2021 Raptor Is a Total BUST!!

[Mister Pinky]

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.
View attachment 161370

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but most manufacturers use a sealant over a physical gasket these days.

 

[GWBush]

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

Yup. “Eco” Boost. Light on Eco, heavy on Boost.

Marketing.

 

[rtmozingo]

Yup. “Eco” Boost. Light on Eco, heavy on Boost.

Marketing.

Hate to break it to you guys, but BY DEFINITION turbo engines are more efficient than NA or Superchargers (which are by far the worst). So assuming you stuck turbos on your beloved V8s, you'd be getting more power for less cost.

My little V6 is much more powerful than my FIL and my grandfather's new chevys, and they both opted for the big boy V8s. And it gets basically the same gas mileage (when accounting for tires and aerodynamics). They routinely comment how impressive my engine is.

 

[Rated R]

I once towed my 6X12 with two adventure bikes and gear in my '17 Raptor for 400 miles or so. It was spooled up all day long and got 10mpg avg on that trip.

 

[Jakenbake]

Hate to break it to you guys, but BY DEFINITION turbo engines are more efficient than NA or Superchargers (which are by far the worst). So assuming you stuck turbos on your beloved V8s, you'd be getting more power for less cost.

My little V6 is much more powerful than my FIL and my grandfather's new chevys, and they both opted for the big boy V8s. And it gets basically the same gas mileage (when accounting for tires and aerodynamics). They routinely comment how impressive my engine is.

I wouldn’t mind seeing a smaller V8 with twin turbos.

One thing I see thrown around a lot is the parasitic loss with super chargers and that turbos are more efficient.

I have not researched this much, but I would like to see a comparison of the losses associated with both.

That is to say a naturally aspirated engine spinning a turbo that is not plumbed into the intake. Then the same for supercharger.

Basically the engine is either spinning the turbo or the supercharger and a comparison of the losses associated with both.

 

[codeman]

Hate to break it to you guys, but BY DEFINITION turbo engines are more efficient than NA or Superchargers (which are by far the worst). So assuming you stuck turbos on your beloved V8s, you'd be getting more power for less cost.

My little V6 is much more powerful than my FIL and my grandfather's new chevys, and they both opted for the big boy V8s. And it gets basically the same gas mileage (when accounting for tires and aerodynamics). They routinely comment how impressive my engine is.

By definition? I'd be careful subscribing to that line of thought. Not by definition ... I think auto manufacturers are in part fooling moronic politicians and policy makers by getting them to focus on displacement numbers, and MPG ratings that are heavily doctored from inaccurate computer calculations, and graphs that are presented to these moron politicians and otherwise who take a quick look at a graph that's put together to push a specific talking point, then go away happy. It's far more complicated than displacement numbers and MPG taken with a driver who uses a straw to blow on the gas pedal, and idles at a stop light for 60 second stints.

Here's a crack at explaining why these small displacement turbo engines are a load of nonsense in the "Eco" devision unless those tiny engines are mated to an equality tiny (and light) vehicle. An under displaced, turbo charged engine on a large heavy truck isn't "Eco". Not saying you don't get great performance out of this engine, you do. But it's not "Eco". Engine performance has come a long way though - compare a 2020 V8 with a 1990's V8 of the same displacement, both naturally aspirated. Major performance increase, and lighter engines by hundreds of pounds.

Why Small Turbo Engines Are Not Efficient

 

[goblues38]

Anybody else agree with me?

nope. Totally happy with the Gen 3 raptor. Solid upgrade over gen 2. Raptor R is the perfect way to allow little boys with small ***** over compensate by purchasing an over the top attention ***** truck that has very little extra to offer other then looking better on paper, or the 1x every month when you want to blow away someone with a 0-90 pull on the street.

 

[dc1gator]

Running TORR event Bama to Florida 26-27 February. I doubt of prissies will be there but if one shows up no hugs from me.

 

[dc1gator]

For most of my life I have been a V8 person. I'll have to admit that I was impressed with the Gen II enough that I turned my Coyote loose. No regrets.

 

[raptorbone]

I love it. Reminds me of my Gen1. I will be adding one to the stable along with a new Bronco.