Reason why no 2.3L Manual?

[Streetbob08]

I bought a 2wd Ranger with a five speed about ten years ago. I wanted to make it look better by putting the 4x4 tire size on it. After that I had to slip the clutch a lot to get it going and hold gears a lot longer. It may just be that the clutch and the gearing they want to use just won't hold up to hard off road abuse. They have to look at it from a customer satisfaction and a warranty issue. I don't think any of us would be happy if after several rock crawling trips the clutch started acting up only to be told by the dealership we need a new clutch. There also maybe to a smaller extent the fuel economy/EPA problem. It would take more fuel to get the truck going with the bigger tires. That maybe enough to not meet the fuel economy figures they need. The Ranger I had used alot more fuel after the tire swap.

Sponsored

 

[Bmadda]

Google CAFE regs. Been a thing for MANY years (most of my adult life).

 

[Squatch]

The only official word that precludes the man-squatch is that Ford said the Sasquatch package includes Trail Control and that is an exclusively automatic transmission feature.

Ford could give us the man-squatch, but they're just not. I think it's a terrible mistake to alienate the man-squatch proponents just because someone from marketing wants to leverage Trail Control in an upcoming commercial or other marketing materials.

 

[Bmadda]

The only official word that precludes the man-squatch is that Ford said the Sasquatch package includes Trail Control and that is an exclusively automatic transmission feature.

Ford could give us the man-squatch, but they're just not. I think it's a terrible mistake to alienate the man-squatch proponents just because someone from marketing wants to leverage Trail Control in an upcoming commercial or other marketing materials.

The whole thing is rather curious isn't it? The "conspiracy theorist" in me loves this whole saga...its so Ford! Ford has got me studying product knowledge in every detail! Genius!

 

[Bmadda]

I know autos perform better on the tests that they use. Not saying that is the reason either. I'm not trying to argue w/you at all, I'm just saying there are reasons which are in no way mechanical that could make it a bad business decision for Ford to offer 2.7/7mt as a package. As far as FCA I don't see what you mean. 2.3/7mt outperforms 3.6/6spd on paper...and on Bronco thats the BASE engine. If it lives up to published numbers that's a win for Ford!

 

[Bmadda]

This may be completely true, however you are not the one who administers the tests, or makes the rules for said tests. I have worked in the auto industry all my adult life, and it is considered gospel truth that they are in no way a true representation of real world driving. However they are what they are. This is the reality of the auto industry...politics are now, and will always be, a factor.

 

[The Pope]

Same here! I have ALWAYS been able to get better fuel mileage from a MT than an AT on equally equipped vehicles.

Anytime I see the comment saying that fuel economy is worse with a MT, I know that the person making the statement is most likely someone who has little experience with a MT.

 

[Txchewy]

The Bronco has many features that I am sure were expensive to develop but they wanted to please the enthusiasts so they could sell to masses. I don't think they appreciated how many enthusiasts would want the manual sasquatch. I agree we need to keep the pressure up. I am hopeful for a change! The thought of having to buy take off parts for my new bronco is really upsetting.

 

[Darforce]

It’s hard to drink coffee, smoke a cigar and shift. That’s my reason.

Ugh! Is it really THAT hard to make an accessory to hold your cigar while you shift? Even a wire hanger could work. ?

 

[flatlander40]

It may be coming if we keep pushing. That pricing survey email said the Mansquatch was "not currently available". There's hope.

maybe that’s why the Build and Price isn’t up yet! Lol

 

[Lakelife36]

maybe that’s why the Build and Price isn’t up yet! Lol

Perhaps....
Perhaps for a max tow package as well?

 

[rapidredbronco2021]

The new manual transmission might not be rated to handle the power of the 2.7 engine. And could also require a stronger drivetrain. For example, the Jeep Wrangler JL comes standard with the heavier duty rear axle, when ordering the manual transmission. It's possible Ford didn't want the higher output 2.7 engine coupled to the manual trans, which also has granny gear to further the stress on the drivetrain.

I'd think since this engine was in the Focus RS and currently in the Mustang EcoBoost, and those both had a manual with that engine. Maybe it was easier to modify that manual for a Bronco than to develop a manual for the 2.7L. Maybe in the future there would be a manual of the 2.7L or a bigger engine than the 2.3L with a manual.

 

[Grave Digger]

Many will tune the 2.7 to 425HP and instantly brake the manual. There are lots of reasons as pointed out above. Clutch drops, people who don't know how to drive and unload the the torque instantly, etc. Ford builds them to be unbreakable and can't suffer a bad rep in the first year because teenagers are trying to destroy dads truck

Sponsored