Reptard,
Do you know the difference between 3.5L and 6.2L pushing a 6000# vehicle in terms of durability? Ill give you a hint, larger is better.
lol I love it, if it's not little cute names for the 3.5 ecoboost, it's plays on screen names of "Reptar" to "Reptard" haha. I'll bring up valid comparison points for discussion like weight, 1/4 mile times, back to back testing in equal trim models, and the responses back are just "well you're a retard" and "ecoboost is an ecoturd" and "bigger is better"....well nanny nanny boo boo, stick your head in doo doo. Now we're having a tech discussion!
Where's your evidence that bigger is better? I'd love to see it. I can link you several videos to the 3.5 ecoboost torture test that Ford did back in 2010/2011, and there's some evidence that the 3.5 ecoboost shows excellent durability. That does not say the 6.2 doesn't have killer durability as well...heck I own a 6.2 so I hope that thing lasts forever! lol. But it doesn't mean that just because the number 6 is greater than the number 3 that therefore it's twice as "better" lol
The death of the v-8 will be the beginning of the slow death of performance, if the vehicle manufacturing industry thinks we want mpg more than horsepower then eventually we will have only 1 cylinder engines and for performance we'll have 1 cylinder turbos, I want 8, 10, 12, even 16 cylinders to live on forever, if we accept that v-6 turbos are the future then we accept that performance cars will soon be the past and soon the regulations will come down and enthusiastic driving practices will more strictly be cracked down upon until we are no longer allowed to even drive our cars to work ourselves, it will be done by a computer that prevents any accident, let alone drive them down a back road or even worse offroad, if we give the econazis an inch, they'll take everything, not just a mile
I do agree that the driving nannies are getting out of hand with the automatic braking, drive by wire with all kinds of throttle controls to filter your right foot, lane keeping, auto parallel parking, auto cruise control, it's pretty ridiculous, and it trains people to pay less attention onthe road because they rely on those nannies to save their azzes during that numbed up driving experience, rather than actually feel the road and feel the vehicle through the controls.
But I disagree on getting all paranoid that the only cars are going to be 100 hp 4 bangers with 500 mpg down the road. Manufacturers, ford especially, are still making big power tire roasting V8s, yet still offering economical alternatives. And even on their big power V8s, they're taking measure to improve fuel economy and not sacrafice power. The 2013 GT500 shows just that by avoiding the gas guzzler tax (IIRC) yet still putting out over 650 hp! And the 2015 mustang is offering a 4 banger turbo for the fuel economy minded, yet it's still over 300 hp which will blow away v6 stangs, and they aren't ignoring their flagship 5.0 V8 that will now push beyond 420 hp. And since CAFE is for fleet AVERAGES, the more 4 banger and v6's they sell with great gas mileage, the more big v8's with huge power and ****** mileage they can offer, and still meet CAFE standards lol. And with the 2015 f150, they're not getting their MPG by removing V8's from the lineup and pulling 100 hp from the engines, they're doing it by being smarter and removing weight and making them more aerodynamic, so you can retain the big power V8, and not have to take a hit in the horsepower department, and still get your mileage standards.
Obviously it's because the "special" part of the Raptor is its off road capability and that's where the development money was spent and what makes it so attractive to so many. But they did give it the 6.2L motor which makes most owners happy (just ask the 5.4L owners).
Yes I know the "special" part is it's offroading, but just pointing out that SVT didn't have didly squat to do with the 6.2 itself. They did select the largest engine Ford had to offer in it, but it's nothing like a Lightning or Cobra or Shelby where the engine got special upgrades under SVT, where non-SVT versionsof the engine didn't get those things. Our 6.2 is just a regular 6.2. Nothing SVT special about it.
It's NOT the vehicle manufacturers who want MPG more than HP. It's the government, the legislators, especially those in Kalifornia who love to make rules that restrict and govern the auto industry because they know that their laws carry enough weight to impact the entire industry.
It's the drivers too, except the handful of guys on the forums who feel like more of a badass by saying "i don't care if I got 2 mpg!" or "I didn't buy a raptor for fuel economy I would have bought a prius if I cared!".
Those guys have their heads up their asses lol. Of course nobody bought a raptor specifically for the MPG, and I would have still bought my Raptor if it got 10 mpg or if it got 20 mpg, that wouldn't have changed my decision, but I bet NOBODY would complain if their Raptor got 25% better fuel economy with NO loss of power. If that were the case, I'd have an extra 1,000 bucks a year in my pocket to throw at the truck in mods. For what sacrafice? Not horsepower, not reliability, just making Ford's engineers work a little harder and earn their salary to think smarter. So nope, I don't want automakers to have to be lazy and not care about fuel economy, let trucks just sit in the 80's with 9 mpg and not do anything about it. Screw that, they're smart engineers, it's almost 2014, get rid of this boat anchor 200+ lb iron block, give me a 100 lb aluminum block, give me TIVCT and DOHC like the 5.0 not SOHC, give me direct injection, and heck slap some turbos on the V8 to make stupid power and keep the fuel economy just the same.
As i understand it in real world use the 5.0 and the ecoboost get about 15 mph all around. And the 0 to 30 and the 0 to 60 times are very close. Is this a misconception.
Yes it is a misconception lol. Guys owning 3.5's will tell you it blows 5.0's out of the water. Guys owning 5.0s will tell you those "ecoturds" are slow as balls. Guys who have 3.5's and lifted them and put big tires and get ****** mileage won't admit they didn't change gearing like they should have, or even retuned the PCM for the tire size to even show an accurate fuel mileage lol. Or guys being badazzes street racing like an idiot won't tell you they had an intake or tune or exhaust on their 5.0 when they were racing a 3.5, of a different trim package, from a stop light when the guy in the 3.5 probably didn't even know the idiot in the other lane was trying to race, but oh no man, he smoked that guy so bad!....yeah it's because he wasn't racing your dumbazz from light to light lol. Or the guy with the 5.0 who feathers his pedal will tell you he gets 22 mpg, and the guy with the 3.5 who's always in boost driving like a maniac will tell you he only gets 12. That's not the gospel for average or real world fuel economy lol.
There's a LOT of skewed information out there. Be very carful of what you read. If you want to find out first hand, go drive each one, but make sure they're equally equipped, because gears, weight, etc. make a significant difference.
I will say, with our 3.5 EB explorer Sport, that right foot as a HUGE impact on the mileage based on driving habbits. When my wife drives it, she gets 18 mpg around down. When we take it highway, we get 22-23 mpg. When I drive it around town, I get 13-14 lol. I'm always in boost and love hearing those BOVs vent. When I drive the Raptor however, it's so friggin heavy, and the 6.2's torque curve doesn't hold a candle to the 3.5, it feels like a **** after driving the Sport, so I don't even bother driving spiritedly, I just drive it normal, and I get 13-14 mpg. If I do drive it spiritedly, it gets 11-12. So not as much of a swing between mild & wild driving. So yes my 3.5 EB and my 6.2 get the same mileage when I drive, but that doesn't mean real world mileage they're the same, because the 3.5 I'm driving it like I stole it, pedal to the floor more often than I can count, and my 6.2 I'm driving it like a granny, and pedal to the floor happens once in a blue moon, if even that. When I drive my 3.5 like that, it's 22-23 mpg....my 6.2 can't even dream of that lol
