Sponsored
Lack of power.
I really hope the 2.3 puts out more power than the 270hp / 310 lb-ft currently in the Ranger. I'm Hoping it's more in the ballpark of the Mustang's 2.3. And If there is a 2.7 option, hopefully it's not only offered on the most expensive "ST" trim or something like that...
I really hope the 2.3 puts out more power than the 270hp / 310 lb-ft currently in the Ranger. I'm Hoping it's more in the ballpark of the Mustang's 2.3. And If there is a 2.7 option, hopefully it's not only offered on the most expensive "ST" trim or something like that...
- First Name
- Al
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2019
- Threads
- 13
- Messages
- 514
- Reaction score
- 1,034
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Vehicle(s)
- 2008 Jeep Liberty Sport
- Your Bronco Model
- Big Bend
I really hope the 2.3 puts out more power than the 270hp / 310 lb-ft currently in the Ranger. I'm Hoping it's more in the ballpark of the Mustang's 2.3. And If there is a 2.7 option, hopefully it's not only offered on the most expensive "ST" trim or something like that...
[/QUOTE]
And if there is a 2.7 option, hopefully it will be offered with a manual.
[/QUOTE]
And if there is a 2.7 option, hopefully it will be offered with a manual.
- First Name
- Josh
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2020
- Threads
- 3
- Messages
- 350
- Reaction score
- 1,132
- Location
- Prescott az
- Vehicle(s)
- Suzuki samurai
- Your Bronco Model
- Base
Maybe I'm alone here, but the 270hp/310ft-lb of the 2.3 ranger are good numbers for the entry level bronco. At least in my eyes. How many complaining about it have even test driven the ranger? It's peppy and strong.
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2020
- Threads
- 5
- Messages
- 140
- Reaction score
- 269
- Location
- stop and go traffic
- Vehicle(s)
- 15 pp vert
- Your Bronco Model
- Base
Manual Soft-Top. It better be powered if they want to compete with Jeep and not that sliding cloth crap either.
Sponsored
My 205 HP 3.8 4-door wrangler on 33’s with a stick and 3.21 gears is “fine” (if I went to 35’s would probably be pretty miserable though.)
Bronco will be a rocket ship with 270 and 3.73 or 4.10 gears.
Power is an important consideration and I will never buy another vehicle without sufficient power to “move along.” I agree with Jook13; my ‘19 Ranger with the 2.3L moves that truck just fine (it would blow the doors off my former ‘11 Dodge Dakota 3.7L). My wife has a ‘19 Lincoln MKC AWD with the optional 2.3L (presumably the same engine, but I believe it’s “tuned“ to 285hp/305ft-lb) and that also moves along just fine. I have no complaints with that engine in those two vehicles and with the new Bronco my only concern would be weight and tuning. We had (since sold) a ‘16 Jeep Renegade with a 2.4L that we used for odds and ends and that was almost as anemic as the 3.8L in my ‘08 Jeep Wrangler (also sold). Neither vehicle could get out of its own way. So I will take a 2.3L in the Bronco as long as the vehicle’s weight does not overwhelm it and it is properly tuned for the Bronco. Not to say the 2.7L or the 3.5L wouldn’t be more fun!...
Last edited:
My first vehicle was an extended cab 4x2 2001 GMC Sonoma with a 2.2L naturally aspirated 4-banger that made 120HP (as long as the air conditioner was off) and 140 lb.-ft. of torque with a curb weight of 3,040 lbs. It wasn't built for racing, but it would get me up to speed on the highway just fine, which is pretty important since my driveway connects directly to a fairly busy state highway. That's a power-to-weight ratio of 0.039 and a torque-to-weight ratio of 0.046.
The closest modern Ranger equivalent (2020 XL 4x2 Supercab with that 2.3L EcoBoost) has a curb weight of 4,145 lbs., giving it a power-to-weight ratio of 0.065 and a torque-to-weight ratio of 0.075. I'd hardly call that a lack of power.
