Sponsored

2020 Ranger: Will it get the 2.7 V-6 Eco Boost?

kep

Well-Known Member
First Name
James
Joined
Aug 16, 2018
Threads
3
Messages
198
Reaction score
186
Location
Aurora, SD
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger Lariat
Occupation
Retired
Seriously, no offense but can we just stop it with the 2.7L stuff? I've had a smile on my face ever since I picked up my truck; the 2.3L Ecoboost has more than enough power to make this truck get up and go. If ford wants to do something special for a N/A Ranger Raptor then maybe the 2.7L is the ticket if they can squeeze it between the rails. Until then, to those that haven't taken delivery or are considering buying, I can assure you the Ranger is NOT down on power by any measure.
There maybe some faults I have not found yet..but power isn't one of them.
Sponsored

 

Floyd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2019
Threads
38
Messages
2,064
Reaction score
3,132
Location
illinois
Vehicle(s)
'19 Ranger SCab,'16 Connect,'95 MustangGT,'50 Ford
i love the 2.7, but given the choice I would choose the 2.3 for this application.
Remember the SVO 2.3L Turbo? or even the 1979 2.3L Turbo?
Each made power to match their contemporary V8s.
I can feel the "spirit" of that heritage in the Ecoboost 2.3L.
There is no need for a 2.7 in the Ranger.
 

2.7EcoBoost

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2019
Threads
5
Messages
315
Reaction score
340
Location
NY
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger FX4 Screw
I think it's a pretty safe bet the 2.7 wil not be offered on the current generation. The redesign? I hope so.
My thoughts also. I'm not saying the 2.3L is a bad choice or not capable, especially compared to the current class offerings, but the 2.7 would do everything with so much less effort that I believe it would actually get better real world mpg for the vast majority of owners. Plus it would change the rules in the class. It's an impressive performing engine for it's small size. Ford would would not be able to have it certified higher by the epa though or they'd look like clowns.
 

Floyd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2019
Threads
38
Messages
2,064
Reaction score
3,132
Location
illinois
Vehicle(s)
'19 Ranger SCab,'16 Connect,'95 MustangGT,'50 Ford
My thoughts also. I'm not saying the 2.3L is a bad choice or not capable, especially compared to the current class offerings, but the 2.7 would do everything with so much less effort that I believe it would actually get better real world mpg for the vast majority of owners. Plus it would change the rules in the class. It's an impressive performing engine for it's small size. Ford would would not be able to have it certified higher by the epa though or they'd look like clowns.
Fuel management is the key.
I don't understand your logic as to why the 2.3 would work significantly harder than the 2.7.
with the additional rotating mass and two extra cylinders, along with the extra turbo, I think the
" extra effort" is compensated for in extra inherent efficiency.
 
Last edited:

Stampede.Offroad

New Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2019
Threads
0
Messages
1
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Vehicle(s)
beat up old VW Passat
Fuel management is the key.
I don't understand your logic as to why the 2.3 would work significantly harder than the 2.7.
with the additional rotating mass and two extra cylinders, along with the extra turbo, I think the
" extra effort" is compensated for in extra inherent efficiency.
Load. While I'm sure the 2.3L I4 does fine for an unladen vehicle zipping around as a daily driver, where it does equally well in an Edge or Ranger, the larger engine will perform considerably better under load. This is a pickup after all, it is meant to haul and pull. I don't see a lot of Edge's with 3/4 ton of material in the back end, or pulling a trailer that is 1.5x heavier than the vehicle itself. Under load is where a 3.0L V6 would be a better option than the 2.3.

Offering the 3.0L V6 would also leave room for there to be a high performance version of the engine for use in a Raptor (which already exists, and is used in Lincoln's and the new Explorer ST).
 


Floyd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2019
Threads
38
Messages
2,064
Reaction score
3,132
Location
illinois
Vehicle(s)
'19 Ranger SCab,'16 Connect,'95 MustangGT,'50 Ford
Fuel management is the key and turbocharging enhances fuel management.
I don't understand your logic as to why the 2.3 would work significantly harder than the 2.7.
with the additional rotating mass and two extra cylinders, along with the extra turbo, I think the
" extra effort" is more than compensated for in extra inherent efficiency.
Load. While I'm sure the 2.3L I4 does fine for an unladen vehicle zipping around as a daily driver, where it does equally well in an Edge or Ranger, the larger engine will perform considerably better under load. This is a pickup after all, it is meant to haul and pull. I don't see a lot of Edge's with 3/4 ton of material in the back end, or pulling a trailer that is 1.5x heavier than the vehicle itself. Under load is where a 3.0L V6 would be a better option than the 2.3.

Offering the 3.0L V6 would also leave room for there to be a high performance version of the engine for use in a Raptor (which already exists, and is used in Lincoln's and the new Explorer ST).
Yours is a persistent argument with just enough merit to sound plausible.
Unfortunately it is an old one and I remember when it was used to support V8s when the better choice was an I-6 for a particular application.
You may be chasing rainbows and wasting money next year if the V6 is offered and you trade-in a perfectly capable new truck, but it may be worth it if it makes you happy, and that is what really matters.:like:
It took 3 model years to get Ford to build my old Ranger, but I kept it for 18 years so I get it.
 
