Chevrolet Corvette Stingray C7 Forum - View Single Post

*DGthe3* · 01-15-2018, 02:50 PM

No V6 makes sense to me. Its a Ford, so of course it has an EcoBoast. Which is downsizing, turbocharging, and direct injecting. So in the case of the Ranger, that means ditching the V6 in favour of the turbo4. Just like in the Mustang.

What I find odd is no large NA 4 cylinder or small EcoBoast at roughly 200 hp as a base engine with even better fuel economy than what this 2.3 will get.

I would also expect a high output version of the 2.3 as the engine for a Ranger Raptor instead of a V6. They could get similar numbers out of that as they would for the 2.7L, but without the hassle of having to design the engine bay to accommodate a V6.

01-15-2018, 02:50 PM	#13
DGthe3 Moderator.ca Drives: 05 Grand Am GT Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Niagara, Canada Posts: 25,366	No V6 makes sense to me. Its a Ford, so of course it has an EcoBoast. Which is downsizing, turbocharging, and direct injecting. So in the case of the Ranger, that means ditching the V6 in favour of the turbo4. Just like in the Mustang. What I find odd is no large NA 4 cylinder or small EcoBoast at roughly 200 hp as a base engine with even better fuel economy than what this 2.3 will get. I would also expect a high output version of the 2.3 as the engine for a Ranger Raptor instead of a V6. They could get similar numbers out of that as they would for the 2.7L, but without the hassle of having to design the engine bay to accommodate a V6. __________________ Note, if I've gotten any facts wrong in the above, just ignore any points I made with them __________________ Originally Posted by FbodFather My sister's dentist's brother's cousin's housekeeper's dog-breeder's nephew sells coffee filters to the company that provides coffee to General Motors...... ........and HE WOULD KNOW!!!! __________________ Camaro Fest sub-forum