Manual or the 2.7

[O'Carroll]

I’m either getting the 2.3L manual (Black Diamond), or getting an outer banks and jumping to the 2.7L. And still contemplating Sasquatch on either, so if I have to go auto, I’ll jump to the V6.

Sponsored

 

[rapidredbronco2021]

I'm still undecided on what engine I'll be going with, waiting to actually be able to test drive both, but either way it'll be auto. Never was a fan of stick shift and then factoring in the Sasquatch requirements makes it a easy decision for me.

The fact that you can’t get the Sasquatch package with the manual might be bigger deal break to most than the manual not being offered with the 2.7 V6. I was considering test driving the Ranger to get some sort of feel for the engine.

 

[Toccoa]

The answer is always a manual transmission.

 

[rapidredbronco2021]

I’m either getting the 2.3L manual (Black Diamond), or getting an outer banks and jumping to the 2.7L. And still contemplating Sasquatch on either, so if I have to go auto, I’ll jump to the V6.

I’m leaning that route as well. I was con just going with the manual for the purest perspective. A two door Bronco with a manual would be super rare

 

[SoccerDude]

Without pricing......

 

[vrewald14]

Here ya go, sport.


https://jalopnik.com/an-extremely-detailed-look-into-the-ford-broncos-engine-1844389830

I have read that article before, which is fascinating by the way. However, either I can't read, or that article doesn't contain any information on 2.3L engine or manual transmission reliability or durability.

Can you point me to some quotes?

 

[rapidredbronco2021]

Without pricing......

These are just some of the things I think about until I get to build it and see the options and the possibilities

 

[Chadillac]

Manually shifting a turbo Bronco is what I’m here for.

 

[Rogues Gambit]

I built an Ecoboost before, it'll be more than enough

If I was interested in an automatic, there's a million Jeeps on the lot I can get for a steal

 

[Rick Astley]

I have read that article before, which is fascinating by the way. However, either I can't read, or that article doesn't contain any information on 2.3L engine or manual transmission reliability or durability.

Can you point me to some quotes?

The engine component of that article is incredibly thin and contains no info regarding the engine's reliability or operation

(Full disclosure: I do not take anecdotal comments from Jalopnik as factual and therefore have disqualified them from consideration in this response)

 

[vrewald14]

The engine component of that article is incredibly thin and contains no info regarding the engine's reliability or operation

(Full disclosure: I do not take anecdotal comments from Jalopnik as factual and therefore have disqualified them from consideration in this response)

My conclusion exactly.

I'm definitely in for the 2.3L / Manual - reliability or no reliability concerns. Our family is a manual family therefore if my sons cannot learn to drive a manual then they can walk to school

More seriously - my wife and I truly enjoy driving manual cars, and keeping these "Standard" options on a Badlands will allow us to invest in more creature comforts.

I'm no stranger to turning a wrench - so if there is some intake valve cleaning needing done at 100k so be it, but that type of normal maintenance should not deter anyone from going with the 2.3L (even if you pay someone else to do it).

 

[Chadillac]

It’s a 4x4 convertible Mustang that pulls my boat. I want it to feel every bit as sporty as my other pony car.

 

[wolfpackinva]

Manual for me. My focus with the 2.0 and 5 speed has plenty of pep. This will have 80% more ponies and a couple extra gears. I'm good.

Not to mention, theres a dealer out there with a lifetime powertrain warranty (Leo Kaytes Ford).

 

[wolfpackinva]

My conclusion exactly.

I'm definitely in for the 2.3L / Manual - reliability or no reliability concerns. Our family is a manual family therefore if my sons cannot learn to drive a manual then they can walk to school

More seriously - my wife and I truly enjoy driving manual cars, and keeping these "Standard" options on a Badlands will allow us to invest in more creature comforts.

I'm no stranger to turning a wrench - so if there is some intake valve cleaning needing done at 100k so be it, but that type of normal maintenance should not deter anyone from going with the 2.3L (even if you pay someone else to do it).

This will be the third manual in our driveway. If the tundra came in a manual, that would be another. My 13 year old is already learning to drive a stick.

 

[Rick Astley]

That’s what I was thinking as well. That engine has been pretty reliable in the F-150 which would be a plus for longevity. I was also concerned the inline 4 would feel under powered, manual or the 10 speed; compared to the 2.7.

Comparing them back to back, the 2.7 is sure to feel stronger with that much more torque. The question is really if the 2.3 is a slouch and should disqualify itself as a "penalty box" engine instead of a viable power plant for this application?

The answer to that question is a resounding NO! The 2.3 has plenty of torque for the application, it is also refined and smooth (if you take the automatic transmission out of the conversation). Having driven a Ranger with the 2.3 for about 5,000 miles I will confirm what those on the Ranger forums have been saying for the past few years: This is a more-than-capable engine even if you're at max load (7,500 lbs towing, and another 1.2K lbs in the bed) the Ranger hauls it without drama and feels that it has more to give. It's tow rating is frame-dependent in the same way that Bronco is stuck with a class 2 hitch (3,500 lbs). They can't have it compete against the F-150. The 2.3 engine stands on it's own merits and is PLENTY of engine for the Bronco.

The fact that you can’t get the Sasquatch package with the manual might be bigger deal break to most than the manual not being offered with the 2.7 V6. I was considering test driving the Ranger to get some sort of feel for the engine.

The take-rate for Sasquatch will be higher in the pre-sales than regular retail sales will be in 2 years time. It's essentially a package which removes the vehicle from daily driving duties for many people. My guess is that they will be special order for most dealerships once the initial rush on Bronco dies down.

As for feeling the 2.3 engine in the Ranger, I strongly suggest you do so.
If your goal is to compare a potential Bronco 2.3/MT against the 2.7/AT then you absolutely MUST put the ranger transmission into sport mode and I also suggest locking out the 7th - 10th gears. This will give you a drastically more accurate comparison against how a human might shift gears as the 10AT in the Ranger will basically "sprint" to 10th gear as fast as possible and you will wonder why the engine feels down on power and torque. The engine has tons of torque at 3,000-4,000 RPM, but that transmission will have you shifting at 2,800 RPM all the way up to 10th gear.... Which is why, IMHO, the NON-Sasquatch 2.3 paired with AT for the Bronco should be the lowest selling drivetrain combination in existence.

Hope you enjoy the drive and I encourage you to give your honest feedback via a dedicated thread on your experience. There are a LOT of people here who just want to buy the larger engine because it's larger and therefor the smaller engine won't be sufficient. That is not the case here.

Sponsored