Report: 2019 F-150 Raptor To Receive Ford’s New 7.0L DOHC V8 Motor

[Truckzor]

So your only argument is shifting? hahaha, that's it? Shifting? nothing else? I've seen plenty of towing videos with the 6.2 and it still shifts. Not only does it shift, the shifts are harsher because the ratios are further apart than on the 10 speed used on the Gen2.

So there it is, your only argument is a non-starter. Try again.

Non-starter? You are arguing against low end torque and throttle response in a truck.

 

[jabroni619]

Non-starter? You are arguing against low end torque and throttle response in a truck.

Arguing for mid-range power isn't the same thing as arguing against low end torque. Learn to debate.

I'll take the mid range power, so when I stomp on the gas at the same time as a Gen 1 owner, I can envy, via my rear view mirror that he can add a winch easier than I can.

 

[Truckzor]

Arguing for mid-range power isn't the same thing as arguing against low end torque. Learn to debate.

I'll take the mid range power, so when I stomp on the gas at the same time as a Gen 1 owner, I can envy, via my rear view mirror that he can add a winch easier than I can.

Bought your truck for street racing, did you? Live your life a quarter mile a time?

You know what would be nice? Having both low end and mid ranger power. You know what does that? Hint. It's not a Taurus motor.

 

[jabroni619]

Bought your truck for street racing, did you? Live your life a quarter mile a time?

You know what would be nice? Having both low end and mid ranger power. You know what does that? Hint. It's not a Taurus motor.

I bought it for Starbucks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC5ol86uX8g

 

[MGD]

Bought your truck for street racing, did you? Live your life a quarter mile a time?

You know what would be nice? Having both low end and mid ranger power. You know what does that? Hint. It's not a Taurus motor.

Agree. Folks forget this truck is built for off-road/mud/rock crawling... not sure it’s a good idea to have to wind up the engine to anything over 2500rpm just to get the necessary power to get out of a jam.

 

[jabroni619]

Bought your truck for street racing, did you? Live your life a quarter mile a time?

You know what would be nice? Having both low end and mid ranger power. You know what does that? Hint. It's not a Taurus motor.

Sasquatch just agreed with you. Bet you’re reconsidering your position now.

 

[Sasquatch78]

^^^ agree. Us 6.2 folks are completely happy and have NO desire for a different engine.... especially something as unproven as the double turbo ecoboost 10spd. Yikes... I just want to make sure once I get on the trail, that I can get off without mechanical incident.

Trail? You haven't made it out of my basement!
Trolling ecoboost internet sites has gotten out of hand with you.

---------- Post added at 12:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:53 AM ----------

Agree. Folks forget this truck is built for off-road/mud/rock crawling... not sure it’s a good idea to have to wind up the engine to anything over 2500rpm just to get the necessary power to get out of a jam.

It might be helpful for folks here to know that you're 14 and grounded for trolling ecoboost internet sites.

 

[MJslasherADMIN]

Horsepower per liter is the joke, bro. It was made up by the marketing department of car companies that sold slow cars in the 80s. And thinking a Raptor is a performance vehicle is also a joke. And so is putting a Taurus SHO motor in a full size truck. And so is the Ecoboost's low end torque. And its reliability. And its longevity. And let's not forget about the sound.

I think HP per liter is a valid measurement. Its used to describe performance in all sorts of engines.

I agree with everything else you said here though. Dead on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Truckzor]

I think HP per liter is a valid measurement. Its used to describe performance in all sorts of engines.

I agree with everything else you said here though. Dead on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I should clarify. I stand by my comment about the origins of the specific output measurement, at least for common use. It was definitely slow car owners in the 80s and 90s trying to make themselves feel better about how high tech their engines were, which is and was laughable.

I do agree it is a valid measurement in specific situations, though. For example, if you lived in a socialist country that limited engine size in passenger cars, or if you were participating in a racing class that limits engine displacement. Then you would definitely want to seek the highest power output per liter, no matter the cost or trade offs.

Otherwise, it's completely useless marketing jargon. Last I checked, I can make my engine as big as I want. 'Murica. **** yeah.

 

[jaz13]

I should clarify. I stand by my comment about the origins of the specific output measurement, at least for common use. It was definitely slow car owners in the 80s and 90s trying to make themselves feel better about how high tech their engines were, which is and was laughable.

I do agree it is a valid measurement in specific situations, though. For example, if you lived in a socialist country that limited engine size in passenger cars, or if you were participating in a racing class that limits engine displacement. Then you would definitely want to seek the highest power output per liter, no matter the cost or trade offs.

Otherwise, it's completely useless marketing jargon. Last I checked, I can make my engine as big as I want. 'Murica. **** yeah.

LOL, you're a funny dude. Installing a 700hp blower tells me you are one of those cars and coffee dudes. The only questions left is how big are your rims and how high did you lift your truck? I bet all the cars and coffee dudes go crazy for your "extreme" truck.