17.4 MPH

[FordTechOne]

What purpose would any of us have to make this up???? This forum is to share information and I did just that. U don't give a rats a... if a truck is Gen 1 2 or 3. Or a Dodge or a Chevy. I love all American made Trucks. Its the gear head in me and us

I’m not claiming you made it up. I’m stating that the results you obtained, possibly from the instrument cluster indication, simply aren’t plausible, nor realistic. You’re claiming a 35% increase over the factory fuel economy rating. If the truck was even remotely capable of achieving that, Ford would have found that when determining the EPA rating, which counts toward their CAFE average.

Your claim is the same as me saying I managed 25MPG on a trip in my Gen 2. Neither are happening.

 

[Ruger]

The fact he works for "Uncle Sam" seems to have been overlooked. I have a 2013 with 80k. I'm meticulous with the servicing, and running stock BFGs that I rotate and air check every 5k. I drive a mix of highway and town, and the best I can ever get is 13 MPG

FYI: I was a Department of the Army career civilian employee, AKA - DAC. The Army employs far more civilian personnel than it does uniformed personnel - scientists, engineers, logisticians, contract administrators, budget wizards, and other business-types. I was on the business end of things. I hope that's sufficient clarification.

 

[CodeOrangeGen3]

Drove like a gramma yesterday and got 17.4 mpg, typically, I average 12 mpg as I usually have my foot into it all the time…this is after burning 1/4 of a gallon before resetting the trip computer. Drove 70% hwy, 30% city and 50% of hwy driving was heavy traffic.

13.5 all day in sport mode. After two months I’ve found the perfect pedal feathering to get that exhaust crackle that makes me smile. Haha.

 

[Ruger]

I got 18.8 on my Gen 1 traveling from OC Maryland to CT with cruise control set a 72. Didn't get any traffic though on a 6 hr trip

I got better than that - ONCE. It was an all downhill Interstate run out of the Rockies with my foot off the gas almost the whole time. Like the man says, "Location, location, location!"

 

[Gen1 Beast]

There's a long steep hill near my house. Sometimes I'll reset the mileage guage at the top of it and will coast (in gear, with no throttle) down the hill. Seems like I might be misrepresenting the reality of the fuel mileage if I told people sometimes I get 99 mpg.

I'm pretty sure that nobody on here bought their truck for the fuel economy. If you're looking for fuel economy, I think there's a Prius board out here somewhere.

Additionally, hopefully nobody on this board bought their truck to drive like a grandma. The truck is meant to be a performance vehicle, not a 78 Buick

The EPA may not be completely accurate in every situation because I think they only test about 15% of new vehicles. If they didn't test the Raptors, I'm pretty sure if Ford could prove a higher mileage per gallon, they would have given that information to the EPA. Because of this, I suspect they may have actually tested the Raptors.

My driving experience seems to be line with the 11/14 mpg that was posted on the sticker. If you get better than that, then good for you.

 

[mashtastic]

65 mph is the EPA’s magic number and most vehicles get the best mileage at that speed.

 

[Ruger]

Well, I came by my opinion that the 6.2L was designed for the Raptor honestly. Here are a couple of quotations direct from Ford promotional literature circa 2011:

- From a page entitled "2011 Ford F-150 Raptor 6.2-liter V8 Engine" - "Ford's rich racing heritage inspires the new 6.2-liter V8 engine for the 2011 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor." (emphasis added)

- From http://media.ford.com/article_print.cfm?article_id=33181 -
--"New for 2011, the Ford F-150 SVT Raptor delivers a standard 6.2-liter V8 engine with class-leading 411 horsepower and 434 lb-ft of torque, powering customers through almost any off-road terrain they encounter."
--"The engine and truck were tested in the Baja 1000 and on a unique desert loop designed to prove out the durability that high-performance, off-road enthusiasts demand."
--"Core features of the new 6.2-liter engine include cast-iron engine block and four-bolt main bearing caps, aluminum cylinder heads, a single overhead camshaft with roller-rocker shaft drivetrain and dual-equal variable cam timing."
"The 6.2-liter V8 is similar to the engine used in the all-new 2011 Super Duty, but features unique tuning and a special cam profile to produce more horsepower and torque."

