2016 [2017*] Raptor test mule spy shots

[Reptar]

The raptor was not built for towing....

ummm it wasn't built with the primary focus of towing, but it still was built to tow. That's why it's got an 8k lb tow rating for the screw, a trailer hitch already wired up, an integrated trailer brake controller, a tow/haul mode, and a dedicated secondary odometer for trailer mileage.

If Ford stripped the towing ability of the Raptor it would most definitely have hurt the sales. I see Raptors towing all the time. I certainly wouldn't have bought one if it was a pu55ified truck that couldn't tow because almost 20% of my mileage on the raptor is with a trailer hooked up.

Yeah seriously. I have a cummins 6.7 for towing. Ecoboost motors with 35's get about 1-2 mpg better fuel economy. What are the other upsides? No thanks

The upsides are I don't have to spend another $50k for a dedicated tow rig to drive all of 2k miles a year, and instead I can use my Raptor for that 2k miles a year worth of towing by having a multi-purpose vehicle. And 1-2 mpg better, almost 30k miles on my truck so far, if I got 13.5 mpg avg instead of 12.0 mpg avg it would have saved me 278 gallons of fuel so far, or about $1,000 in gas....it's not multi-thousands, but hey it's free money. Add in a torque curve that's flat as a table top, there are upsides. There's downsides as well don't get me wrong, but there certainly are upsides.

What he means is that the truck isn't geared for, nor is the engine designed for maximum torque/hp in the lower rev range, for towing. These trucks are made to have the maximum hp/torque in the high rev range to keep the tires rotating as fast as possible over sand, mud, and high speed terrain.

The towing is just a perk with these. Nothing more.

Ummm that's total BS lol. The 6.2 isn't designed as a high hp/torq for high rev range. It's got what a 6k RPM rev limiter? It's not a 7500 RPM 5.0 Boss Mustang engine lol. There's NOTHING raptor-specific about the 6.2L engine, it's the EXACT same 6.2 that is in the Platinum and Harley F-150's that were built as well, and they aren't high speed sand/mud/offroading trucks lol. The Raptor has ORM and 4.10's, etc. to help tune it for optimal offroading, but the 6.2 engine itself is not some special desert runner engine. It's a standard f150 6.2L engine that makes the same hp, same tq, at the same rpm, as the regular f150's that also have the 6.2, which is designed for max power and torque at as low RPMs as possible for towing and hauling. But since it's not forced induction, that power band can only come in at so low of an RPM. The ecoboost being a forced induction engine has the big advantage on low end torque from that magical thing called boost.

 

[sublime1996525]

ummm it wasn't built with the primary focus of towing, but it still was built to tow. That's why it's got an 8k lb tow rating for the screw, a trailer hitch already wired up, an integrated trailer brake controller, a tow/haul mode, and a dedicated secondary odometer for trailer mileage.

If Ford stripped the towing ability of the Raptor it would most definitely have hurt the sales. I see Raptors towing all the time. I certainly wouldn't have bought one if it was a pu55ified truck that couldn't tow because almost 20% of my mileage on the raptor is with a trailer hooked up.



The upsides are I don't have to spend another $50k for a dedicated tow rig to drive all of 2k miles a year, and instead I can use my Raptor for that 2k miles a year worth of towing by having a multi-purpose vehicle. And 1-2 mpg better, almost 30k miles on my truck so far, if I got 13.5 mpg avg instead of 12.0 mpg avg it would have saved me 278 gallons of fuel so far, or about $1,000 in gas....it's not multi-thousands, but hey it's free money. Add in a torque curve that's flat as a table top, there are upsides. There's downsides as well don't get me wrong, but there certainly are upsides.




Ummm that's total BS lol. The 6.2 isn't designed as a high hp/torq for high rev range. It's got what a 6k RPM rev limiter? It's not a 7500 RPM 5.0 Boss Mustang engine lol. There's NOTHING raptor-specific about the 6.2L engine, it's the EXACT same 6.2 that is in the Platinum and Harley F-150's that were built as well, and they aren't high speed sand/mud/offroading trucks lol. The Raptor has ORM and 4.10's, etc. to help tune it for optimal offroading, but the 6.2 engine itself is not some special desert runner engine. It's a standard f150 6.2L engine that makes the same hp, same tq, at the same rpm, as the regular f150's that also have the 6.2, which is designed for max power and torque at as low RPMs as possible for towing and hauling. But since it's not forced induction, that power band can only come in at so low of an RPM. The ecoboost being a forced induction engine has the big advantage on low end torque from that magical thing called boost.

