2021 Raptor Is a Total BUST!!

[Raptor R]

I was gonna say that an aluminum frame could have partially made up for a lackluster engine.

Lol. No kidding. All Is good, the Raptor R is on route. 5.2 Predator will fix that.

 

[rosh]

Entertaining and LONG thread-

That's what she said.

 

[codeman]

You're missing the point. If you're using all available power, fuel consumption will be the same. You need fuel to make power. The advantage of the EcoBoost is that when you're idling or under part throttle, fuel consumption is much less because you're only fueling a 3.5L V6. When you want/need the power, the turbos provide it. That's not an option with a V8, especially an F/I one. You need to fuel all 8 cylinders regardless, and the S/C is a constant drag on efficiency.

Yeah but that's only half the story. Perhaps if Ford improves low-end torque on these EcoBoost engines, then you'd see more of an advantage overall. But even still, the low-end torque on the 5.0L is more than the 3.5L EcoBoost. To get the same acceleration and torque around 2,000-2,500 RPM you need to gas the EcoBoost harder. Even highway cruising, the EcoBoost sometimes doesn't have the guts to cruise at 60-70mph without getting into the turbo. The V8? Not a problem at all, and further to that with cylinder deactivation on the V8 ... the EcoBoost loses all around. Try towing something. The RAM TRX matches the Raptor when towing on even slightly difficult terrain in MPG.

I'd rather a very lightly boosted twin Turbo 5.0L V8 any day. I still love my Raptor, but the EcoBoost engine is hardly "eco" even when out of boost. Now, compared the 3.5L EcoBoost engine to the 3.0L Audi V6 ... the Ford engine is hilariously outclassed. The twin turbo RS5 hits 450HP and a square torque spec with the 0.5L less displacement. And, the low-end torque is available immediately on the Audi engine. The low-end torque numbers until you hit at least 3,500+ on the Ford are laughable in comparison.

It's not that great an engine ... let's be honest. It's not crap, and it's not bad, it's good. Excellent? Not a ******* chance. When you can't make an excellent turbo Engine, but you have a long history of decent V8's ... stick with developing your small block V8 Just my 2 cents ... the EcoBoost has come a long way, and the hybrid version kind of hides the EcoBoost shortcoming.

What's interesting though, is the Gen 3 will see Ford put some attention on the low-end available torque for the engine and slightly increased compression ratio. Ford knows they need another major revision on the "Eco"-Boost ...

 

[FordTechOne]

Yeah but that's only half the story. Perhaps if Ford improves low-end torque on these EcoBoost engines, then you'd see more of an advantage overall. But even still, the low-end torque on the 5.0L is more than the 3.5L EcoBoost. To get the same acceleration and torque around 2,000-2,500 RPM you need to gas the EcoBoost harder.

The EcoBoost already makes significantly more low end torque than the 5.0; there is no comparison. This chart is a Gen 1 EcoBoost; Gen 2 EcoBoost in the Raptor makes almost 100 lb-ft of additional torque.

Even highway cruising, the EcoBoost sometimes doesn't have the guts to cruise at 60-70mph without getting into the turbo. The V8? Not a problem at all, and further to that with cylinder deactivation on the V8 ... the EcoBoost loses all around. Try towing something. The RAM TRX matches the Raptor when towing on even slightly difficult terrain in MPG.

Building boost when additional power is required is design intent and improves efficiency. With an NA V8, the same principal applies, but instead of adding a positive air charge to the manifold, the throttle angle increases to allow additional air in. Under those conditions both will use a similar amount of fuel; however, when boost is no longer required the EcoBoost provides an efficiency advantage that the 5.0 cannot. Have you ever driven a turbo diesel? They operate on the same principles; a 6.7 Powerstroke will build boost pulling grades at highway speed.

Even with cylinder deactivation, the 5.0 is rated at 16/22/19, while the EcoBoost is 18/23/20.

I'd rather a very lightly boosted twin Turbo 5.0L V8 any day. I still love my Raptor, but the EcoBoost engine is hardly "eco" even when out of boost. Now, compared the 3.5L EcoBoost engine to the 3.0L Audi V6 ... the Ford engine is hilariously outclassed. The twin turbo RS5 hits 450HP and a square torque spec with the 0.5L less displacement. And, the low-end torque is available immediately on the Audi engine. The low-end torque numbers until you hit at least 3,500+ on the Ford are laughable in comparison.

