5.2L Supercharged V8 Confirmed

FastEddie said:

Isn’t the 10 speed trans used by GM in high power applications?

Click to expand...

Yes, the ZL1 Camaro has 650 hp and 650 lb ft of torque.

I'm confused, are we talking about an offroad focused Raptor or a pavement princess Lightning?

I've taken the Raptor in the backcountry for a week and I definitely prefer the economy and weight of the V6TT. A supercharger would not only be completely useless in low traction dirt, its vastly increased fuel consumption is a huge liability on multi-day trips.

RAPTERRIER said:

It's a cross plane so it shouldn't grenade like the flat plane in the 350

Click to expand...

Whats wrong the the 5.2 FPC?

FPC is a gimmick. Not a robust solution, just one that sounds pretty. They really could have gotten nearly the same performance with a CPC.

jaz13 said:

I'm confused, are we talking about an offroad focused Raptor or a pavement princess Lightning?

I've taken the Raptor in the backcountry for a week and I definitely prefer the economy and weight of the V6TT. A supercharger would not only be completely useless in low traction dirt, its vastly increased fuel consumption is a huge liability on multi-day trips.

Click to expand...

Shit man- how far off road you going to worry about that? A 35 gallon tank will take you a long ass way even at 5 mpg. It's gonna take a certain amount of energy to shove 3 tons around, and the drag from a couple extra piston rings and the blower isn't going to change that much. Why would anyone want less power and torque in a Raptor? (Unless there is a decrease in reliability associated with it- IE the whole 6.2L vs TTV6 argument). I don't see how you think a turbo 3.5L is perfect, but a s/c 5.2L V8 is "completely useless". The s/c V8 has better throttle response and modulation in every situation. More reliable too.

Well said.

EricM said:

FPC is a gimmick. Not a robust solution, just one that sounds pretty. They really could have gotten nearly the same performance with a CPC.




Shit man- how far off road you going to worry about that? A 35 gallon tank will take you a long ass way even at 5 mpg. It's gonna take a certain amount of energy to shove 3 tons around, and the drag from a couple extra piston rings and the blower isn't going to change that much. Why would anyone want less power and torque in a Raptor? (Unless there is a decrease in reliability associated with it- IE the whole 6.2L vs TTV6 argument). I don't see how you think a turbo 3.5L is perfect, but a s/c 5.2L V8 is "completely useless". The s/c V8 has better throttle response and modulation in every situation. More reliable too.

Click to expand...

As I said, I spent a week in the backcountry. Everyone else was messing around with gas cans while I did it comfortably with the 36 gal tank. A supercharged V8 would cut my MPG in half and I'd need half a dozen gas cans too.

As for supercharger v turbo, turbos uses free energy. Depending on how big the supercharger is, it takes 100 to 150 hp to run it. That's a lot of extra gas to power something that a turbo does for free. And when I'm putzing along at low speed and out of the turbo, I'm using a small V6 motor. The supercharged V8 drinks like a supercharged V8 no matter how slow it goes.

And I don't think anyone would argue a 5.2L supercharged V8 weights a lot more than a 3.5LTT V6. That makes a big difference in the soft stuff.

If people want to go fast, put the supercharged V8 in the Platinum with its smaller and lighter tires and you'd have a rocket. The Raptor will always be slow on the street because of the 800lbs worth of offroad bits and oversized tires.

Keep in mind the reason for wanting this 5.2 (or just 5.0)... Reliability.

Since we talking about how much more power the Raptor needs, I'll share my experience..
More desert running then anything else and no problems with the EB power...some general trail running and a few small not crazy hills...still not lacking for power...and just a little bit of low range action and how much more power do you need when in low range?
I have to be up front - no time in the sand, and no doubt about it nothing sucks power like sand...so no comment on sand running...

It's not a power issue... It is a reliability issue that beed to be fixed

the cpc 5.2 has been in the gt350 race cars from the get-go. Different cams, but id be shocked if ford isn't using the gt350 heads. my engine builder said that he'd polish them but that there really wasn't a whole lot of flow that he could add to the design.

I like the new wheels, i hate the circular shifter garbage. looks like a rental chrysler 300 console.

i think they missed on not making the hood vent CF to pull the CF theme from the wheels and the spoiler.

net/net Ford's pony cars are punching WAY above their weight in the market. a gt350 makes a rough day at the track for many cars that are 4x the price.