**REAL rwhp** 2.7L vs 2.3L

Studawg

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
798
Reaction score
1,659
Location
SC
Vehicle(s)
02 Excursion, 96 Land Cruiser, 13 Land Cruiser
Stated what it is in an automatic, seems pretty relevant to " does anyone have any analysis of 2.7L/auto"
Well "does anyone have any analysis of 2.7L/auto VS 2.3L/man" is what the OP said. He was looking for a head to head comparison of those two combinations.

If you haven't contemplated getting the manual transmission and what you would have to give up Horsepower wise to get it, considering the V6 isn't offered with the manual, you may not have thought about this exact issue, but I had, so I knew exactly what he was getting at.





Advertisement

 

Studawg

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
798
Reaction score
1,659
Location
SC
Vehicle(s)
02 Excursion, 96 Land Cruiser, 13 Land Cruiser
So, there is proof that say a tuned 2.3 is great. Wouldn't that mean though, that a turned 2.7 is greater-er?
Not if it doesn't have a manual transmission! :ROFLMAO:

Of course there is no replacement for displacement, that is definitely true.

But some of us aren't just looking for peak power. If the V6 was offered with a manual transmission, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
 

Andrew_EOD

Badlands
Active Member
First Name
Andrew
Joined
Jul 29, 2020
Messages
33
Reaction score
61
Location
Panama City
Vehicle(s)
Ford Focus ST
Not if it doesn't have a manual transmission! :ROFLMAO:

Of course there is no replacement for displacement, that is definitely true.

But some of us aren't just looking for peak power. If the V6 was offered with a manual transmission, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
That's true. I'm still torn on if I want a MT or AT. Sometimes I'm tired of driving in traffic with a 6 speed. If I want an AT I'll get the OBX, probably with the 2.7. If I want MT I'll get BD or BL...
 

rapidredbronco2021

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Aug 8, 2020
Messages
322
Reaction score
304
Location
Westchester, New York
Vehicle(s)
DD 2019 Ford Escape
I have the 2.3L in my Ranger, there are a few issues here:

1. HP / Torque curves always have peaks in any gas engine (naturally aspirated or turbocharged/supercharged). The peaks are not ever near the bottom of the RPM curve.

2. This is especially true for a turbocharged 4 cylinder (and even 6 cylinder). Torque at low RPMs is low because the turbochargers are not spooled up. Modern engine calibrations and auto transmissions try to disguise this “turbo lag.” Once the turbo is spinning you do get a rush of torque but a good calibration will keep it relatively flat through the rest of the rev range

3. If you’re driving below 2k RPM in any car you won’t have to worry about this because you’ll be going slow and sipping gas. My 5.0L Mustang is very sleepy and smooth at these RPMs. The 2.3L is no different. Unless you buy a Tesla you’re not going to hit a wall of torque when you first touch the gas pedal.

People say the Ecoboost is either “Eco” or “Boost” and my experience is this is true. For grannying around town it’s a very quiet and fuel efficient ride, but it has plenty of power when you need it.

I was tailing my husband (him in the Ranger, me in the Mustang) this morning as we were dropping the truck at a shop and he whipped it past a semi that cut us off, he boosted it _very quickly,_ it took me a lot longer to react with my manual transmission and by the time I did that Ranger was flying. It’s a surprisingly powerful engine.
So since you have experience with the 2.3L in the Ranger, are you going with that engine or the 2.7L? I'm leaning towards the 2.3L w/ manual but still considering the 2.7L.
 

rapidredbronco2021

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Aug 8, 2020
Messages
322
Reaction score
304
Location
Westchester, New York
Vehicle(s)
DD 2019 Ford Escape
Not if it doesn't have a manual transmission! :ROFLMAO:

Of course there is no replacement for displacement, that is definitely true.

But some of us aren't just looking for peak power. If the V6 was offered with a manual transmission, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
I completely agree, if they offered the manual with both engines there would be no question on my decision.
 

Zinn

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jeff
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
203
Reaction score
464
Location
Minnesota
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT, 2020 Ranger Lariat
So since you have experience with the 2.3L in the Ranger, are you going with that engine or the 2.7L? I'm leaning towards the 2.3L w/ manual but still considering the 2.7L.
2.3L manual, no question.

The difference stock-for-stock against the 2.7L can be mostly covered with a tune, and having previously owned a tuned VW GTI with a manual transmission, it was a riot to drive. Ford underrates these engines to allow for 87 octane fuel and there's a ton of headroom to tune with better gas even without swapping any parts. The Ford Performance tune for the 2.3L Ranger gets you 315 crank hp with a warranty, and that's conservative.

The idea of a turbocharged body-on-frame SUV with a manual transmission excites me a lot more than the trivial displacement difference between the 2.3L and 2.7L. Both engines are a joke compared to the headroom in the 5.0 Coyote, but nobody needs that kind of power in a vehicle like this (no matter what they tell themselves).
 

bronchalen84

Big Bend
Well-Known Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Aug 9, 2020
Messages
67
Reaction score
52
Location
Greenville SC
Vehicle(s)
Ford Explorer
Clubs
 
We know it's all speculation at this point, but manual trans has less power scavenge as auto, so does anyone have any analysis of 2.7L/auto vs 2.3/man RWHP?
With this decision, I’m more concerned about which might offer better Lon-term reliability. Any thoughts on that? Is a MT more prone to have repair issues?
 

