2027 F-150 Drops 2.7l for 3.0l

[ExplorerDude]

17 hours ago, akirby said:

I assume it will also share a lot with the TTP truck.

Honestly not that much per se. About as much as the current F-150

and Ranger do. Remember the TTP truck is T6 based, not T3.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, ExplorerDude said:

Honestly not that much per se. About as much as the current F-150

and Ranger do. Remember the TTP truck is T6 based, not T3.

I was thinking they would just downsize F150 to save money but I guess if it's starting with T6 it won't matter much.

[cal50]

The 2.7 is a damn good engine....except for the belt driven oil pump.

Change it back to a chain and gear drive and you have a perfect engine that will go a LONG way without an expensive oil drive belt replacement.

Not an issue for people that do not keep a vehicle but for those of us that do its a design to be avoided.

 

(The front of the engine basically needs to come off to change it)

 

Luckily my daughter purchased a new Bronco and it has the 2.3 / oil pump mechanically driven , no belt.

Edited August 2 by cal50

[ANTAUS]

I livlovee the 3.0L T V6 in my MKZ... Just sad it's on a FWD based architecture.  Even as an AWD it's still FWD-ish.  Like some Meth-Ho, just goes out of control for a split second before conforming herself.  Wont be doing anything FWD based ever again, urrggg.... But as an engine, it's smooth, doesnt need a dramatic downshift to extract power, just smooth.

[Andrew L]

On 7/31/2026 at 11:07 AM, akirby said:

yes

 

Did this change?  It's aluminum (or hybrid aluminum) on my MKZ that was one of the big differences with the 2.7 and 3.0 back in the day at least.  There are pictures of the 3.0 removed from an MKZ in a Lincoln forum showing the upper and lower block is aluminum with CGI sandwiched in the middle. 

 

 

Edited August 2 by Andrew L

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Andrew L said:

 

Did this change?  It's aluminum (or hybrid aluminum) on my MKZ that was one of the big differences with the 2.7 and 3.0 back in the day at least.  There are pictures of the 3.0 removed from an MKZ in a Lincoln forum showing the upper and lower block is aluminum with CGI sandwiched in the middle. 

 

 

Not sure.  Wikipedia says hybrid for first gen 2.7 but just says cgi for 2nd gen and 3.0.

[Sherminator98]

19 hours ago, cal50 said:

The 2.7 is a damn good engine....except for the belt driven oil pump.

Change it back to a chain and gear drive and you have a perfect engine that will go a LONG way without an expensive oil drive belt replacement.

Not an issue for people that do not keep a vehicle but for those of us that do its a design to be avoided.

 

And how often does that happen? your more likely to lose a turbo or something else major before that happens.

I just don't get the whole mantra of everything has to last without breaking for 20 years..the design requirement is 15 years or 150K before any major issues. 

If your buying used, your rolling dice on if its going to reliable or not. 

[SoonerLS]

9 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

the design requirement is 15 years or 150K before any major issues. 

Durability standard for F-150 was 250K miles last I heard. 150K miles was for cars.

[BenKohnen]

Oops, multipost

Edited August 3 by BenKohnen
Multipost

[rmc523]

On 7/31/2026 at 6:10 PM, ExplorerDude said:

The next gen is a clean sheet from a body, frame, and electrical architecture stand point. It still looks like an F-150 but will be visually different that you will be able to tell the difference between the new generation and previous generations. Some powertrains will carry over, some will be all-new. Some may not launch in the first year. Still TBD.

 

I don’t know all the reasons it was delayed twice but there were significant learnings from the skunkworks team that were applied for efficiency improvements. 

I do think it will be worth the wait though. The current truck is still selling exceptionally well and the 2027 updates will keep it looking fresh.

 

Good to hear that it's a leap forward in all aspects.  I wonder if it'll take inspiration from the late 90s aero F-150, or if it continues the current general look?

