Official MPG figures: 2021 Bronco 2.3L and 2.7L fuel economy

[internationlriders]

Chiming in here, I really enjoy manual transmissions, both my cars have them. But my philosophy is that once you reach a certain amount of HP or extremely technical rock crawling, auto is the way to go. I can't shift faster than a good modern auto and I can't modulate the clutch as well as a torque converter. While manual is undoubtedly more fun, the auto is better in every other way nowadays. For myself breaking the 500WHP barrier it makes more sense to have an auto or dual clutch and going on multi day off road rock crawling adventures, giving my left foot a welcome break is key.

Back to the current topic, I drove a mustang with the 2.3 and while it was impressive comparing it to an old fox body mustang but I didn't enjoy it. I did get to drive a 10 speed GT mustang for a week and I was actually surprised finding myself starting to like it. Not as much as my 6 speed camaro but still quite good all things considered. The 2.3 is definitely a great engine but if you're used to a bit of ooompth it leaves a person like me wanting more and I'm hoping the 2.7 has just enough of that. The Jeep hybrid actually has some really good oomph and averaged 28MPG while I had it but I was scared of anything electrical malfunctioning.

The final comparison is that of the wrangler 392. Anyone I know who has a grand Cherokee SRT averages 8-12MPG, so I find it a bit insane that anyone thinks the wrangler 392 will do any better with lower gearing, less aerodynamics, and especially once they get 35s or 37s on it. Comparatively if the sasquatch bronco with either engine gets mid teens or better real world MPGs it's pretty awesome and I'll be filling her up as often as possible.

Sponsored

 

[Rick Astley]

Test drove the Ranger 2.3 and did not like it. Test Drove the F150 2.7 and loved it.
That being said Both these engines are more than capable Truck engines. Both these engines had to meet Ford Truck engine standards. My Wife's 2012 F150 CC 3.5 ecoboost is 9 years old runs like new, looks new inside and out. NO issues none period. My 99 F350 Powerstroke 200,000 miles no issues. Both have Turbos. The 2.3 is a good motor, I prefer the 2.7.

No doubt you disliked it. There is a very specific way you must set up the Ranger so that the transmission doesn't make the experience one you will dislike.

The easiest way to improve that feeling: manual transmission.

The only way to make the Ranger drive properly is to put it in sport mode, have the tach displayed on the left hand screen and use the crappy shift buttons on the shifter (same crappy buttons on Bronco!) While paying close attention to your shift rpm.

If you do that, the truck is an absolute hoot to drive and the 2.3 impresses without the auto killing it.

F150 is more of a traditional "gas and go" vehicle. I have no clue why the auto in Ranger was programmed to be such a POS, but it is.

 

[jqgil]

How do you get worse gas mileage on the highway? (2.3 auto Badlands)

And so much for going with the smaller motor to save gas...

Aerodynamics of a barn.

 

[AcenTitus]

Suddenly find myself watching Outer Banks videos with high package... Just realized it’s the same price to go fancy mall crawler as my BD order. Given that this will be my daily driver and I’m a realtor, it might be time to get... real (sorry) about my likely usage (I drive all over town for work). Man I had this locked in for months before this thread.

Edit: can’t do it. Love the roast cloth seats. Hate the roast and grabber blue dash combo. Don’t love the navy enough to make the jump even with the bigger screen and cameras. I’ll eat the mpg and feel great about my choice when I go to those showings farther out of town where the roads are less road like. Still, the OBX could handle that. Maybe my sudden indecisiveness will cause Ford to schedule my build now that it might be inconvenient. Win win!

