6.2L Raptor: "You're gonna burn fuel"

[Reptar]

from what I've read previously, Ford just updated the numbers to more accurately reflect what the trucks are actually getting.

I'm sure it could be a combination of two things, Ford made a couple tweaks to the ECU for refinements on 2012 (nearly every year they make minor tweaks, thats why there's new computer codes for newer year vehicles), and they probably decided to rerun their fuel economy rating test, however that gets ran, to more accurately reflect what these trucks get. So I'm sure it wasn't just a tune tweak that gained 2 mpg, and I'm sure it wasn't just the fact they decided to slap on 2 more mpg for absolutely no reason. Probably a mix of the two. Seems like quite a few guys on here with 2010-2011 6.2's can get 16 mpg highway, and the last thing Ford wants to do is leave mpg on the table for that window sticker, and for fleet average fuel economy ratings to meet their CAFE standards, so more than likely after they made whatever tweaks on the 2012 ECU's, they reran their fuel economy rating tests, and updated the numbers to more accurately reflect them.

Of course some publications will just take that as "with a revised tune the new trucks are rated 11/16". And yes that is still true. A tune is revised, the new ratings are 11/16. Doesn't mean the old ratings weren't on the low side, and now they've correctly captured it.

 

[HAYNES OFFROAD]

Wreckless, please forgive me for being cynical. If I bought all of the intake swirllers, water injectors, fuel magnitizers, teflon oil additives, etc. and used them on the same vehicle I'd be manufacturing gasoline and would have to sell it to a gas station!

A 2mpg improvement on a truck that gets roughly 15 mpg represents a huge 13 percent improvment, this on a 3-ton vehicle. MAYBE that's possible if the fuel mixture is leaned out to the point that it's running well below the stoichometric optimum. It might run that way at very modest throttle settings, but if driven the way a Raptor was designed to be driven it would run ****** and would eventually destroy the engine.

Now, this is amittedly conjecture on both sides of the argument. So substantive evidence is required to settle the matter. You have advanced the 2 mpg argument so you run the experiment. May I suggest that you take your beautiful Raptor over to a tuner and tell him, "I want a 2 mpg improvment. That's the one and only goal. Make it happen," and then let's see the dyno charts and your fuel economy records. I wouldn't do it because I want to drive my Raptor for the next ten years, but it's up to you to prove your contention.

No animosity intended or implied, sir. I am a skeptic, but I will gladly concede given proof.

Im pretty sure the 2012 numbers are just corrected. My 2011 already gets those numbers.

Then again maybe they revised the AC compressor. My current compressor is a loud obnoxious fuel hog, that I haven't had to use a lot of yet.

haha i want to manufacture gasoline too! lol

I do agree it is a rather large % increase to this sorta truck being that it is 6000lbs. the effects of a revised tune would most likely be lost to the weight alone haha. But if the raptor's fuel map is anything like every other production vehicles fuel map, they are not tuned for just WOT (what the raptor is designed to be in 90% of the time! LOL), but part throttle as well, otherwise you would lose the abiltiy to drive the vehicle smoothly down to your local wally-world. for instance, the tune on my honda is all about performance, im running 750cc injectors that cant meter out the fuel as well as the stock ones do, even tho my fuel map is tuned very well, ive lost some of the low end driveability for sake of my top-end gains. i guess what im trying to say is that it may be possible that ford looked at the part throttle map and leaned it out there around highway speed rpms, and left the WOT as is.
i dunno if youve seen a fuel map (no offense intended) but i included one with my post (just a random one off of google, not mine). as you can see there are partitions for 0-xxxx rpm and for 0-WOT (or in this pictures case, MAP readings, but you get the idea), differant throttle positions at differant rpms flow differant amounts of fuel.

as far as bringing a raptor to a tuner to do said expeirment, couple problems, i dont have my 2012 yet, and going to a tuner with simply a goal to gain mpg, would bring disasterous effects to the motor, i agree. really the only way to really know if they changed the tune is to compare a 2011 and a 2012fuel map side by side, and see if theres any differances.

I am just going by my own expeirances, im not an expert or profesional, and may be wrong about certain things here, and i can accept that.


its also possible that comagt has a point too, for one it may be very easily just corrected numbers. or that they may have updated some hardware such as the ac compressor, IDK. or maybe the 2012 rims are a bit lighter, less weight would mean the motor strains less to pull said weight, bingo 2 mpg (joking)

bomb suit onlol

 

[Hocker52]

I actually do make gasoline! I think the new window sticker reflects what they actually get it hasnt been improved only thing is it should read 8-16 for those of us with heavy feet. Double digit MPG