From an April 27, 2010 Motor Trend article by Angus MacKenzie entitled "First Drive - 2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor 6.2" - "Ford's new 6.2 liter V-8 is the engine the Raptor was always meant to have; the decision to launch with a tuned Triton was made when the engine and truck development programs got six months out of phase."

And very interestingly, there was a Car & Driver road test entitled "2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor 6.2 - Road Test" from October 2010 by John Phillips. The report specified 379 cu in, 6210 cc, and documented an observed fuel economy of 16 mpg.

 

[Nesc204]

There's a long steep hill near my house. Sometimes I'll reset the mileage guage at the top of it and will coast (in gear, with no throttle) down the hill. Seems like I might be misrepresenting the reality of the fuel mileage if I told people sometimes I get 99 mpg.

I'm pretty sure that nobody on here bought their truck for the fuel economy. If you're looking for fuel economy, I think there's a Prius board out here somewhere.

Additionally, hopefully nobody on this board bought their truck to drive like a grandma. The truck is meant to be a performance vehicle, not a 78 Buick

The EPA may not be completely accurate in every situation because I think they only test about 15% of new vehicles. If they didn't test the Raptors, I'm pretty sure if Ford could prove a higher mileage per gallon, they would have given that information to the EPA. Because of this, I suspect they may have actually tested the Raptors.

My driving experience seems to be line with the 11/14 mpg that was posted on the sticker. If you get better than that, then good for you.

I posted my absolute best and average and worst. When playing it be around 11. Best was 18.8. On slow Hilly back roads hour drive to the track I've gotten between 16 and 17. Average to work and back mix of mostly highway some street lights 14.8 in the summer.

 

[FordTechOne]

Well, I came by my opinion that the 6.2L was designed for the Raptor honestly. Here are a couple of quotations direct from Ford promotional literature circa 2011:

- From a page entitled "2011 Ford F-150 Raptor 6.2-liter V8 Engine" - "Ford's rich racing heritage inspires the new 6.2-liter V8 engine for the 2011 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor." (emphasis added)

- From http://media.ford.com/article_print.cfm?article_id=33181 -
--"New for 2011, the Ford F-150 SVT Raptor delivers a standard 6.2-liter V8 engine with class-leading 411 horsepower and 434 lb-ft of torque, powering customers through almost any off-road terrain they encounter."
--"The engine and truck were tested in the Baja 1000 and on a unique desert loop designed to prove out the durability that high-performance, off-road enthusiasts demand."
--"Core features of the new 6.2-liter engine include cast-iron engine block and four-bolt main bearing caps, aluminum cylinder heads, a single overhead camshaft with roller-rocker shaft drivetrain and dual-equal variable cam timing."
"The 6.2-liter V8 is similar to the engine used in the all-new 2011 Super Duty, but features unique tuning and a special cam profile to produce more horsepower and torque."

From an April 27, 2010 Motor Trend article by Angus MacKenzie entitled "First Drive - 2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor 6.2" - "Ford's new 6.2 liter V-8 is the engine the Raptor was always meant to have; the decision to launch with a tuned Triton was made when the engine and truck development programs got six months out of phase."

And very interestingly, there was a Car & Driver road test entitled "2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor 6.2 - Road Test" from October 2010 by John Phillips. The report specified 379 cu in, 6210 cc, and documented an observed fuel economy of 16 mpg.

Facts matter, not opinions. The 6.2 is a 600lb iron block engine that was designed to replace the 5.4 as the base engine in the F-Series and E-Series. It wasn’t ever a “Raptor” engine, it was available in every F-150 until 2014 with identical power and torque ratings. It didn’t have sufficient torque to replace the 6.8 V10, so it lived on until the new 7.3 “Godzilla” was available in 2020.

Ford needed an upgrade to the 5.4 3V Raptor in 2010/2011, and all they had available was the 6.2, so they made it work. To claim that boat anchor was “designed for the Raptor” is simply ignorant and completely inaccurate.

 

[Jakenbake]

This one from 2009? Or the one from Robby Gordon at the last B1K?

That should be it, about 1 hour 45 minutes or so. 2009 sounds about right. It should start out with a quote.