 

It also makes sense that they've taken learnings from skunkworks and applied them.....it's great to see that they're doing that.....hopefully they do that across the lineup, and that it lets them add product back in other segments...

 

On 7/31/2026 at 6:27 PM, Sherminator98 said:

Yeah I saw that post on B6G about a 6 with a single turbo on….that would make sense if was a inline 6 

 

I just remember it's been a rumor for a while, and with them not needing a FWD version anymore, it makes sense.

 

On 7/31/2026 at 7:06 PM, jpd80 said:

To me this is a scales of economy thing much like the 6.8/7.3 Godzilla,

it's easier to make the one engine and maybe offer a couple of tunes,

maybe with and without hybrid/site power?

 

Its more about Ford simplifying manufacturing and getting savings with

fewer parts variations but sad to see the 2.7 go…..it was a great engine.

 

puely speculation here,

I wonder if that engine (2.7 V6) makes it way to South Africa as an option

on international Ranger as a better PHEV vs Chinese competition?

 

Yup, agree.....

 

I think this news means the 2.7 is gone altogether and will be phased out in all products, with the 3.0 being offered in "regular" power versions for non-performance products (think Outer Banks, Badlands, F-150, Explorer, etc), and High Output power versions for performance products (like Raptor or ST models).

It makes sense for Ford to want to consolidate two similar powertrains into one with multiple tunes. They'll get even larger economies of scale by now bringing F-150, Bronco, Ranger (or F-100 replacement), Explorer, Aviator all under a single powertrain, instead of having Explorer, Aviator and Bronco/Ranger Raptors as the only 3.0 products with a separate 2.7 on F-150, Bronco and Raptor.

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

I just remember it's been a rumor for a while, and with them not needing a FWD version anymore, it makes sense.

The question of the hour is will be a new design, or will they just add two more Cylinders to the 2.3L MPC I4, which if my math is right, would make it a roughly 3.4/5L engine. 

 

I also got schooled that Acura and Saab used a single turbo on their V6s on B6G LOL. 

[Hugh]

On 7/31/2026 at 10:40 AM, ExplorerDude said:

The reason for the change was that the 2.7 wasn’t going to clear some emission compliance requirement of some sort. They’ve been working on this change since 2023.

 

The 2027 F-150 XLT, Lariat, King Ranch & Platinum all get new grilles and new wheels.

 

XL, STX, Tremor and Raptor keep current grilles and wheels.

 

Tremor and Raptor also get new lower

priced variants as well which should help sell even more of those trims.

 

You can get the 5.0 on the King Ranch and Platinum trims again.

Another reason is back in the early stages of NANO. The 2.7L would eventually give way to the 3.0L after Lincoln had it first.

I would have loved to swap the 2.7 out of my old Fusion for the MKZ 3.0L from the MKZ.

[Hugh]

On 8/2/2026 at 12:39 PM, Sherminator98 said:

 

And how often does that happen? your more likely to lose a turbo or something else major before that happens.

I just don't get the whole mantra of everything has to last without breaking for 20 years..the design requirement is 15 years or 150K before any major issues. 

If your buying used, your rolling dice on if its going to reliable or not. 

Personally, I got a shock reading about a 2.7L valve failure. Catastrophic result. No indication, regularly serviced. It does happen.

[Sherminator98]

10 hours ago, Hugh said:

Personally, I got a shock reading about a 2.7L valve failure. Catastrophic result. No indication, regularly serviced. It does happen.

 

Shit happens, but the internet amplifies the issues IMO

 

The issue that the Bronco had with its 2.7L affected less then .01 of the production run. 

[akirby]

10 hours ago, Hugh said:

Personally, I got a shock reading about a 2.7L valve failure. Catastrophic result. No indication, regularly serviced. It does happen.

But that was from the valve supplier not heat treating them properly.  Not a design flaw or something wearing out.

[ANTAUS]

I can understand how they are scaling back the 3.0L Power, it can be so much more.  I"m sure in another 2-3 years, the 3.0L will be allowed to pump 400HP and push the 3.5L to 450HP. They just aren't there yet....

