Truck vs. Car application

[Cookieck]

The 2.3L has gone into the Bronco, Ranger, Mustang, and Focus. Much like in the past, each application get a different power yield. Cars get high HP, trucks get high TQ. But it would seem the Bronco/Ranger doesnt get as high a TQ rating as its siblings. Its almost left caged.
Bronco: 270HP-310Ft/Lbs
Ranger: 270HP-310Ft/Lbs
Mustang: 310HP-350Ft/Lbs
Focus RS: 350HP-350Ft/Lbs
I'm sure tuning will be an option, but with it dumbed down from the go, its not funny.

I think this is just more just the way it works with turbo engines. The whole more hp for cars, more torque for trucks is usually for naturally aspirated engines(diesels excluded, turbo diesels make massive tq but also aren’t same engines in cars so no comparison). With turbo engines, torque and HP tend to stay more relative to each other(lower hp variants of a turbo engine usually also have lower tq). Hard to say for sure since there’s only a handful of turbo truck engines that are also in cars to compare the hp/tq changes to, but fords 2.7 and 3.5 are both similar, with more hp also meaning more tq, less hp is less tq. Even chevys new 2.7 turbo is similar, the Silverado has less hp and less tq than the Cadillac ct4-v version. Think the bigger thing with trucks is keeping the powerband lower, so more tq on the low end. But a turbo makes more power higher up, so moving the powerband more inline with the turbos power means an increase to both tq and hp for those car variants. But that makes a less usable powerband for a truck. Turbos also in general tend to make more tq than a NA engine at same hp lvls.

Sponsored

 

[Hemisfear]

The 2.3L has gone into the Bronco, Ranger, Mustang, and Focus. Much like in the past, each application get a different power yield. Cars get high HP, trucks get high TQ. But it would seem the Bronco/Ranger doesnt get as high a TQ rating as its siblings. Its almost left caged.
Bronco: 270HP-310Ft/Lbs
Ranger: 270HP-310Ft/Lbs
Mustang: 310HP-350Ft/Lbs
Focus RS: 350HP-350Ft/Lbs
I'm sure tuning will be an option, but with it dumbed down from the go, its not funny.

Most likely something to do with durability I would think...

 

[Chuck_Ruck]

I think this is just more just the way it works with turbo engines. The whole more hp for cars, more torque for trucks is usually for naturally aspirated engines(diesels excluded, turbo diesels make massive tq but also aren’t same engines in cars so no comparison). With turbo engines, torque and HP tend to stay more relative to each other(lower hp variants of a turbo engine usually also have lower tq). Hard to say for sure since there’s only a handful of turbo truck engines that are also in cars to compare the hp/tq changes to, but fords 2.7 and 3.5 are both similar, with more hp also meaning more tq, less hp is less tq. Even chevys new 2.7 turbo is similar, the Silverado has less hp and less tq than the Cadillac ct4-v version. Think the bigger thing with trucks is keeping the powerband lower, so more tq on the low end. But a turbo makes more power higher up, so moving the powerband more inline with the turbos power means an increase to both tq and hp for those car variants. But that makes a less usable powerband for a truck. Turbos also in general tend to make more tq than a NA engine at same hp lvls.

My chief concern is that all four 2.3L engines are turbo'd: Mustang, RS, Ranger, Bronco.
The trucks SHOULD have more TQ, but they dont. They have less TQ, and less HP. If you google the dyno sheets, the torque curve across all is pretty wide/flat. The truck application being detuned for longevity is a theory but doesnt that go against the idea of selling more cars? There have been posts about tuners not being able to mess with the new broncos without compromising the programming of other secondary functions.

 

[jjack50]

Ranger engine is based on RS engine which is not quite the same as the Mustang engine. But a factory tune will bring it up to the same level. That option is available on the Ranger and shows in the accessory catalog for the Bronco.

 

[dcmdon]

The numbers above don't tell you how much torque the engine makes at various RPMs.

For example, lets say the mustang has a larger turbo and a more aggressive tune. Torque pretty much tracks boost at a given RPM.

So if the smaller turbo on a bronco can give you enough boost for 310 ft-lbs of torque at 2000 rpm, and a larger turbo on a mustang isn't fully spooled up by 2000 rpm and can only give enough boost for 250 ft lbs of torque, the Bronco will make more power at 2000 rpm.

If the Bronco with the smaller turbo is maxed out at 2000 rpm, then its literally all down hill from there as far as boost and torque are concerned. If the mustang with its larger turbo and more aggressive tune continues to build boost and torque continues to rise until lets say 3000 rpm at which point its making 350 ft-lbs of torque, then we will see the numbers above.

Remember that peak torque and peak power are measured at a specific RPM. It doesn't tell us what is making more torque at each RPM.

I think that what you would see if you had a graph is the Bronco and ranger making more torque off idle and then maxing out at a relatively low RPM. At some point the two lines cross as the mustang builds boost and the larger turbo allows it to continuing to build boost as the RPMs go up.

The above is all logically sound theory and an educated guess based on the numbers above.

 

[jwoobs]

For example, lets say the mustang has a larger turbo and a more aggressive tune.

This is my theory too. Bronco is probably going to have a smaller turbo so it gets spooled up sooner.

This makes sense for towing or off-roading where you want more torque at low speeds. There could also be some de-tuning for engine longevity reasons, but I don't think Ford is putting the RS engine in and just turning it down. There are conscious trade-offs they made.

 

[jonboy1225]

The cars use a very different tune and some with a slightly bigger/better twin-scroll turbo as well. At least the High Performance Package Mustang does for sure, per the Ford literature. Focus RS had many different parts due to transverse layout, and wayyy different goals. They crave higher RPM where as a truck needs grunt down low, coming on sooner and flatter through mid-range.

With newer variable timing engines, it's easy for the OEM to shift power curves around for it's intended application. I've thought about the potential for upgrading to the Mustang HPP turbo down the road after warranty is up, as long as it doesn't harm the low end too much.

EDIT: posts above me I missed on the second page beat me to it oops, but I'll let it stand as a contribution

Sponsored