What's next?

Creepystalker

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kc
Joined
Mar 6, 2020
Messages
179
Reaction score
269
Location
Los angeles
Vehicle(s)
2014 Silverado
Upgrade the intercooler, charge pipes as well, maybe a turbo blanket
Or buy a v8 that was designed for a truck



Advertisement


 
OP
Nickp

Nickp

Moderator
Moderator
First Name
Nick
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
1,877
Reaction score
5,732
Location
Phoenix
Vehicle(s)
2010 WRANGLER 4 DOOR MT
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #272
Ford is planning on you wanting everything imaginable. They’ll have something for everyone.
I guess that’s one way to make a mint :ROFLMAO:
 

MaverickMan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2020
Messages
771
Reaction score
1,138
Location
96708
Vehicle(s)
96 bronco sport 91 comanche eliminator 93 v8 zj 80 amc eagle 85 cj7 laredo 79 ford quadravan(inoperable due to tragic fire)
Or buy a v8 that was designed for a truck
The 5.0 was not designed for a truck the 5.4 was, the godzilla is, the 2.7tt was. The 4.6 was designed for cars and the 5.0 is an evolution of that. It was only deemed acceptable in trucks never a top performer, Same is true of the real 5.0 SBF and the 5.8. The 5.0 always struggle to make the torque. I think the only reason these absolutely huge F150s these days even use cammer 5.0s is because they sell so many to soccer moms and other people who dont use use them for much hauling.

Also if the 2.7 is just an acceptable motor in the f150 then it will be a mean motor in the smaller lighter bronco. Weight load is a direct factor in heat build up and the bronco has less of it.
 

JimmyDean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
3,036
Location
Louisiana
Vehicle(s)
82 Bronco, 513 ci; 71 mach 1, 351C; 06 F-250, 6.0; 56 800, 172c.i. gas
The 5.0 was not designed for a truck the 5.4 was, the godzilla is, the 2.7tt was. The 4.6 was designed for cars and the 5.0 is an evolution of that. It was only deemed acceptable in trucks never a top performer, Same is true of the real 5.0 SBF and the 5.8. The 5.0 always struggle to make the torque. I think the only reason these absolutely huge F150s these days even use cammer 5.0s is because they sell so many to soccer moms and other people who dont use use them for much hauling.

Also if the 2.7 is just an acceptable motor in the f150 then it will be a mean motor in the smaller lighter bronco. Weight load is a direct factor in heat build up and the bronco has less of it.
right now is I think the first time there hasn't been a truck motor with a shorter stroked motor off the same architecture for cars in like 50+ years.

302/351
429/460
4.6/5.4
 
OP
Nickp

Nickp

Moderator
Moderator
First Name
Nick
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
1,877
Reaction score
5,732
Location
Phoenix
Vehicle(s)
2010 WRANGLER 4 DOOR MT
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #275
right now is I think the first time there hasn't been a truck motor with a shorter stroked motor off the same architecture for cars in like 50+ years.

302/351
429/460
4.6/5.4
Isn’t the 6.2 a truck only engine?
 

MaverickMan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2020
Messages
771
Reaction score
1,138
Location
96708
Vehicle(s)
96 bronco sport 91 comanche eliminator 93 v8 zj 80 amc eagle 85 cj7 laredo 79 ford quadravan(inoperable due to tragic fire)
Ohh yeah the 6.2, the 5.0 is the it'll get you buy motor and the 6.2 is the real truck one. the 2.7 and the 3.5 are the next generation of that formula. Which puts the 2.7 in perfect for the smaller bronco/ranger lineup. It will literally be like getting the old 5.0 in a 80s ranger.
 
OP
Nickp

Nickp

Moderator
Moderator
First Name
Nick
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
1,877
Reaction score
5,732
Location
Phoenix
Vehicle(s)
2010 WRANGLER 4 DOOR MT
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #277
Ohh yeah the 6.2, the 5.0 is the it'll get you buy motor and the 6.2 is the real truck one. the 2.7 and the 3.5 are the next generation of that formula. Which puts the 2.7 in perfect for the smaller bronco/ranger lineup. It will literally be like getting the old 5.0 in a 80s ranger.
2.7 would blow the doors off a 5.0 ranger. Even a 5.0 SN95 mustang had a 0-60 in about 6.7 seconds or so... which is almost the exact same as the 2019 ranger with no tune or anything. 2.7 Bronco would be sub 6.0 for sure and probably sub 5.5.
 

ChrispyKC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
1,758
Reaction score
4,814
Location
Somewhere
Vehicle(s)
Vehicles
No but you miss my point.

Towing with a turbo v6 in HOT weather will reduce your power quite a bit. I don’t want to be lacking power trying to pull the boat out of the water on a steep launch ramp.

yes you lose power in a NA motor in heat as well due to air density but the loss in the turbo is much more
Peak HP isn’t where the EcoBoost family shines. It’s the power that develops from idle to 3000 RPM where the engines shine. They’ll absolutely curb stop an NA engine regardless of temps in the low range. Mid to high revvs is where they’ll lose a bit of power, but regardless of temps the EcoBoost engines are far superior to the NA offerings. EcoBoost engines deliver near diesel power curves without the price premium and the DEF.
 

ChrispyKC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
1,758
Reaction score
4,814
Location
Somewhere
Vehicle(s)
Vehicles
Isn’t the 6.2 a truck only engine?
Truck and Econoline. The 4.6/5.4/6.8 were mod engines developed by Ford and Jaguar. Ford originally had 5 valves per cyl planned for much smaller V8’s, one version found its way into Lincoln LS and Thunderbird.
 

Creepystalker

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kc
Joined
Mar 6, 2020
Messages
179
Reaction score
269
Location
Los angeles
Vehicle(s)
2014 Silverado
2.7 would blow the doors off a 5.0 ranger. Even a 5.0 SN95 mustang had a 0-60 in about 6.7 seconds or so... which is almost the exact same as the 2019 ranger with no tune or anything. 2.7 Bronco would be sub 6.0 for sure and probably sub 5.5.
I don’t thi
Peak HP isn’t where the EcoBoost family shines. It’s the power that develops from idle to 3000 RPM where the engines shine. They’ll absolutely curb stop an NA engine regardless of temps in the low range. Mid to high revvs is where they’ll lose a bit of power, but regardless of temps the EcoBoost engines are far superior to the NA offerings. EcoBoost engines deliver near diesel power curves without the price premium and the DEF.
good to know. When I purchased my Silverado it was 2014. Not sure if they were as good back then as they are today, but I remember being concerned about heat when deciding between the F150 and the Rado.
Our launch ramp hits 110+ at times in Norcal.
 

ChrispyKC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
1,758
Reaction score
4,814
Location
Somewhere
Vehicle(s)
Vehicles
I don’t thi

good to know. When I purchased my Silverado it was 2014. Not sure if they were as good back then as they are today, but I remember being concerned about heat when deciding between the F150 and the Rado.
Our launch ramp hits 110+ at times in Norcal.
The early 3.5’s had some really weird and VERY random issues with intercoolers that developed condensation when it was humid or near a ton of moisture. That’s the only time I’ve heard of 3.5L issues related to weather or temps.
 

The Ford Bronco Will Be Revealed In...









Top