Eco boost raptor?!?

[Boss Hoss]

Fact of the matter is that Ford does not want to be in 2nd place with performance or mpg's. We will just have to see--I for one cannot wait and will rest assured be First SOB in line if they get it right. If not then I will just stay with a 6.2 DI with tune that gets 25% better mpg's and more hp than my 2011 modified Raptor did.

Actually the 6000 series sheet metal appeals to me.... Better for corrosion esp on the back side where you cannot see it. If it costs more I could care less just want the performance baby an lighter is 1000% better esp off road! Would have kept my 2011 but it was having some mechanical and cosmetic issues and decided to let someone else deal with it. Driving 30-35k a year wears them out fast.

 

[WarSurfer]

I'm not convinced that DI in N/A platform would yield much better mpg's. The 3.7 wasn't DI and it gets better city/combined/hwy mpg than the Eco. I don't doubt the potential is there, but it may be less than .5 mpg. It certainly won't be a 25% improvement.

I'm more intrigued by the fact that the 2015 that was run in Baja had 09-up aluminum panels. One might assume that there isn't much dimensional variance between the two - meaning an aluminum retrofit of new body on our frames could be possible. Given my sunk cost on my current truck I'd be more likely to swap bodies than trucks. WAAAY cheaper, I could buy a new Raptor for less than what I have in modifications.

 

[Boss Hoss]

I'm not convinced that DI in N/A platform would yield much better mpg's. The 3.7 wasn't DI and it gets better city/combined/hwy mpg than the Eco. I don't doubt the potential is there, but it may be less than .5 mpg. It certainly won't be a 25% improvement.

GM did it with the 2014 6.2l---no reason Ford cannot

 

[WarSurfer]

GM did it with the 2014 6.2l---no reason Ford cannot

Does that truck have a lift or run on 35's? All that has an impact.

It also isn't hard to drive 68 miles on flat ground and post numbers that may not reflect reality.

I can get 18 mpg in my Raptor on flat ground at 65mph.

 

[Boss Hoss]

Does that truck have a lift or run on 35's? All that has an impact.

It also isn't hard to drive 68 miles on flat ground and post numbers that may not reflect reality.

I can get 18 mpg in my Raptor on flat ground at 65mph.

Yes 6in BDS and 35 in Toyo's---the Raptor made that run to the casino across the border at least a dozen times and I never got over 16. I ran on top perch. Many trips to NM to the ranch fighting a 30mph headwind I would get 11.5 to 12 driving the speed limit and the best was 16. The GMC 19.5 with a slight crosswind. Going to 4cyl on the flat areas really helps.

 

[WarSurfer]

Yes 6in BDS and 35 in Toyo's---the Raptor made that run to the casino across the border at least a dozen times and I never got over 16. I ran on top perch. Many trips to NM to the ranch fighting a 30mph headwind I would get 11.5 to 12 driving the speed limit and the best was 16. The GMC 19.5 with a slight crosswind. Going to 4cyl on the flat areas really helps.

Cylinder deactivation and Direct Injection are two different things. I thought you were saying DI (direct injection) could net a 25% increase in mpg. I must have misunderstood.

 

[Boss Hoss]

Cylinder deactivation and Direct Injection are two different things. I thought you were saying DI (direct injection) could net a 25% increase in mpg. I must have misunderstood.

Combination of both---the 6.2 makes enough power to let the 4cy mode work where it would not on the smaller motor.

GM with this motor does have a leg up.

http://www.gmhightechperformance.com/hotnews/ghtp_1210_gen5_inside_gms_all_new_lt1_small_block/

 

[Maxx2893]

Cylinder deactivation and Direct Injection are two different things. I thought you were saying DI (direct injection) could net a 25% increase in mpg. I must have misunderstood.

I don't think he is claiming direct injection alone nets 25%. I think he is just listing that as one of the advancements.

 

[WarSurfer]

Yeah, I misunderstood his post.

I'm not a fan of cylinder deactivation - all that mass is still turning and wearing parts, just not developing power. Me personally, I'd lean more towards displacement on demand (Eco).

The ultimate solution would be a combination of the GM/Ford offerings, IMO = An LS based 4.3 V6 with DI and twin turbos. Much simpler design than the Eco but with all the benefits AND better initial throttle response because of the slight displacement advantage.

What do I know, I want a H/C/I LS7...

 

[Hockster]

The new F150 is a start and stop system. In the city the engine will stop at the lights and start up when you want it to.