BAM!!

 

[Jimbo]

I think the biggest issue for me is going to be direct injection with the Ecoboost. I don't have a Raptor yet, but have been going back and forth between getting a 2014 or wait for the 2016. However, I am in the auto service industry (BMW/Mercedes) and can't fathom long term reliability with direct injected vehicles. I can't count how many vehicles I get in that are so excessively coked up. When I purchase, I plan to keep it for a very long time. Realistically, yes I can tear it all apart, walnut blast, and put it all back together... but let's be honest, that would be the last thing I'd want to do!

Just my .02 cents...

And, Hi, I'm Jimbo... a new guy here.

 

[sabumaru]

I think the biggest issue for me is going to be direct injection with the Ecoboost. I don't have a Raptor yet, but have been going back and forth between getting a 2014 or wait for the 2016. However, I am in the auto service industry (BMW/Mercedes) and can't fathom long term reliability with direct injected vehicles. I can't count how many vehicles I get in that are so excessively coked up. When I purchase, I plan to keep it for a very long time. Realistically, yes I can tear it all apart, walnut blast, and put it all back together... but let's be honest, that would be the last thing I'd want to do!

Just my .02 cents...

And, Hi, I'm Jimbo... a new guy here.

My lil brother is a mechanic as well (peugeot)
Its seems to be more a child desies according to him
As he has engines in that need a walnut massage after just 15k
But also engine that lasted well into the 100k (kilometers)

Rebuilding an engine at any point sucks
But if we need a EB raptor in 2016 because of laws
So be it

Better then non at all
Long live the legacy!! ( in any form )

Tbh even a diesel hybrid like they have in the peugeot or BMW i8 would he welcome. Would save me a ton in road taxes here in the netherlands (hybrids are LOW taxed, sometimes even free)

 

[tplee]

It's interesting how 'stuck' on the V8 a number of people are.

I own a 14 Raptor SCREW and a 12 Ecoboost (3.5L) SCREW Long box 4x4 with a 3.73 rear end Lariat loaded and my wife liked my 12 so much she went and got a 13 Eco Platinum w/the same spec's.

I've now towed with both (could say all three). The Ecoboost wins plain and simple. Faster off the line and tows better. On hills my Eco would downshift to 5th, the Raptor would downshift to 3rd.
The Ecoboost is much quieter, while some may like the engine noise over time it gets old hearing the drone of the engine and yes I know the engine drone vs tire noise.

Granted my Eco is tuned, which in runs much better, but on these towing tests I put in back to stock a couple hundred miles prior to testing and my wife's has never been tuned. I've even tried using tow haul mode on the Raptor, which it helped some, but the Eco still wins.

Just look at the factory specs, but the Torque really tells the story
HP
411 @ 5500 rpm (6.2L V8)* Using 93-octane fuel.
365 @ 5000 rpm (3.5L EcoBoost®)
Torque
434 @ 4500 rpm (6.2L V8)* Using 93-octane fuel.
420 @ 2500 rpm (3.5L EcoBoost®)

Within 14 lb/ft at 2000 less RPM...

Interesting 6.2 posted using 93, why wasn't the Eco? Pulled the manual but couldn't find info with 93 on the 3.5 Eco.

*All vehicles tested with stock rims and tires

Let me know when you put a heavy set of 35s and 4.10s on your echo boost. Wonder how she'll tow then? But who among us is ever satisfied with 35s? Who among us is completely content with the power of a bone-stock truck? That 3.5 is already giving you all she has...overachieving one might say. Conversely, the 6.2 can be coaxed into pushing its output to double that of its OEM numbers.

If Ford dumps the V8, don't worry, it'll be back-after another government bailout.