 

[DBrab_1914]

I'm honestly not even upset or bothered by the 17 MPG with the Sasquatch package. I'm going for the OBX model with the 2.7L, but I still want the Sasquatch package even though I plan to change the tires and wheels to a lightweight 1-piece alloy to help save weight. I don't like the look of the non-squatch OBX, just looks like something is missing. 35" tires are not the lightest at the least, so expecting more than 19 MPG is a little unrealistic. Although the Bronco is very impressive and loaded with technology, it's not a luxury SUV nor is it made for family road trips that have great MPG. It's not made for aerodynamics, it's made for off-roading and having fun. As a DD, yea it may not be the most fuel efficient but is that really what you are buying this for? I know I'm not. I'm buying this as a fun all around vehicle to satisfy all of my needs, so sacrificing some MPG to me is worth it. Others with Wranglers and Gladiators do the same when they drive them daily on 2" lifts with 35's or 37's. At least it's not 13-15 MPG....

 

[markregel]

No doubt you disliked it. There is a very specific way you must set up the Ranger so that the transmission doesn't make the experience one you will dislike.

The easiest way to improve that feeling: manual transmission.

The only way to make the Ranger drive properly is to put it in sport mode, have the tach displayed on the left hand screen and use the crappy shift buttons on the shifter (same crappy buttons on Bronco!) While paying close attention to your shift rpm.

If you do that, the truck is an absolute hoot to drive and the 2.3 impresses without the auto killing it.

F150 is more of a traditional "gas and go" vehicle. I have no clue why the auto in Ranger was programmed to be such a POS, but it is.

Opinions definitely vary on this one. There are numerous threads on the performance of the 2.3 and it is generally positive. Someone even said they liked the Ranger 2.3 better than the F150 2.7. That said seriously folks trucks aren't normally purchased for drag racing. Get yourself a Hellcat if that is your objective.

 

[markregel]

Definitely looks like some holes in this data. It doesn’t specify 2dr vs 4dr, hardtop or soft, and how can all trim models with Sasquatch be the same when some do not have steel bumpers, bash plates, sliders, etc. Why even release this? It’s close to useless.

No car marker releases MPG data for every option things like steel bumper is insignificant. Big tires and gearing is the difference between 20-22 and 17-17.

 

[gammaguybronco]

How do I NOT upgrade to the 2.7 now ??

If you're getting an auto the 2.7 is a no brainer. The bronco guys at the event all liked driving the 2.3L with the manual better though. Take that for what it's worth.

 

[Bdockins]

If you're getting an auto the 2.7 is a no brainer. The bronco guys at the event all liked driving the 2.3L with the manual better though. Take that for what it's worth.

I ordered a Stick. If the 2.7 was available with one I’d pay up.

 

[Crush0205]

Was it just me or was anyone expecting these numbers and already had plans to make MPG modifications? I don't think you can ever get a Bronco to 27+ MPG without pushing it down a hill first, but I think with mods and tunes you can get a 23-25 MPG combined for 2dr and non-sas

 

[markregel]

Via Bronco Nation

The competition

More reference points / technical specs chart for comparing the trims / models:

seems bogus. example Sas all trims. 17 both HWY and City? How? I mean, I am cool with that but it makes no sense to me.

Sure it makes sense. Firstly the Bronco is not aerodynamic. You put massive tires and low gearing on it and HWY mileage is not going to be great. The non-SAS at 20-22 is more than respectable compared to any 4WD truck. Crazy these guys complaining about MPG and going with BL SAS what did you expect? I bet some of these folks are the same ones making fun of Base buyers on other threads. If you want a daily driver that gets reasonable MPG ditch the BL and SAS. Of course you can do better in a car based crossover but the difference isn't huge especially the city number.

 

[Chrism81]

I am happy with those numbers w/ sas

 

[Fly by Nite]

Maybe the reps at the preview events will talk about mpg now.....
We've seen sneak peaks of 20 mpg, will the reps confirm/deny this?

 

[AZshot]

It's not a daily driver for me, but a go to town on the weekends, or go out in the field vehicle. Both will be on secondary roads, about 60 MPH. With the stick and 2.3, I should get excellent mileage.

 

[Ronaldo]

Umh Sasquatch be thirsty

Sponsored