Looking for 2.3 owners input

[Brian_B]

Torque multiplication is done through gearing.

You are right, most of the torque multiplication is done via gearing. But Autos can also do it via the torque converter. They can also boost torque proportional to slippage; I won't pretend to understand it, but something about a stator and it allowing it to do more than just be a hydraulic clutch or dumb coupling.

Now, you don't rely on that torque multiplication for long durations, or you'd overheat pretty quickly. But for getting initial momentum and other events, just like where you would have to ride a manual clutch to keep the engine running, it seems to do just fine.

Part of the reason why the Autos have a much smaller final gear ratio, but are able to crawl just as well

Sponsored

 

[WarthogJr]

2.3 owners: “It’s peppy!” “Lively!” “Better mileage!” “More reliable!” “Don’t need more power!”
2.7 owners: “Cool story, bro.”

 

[crenca]

If you're going from a Honda Odyssey to a Bronco the 2.3 auto in a 4-door Badlands will get you to 60mph 1.3 seconds faster.

Anyone know of any "official" 0-60 (1/4 mile, etc.) done by any of the usual magazines/sources?

I have a 4 door SAS 2.3 manual with Ford Performance tune and my butt-meter places it right about 7.0 seconds, and would probably be just a tad faster with an auto. The beefy midrange torque can fool a person into thinking it is quicker. My old Odyssey was an on honest 8.0 second vehicle (at sea level, not my altitude).

Locally lots are full of bronco Sasquatch’s. Go drive both the 2.3 and 2.7 , I did before buying and it was very clear , 2.3 only if you wanted a low performance bronco with manual , 2.7 hands down with the auto , 100 lbs of torque you don’t pass up on for the same fuel economy and the extra money you’ll recoup on resale .

Or the OP could get a FP tune for the 2.3 and get 385flbs of torque (for less $ then 2.7 price), which is pretty close to the 2.7. Just a thought.

 

[Area51BS]

Yeah I’m thinking about badlands with out Sasquatch as for what we need even badlands it over kill auto is a must for wife so now it’s the engine options I will drive both and want to make the right choice as we will have it for a long time

Best trim there is

 

[indio22]

I have a 22' 4 door Badlands with the 2.3 as a daily driver. It has plenty of giddy up with 93 octane, even towing a small teardrop trailer up some very steep New England grades. I have no regrets and personally I wouldn't change a thing. Some folks have suggested taking the 2.3 and 2.7 out back to back to compare your personal needs. I agree, do it.

That's a key in my book - test drive the various versions. I didn't place an order until having done that. That's how I knew the manual 2.3L was a good match for my driving style and usage.

Since purchase I tend to keep the turbo boost gauge on the dash display, and have noticed I don't often dip into boost. So that indicates V6 power would have been largely wasted on me.

For a lead foot driver, someone who loads their Bronco with lots of heavy accessories/gear, perhaps does a lot of higher altitude driving, or towing things on the heavier side ... I'd probably go V6.

 

[KC2LLW]

We drove the 2.7 4dr BD Sas and loved it now I need to find a 2.3 to drive I took my F150 2.7 10 speed up the NY Thruway today and noticed the RPMs at 70 mph and it was 1600 RPMs gear ratio is 3:55. I imagine 4:70 would be 2500 which seems a lot to me?

 

[userdude]

We drove the 2.7 4dr BD Sas and loved it now I need to find a 2.3 to drive I took my F150 2.7 10 speed up the NY Thruway today and noticed the RPMs at 70 mph and it was 1600 RPMs gear ratio is 3:55. I imagine 4:70 would be 2500 which seems a lot to me?

My 2.3 runs around 1800-2krpm around 70mph (can't recall exactly). I've heard the ecoboosts run most efficiently around 2500-2800rpm as well, but don't know that for sure.

 

[KC2LLW]

I also don’t plan on doing anything to either engine other than maintenance. I don’t want to alter it with performance mods

 

[Brian_B]

Or the OP could get a FP tune for the 2.3 and get 385flbs of torque (for less $ then 2.7 price), which is pretty close to the 2.7. Just a thought.

While it's true that the up front cost is more - the FP tune locks you into Premium gas to get close to the same power the 2.7 gets on 87 octane.

I think I did the math once upon a time and at $0.50/gal difference, it was something like 37,000 miles that the 2.7 broke even, and after that the 2.3 with tune would end up costing you more. Don't quote me on those numbers exactly, going off beer math and bad memory -- but yeah, I thought the exact same thing until I sat down and thought about it, and there was definitely a point where the "2.3 with a tune is a like a 2.7 only it saves you money" case broke down.

 

[Bronccraig]

2.3 is great, plenty of power. Very fun with a manual. But if you are getting an auto I'd opt for the 2.7 just because you can.

I run 89 no issues

Love my 2.3 manual the 2/3 shift is the funnesestttt

 

[Brian_B]

Love my 2.3 manual the 2/3 shift is the funnesestttt

Totally agree, I love that shift into 3rd and push the pedal down.

 

[thesocalexplorer]

Totally agree, I love that shift into 3rd and push the pedal down.

Yep! That initial boost shove below 10PSI, and the very welcome extra shove when it hits 18-19 PSI and makes a whoooosh sound.

 

[Canadian5.0]

Anyone know of any "official" 0-60 (1/4 mile, etc.) done by any of the usual magazines/sources?

I have a 4 door SAS 2.3 manual with Ford Performance tune and my butt-meter places it right about 7.0 seconds, and would probably be just a tad faster with an auto. The beefy midrange torque can fool a person into thinking it is quicker. My old Odyssey was an on honest 8.0 second vehicle (at sea level, not my altitude).



Or the OP could get a FP tune for the 2.3 and get 385flbs of torque (for less $ then 2.7 price), which is pretty close to the 2.7. Just a thought.

Run higher octane consistently, Jeopardize warranty , still less power and have to over work that little all aluminum engine when the 2.7 is built like a diesel engine , superior block , tune won’t hold value , 2.7 upgrade will

 

[KC2LLW]

My 2.3 runs around 1800-2krpm around 70mph (can't recall exactly). I've heard the ecoboosts run most efficiently around 2500-2800rpm as well, but don't know that for sure.

That’s not bad what axle ratios?

 

[Montana Bronco]

For the same money to add an auto trans and a V6, you could keep the 2.3 and 7MT and convert to a 5.13 gear ratio.

I certainly know which direction I would go. Talk about a torque multiplier !

Sponsored