine lagged at start until the turbo kicked in. Yes higher rpm it has some pep. But it feels more like a car engine, not a Bronco engine.
For me... I did not like it at all. Maybe with a manual if you Rev higher before releasing the clutch it'll compensate for that. But for me, it's just not what I want.
But that's OK, Cuz all y'all can get what you want. This is America after all.

Totally agree and it’s the one thing I don’t like about my Ranger. It’s still a great vehicle but feels a bit gutless. For towing, fine. But for the kind of off-the-line torque you’d want in off-roading, I don’t know. I’m definitely hoping the 2.7L engine upgrade isn’t too expensive for the Bronco.

 

[Deleted member 3063]

Share head gaskets with the RS???

Can't answer that. I do know that they changed cooling passages in the RS that required the head gasket change. Then someone mixed up the 2 very similar head gaskets when assembling some RS motors causing blown head gaskets.
I would like to think if the cooling passage change improved head cooling it would be played forward to the Bronco and other applications for that matter.

 

[Covfefe]

Always get the biggest engine available if your vehicle is HEAVY

 

[tripjammer]

Why would the 2.7 liter ecoboost engine upgrade be that expensive? Its only a $995 upgrade on the base F150 so it should not be that much more on the 2021 Bronco....

 

[Mile630]

I'm sure the 2.7 upgrade will be a pricy option. Plus you lose the option to have a manual transmission.

If you upgrade you gain "only" 40hp (270 on 2.3, 310 on 2.7) but get 105 ft-lb more torque (295 vs 400)

If 95% of my use of this truck as a DD not towing anything is that hp/torque difference going to be that noticable? Am I going to be disappointed in my 2 door being under powered?

Initially I was upset I couldn't get the manual transmission in the 2.7 but the more time I've had to think about it I'm not so sure the 2.3 won't be just fine my 2 door and meet my needs. Plus save me some money and allow me to have the manual which I really desire. This truck will be my 11 year old sons in 5 years and I want a manual transmission so his friends can't likely drive it and he cant text and drive. Him being a little underpowered may not be a bad idea either.

My buddy at my local Ford dealership is going to let me come test drive a Ranger in a 2.3 if they have any available so I can get a feel for it.

It’s a personal preference, but extra torque will never not bring a smile to your face. IMHO

 

[tripjammer]

It’s a personal preference, but extra torque will never not bring a smile to your face. IMHO

So true

 

[da_jokker]

My biggest concern is the MPG difference. In looking at fuelly the 2.3L Ford Ranger is 19.9 mpg and the F-150 is 18.6.

Now that is not really comparing apples to apples because I'm sure the F-150 is heavier. It also doesn't account for gear ratios and what Sasq will do to mess with it all.

 

[Frank N]

I can live with the auto trans for the 2.7, more torque, more better.

 

[PELS82]

Im sure the 2.3 is fine, i just have never owned an SUV or truck that was a 4cyl.
My first must have option is the 2.7.

 

[Dominant1]

Get the 6 cylinder twin turbo, the 2.3 liter 4 cylinder is no slouch. A tuned twin turbo V6 can make as much or more power then a stock Coyote V8 and get better fuel mileage at the same time.

Sponsored