Anyone hear any fuel mileage yet on these Broncos?

 

Nothing official that I saw but going by the B5 Audi platform 2.7L twin turbo V6 I owned several of expect 12-15mpg average if you drive it like its meant to be. Ford's 2.7L uses direct injection with variable intake and exhaust timing with very high compression so it will squeeze every potential advantage it can out of fuel combustion. The downside to direct injection twin-turbo is working on them once things do wear out after 60-80k miles, the soot and heat the internals, injectors, hoses and intakes deal with are no joke.

 

Audi's stuff is high performance and fragile...it's 2.7 (5 valve) engine was designed 20 years ago and was never meant as a consumer engine. Audis are meant for people with too much money and are a nightmare in terms of long term maintenance costs.

Ford's 2.7 is meant to be a working engine, tuned for regular gas. I would look to the Ranger 2.3 and the F150 2.7 for projecting Bronco fuel mileage.

 

I'm just hoping I could possibly get close to 30 mpgs with the 4 banger (not driving crazy). Because my 79 Bronco and 2000 SD already get 12-15 MPGs. Need something more fuel efficient that's capable offroad. Was just about to get a Subuaru Outback but now the Bronco is here...I am considering it especially with the 7 speed.

 

We've had a couple Foresters and the newer '17 with CVT will get 30-32 mpg on the road. I had an '09 Forester with a stick (drove it 120k miles, now my son has it) and my highest freeway averages were about 26 mpg. The only Bronco that might get 30 mpg for you is the Bronco Sport with the 3-cylinder Ecoboost 1.5 and low rolling resistance road tires. Or wait till they make a hybrid Bronco. Physics gets in the way of 30 gasoline mpg and off-road capability in a boxy vehicle with aggressive tires. Wranglers struggle to get over 20 mpg in any circumstances.

 

Well, I would like to see these Ford-working-engines after 100k of use as a work truck. I have owned several Audi 2.7T variants with around 200k miles driven by me (consumer) between them. I have worked on them and I have seen just about everything that goes wrong with them. To call them high performance or fragile would not be accurate. The stock internals can take around 450awHP, stock pistons are forged and really dont have an attainable limit, 5V although over complicated do what they are supposed to. Being twin turbo they are VERY responsive to tuning, however heat has always been a big issue - and I am very curious to see how Ford is going to manage it in a vehicle that weighs more than the Audi's of "20 years ago". Speaking of which, I strongly doubt Ford did not take a long hard look at the previous twin-turbo applications by other makers when they made their own.

Where am I going with all of this ? Audis are/were intelligent AWD (my S4 switched the load distribution between the diffs 100+ a minute) and heavy, 2.7TT problems stemmed' from managing a lot of weight and heat. The new Bronco is heavier with bigger, heavier wheels meant to go offroad, away from shops and repairs. No twin-turbo application will ever be as reliable as a simple as possible NA setup. I really dont care for Chrysler but they have a more logical approach to their offroad overpriced Jeeps. So I am very skeptical and surprised that Ford didnt just stick a mustang 5.0 in there.

 

The 3.5 Ecoboost has twin turbos and there are many that have gone 200k miles since its 2011 introduction without engine or turbo problems...in heavy, working and towing vehicles, and running on regular gas. Or packed tightly into transverse applications such as the police Taurus and Explorer (aka the SHO and Explorer Sport). Turbo cooling technology is pretty advanced in these engines.

I'm in no position to compare reliability to Audi, but the 2.7 Ecoboost has a graphited iron block and should be even more durable than the 3.5...and the 2.7 is also used in the Fusion and Edge in a transverse (and tightly packed) engine bay. And an F150 with the 2.7 has a towing capacity of 9000 lbs on regular gas. What's the towing capacity of the Audi?

 

oh about 4 adults @ 10 second 1/4 mile

 

You are comparing a performance (yes, it is a performance engine in your Audi application) vs an engine designed for hard use in pickups and police vehicles. I'd say that's apples to oranges.

And yes, while the 2.3 is just DI, the 2.7 is actual dual injection so it should not have any problems with carbon buildup in the intake system.

Side note does anyone know why the 2.3 isn't dual injection yet? It would appear all the 4 cylinders are still all direct injection, while all v6's are now dual injection. The 2.3 isn't exactly new, so have they just figured out it doesn't have carbon buildup problems?