Last edited:

EcoRanger

Well-Known Member
First Name
Doc
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Threads
31
Messages
1,010
Reaction score
2,446
Location
West By God Virginia
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger XLT 301A SuperCrew 4X4 2015 Ecoboost Mustang 50 Year Appereance Package convertible
Vehicle Showcase
5
The rumor I'm hearing is the 2.0L diesel coming out in the 2020 Transit will be the new engine option for the 2020 Ranger
 

VAMike

Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Feb 22, 2019
Threads
1
Messages
3,390
Reaction score
4,408
Location
Virginia
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger Lariat SuperCab
The rumor I'm hearing is the 2.0L diesel coming out in the 2020 Transit will be the new engine option for the 2020 Ranger
Diesels make no sense in this market. As I said earlier, I expect a bigger engine just for marketing but really if your primary use case is hauling 7500lbs (vs doing so occasionally) a full size truck makes more sense just from a handling perspective. But why stop at an F150 with a crummy v6 when an F350 with the new 7.3 v8 can efficiently haul 34k pounds all day long? Really, everyone should have one just in case they might ever tow anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kep

EcoRanger

Well-Known Member
First Name
Doc
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Threads
31
Messages
1,010
Reaction score
2,446
Location
West By God Virginia
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger XLT 301A SuperCrew 4X4 2015 Ecoboost Mustang 50 Year Appereance Package convertible
Vehicle Showcase
5
Diesels make no sense in this market. As I said earlier, I expect a bigger engine just for marketing but really if your primary use case is hauling 7500lbs (vs doing so occasionally) a full size truck makes more sense just from a handling perspective. But why stop at an F150 with a crummy v6 when an F350 with the new 7.3 v8 can efficiently haul 34k pounds all day long? Really, everyone should have one just in case they might ever tow anything.
When has anything Ford has done make sense to us. Colorado has one and it has a bigger payload than Ranger a diesel would give Ranger the load carrying crown it could happen.
 

flatus

Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Feb 1, 2019
Threads
0
Messages
19
Reaction score
8
Location
Mississippi
Vehicle(s)
2018 F1Fitty
I think they need to drop the 6.2 V8 in the Ranger. Maybe even the new 7.3 V8 that's coming out soon.:rockon:
 

VAMike

Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Feb 22, 2019
Threads
1
Messages
3,390
Reaction score
4,408
Location
Virginia
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ranger Lariat SuperCab
When has anything Ford has done make sense to us. Colorado has one and it has a bigger payload than Ranger a diesel would give Ranger the load carrying crown it could happen.
I'd be amazed if Ford wanted to pay for the certifications for a diesel for the ranger because it would be tough to make a profit on it. People like to talk about the chevy diesel more than they like to buy it. The economics just don't work for diesel in the us market (and are getting worse in Europe due to emissions concerns). This is from someone who's been driving a diesel more than 15 years--the numbers don't add up the way they did 15 years ago.
 

Roofhopper

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ted
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Threads
6
Messages
326
Reaction score
607
Location
Fairfield OH
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ford Ranger XLT FX4
Occupation
HVAC Service Manager
Vehicle Showcase
1
Internal combustion engines make power by moving air, and 1lb of air is 1lb of air. Whether I’ve moved it with the aid of 2 extra cylinders, a turbo, supercharger etc doesn’t matter. I can tell you first hand these new rangers haul just fine with a load in them
 

metroplex

New Member
First Name
Charlie
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Threads
0
Messages
4
Reaction score
3
Location
Detroit, MI
Vehicle(s)
2017 Ford Fusion Sport
I doubt Ford will offer the 2.7 EcoBoost on the Ranger because it'd be much faster than the F-150. Just like they do not offer the 3.5 EcoBoost on the F-150 Regular Cab w/ 4x2. It'd be super light with a lot of power, kind of a cheap Lightning setup.

I have the 2.7 EcoBoost V6 in my Fusion Sport and wish I had more power with a 2nd-gen D35 3.5L EcoBoost. You can never have too much power. Looking at the specs on paper, even with a fully tuned 2.3 on the Ranger at 350-400 hp, I'd still want more power like 500+ with a tune-only 3.5 truck EcoBoost.
 

FLEngineer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2018
Threads
13
Messages
313
Reaction score
256
Location
Orlando,FL
Vehicle(s)
2019 Ford Ranger Lariat SCrew
Vehicle Showcase
1
You can never have too much power. Looking at the specs on paper, even with a fully tuned 2.3 on the Ranger at 350-400 hp, I'd still want more power like 500+ with a tune-only 3.5 truck EcoBoost.
You hit the nail on the head... When you chase power you can never stop, there is always some new mod or option that can give that little bit more. At some point you've got to step back and say I've done my best and enjoy the product.
 

Pioneer74

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2019
Threads
0
Messages
357
Reaction score
206
Location
Michigan
Vehicle(s)
2018 Focus ST 2018 F150 Lariat
I doubt Ford will offer the 2.7 EcoBoost on the Ranger because it'd be much faster than the F-150. Just like they do not offer the 3.5 EcoBoost on the F-150 Regular Cab w/ 4x2. It'd be super light with a lot of power, kind of a cheap Lightning setup.
You can get the 3.5 EB on a long bed regular cab 4x2. Ford tried a short bed 4x2 3.5 EB in 2014, called it the Tremor. It didn't sell.
Sponsored

 
 








Top