Nothing “laughable” about that; you’re comparing a high performance car engine with a truck engine that is designed to tow 8,000lbs, which comes out to a GCWR of over 14,000lbs total. I’m not sure why you keep claiming that the Ecoboost isn’t efficient when it gets superior fuel economy to every other truck engine this side of a diesel. As far as torque, you are confusing peak torque with low end torque. 90% of the peak 510 lb-ft of torque is available by 2,000RPM.

 

[GWBush]

One more thing to take in account, the younger generation now days like the v6 sound over a v8. Days of the v8 are definitely numbered.

Put down the crack pipe and step away Sir.

 

[DMays]

I am probably a rarity but I was happy to see the 3.5 still offered. I love the way my 20 drives, and I drive a ton for work. Bought the truck new in May and has 24k on the odometer. The TRX is a cool truck, but I cant justify 7 miles per gallon with my driving and I imagine a 700hp Ford wouldn't be much more efficient.

 

[Cthulhu]

I was getting 18 with the stock tires.... excluding offroading, where I was averaging 5 or 6 haha

Yeah, I've only had mine for about a month, and...well let's just say I've been on the throttle a bit. Been keeping the stop-start thingy disabled since it's winter. Also been driving around in sport mode exclusively.

 

[codeman]

The EcoBoost already makes significantly more low end torque than the 5.0; there is no comparison. This chart is a Gen 1 EcoBoost; Gen 2 EcoBoost in the Raptor makes almost 100 lb-ft of additional torque.

View attachment 161356



Building boost when additional power is required is design intent and improves efficiency. With an NA V8, the same principal applies, but instead of adding a positive air charge to the manifold, the throttle angle increases to allow additional air in. Under those conditions both will use a similar amount of fuel; however, when boost is no longer required the EcoBoost provides an efficiency advantage that the 5.0 cannot. Have you ever driven a turbo diesel? They operate on the same principles; a 6.7 Powerstroke will build boost pulling grades at highway speed.

Even with cylinder deactivation, the 5.0 is rated at 16/22/19, while the EcoBoost is 18/23/20.



Nothing “laughable” about that; you’re comparing a high performance car engine with a truck engine that is designed to tow 8,000lbs, which comes out to a GCWR of over 14,000lbs total. I’m not sure why you keep claiming that the Ecoboost isn’t efficient when it gets superior fuel economy to every other truck engine this side of a diesel. As far as torque, you are confusing peak torque with low end torque. 90% of the peak 510 lb-ft of torque is available by 2,000RPM.

Great reply, was hoping you'd dig deep lol

I would be curious to see the fuel flow rate/consumption mapped overtop of the dyno run. Dyno runs aren't perfect measures, and that chart doesn't take into account what I'm hinting at here. With 5.0L of displacement, over 8 cylinders looking at the bore and stroke of the coyote vs. the HO EcoBoost the v6 is (if my quick math isn't off here) roughly 50CC smaller per cylinder on top of it being a 6 versus 8 cylinder. I think the chart you posted is missing some data, but the other thing to consider is how flat the torque curve is. The v8 is going to have higher initial rolling torque off the line, with less throttle input every single time.

Also GCWR to a large extent, is based on transmission and axle ratios as well. Obviously an engine has to be built to withstand higher load being a truck engine, but you can't compare the overall design and quality of the Audi engine to the Ford; tear one apart. Ford doesn't even use gaskets anymore on half the front-end of the damn thing to save money. I wonder how tight tolerances are, and the bearing quality and tolerance specs etc. etc.

The image is to the wheels, and just as a quick example, two "identical" (as humanly possible) F150 trucks, one with the 3.5L EcoBoost tuned and a 5.0L coyote tuned, produces these results to the wheel. The quarter mile time with the same driver on multiple passes shows within margin of error a dead heat around 14.4 @ 95mph. Of course again, this shows wide open throttle ... but sometimes there's no comparison to more displacement and a more mechanically simple design for efficiency.

Have you read much about the Koenigsegg engines? Damn cool!

 

[dixonk]

I would look at a TRX but A.) I don’t like men and B.) I’m not blind. Dear Lord that is a birth control truck if I ever seen one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Mister Pinky]

It’s funny you say that, to the dismay of you V6 fanboys, that’s what my 2020 Gen 2 gets in fuel economy. Unless you baby the EB, the MPG is no different than what you can get with a V8. Wait until guys run the 37 package on the Gen 3 with the V6. The fuel economy will be close to the Raptor R

View attachment 161289

First off, that MPG gauge is about as accurate as a drunk with a pistol. Secondly, stay out of boost and see what happens. My wife exclusively does short trip in town driving and in the fair weather months when we aren’t idling as much, our fuel economy has never been that bad. I hand calculate all my fill ups.