For comparison, my current vehicle is a Double Cab 4x2 2011 Toyota Tundra with a 4.6L V-8. It makes 310 HP and 327 lb.-ft. of torque with a curb weight of 5,085 pounds. That gives it a power-to-weight ratio of 0.061 and a torque-to-weight ratio of 0.064. Pound for pound, the Ranger has more power than my Tundra. Now, my Tundra has a higher max towing capacity, and it's certainly easier to haul larger things in the bed, but even without driving one, I can look at the numbers for the Ranger and tell that it's not gutless.
That 2.3L EcoBoost may be tiny, but it's fierce.
- First Name
- David
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2020
- Threads
- 0
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 11
- Location
- Astoria, OR
- Vehicle(s)
- 2006 Duramax
Price is the big one. If they can compete with Jeep and keep a m/t 4 door with minimal options in the low-mid 30s im in. Plenty of 2020 6 speed JLUs around me for ~$33k.
Second will be power, but the 2.3T with a manual behind it hardly gives me pause. With decent gearing 275ish hp is plenty.
Second will be power, but the 2.3T with a manual behind it hardly gives me pause. With decent gearing 275ish hp is plenty.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2019
- Threads
- 10
- Messages
- 3,998
- Reaction score
- 8,347
- Location
- Chicagoland, USA
- Vehicle(s)
- '72 Rover, '85 CJ7, '98 TJ, '14 BRZ, '23 Bronco
- Your Bronco Model
- Base
Price for me as well. I would be buying as a rugged 4x4 utility vehicle with top-down fun. Hopefully Ford makes the additional accouterments and gadgets extra for customers who are into that stuff. Driving around with top down and on trails is the primary thing for me, I'm just not into all the extras, and would rather spend that money on other things. So hopefully Ford swings a wide loop and doesn't price-out customers wanting a more basic vehicle.
Sponsored
I'm thinking rugged = $$$ and probably $40k with minimal options when you compare to Wrangler lower trims. When you get to the Rubicon, it's around $38k base price. I'm hoping a model comparable to Sahara Overland with most options doesn't push above $55k
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2019
- Threads
- 10
- Messages
- 3,998
- Reaction score
- 8,347
- Location
- Chicagoland, USA
- Vehicle(s)
- '72 Rover, '85 CJ7, '98 TJ, '14 BRZ, '23 Bronco
- Your Bronco Model
- Base
By "rugged" I just mean it's not a car. Bronco is going to be a body on frame 4x4 with open top. For years I drove all over, on and off road, in my CJs. I'm fine with a base model similar to a JL Sport, but the Bronco has to come in the lower 30k range, at least for the sale price. The most I've ever spent for a vehicle is 14k, for a new car last January for my wife. Come on Ford delivery a base truck for guys like me!
So when I first saw @Justin96's post, I had the same thought as @Jook13 except more to the tune of, "this guy drives an Accord and 270HP/310FT-LB isn't enough for him?!?" Which prompted me to google the 2008 Honda Accord v6 to find out that it made ~270HP/250FT-LB... and suddenly 270HP for the Bronco seemed anemic when it can be directly compared to a 12 year old mid-size car...
Also, maybe Ford wouldn't be canning all of their cars if they did like Honda and gave them some balls.
- First Name
- Josh
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2020
- Threads
- 3
- Messages
- 350
- Reaction score
- 1,132
- Location
- Prescott az
- Vehicle(s)
- Suzuki samurai
- Your Bronco Model
- Base
Keep in mind we are talking about the base, least powerful version of the bronco. Rumor is multiple engine options... My assumption is that 270hp and over 300ft lbs is really good for a starting point
- First Name
- David
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2020
- Threads
- 0
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 11
- Location
- Astoria, OR
- Vehicle(s)
- 2006 Duramax
The 270hp/310tq 2.3T should be plenty peppy given they dont neuter it with highway gear ratios like the 3.21s found in the Jeep JL. My 14 Explorer with the 3.5 Duratec has 290hp/255tq and ive never thought gee, i wish this was faster, it has plenty of power on tap. Theres more to it than raw hp and tq numbers.
Sponsored
