Raptor w/ecoboost MPG?

[mmp]

I am trying to estimate what kind of MPG a Raptor would do powered with an ecoboost. My logic is that if I took a regular F150 with the ecoboost and loaded the weight difference as payload, the MPG would come close to what a raptor would do with the ecoboost. Do you agree with this idea? Has this been done already?

 

[Maxx2893]

You would have to put the heavy tires on for the unsprung weight and the front of the raptor is less aerodynamic as well.

 

[Droid]

I'd disagree that it's a weight thing. I think the biggest impacts of the Raptor design on efficiency are its drag and higher rotating wheel/tire mass.

A Raptor has a higher frontal surface area than a regular F-150, and likely higher coefficient of drag as well. Regular F-150s have a chin spoiler, Raptors have large cutouts in the front bumper, larger wheel openings, larger A/T tires, all of which increase aero drag.

Additional rotating mass (90lb per corner wheel/tire vs. 60ish for a regular F-150) will hurt acceleration-related mileage, but won't affect cruise mileage.

And last but not least, Raptors are geared fairly short.

For a wild ass approximation of what a Raptor would do with an Ecoboost, start with a 2011 Harley or Lariat Limited with the 6.2L and compare that to a similar Ecoboost. Then multiply the Raptor's mileage by that factor. I wouldn't put much stock in the result though.

 

[Droid]

And for ***** and giggles...the result of the wild ass approximation above:

Ecoboost 4WD = 15/21
6.2L 4WD = 12/16

Factor = 1.25/1.3125

Raptor = 11/14

Hypothetical EcoRaptor = 13.75 / 18.375

 

[Reptar]

And for ***** and giggles...the result of the wild ass approximation above:

Ecoboost 4WD = 15/21
6.2L 4WD = 12/16

Factor = 1.25/1.3125

Raptor = 11/14

Hypothetical EcoRaptor = 13.75 / 18.375

I'd say thats a roughly loosely decent estimation, and 13.75/18.375 is a substantial improvement over 11/14. For nearly the same power, and a better torque curve.

I'm still 3.5 EB jealous.

 

[AdkRaptor150]

Idk about all of you but I wouldn't give up my 6.2 V8. Those turbo's are going to have to be working pretty hard to produce the amount of power a stock 6.2 V8 produces. As well as if you want more power-what upgrade the turbos and intercooler. I'll be interested to see how this turns out but I forsee alot of trips to the service dept with repairs.

 

[RaptorScrew]

And for ***** and giggles...the result of the wild ass approximation above:

Ecoboost 4WD = 15/21
6.2L 4WD = 12/16

Factor = 1.25/1.3125

Raptor = 11/14

Hypothetical EcoRaptor = 13.75 / 18.375

Hypothetically NOT WORTH losing the rumble of my 6.2L. I'm already pulling low 17s mpg. a whole 1.375 added on would not get me to change...

 

[AdkRaptor150]

17 mpg...shit what are you doing to get that. Are you fred flinstonin it lol?

 

[comagt]

I have a feeling the ecoboost wouldn't fare much better to provide the same HP. Ecoboost is only ECO when it's not using BOOST. The F150 forums are also indicating real world numbers aren't near the posted numbers.

 

[WarSurfer]

I'd say thats a roughly loosely decent estimation, and 13.75/18.375 is a substantial improvement over 11/14. For nearly the same power, and a better torque curve.

I'm still 3.5 EB jealous.

I get 13.5/17.2 with my 6.2 so...

The EB only has a tq advantage for about 1.5 seconds, under acceleration, not worth it in my book.

The lower hp version of the 6.2 is in the SuperDuty and it has a higher tow rating than the Eco... No Eco in SuperDuty.

Despite the nutswinger rhetoric there is zero real advantage to the Eco in equal vehicles. Add larger tires and a lift and it gets 6.2mpg.