First 2024 Ranger with 2.7L engine delivered!

[CherryCoke]

Unless it was some kind of pre-production demo truck, that seems....unlikely.

Oh well. Guess I'll take pictures for next time anything happens. Got to have proof nowadays

Sponsored

 

[Jason B]

Does this still apply to the 2.7 in Rangers? Is the 2.3 the same?
I might want to rethink my plans for a 2.7.

 

[HighDesertRanger]

Oh well. Guess I'll take pictures for next time anything happens. Got to have proof nowadays

Well when you see one before Ford was producing them....photos would be ideal

 

[ZRRekz]

Does this still apply to the 2.7 in Rangers? Is the 2.3 the same?
I might want to rethink my plans for a 2.7.

It's my understanding the wet belt is also the same design for the 2.7 in the ranger, yes. Don't quote me on it though.

 

[1986YellowRanger]

It's my understanding the wet belt is also the same design for the 2.7 in the ranger, yes. Don't quote me on it though.

Yes, the 2.7L has a wet belt. See the 11:40 mark on this video.

 

[hand-filer]

It's my understanding the wet belt is also the same design for the 2.7 in the ranger, yes. Don't quote me on it though.

It's also used on the Ford current generation 5.0 and the Duramax diesel. I'm not the least bit concerned about it.
It's a much better design then the direct crankshaft driven oil pump on my Gen 1 5.0.
That design is notorious for shattering oil pump gears at high RPM due to harmonics.
All kinds of negative chatter about this design by the uninformed.

 

[1986YellowRanger]

Welp, that didn’t last long… The power steering gearbox went out, took it to the dealer, and the part is on back order. Service manager said it could be a couple weeks or even a month before she will be able to find a replacement. The truck has 200 miles on it, I drove it very gently for three days, and it’s already out of commission indefinitely. I understand that this stuff happens so I’m not upset about the component failure, but I am upset that the needed part is on back order and not available.

Any help you can provide getting my dealer the needed replacement part more quickly would be greatly appreciated. The loaner vehicle in the driveway, and the loaner parked in the parking lot at work are not a good look for Ford after everyone was excited for my new truck on Friday.

@Ford Motor Company are you able to call anyone? My dealer is telling me my 3 day old truck is going to be in the shop and waiting weeks for a replacement part!

 

[Deleted member 5785]

Crickets

 

[stemplar]

Does this still apply to the 2.7 in Rangers?

The wet belt is still the same, but the leaking oil pan has been corrected.

 

[RANGER_MARC]

Delivered via convoy to Ohio the same day it was shipped. Blend Date of 8/7, built date of 8/12, ship date of 8/14. The truck in my garage was literally piece parts less than two weeks ago.

Congratulations! I am very interested in this engine! How's the ride? Does it outperform a tuned 2.3?

 

[AlpineBike]

@Ford Motor Company are you able to call anyone? My dealer is telling me my 3 day old truck is going to be in the shop and waiting weeks for a replacement part!

Just like calling Ford directly, they won’t help you.
They have your money already. @Ford Motor Company and their lazy UAW assembly line workers couldn’t care less about you unfortunately…

 

[1986YellowRanger]

Congratulations! I am very interested in this engine! How's the ride? Does it outperform a tuned 2.3?

It’s still in the shop waiting on a replacement power steering gear, but apparently it is on the way this weekend. Honestly, I know there is a lot of debate on this forum between the 2.3L and 2.7L, but my loaner vehicle is a 2024 Explorer with the 2.3L and it is a dramatic downgrade from the 2.7L. It’s been crazy hot here in the Midwest so I’ll give the 2.3L the benefit of the doubt, but the 2.3L has horrible turbo lag and feels sluggish in city driving. On the highway the 2.3L does totally fine, but I haven’t challenged it with any heavy loads on the highway. The sound from the 2.3L is best described as unimpressive, I’ll leave it at that as to not offend...

For the few days I drove the 2.7L, I noticed zero turbo lag. It is incredibly peppy in city driving without even pushing hard. The sound from the 2.7L is an impressive deep rumble when compared To the 2.3L. On the highway the 2.7L doesn’t strain even a little bit, but I can’t say that there is a massive highway performance different between the 2.3 and 2.7 other than the engine sound and RPM readings. The 2.7L would probably be better when power is needed to get out of a pickle, but I haven’t found myself in that situation yet.

I would spend the extra $2,000 on the 2.7L without hesitation if buying again. In fact, I think Ford is leaving money on the table in only charging $2,000 for this upgrade. It’s worth at least double what they are charging. My guess is that in 2025 the Raptor is going to increase by at least $5k and the 2.7L upgrade is going to increase to around $3K.

Regarding the potential for a 2.3L tune upgrade, I’m sure they will be able to squeeze more power out of it, but it’s still going to have turbo lag and it’s going to need every bit of that turbo to increase power.

 

[Peter949]

I had '19 2.3 (same engine) it's not turbo lag. Put in sport and it's pretty responsive and a tune will most definitely bring it to life and even match a stock 2.7. The 2.3 is one of the best turbo 4 out there.

 

[hand-filer]

I test drove the 4 cylinder and the 2.7 before I bought my Lincoln.
Not only was the 2.7 quicker, smoother, it bested the 4 cylinder on the highway for fuel economy.
In the case of the Ranger, the 2.3 is rated 1 mpg better hwy/city combined. That's a small penalty for a superior performing motor.
Sure a tune will bump up the power of the 2.3 a bit, but then you're forced to burn premium. The cost of the tune, the reduced warranty and the additional fuel expenses will negate the original purchase saving in no time.
The 2.3 is a good motor, the 2.7 is a better motor.

 

[1986YellowRanger]

I test drove the 4 cylinder and the 2.7 before I bought my Lincoln.
Not only was the 2.7 quicker, smoother, it bested the 4 cylinder on the highway for fuel economy.
In the case of the Ranger, the 2.3 is rated 1 mpg better hwy/city combined. That's a small penalty for a superior performing motor.
Sure a tune will bump up the power of the 2.3 a bit, but then you're forced to burn premium. The cost of the tune, the reduced warranty and the additional fuel expenses will negate the original purchase saving in no time.
The 2.3 is a good motor, the 2.7 is a better motor.

Using regular fuel I got 23.4 MPG (onboard computer calculated) for an 89 mile highway drive where I had the cruse control set at 81 MPH. This was roughly 120-210 miles into the odometer, tonneau cover installed. I would expect it to get a bit better after a few hundred more miles of break-in. I don’t know how accurate that is, but it is a data point…

Sponsored