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

[Dlerojo]

For me it helps to think in percentages. In going from the 2.3 to the 2.7 you get a 15% increase in horsepower and a 36% increase in torque. You’ll have to determine if that’s worth it or not for you depending upon the price.

Sponsored

 

[Dominant1]

Coyote swap is your ultimate salvation, no boost needed. Put a 10speed behind it and cut your own path everywhere!!!

 

[Frank N]

Not even getting into the CGI block, direct injection, spec made motor disussion of the 2.7, topline is the 2.7 has more cylinders, more displacement, alot more HP, alot more torque and twice the turbos, so more more more....the decision isn't difficult if the price delta is 1.5k or less.

 

[Dominant1]

Dont be concerned about the 392 jeep its a heavy vehicle. The twin turbo 2.7 10 speed will make the bronco rock n roll right over that jeep. 2 door base Sasquatch package, with v6-10 speed.. simply badass..!!!!

 

[desert_rat]

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.

this is my [ignorant] question - how does the 2.3L vs. 2.7L affect mpg? is it fair to say the 2.3L will have better mileage, everything else being equal?

 

[da_jokker]

this is my [ignorant] question - how does the 2.3L vs. 2.7L affect mpg? is it fair to say the 2.3L will have better mileage, everything else being equal?

There seems to be some debate because it sounds like if you "do it right", the Tire Size is matched with the Gear Ratio so you are turning lower RPMs at freeway speeds... I dunno.

But as mentioned, per Fuelly..

F-150 2.7 is 18 mpg for the recent years
Ranger 2.3 is just under 20 mpg for the recent years.

The issue is that F-150's are heaver so if you were to put that bigger engine in the larger truck (and stayed off the throttle)... I would suspect higher than 18, but who knows?

If you were towing or loading it up with equipment, I would guess that the 2.7 would get better than the 2.3 ... but again guessing.

I remember years ago, I bought of of the first Dodge Dakota's and it came with a V8.. so we are talking a smaller Ranger/Tacoma size truck with a V8. I'' tell ya, it didn't matter if I was going uphill with the air on, pulling a trailer... the MPG was always the same.. nothing phased that truck....

... of course the MPG was 16 per gallon

 

[buildbigboats]

The 2.7 has direct fuel injection AND port fuel injection to mitigate carbon buildup on the intake valves.

I don't know if a catch can on the 2.3 would yield similar results.

I've been thinking about this Direct plus port injection setup. Understand one positive aspect might be having the port injectors blowing fuel over the valves to help keep them cleaner but seems to me to be adding a bunch more stuff....another lower pressure injection pump(?), 6 more different pressure injectors, associated hoses, o-rings, plastic connectors etc. Kind of a more complex therefore potentially troublesome solution. Still undecided on which engine to go with. Thanks for all the different points of view and input. Will be pulling the trigger on a 2dr as soon as they let me

 

[dingle87]

I want to thank you all for sharing your personal views and information, along with sharing links. I am by no means someone that has taken the time to learn about engines in my lifetime, yet here I am taking in all the information I can to make a decision down the road. I'm trying to be a sponge and do what I feel is best for me, but to do that I've had to be a wallflower and just soak it all up. Between here and the 2.3L threads, it's been really interesting and fun to dig around and find information. I feel like a junkie, just wanting more! I'm starting to understand how this can consume a person and become a lifetime passion.

Thanks again, keep the information coming.

 

[da_jokker]

Personally after reading a bunch myself, I have now reach the opinion that either motor has enough Power to do pretty much whatever you want. The 2.3 of course may have to work a bit harder at times, but is capable.

If you are really into it, the two engines do have a totally different design so you can be the judge of it (Different Injection, multiple turbos, different valve train).

Then of course there is the age old debate of MPG. If you are just driving it around, pretty sure that the 2.3 is going to get better MPG. As soon as you load it up or start pulling hills, then the 2.7 will get better MPG.

And if you are still undecided, you could toss in "Features".. for example, one of those Trail Assist options only comes with the 2.7.

Good luck my friend... I can't wait until we get some Prices and EPAs to go on (even though they are always higher than real life)

 

[Comadivine11]

I went and test drove a 2.3L Ranger and a 2.7L F150 today. The Ranger was...fine but even in the heavier F-150 the 2.7L blew it out of the water. The 2.7 in a 2-door Bronco will scream. I was on the fence between these engines but I will for sure be getting the 2.7.

 

[da_jokker]

I went and test drove a 2.3L Ranger and a 2.7L F150 today. The Ranger was...fine but even in the heavier F-150 the 2.7L blew it out of the water. The 2.7 in a 2-door Bronco will scream. I was on the fence between these engines but I will for sure be getting the 2.7.

That is helpful... maybe I should try that myself. One of the things that have kept me away from Jeeps is that they only get 19 MPG but reading post like yours make me think.. the hell with it... it's only money and the environment

 

[_2020_]

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.

Same deal here... the bright side is that on a chilly morning i can still make it to work topless & doorless with appropriate jacket and beanie! A longer drive I would have to put doors back!

 

[Chrome_Pony]

You can, just aftermarket. Would suggest a neutral safety switch instead of just a clutch override.

Exactly.

You would also most likely end up with a two-way remote start. Most OEM remote starts are one-way, meaning there is no notification that the vehicle has started, the signal is only sent to the auto; In a two way, the remote start signal goes to the vehicle, and upon successful ignition, a signal is sent back to the remote indicating a start.

Apps that perform vehicle starts can perform like two-way remote starts, but usually have a subscription service cost, unlike the onetime cost of an aftermarket remote start system's install.

 

[ChapEJF]

I just test drove a Ranger with the 2.3L. Half way up the entrance ramp to the interstate the salesman said punch it to see what it’s got. I hit it, merged onto the road and looked down and I was doing 80, effortlessly. I had to do a double take because it got to 80 really quick! I notice very little turbo lag and the drive/shifting with the 10speed is seamless to me. Probably the combo that I will go with. There are other areas that I will spend my money on that are must haves such as hardtop, Mid Package, etc.

 

[Jhuff]

I'm fortunate to live 2 miles from my office in a small pretty rural town in North Georgia. Heater can't get my ride warm before I get to work in in the winter.

That's another thing to consider with manual, I use remote start nearly every day to cool/warm my vehicle prior to me getting in it. Can't have remote start with a manual.

There are some neat options for manuals these days, they just vary on the procedure for arming the remote start.

The one that is most memorable (which I will have to research again to find the name before I buy) leaves the truck running a certain number of seconds after the vehicle is exited and locked... this is confirmation that the transmission is in neutral, which allows for the remote start to work safely. If the doors are unlocked any time before the next start, the remote start will disarm because it no longer knows for sure that the transmission wasn't put into gear.

I will be installing one.

Sponsored