It’s just slow

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.

Bullet Bob

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Posts
242
Reaction score
291
Location
Mid-Atlantic
I would be surprised if I put a supercharger on a 5.0 F-150 if I could get 100k without the engine or transmission giving up the ghost. The 6.2 is a great commercial engine though except for all the spark plugz.
I agree with you Grayson. As a general rule, anytime power is increased, longevity is decreased. That particular Raptor may just be an anomaly. Or possibly an example of how well these trucks are engineered today. Either way, I'm impressed. At 200K miles it looks and runs like it has 20K on it.
 
Last edited:

Canuck714

FRF Addict
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Posts
1,192
Reaction score
992
Location
San Antonio TX
Its not an anomaly.. there are a bunch of higher mile 6.2's with superchargers on them. I had 120k when it laid down good numbers and it was a truck that saw some abuse.
The trick to longevity with that set up is how you are forcing the air and who tuned it. The Roush (TVS 2300) and Whipple are very reliable with the right tune ala JDM.
Turbo's and Pro-Chargers are tricky to tune on the old software and have definitely had some issues.

To the guys that like to complain about the weight of this boat anchor, have you ever weighed a Eco-Poop with the turbos and manifolds?
There really isn't that huge of a difference up front. Isn't the Gen 2 only 600 pounds lighter for the total truck...Like how heavy do you think the 6.2 is...LOL
 

FordTechOne

FRF Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Posts
6,664
Reaction score
13,041
Location
Detroit
Its not an anomaly.. there are a bunch of higher mile 6.2's with superchargers on them. I had 120k when it laid down good numbers and it was a truck that saw some abuse.
The trick to longevity with that set up is how you are forcing the air and who tuned it. The Roush (TVS 2300) and Whipple are very reliable with the right tune ala JDM.
Turbo's and Pro-Chargers are tricky to tune on the old software and have definitely had some issues.

To the guys that like to complain about the weight of this boat anchor, have you ever weighed a Eco-Poop with the turbos and manifolds?
There really isn't that huge of a difference up front. Isn't the Gen 2 only 600 pounds lighter for the total truck...Like how heavy do you think the 6.2 is...LOL

6.2: 580lbs
Gen 2 3.5: 416lbs

That’s complete engine (including manifolds and turbos) without accessory drive components.

Over 160lbs less weight over the front axle is huge, especially in a high speed off road truck.

The shipping weight of the Whipple Supercharger kit alone is 160lbs, so now you’re 320lbs+ heavier over the front end. And you’ll still get smoked by a Goosetuned Gen 2!
 
Last edited:

Grayson

Full Access Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2022
Posts
515
Reaction score
617
Location
NC
6.2: 580lbs
Gen 2 3.5: 416lbs

That’s complete engine (including manifolds and turbos) without accessory drive components.

Over 160lbs less weight over the front axle is huge, especially in a high speed off road truck.

The shipping weight of the Whipple Supercharger kit is 160lbs, so now you’re 320lbs heavier over the front end. And you’ll still get smoked by a Goosetuned Gen 2!

I have to put my sac somewhere, might as well be placed over the front axle.
 

Grayson

Full Access Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2022
Posts
515
Reaction score
617
Location
NC
Exactly. The ecoboost is great n all but it still sounds gayer then two men having sex

While I don't compare the way an internal combustion engines to the ****** preferences, sounds and/or choices activities of other people want or choose to do; Ecoboost engines for the most part are a superior choice to a V8 in regard to horsepower, torque and weight.

A 3.0 Ecoboost that is going to be in the Ford Ranger Raptor and Bronco Raptor...I don't ever want to work on one again but still reliable. The 7.3 gas powered work engine but it's a pushrod design with roughly the same specs as a 351w and could make great power with moderate fuel economy if Ford incorporated auto start stop & MDS/AFM type systems that would cause issues. Ford would also need to make the 7.3 both port and direct injection most likely as well.
 

rat196426

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2021
Posts
20
Reaction score
23
Location
michigan
V6 garbage... 520 pounds of gutless. My 2012 6.2 runs circles around the v6 and a lot more reliable, a soccer mom car engine does not belong in a truck. You want a real engine, strip out engine bay and install a 351 Windsor aluminum heads /intake holly 4 barrel (410 pounds) 800 horsepower all day long boys. I build these engines for my arca car and a few other teams. Building a 460 ford aluminum heads /intake for my 2010 raptor and my own 4 link rear suspension design on BendTech software. A real mans offroad truck...Pics coming soon
 
Top