Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
this thread gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling inside. from this point forward, state your points and keep it clean. no serious bashing of other members is 1 of our 1 rules thanks fellas
OK Craptar. Or maybe I know when to keep my mouth shut when I don't know what the **** I'm talking about unlike you, you ******* retard.
Do you really think anyone here is taking you seriously anymore?
You are assuming that Ford will eat the tooling costs associated with putting the Eco in a Raptor. I admit we are talking nothing more than adding a power steering pump, but the accessory layout doesn't allow for one which means there will be an expense. It probably won't be enough to make up the 1500$ difference but it will eat into it.
Valid point, or they could keep EPAS and add it into the truck. May be as simple as a beefier unit to respond as intended with the larger tires. Then it could be added to the 6.2 version as well, and those investment costs become shared, and less of an impact to the individual customer. They're doing some pretty cool stuff with EPAS and having different modes. On the Mustang our 2011 only has two, standard and sport mode, and I believe the 2012's actually had 3 modes. It does make a considerable difference in driving feel. I'm sure they could toss it out as a new feature update on 2013 trucks if they did it, to have a standard mode, a high speed offroading mode, and a lowspeed/rock crawling mode that has different responses of steering input.
As for fuel savings, that's arguable. Most guys with the Eco aren't seeing the advertised mpg's unloaded and are downright pissed about 8-10mpg towing. I just don't see much better numbers and in a flagship vehicle giving up any hp/tq for a 1-2mpg savings just doesn't sound viable.
Yeah I'm with you that it certainly won't be at the advertised ecoboost mpg from the regular trucks, but it would be a Raptor-specific lower fuel economy rating with the EB comapred to a regular f150 with the EB. I'd say it'd still be roughly the same percentage imrpovement in mileage over the 6.2 raptor, as a regular f150 eb is over a 6.2 regular f150 though. As I said even 2 mpg is a considerable amount of savings. $1,000-$1,500 initial sticker difference, and if you drive roughly 15k miles a year, depending on fuel costs in your area, that 2mpg would account to at least $500/yr savings and up to $1,000 in fuel savings, which isn't anything to sneeze at.
Having said all that, if they did just a couple tweaks to the Eco to match or exceed the 6.2 output (easily done), I have no doubt they would sell as many as they can make.
I really don't see them ever upping the 3.5 EB numbers above the 6.2's, just to keep the divisions clear between engine lineups. The profit margin on the 6.2 is more than likely higher, so they'd want to still keep it with the highest peak numbers to still have a sales pitch for pushing it. I would love to see the aftermarket really start to get tuning and everything else down with the 3.5's though. They certainly have a lot of potential to surprise some people!
Back to the topic...any other thoughts on what may be in that spy shot Raptor?