Zinn

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jeff
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
203
Reaction score
464
Location
Minnesota
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT, 2020 Ranger Lariat
With this decision, I’m more concerned about which might offer better Lon-term reliability. Any thoughts on that? Is a MT more prone to have repair issues?
MT is much easier to service. You'll have tons of aftermarket clutch / flywheel options. Ford / GM's 10 speed auto transmission is pretty ubiquitous for the time being but much more complicated and more of a black box. Long term the manual will be easier and cheaper to service, and likely able to find parts for a long time.
 
Last edited:

rapidredbronco2021

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Aug 8, 2020
Messages
322
Reaction score
304
Location
Westchester, New York
Vehicle(s)
DD 2019 Ford Escape
2.3L manual, no question.

The difference stock-for-stock against the 2.7L can be mostly covered with a tune, and having previously owned a tuned VW GTI with a manual transmission, it was a riot to drive. Ford underrates these engines to allow for 87 octane fuel and there's a ton of headroom to tune with better gas even without swapping any parts. The Ford Performance tune for the 2.3L Ranger gets you 315 crank hp with a warranty, and that's conservative.

The idea of a turbocharged body-on-frame SUV with a manual transmission excites me a lot more than the trivial displacement difference between the 2.3L and 2.7L. Both engines are a joke compared to the headroom in the 5.0 Coyote, but nobody needs that kind of power in a vehicle like this (no matter what they tell themselves).
Honestly most of us will always want more power even if it's unnecessary for the vehicle. At this point that's the same direction I'm going. I was disappointed like most when they said the manual is only for the 2.3L, but the tune for the Ranger would be a welcomed power boost to the Bronco. Also if they can make the Sasquatch package available with the manual, I'd be all for that.
 

bronchalen84

Big Bend
Well-Known Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Aug 9, 2020
Messages
67
Reaction score
52
Location
Greenville SC
Vehicle(s)
Ford Explorer
Clubs
 
MT is much easier to service. You'll have tons of aftermarket clutch / flywheel options. Ford / GM's 10 speed auto transmission is pretty ubiquitous for the time being but much more complicated and more of a black box. Long term the manual will be easier and cheaper to service, and likely able to find parts for a long time.
Thanks for that info. I prob will go with the 2.3 MT so I can add in other options into my purchase budget. The 4dr Bronco price with options adds up quick! What I find ironic is the 2.3 l 4 cylinder has more HP than the V8 4.6L in my 2005 Ford Explorer Limited. Pretty amazing the advances in engines last 15 years. Thanks again for the reply!
 

jonwithanelcamino

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jon
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
419
Reaction score
1,075
Location
Bay Area
Vehicle(s)
El Camino
Clubs
 
2.3L manual, no question.

The difference stock-for-stock against the 2.7L can be mostly covered with a tune, and having previously owned a tuned VW GTI with a manual transmission, it was a riot to drive. Ford underrates these engines to allow for 87 octane fuel and there's a ton of headroom to tune with better gas even without swapping any parts. The Ford Performance tune for the 2.3L Ranger gets you 315 crank hp with a warranty, and that's conservative.

The idea of a turbocharged body-on-frame SUV with a manual transmission excites me a lot more than the trivial displacement difference between the 2.3L and 2.7L. Both engines are a joke compared to the headroom in the 5.0 Coyote, but nobody needs that kind of power in a vehicle like this (no matter what they tell themselves).
Are you getting the 2 or 4 door?
 

HuskerJen47

Big Bend
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jennifer
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
252
Reaction score
443
Location
Omaha
Vehicle(s)
Ford Fusion
I can confirm. This statement cannot be anymore true.
I have a Ford Fusion with the 2.0T EcoBoost (245hp) and it has nice pep to it. It is surprising what a 4 cylinder can do. Note that I have owned several sports/muscle type cars in the past.
 

5280Bronco

Big Bend
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
319
Reaction score
697
Location
Denver
Vehicle(s)
2002 Mustang GT, 2014 Ford Fusion, 2005 Volvo V70R
Clubs
 
I have a Ford Fusion with the 2.0T EcoBoost (245hp) and it has nice pep to it. It is surprising what a 4 cylinder can do. Note that I have owned several sports/muscle type cars in the past.
We have a 2014 with the same motor. Engine is pretty good, but the transmission stinks imo. It's left us in intersections deciding what gear it should be in before accelerating multiple times and you get either no power or a downshift to a much lower gear than needed when trying to pass on the highway. We will be getting rid of it as a part of the transition to the Bronco. It does have a timing cover leak on the 2.0 at 75k miles that i think shouldn't be happening, but the motor has been good other than that.
 

Hey19

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
JJ
Joined
Jul 28, 2020
Messages
237
Reaction score
556
Location
Bethlehem
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT 6spd 2013 F150 4x4
Vehicle Showcase
1
I feel the 2.3 would be sufficient for me, but will still look at tune options from Ford Performance when they come out. Keeping the warranty intact is pretty important for me.

As far as "wheel hp" are we considering loss through the T-case? I would imagine it to be minimal but worth consideration. What will be the difference in loss between the two T-cases offered?
 

Rednek

Big Bend
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jimmy
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
193
Reaction score
424
Location
Northern Alberta
Vehicle(s)
2012 f350S/D 6.2L,2017 Fusion,2003 Sporttrac(pos)
Clubs
 
what people are forgeting is the human error part of the equation,can you shift a manual consistantly all the time?the new at transmissions are very precise in shift scheduling and don't forget the torque multiplication in the converter itself.
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top