Who’s got the highest mileage raptor eco boost?

[BigBlue20]

2020 with 19,000 no issue miles. No noises when cold. Love it! Although not a Raptor , I did own 2016 F150 with a 2.7 eco boost. It had noisy cam phasers replaced (warranty) at 23k. Then it ran problem free till I traded for my Gen2 at 65k. There are many non high output 3.5ecoboost engines out there with no issues. The basic design, which is great and well proven! I’m a fan!

 

[Grayson]

Some are you Gen 1 guys so defensive; it wreaks of insecurity. This is a Gen 3 thread discussing the Gen 2/3 engine, it had nothing to do with the antiquated 6.2 until "dspangler" (kuan, azrael, predator raptor) started derailing the thread with his usual trolling. Regardless, the drone of the 6.2 is horrible with any aftermarket exhaust. It is not in any way a performance engine; comparing it to the sound of an actual high performance V8 (DOHC 4.6/5.4/5.8 Modular, 5.0 Coyote/Roadrunner, 5.2 Voodoo/Predator) makes that even more blatantly obvious. This is where the 6.2 resides in it's natural habitat:
View attachment 344395

Now can we please keep the thread on track?

This is 20 miles from me, I need to go check that performance vehicle out

 

[DS550]

How much did that set you back?

It was $3,600.00 with the water pump, spark plugs and new valve cover gasket. The dealer I WAS taking it to for service wanted 5K for the work without the water pump and plugs. I ended up going to the Ford dealer I buy my fleet parts from and they charged me their cost plus 10% with no extra labor on the water pump.

 

[dspangler]

When the Gen1 came out it was the top dog overall performance truck. That was then, this is now. Ford abandoned the old design to make significant improvements. Although still a good truck, it’s just heavy and slow compared to new technology. You’re proving what others have said in that you’re just trolling a Gen2 forum because you jealous you don’t have one. It’s ok to be envious, but your comments are simply incorrect. Are you the new/same-old Sasquatch?

I think you really missed the point. Nobody argues performance that the 3.5 is better than the 6.2. But, the world knows that 3.5 ecoboost is much more problematic than the 6.2 ever was. Nobody has ever presented the argument that the 3.5 has less issues than the 6.2. Keep in mind the 6.2 has many years of service across e-van series, f-series, and various other vehicles. It is a very stout engine… some may call slow. But, hey, I will take a a slow turtle that I don’t have to work on versus a jackrabbit with ADD.

Truck for truck that is true.

However, a lot of people attribute that to the 3.5 > 6.2, but there are a few other differences that help out: 10 speed and weight are some big ones.

An interesting question would be which would you take in a race/whatever comparison the hypothetical you wants? An otherwise stock “gen 1” but with the 3.5 HO or an otherwise stock “gen 2” with the 6.2?

Edit****

OP something that might be interesting is to check on other forums for the gen 1 or gen 2 ecoboost high mileage threads. Might help to put your mind at ease on choosing the ecoboost as a platform.

You are missing the point. this is about longevity/reliability, not 0-60.

 

[Donovan]

Whos got the most mods raptor ecoboost?

 

[Jakenbake]

I think you really missed the point. Nobody argues performance that the 3.5 is better than the 6.2. But, the world knows that 3.5 ecoboost is much more problematic than the 3.5 ecoboost. Nobody has ever presented the argument that the 3.5 has less issues than the 6.2. Keep in mind the 6.2 has many years of service across e-van series, f-series, and various other vehicles. It is a very stout engine… some may call slow. But, hey, I will take a a slow turtle that I don’t have to work on versus a jackrabbit with ADD.



You are missing the point. this is about longevity/reliability, not 0-60.

I didn’t miss the point, I was responding to a post that mentioned that the gen 2 “runs” better than the gen 1. Thus I addressed that comment with comments on speed.

I personally think the 6.2 gets a bad rap, and is better than most think. I think the big issue that everyone runs into is what is their use case. I believe most people think how they use the truck is how everyone does.

I would say that both the 6.2 and 3.5 HO are plenty reliable for the use case they were assigned. I have not looked but I bet they knocked the power down on the 6.2 in superduty trim to make it more durable for that platform.

 

[dspangler]

I didn’t miss the point, I was responding to a post that mentioned that the gen 2 “runs” better than the gen 1. Thus I addressed that comment with comments on speed.

I personally think the 6.2 gets a bad rap, and is better than most think. I think the big issue that everyone runs into is what is their use case. I believe most people think how they use the truck is how everyone does.

I would say that both the 6.2 and 3.5 HO are plenty reliable for the use case they were assigned. I have not looked but I bet they knocked the power down on the 6.2 in superduty trim to make it more durable for that platform.

I any case, the 6.2 proved to have less issues than the 3.5. That is the real takeaway for the OP.

 

[TwizzleStix]

I any case, the 6.2 proved to have less issues than the 3.5. That is the real takeaway for the OP.

If you want to approach it from long-term reliability, then the 6.3 is a baby. The small block Chevy &Fords have been around a whole lot longer, so the 6.3 isn’t even in the longevity game. Neither is the entire line of Ecoboost engines, along with ALL the gasoline direct-injection engines. If you extrapolate time in service with number of different “issues” were not even in the calculations.

An anvil will generally outlast a bench-vice hammer plate, but the vice is WAY more useful…

 

[dspangler]

If you want to approach it from long-term reliability, then the 6.3 is a baby. The small block Chevy &Fords have been around a whole lot longer, so the 6.3 isn’t even in the longevity game. Neither is the entire line of Ecoboost engines, along with ALL the gasoline direct-injection engines. If you extrapolate time in service with number of different “issues” were not even in the calculations.

An anvil will generally outlast a bench-vice hammer plate, but the vice is WAY more useful…

Whew.. you missed the mark badly. What is a 6.3? You do realize what the 6.2 went into and how long it’s been out, right??



The 6.2 has been around a long time… probably sold more than the 3.5 eco. It has a trouble free record compared to ecoboost.

 

[FordTechOne]

Whew.. you missed the mark badly. What is a 6.3? You do realize what the 6.2 went into and how long it’s been out, right??



The 6.2 has been around a long time… probably sold more than the 3.5 eco. It has a trouble free record compared to ecoboost.

More unsubstantiated claims. You sound like a broken record; you say the same thing over and over again without any data to back it up. You don’t know anything about engine reliability nor do you even own a Raptor.

The Gen 1 EcoBoost came out at the same time as the 6.2; 2011. And for the record, Ford has sold more 3.5 EcoBoost trucks than 6.2 trucks by a wide margin.