 

[gwpfan]

Let me know when you put a heavy set of 35s and 4.10s on your echo boost. Wonder how she'll tow then? But who among us is ever satisfied with 35s? Who among us is completely content with the power of a bone-stock truck? That 3.5 is already giving you all she has...overachieving one might say. Conversely, the 6.2 can be coaxed into pushing its output to double that of its OEM numbers.

If Ford dumps the V8, don't worry, it'll be back-after another government bailout.

Seems your facts are off.

When's the last time you drove a tuned Eco? There's a number of more items one can do. While maybe one can't get as much out as the 6.2, still it's not like it's over after a tune.

Also they didn't take the bailout, one reason all my newer vehicles are blue oval.

 

[tplee]

Seems your facts are off.

When's the last time you drove a tuned Eco? There's a number of more items one can do. While maybe one can't get as much out as the 6.2, still it's not like it's over after a tune.

Also they didn't take the bailout, one reason all my newer vehicles are blue oval.

How easily we can be duped by propaganda....
From Forbes.com: Automakers Owing Taxpayer Money--The Answer Might Surprise You
"...Ford Motor owes the government $5.9 billion it borrowed in June 2009, the same month GM filed for bankruptcy..."

Forbes ins't really one of those rags that gets the whole GM vs. Ford debate--so its pretty likely free from the blinding effects of abject homerism.

Buy Ford because its a better product, not because of what you think you know about the company's relationship with the ruling party.

But on to your issue of driving an Echo-boost, tuned or otherwise. No, I haven't--so purely conjecture on my part and right of you to critique. For heavy vehicles, I'd rather them supercharge a V8 and tune it for efficiency. Or do what the rest of the world has already seen fit to do, put diesel motors in EVERYTHING. Not only are the higher compression motors more efficient, the fuel itself possess more energy, requires less refinement, and is significantly cheaper to make. And lest you again be confused by what you are conditioned to think and quickly point to the signs showing diesel costing significantly more at the pump, that's all cheddar raked in or imposed upon us again by our imperial rulers, bowing at the alter of the great myth of anthropogenic global warming.

One thing I am admittedly stuck on, however, is the old saying: "There's no replacement for displacement."

 

[BAJASVT]

I'm not one to dog on the 3.5L EcoBoost because I think it's a very impressive powerplant, but I will say that I knew I wanted a 6.2L Raptor without driving one... had they been powered by a 3.5L EcoBoost, I would have wanted to take a test drive. The flat torque curve on the EcoBoost really is remarkable!

I also don't want to get into a debate about the GM/Chrysler vs Ford bailout, but there was a difference. GM and Chrysler were sure to go bankrupt without government help and neither of them had a plan to save themselves. Ford was on the verge of bankruptcy as well, but nowhere near as bad GM and Chrysler and they also had a plan to bring themselves back to profitability. GM and GMAC (Ally) combined were bailed out with nearly 12 times the amount of the Ford loan and let us not forget that the federal government now owns 32% of General Motors while Ford Motor Company is still 100% owned by it's shareholders with the Ford family having controlling interest.

 

[tplee]

I also don't want to get into a debate about the GM/Chrysler vs Ford bailout, but there was a difference. GM and Chrysler were sure to go bankrupt without government help and neither of them had a plan to save themselves. Ford was on the verge of bankruptcy as well, but nowhere near as bad GM and Chrysler and they also had a plan to bring themselves back to profitability. GM and GMAC (Ally) combined were bailed out with nearly 12 times the amount of the Ford loan and let us not forget that the federal government now owns 32% of General Motors while Ford Motor Company is still 100% owned by it's shareholders with the Ford family having controlling interest.

Semantics. Ford dined at the government trough with the rest of them. To hate GM simply because they ate more is silly. Ford giving us the Echo-boost is just part of the deal they made with the devil (i.e. producing "greener" cars was part of the terms of the loans and grants). Glad I got my Raptor now.

 

[pat247]

I had an 2011 ecoBoost crewcab with 3.73 gears that I put a set of Raptor wheels and tires on. From a dead stop on pavement it would roast the rear tires if you floored it. Then I had a 2012 ecoBoost crewcab with 3.31 gears that could not spin the factory 20's no matter how hard you tried. Overall I found the 3.5 eco to be a very capable motor.