Jump to content

Bronco Based Henessey Velociraptor 400


Recommended Posts

On 7/18/2021 at 3:11 AM, blwnsmoke said:

The Explorer ST has the same trans and many people are running tunes well into the 500+.  Should be no problem with the 10r60

The thing I’d like to know is where do owners stand with warranty, do modifiers

like Hennessy cover any gearbox repair or do they direct owners back to Ford?

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jpd80 said:

The thing I’d like to know is where do owners stand with warranty, do modifiers

like Hennessy cover any gearbox repair or do they direct owners back to Ford?

They offer their 3/36k because it would void the Ford warranty (only if reported to Ford by dealer or through inspection).  No different then FP or Roush.  

 

The 5/60 would be gone..  however if you have an ESP, no telling what you could or couldn't get away with.

Edited by blwnsmoke
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/17/2021 at 1:11 PM, blwnsmoke said:

The Explorer ST has the same trans and many people are running tunes well into the 500+.  Should be no problem with the 10r60


Explorer 2.3L and All Broncos allegedly use 10r60. Everything else uses the 10r80 Including the Ranger & Mustang.

 

It seems odd that the 2.7L wouldn't use the 10R80 as the 10R60 would be over max torque on some good 2.7L from the factory in the right conditions. If they really stuck the 10R60 on the 2.7L I will dump my Bronco sooner than later. The 2.7L will have a lot of transmission failures as they get up 50K+ in mileage, especially if people tow and push them off-road.  You don't put a transmission that maxes out at 600NM with an engine where the base power rating of a low engine maxes out at 550nm. 
 

Ford hasn't had a transmission fiasco in a few years, the 10r60 with the 2.7L would be just that; class action lawsuits  and would trash the Bronco name in no time at all. Maybe that is the plan though Jeeps until the ZF had trash transmissions, maybe Ford is bringing that back to the segment. 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, jasonj80 said:


Explorer 2.3L and All Broncos allegedly use 10r60. Everything else uses the 10r80 Including the Ranger & Mustang.

 

It seems odd that the 2.7L wouldn't use the 10R80 as the 10R60 would be over max torque on some good 2.7L from the factory in the right conditions. If they really stuck the 10R60 on the 2.7L I will dump my Bronco sooner than later. The 2.7L will have a lot of transmission failures as they get up 50K+ in mileage, especially if people tow and push them off-road.  You don't put a transmission that maxes out at 600NM with an engine where the base power rating of a low engine maxes out at 550nm. 
 

Ford hasn't had a transmission fiasco in a few years, the 10r60 with the 2.7L would be just that; class action lawsuits  and would trash the Bronco name in no time at all. Maybe that is the plan though Jeeps until the ZF had trash transmissions, maybe Ford is bringing that back to the segment. 

While I’m less pessimistic about the 10R60’s reliability, many will be watching the Hennessy Raptors,

if they hold up fine, that will be a good sign that regular Raptors should have few gearbox problems.

No withstanding porous valve chest castings and shoddy parts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, jasonj80 said:


Explorer 2.3L and All Broncos allegedly use 10r60. Everything else uses the 10r80 Including the Ranger & Mustang.

 

It seems odd that the 2.7L wouldn't use the 10R80 as the 10R60 would be over max torque on some good 2.7L from the factory in the right conditions. If they really stuck the 10R60 on the 2.7L I will dump my Bronco sooner than later. The 2.7L will have a lot of transmission failures as they get up 50K+ in mileage, especially if people tow and push them off-road.  You don't put a transmission that maxes out at 600NM with an engine where the base power rating of a low engine maxes out at 550nm. 
 

Ford hasn't had a transmission fiasco in a few years, the 10r60 with the 2.7L would be just that; class action lawsuits  and would trash the Bronco name in no time at all. Maybe that is the plan though Jeeps until the ZF had trash transmissions, maybe Ford is bringing that back to the segment. 

 

The 10R60 has a nominal input shaft rating of 600 N-m, hence the "60" in the name.  However that is not necessarily the actual design maximum input shaft torque.  2nd, the 2.7L has a projected 400 lb-ft of torque using 93 octane in the Bronco.  600 N-m = 442.5 lb-ft > 400 lb-ft.  So, there is plenty of margin.  I highly doubt some "good" 2.7L from the factory will ever get close to a 10% overage in torque from the rated spec.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Flying68 said:

The 10R60 has a nominal input shaft rating of 600 N-m, hence the "60" in the name.  However that is not necessarily the actual design maximum input shaft torque.  2nd, the 2.7L has a projected 400 lb-ft of torque using 93 octane in the Bronco.  600 N-m = 442.5 lb-ft > 400 lb-ft.  So, there is plenty of margin.  I highly doubt some "good" 2.7L from the factory will ever get close to a 10% overage in torque from the rated spec.

 
I hope I'm wrong on this as it will trash the Bronco name, and people at Ford will be "how did this ever happen" but this has Ford cost cutting disaster written all over it. 

 

Today's tolerances are much better they still can have a spread of about 5% in power differences (30 years ago it could be as high as 15%). Which yes is still under the 442ft/lbs you are getting very close to max, and would be over max in certain favorable conditions for limited times, (cool temperatures and close to or under sea level). Plus you never engineer something to operate at 90% of the max limit on a continuous basis.  We will know in a year as the mileage starts to add up on these, but a Sasquatch towing 3500lbs up and down the desert mountains in 115 heat doesn't tend to end will when you're already at the top end of the design load.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Flying68 said:

The 10R60 has a nominal input shaft rating of 600 N-m, hence the "60" in the name.  However that is not necessarily the actual design maximum input shaft torque.  2nd, the 2.7L has a projected 400 lb-ft of torque using 93 octane in the Bronco.  600 N-m = 442.5 lb-ft > 400 lb-ft.  So, there is plenty of margin.  I highly doubt some "good" 2.7L from the factory will ever get close to a 10% overage in torque from the rated spec.