[Hugh]

18 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Shit happens, but the internet amplifies the issues IMO

 

The issue that the Bronco had with its 2.7L affected less then .01 of the production run. 

Like I said, it happens.

[Hugh]

18 hours ago, akirby said:

But that was from the valve supplier not heat treating them properly.  Not a design flaw or something wearing out.

Yes, I just said it happens. 

[SoonerLS]

On 8/9/2026 at 7:51 AM, akirby said:

But that was from the valve supplier not heat treating them properly.  Not a design flaw or something wearing out.

There seems to have been a bit of that going around. Earlier this year, Josh Smith of the Montana Knife Company said they lost an entire run of Magnacut knives because they sent them out for heat treatment and the place doing the job screwed it up. 
 

That might also be a contributing reason why they have heat-treating facilities in their new factory…

[Sherminator98]

8 hours ago, SoonerLS said:

There seems to have been a bit of that going around. Earlier this year, Josh Smith of the Montana Knife Company said they lost an entire run of Magnacut knives because they sent them out for heat treatment and the place doing the job screwed it up. 
 

That might also be a contributing reason why they have heat-treating facilities in their new factory…

 

Given my view the industry I work in, I often wonder how bad the erosion of knowledge/skill is when it comes from manufacturing.

 

I've seen this from screws/bolts all the way up to fan blades on jet engines-manufacturing defects are more prevalent then I would expect. 

 

[akirby]

31 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Given my view the industry I work in, I often wonder how bad the erosion of knowledge/skill is when it comes from manufacturing.

 

I've seen this from screws/bolts all the way up to fan blades on jet engines-manufacturing defects are more prevalent then I would expect. 

 

Combination of talent/experience drain and cost cutting.

[jpd80]

On 8/4/2026 at 2:14 AM, rmc523 said:

 

Good to hear that it's a leap forward in all aspects.  I wonder if it'll take inspiration from the late 90s aero F-150, or if it continues the current general look?

 

It also makes sense that they've taken learnings from skunkworks and applied them.....it's great to see that they're doing that.....hopefully they do that across the lineup, and that it lets them add product back in other segments...

 

 

I just remember it's been a rumor for a while, and with them not needing a FWD version anymore, it makes sense.

 

 

Yup, agree.....

 

I think this news means the 2.7 is gone altogether and will be phased out in all products, with the 3.0 being offered in "regular" power versions for non-performance products (think Outer Banks, Badlands, F-150, Explorer, etc), and High Output power versions for performance products (like Raptor or ST models).

It makes sense for Ford to want to consolidate two similar powertrains into one with multiple tunes. They'll get even larger economies of scale by now bringing F-150, Bronco, Ranger (or F-100 replacement), Explorer, Aviator all under a single powertrain, instead of having Explorer, Aviator and Bronco/Ranger Raptors as the only 3.0 products with a separate 2.7 on F-150, Bronco and Raptor.

Couldn agree more.

The 2.7 EB worked brilliantly up against the 3.0 diesel opposition from Jeep, so popular with Ford buyers choosing it and getting a more efficient little engine. The 3.0 is just a natural progression now that the 3.5 EB has grown in power.

Ford is definitely leaving the base competition behind.

 

The one place I would change is with Mustang, offer the 3.0 EB V6 as a throw back to the Early Euro Ford Capri, team it with PHEV to get it across tighter Euro/Aussie fuel economy and emissions regs, could be the path forward in those markets more than the 2.3.

Edited August 11 by jpd80

[ANTAUS]

I always pictured a luxury Mustang (Mark 8?) with the 3.0L...

[twintornados]

11 hours ago, ANTAUS said:

I always pictured a luxury Mustang (Mark 8?) with the 3.0L...

 

Mustang Ghia....

[Motorpsychology]

1 hour ago, twintornados said:

 

Mustang Ghia....

Those were legendary, right down to the pony hood ornament.