17.4 MPH

[Ruger]

Facts matter, not opinions. The 6.2 is a 600lb iron block engine that was designed to replace the 5.4 as the base engine in the F-Series and E-Series. It wasn’t ever a “Raptor” engine, it was available in every F-150 until 2014 with identical power and torque ratings. It didn’t have sufficient torque to replace the 6.8 V10, so it lived on until the new 7.3 “Godzilla” was available in 2020.

Ford needed an upgrade to the 5.4 3V Raptor in 2010/2011, and all they had available was the 6.2, so they made it work. To claim that boat anchor was “designed for the Raptor” is simply ignorant and completely inaccurate.

And all you offer is opinion, while I have offered information from the manufacturer, Car and Driver, and Motor Trend. Having offered all of the information I can conveniently bring to bear, I happily bid you farewell.

 

[FordTechOne]

And all you offer is opinion, while I have offered information from the manufacturer, Car and Driver, and Motor Trend. Having offered all of the information I can bring to bear, I happily bid you farewell.

It’s not an opinion that the 6.2 was built to replace the 5.4 as the base model engine in Super Duty and E-Series; it’s a fact. Hence the iron block, low relative power output, and 600lb weight of the 6.2, none of which are beneficial to an off-road Baja truck. The 6.2 is still serving as the entry level engine in the SD and E-Series 12 years later, but you’re too biased to reason with.

The 6.2 was all Ford had available at the time aside from the 6.8, so it ended up in the Gen 1. The Gen 2 received the 3.5 HO, which was specifically developed for the Raptor and was never used in a base model truck, ever. In fact, it was only available in Raptor and the $90k+ Limited.

 

[thatJeepguy]

anyone know how much the 3.5 weighs vs the 6.2?

 

[FordTechOne]

anyone know how much the 3.5 weighs vs the 6.2?

3.5: 416lbs
6.2: 580lbs

 

[Mister Pinky]

I love this thread so much.

 

[CoronaRaptor]

It's gone off track and now is a comparison between gen 1 and gen 2, lol, exactly what OP wanted.

 

[thatJeepguy]

You can thank triggered fordtechnone… my god is that buffoon a real piece of work. He can’t cognitively think, or understand averages, hand calculations, etc. He has no clue that the mpg from the manufacturer is averaging worst and best in each city and Highway. I drove my 12 6.2 daily on mixed commute, and sure some tanks were better than others. It is idiotic on fordtechnone’s part to think “it can’t be done”. That is a sign of the ecoboost brainwashing he has endured. What a worthless POS…. don’t trust fordtechnone at all.

Dial it back a notch broham, me personally if you actually get that good of milage good for you. I love V-8’s so much. But the though of having a smaller 6 popper around town that can hit beast mode when you need it is great too… appreciate both. Imo tho, the 6.2 is kinda lame with the half ass over head cam job. LS and hemi are better imo cause at least they are more center mass with the cam shaft and push rod setup. Me personally im now figuring out how to get in the 18’s with mixed driving. My mpg os off by .4 because i use fuelly and hamd calc every fill.

 

[thatJeepguy]

3.5: 416lbs
6.2: 580lbs

Thats lit, ill take a 160lbs off the front end. That plus the aluminum… probs looking at 4-500lbs out of the whole chassis.

 

[dspangler]

Dial it back a notch broham, me personally if you actually get that good of milage good for you. I love V-8’s so much. But the though of having a smaller 6 popper around town that can hit beast mode when you need it is great too… appreciate both. Imo tho, the 6.2 is kinda lame with the half ass over head cam job. LS and hemi are better imo cause at least they are more center mass with the cam shaft and push rod setup. Me personally im now figuring out how to get in the 18’s with mixed driving. My mpg os off by .4 because i use fuelly and hamd calc every fill. View attachment 347078

You are correct - the 3.5 is capable in the situation you explained and makes it attractive. However, I just can’t buy an ecoboost and be afraid of the constant battle with ford service. It’s not a proven reliable engine to me after experience and knowing all the TSBs, and not to mention all the other info where people aren’t happy. You don’t see that with the 6.2 - just the 3.5.
To answer how to get the mpg out of your truck, go one full tank using cruise control wherever you go. If you get into hilly terrain, just hold your foot steady in a position. You will be amazed at how this gets the max mpg out of vehicles. I get 22 on my LS 6.2 (has cylinder deactivation still engaged)…. The method itself works great and proven with hand calcs.

 

[FordTechOne]

You are correct - the 3.5 is capable in the situation you explained and makes it attractive. However, I just can’t buy an ecoboost and be afraid of the constant battle with ford service. It’s not a proven reliable engine to me after experience and knowing all the TSBs, and not to mention all the other info where people aren’t happy. You don’t see that with the 6.2 - just the 3.5.
To answer how to get the mpg out of your truck, go one full tank using cruise control wherever you go. If you get into hilly terrain, just hold your foot steady in a position. You will be amazed at how this gets the max mpg out of vehicles. I get 22 on my LS 6.2 (has cylinder deactivation still engaged)…. The method itself works great and proven with hand calcs.

3.5 is a proven and reliable engine that’s been in service in millions of trucks. You have no clue what you’re talking about as always.

You don’t have access to TSBs, you have zero knowledge of engines, and you don’t even own a Raptor. You’ve more than worn out your welcome, especially since this is your 4th username after you were banned under the others.