The 6.2L is built to have decent power, the ability to tow/haul, and is in a truck that weighs over 5000 pounds. For this purpose, it was designed as a 2V motor instead of a 3V or 4V motor. Super high HP/TQ numbers were not ideal. But pulling power and longevity were. It's an all-purpose motor.
The little motor pushing big numbers in that GTR is purpose-built to make that lightweight car (AND NO ADDITIONAL WEIGHT) move as fast as possible.
Just my thoughts. I'll let the other guys who know more about engines step in.
Thanks for your effort! Yes, I understand this point, but the GT-R has even a higher TQ than Raptor? so can we say GT-R can tow more? This is where I start comfusing...
---------- Post added at 04:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:23 PM ----------
Huh..i own both but never considered this....I'm sure there is a technical reason the gtr engine wouldn't be a good fit, but I'm sure the gtr tranny would be a mess in a truck that big.
thanks for your effort here and another thread regarding of my drone issue! I am just wondering if we hold everything constant(I mean transmission) then the only variable is engine, what kind of result are we going to get?
BTW, so jealous that you can own Raptor and GT-R at the same time! I own Raptor now, next goal: GT-R! probably have to save up for at least another two or three years from now...
---------- Post added at 04:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:27 PM ----------
Keep in mind the Raptor's compression ratio is 9.8:1. Which is quite low for a NA engine these days. If it were to be brought up to say 11:1 compression ratio, it would pick up in the neighborhood of 15-20 WHEEL hp and 35wtq. Advantages of using a low compression ratio is the ability to run 87 octane fuel, and perhaps the longevity of the bottom end. Not trying to get too in depth here, but milling these heads to pick up a full point of compression, and add some timing would really wake the truck up, and I'm willing to bet some better MPG. Back to your argument, he has a GTR purpose built for the track, you have a Raptor, purpose built for the dirt. Why is there even a comparison going on? If I were going to swap any motor into the Raptor it would be an 03/04 Cobra platform, or an LSX. You dont even want to know what the powerplant for a GTR would cost you.
LOL, good point here! we were just curious about the result here since both of these two cars are considered as performance vehicles, so for the performance perspective, we were trying to find out which one is better with the performance data and fuel consumption
---------- Post added at 04:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:31 PM ----------
at least 20%... probably more like 25% drive train loss due to the tranny & suspension with 35's. not to mention the white elephant in the room = ( The GTR is TURBO CHARGED. )
Slap 8lbs of boost on the 6.2 and your 600BHP or close to it.
Just another thought is the EPA standards Ford has to abide by due to the 6.2 used in the gas Superduty. As I understand it Ford has a certain carbon print they must not overstep. BC these are not small production motors they have restrictive exhausts and retarded timing that lower power but make them more eco friendly.
thats what i thought, if we add two turbos, raptor's engine will def have more hp and tq. but with a 6.2 and twin turbo, it will def consume more fuel as well, i would say like a 7.2L or so. the power to fuel(or fuel to power ratio, whatever it calls) ratio is still higher than GT-R. If we put transimission and built purpose on the side, just talk about the performance data, is the GT-R engine is a better engine? I am not trying to argue that GT-R is better, I am def on the raptor side cause I own it. But I just want to find a persuasive reason to convince my friend that our raptors are better car than his GT-R!!
thats why I want your guys' help. Thanks for your effort here tho!