You have to add the torque multiplication from the torque converter which comes before the tranny input shaft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, akirby said:


You have to add the torque multiplication from the torque converter which comes before the tranny input shaft.

My understanding is that is accounted for.   The 10R140 is used in the diesels (1032 lb-ft nominal max input), the 10R80 in the pickups and BOF SUV's (590 lb-ft nominal max input), the 10R60 in the Ranger/Bronco/Explorer.  If they didn't account for torque converter effects, you would have seen a lot more failures in the current vehicles with the 10R series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Flying68 said:

My understanding is that is accounted for.   The 10R140 is used in the diesels (1032 lb-ft nominal max input), the 10R80 in the pickups and BOF SUV's (590 lb-ft nominal max input), the 10R60 in the Ranger/Bronco/Explorer.  If they didn't account for torque converter effects, you would have seen a lot more failures in the current vehicles with the 10R series.


Probably right but there seems to be a lot of torque management going on in some vehicles in lower gears where you’d think it wouldn’t be required.  Edge ST 2.7T with the 6F57 e.g.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Flying68 said:

My understanding is that is accounted for.   The 10R140 is used in the diesels (1032 lb-ft nominal max input), the 10R80 in the pickups and BOF SUV's (590 lb-ft nominal max input), the 10R60 in the Ranger/Bronco/Explorer.  If they didn't account for torque converter effects, you would have seen a lot more failures in the current vehicles with the 10R series.


The Explorer Hybrid and Rangers use the 10R80 not the 10R60.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have no concerns, again, the Explorer ST uses it and there are tons of tuned ones out there ripping it up on the road with no trans issues from the power.

 

 

 

https://www.motor1.com/news/520758/ford-bronco-has-explorer-transmission/

 

"Ford has confirmed that the Bronco uses the same 10R60 gearbox found in the Explorer, though customers concerned about durability shouldn’t worry. Ford raced a stock Bronco with the stock gearbox in this year’s NORRA Mexican 1000 off-road rally to a third-place finish

 

Ford is producing the Bronco alongside the Ranger that uses the older 10R80 gearbox, though Ford is using it in the Ranger for very specific reasons. The 10R60 in the Bronco is rated to handle the output from the Bronco’s two available engines – the 2.3-liter and the 2.7-liter. The Bronco’s gearbox is lighter with a lower internal mass, reducing parasitic loss, and it’s more efficient than the 10R80, too."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, akirby said:


Probably, along with handling the additional electric motor torque.

Correct, the electric motor in place of the torque converter adds

up to  200 lb ft in the lower rpms tapering off as revs increase.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, blwnsmoke said:

I'd have no concerns, again, the Explorer ST uses it and there are tons of tuned ones out there ripping it up on the road with no trans issues from the power.

 

 

 

https://www.motor1.com/news/520758/ford-bronco-has-explorer-transmission/

 

"Ford has confirmed that the Bronco uses the same 10R60 gearbox found in the Explorer, though customers concerned about durability shouldn’t worry. Ford raced a stock Bronco with the stock gearbox in this year’s NORRA Mexican 1000 off-road rally to a third-place finish

 

Ford is producing the Bronco alongside the Ranger that uses the older 10R80 gearbox, though Ford is using it in the Ranger for very specific reasons. The 10R60 in the Bronco is rated to handle the output from the Bronco’s two available engines – the 2.3-liter and the 2.7-liter. The Bronco’s gearbox is lighter with a lower internal mass, reducing parasitic loss, and it’s more efficient than the 10R80, too."


The Transmission in the 2020 Explorer is rated 1/5 much worse in both Minor and Major repair on CR. The Transmission on the F-150, Mustang, Expedition, Ranger and Mustang is rated as average to much better than average with the major category being much better than average (5/5). . 

The Bronco will also be modified considerably more often than an ST Explorer and it already has an extremely poor showing. Doing a race is completely different than driving it 60K, 80K or 100K miles. It is a different driving style and not really applicable, its good for PR but not good from a true durability standpoint. 

Edited by jasonj80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Anyone want to lay bets that NG Ranger switches to 10R60 because

I can’t see any reason why Ford wouldn’t standardise across T6 products

 

Unless they detune the diesel it will exceed max torque ratings. Could see NA going the cheap route with the 60 and row going with the 80. They could also go to the 10R80 in 2023 if they see they have an issue going on with warranty. The last thing Ford needs with the Bronco is more bad PR, if transmission failures and problems start cropping up it will be even worse than the delays and leaking roofs. 
 

 The 10R60 makes sense for the 2.3L for the 2.7L they really should have stuck to the 10R80. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jasonj80 said:


The Transmission in the 2020 Explorer is rated 1/5 much worse in both Minor and Major repair on CR. The Transmission on the F-150, Mustang, Expedition, Ranger and Mustang is rated as average to much better than average with the major category being much better than average (5/5). . 

The Bronco will also be modified considerably more often than an ST Explorer and it already has an extremely poor showing. Doing a race is completely different than driving it 60K, 80K or 100K miles. It is a different driving style and not really applicable, its good for PR but not good from a true durability standpoint. 

Most of the transmission issues were 2 things...  programming (2.3L) which has been resolved from majority of posts I go through daily on the explorer forum and facebook.  The other was trans failures due to the trans cooler failing and leaking fluid.  There was a TSB on this as well as a recall to replace them.  Most know you can't take CR for what they claim to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...