2013 ...Is this the year for the ecoboost Raptor ?
- Thread starter Brewboy
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Boss Hoss
FRF Addict
HAHAHAHA---I know several folks that bought the Eco motor and all are not very happy. MPG was not what they had expected---all are happy with performance but none are what I call heavy footed drivers. Ford has bet the farm on the Eco motors across the line but in the trucks not that great.
My Raptor with 35x18 MTR's at 58psi, CAI, 5 Star 93 tune, Magna Pak (did have regular Magna Flow) gets at 55 in no wind 16.8, 65 in no wind 14.8.
Worst I ever got was going to the ranch in NM fighting a 30 to 50 mph headwind for 9 hours driving 70 to 75 got 10.5!!
This truck gets better mpg with some tires---I have had 4 sets so far. The factory tires and wheels for a couple of weeks, then Trail Grapplers one trip to NM, General Red Letter lasted 5k but started to vbrate at 55 to 65 and finally the MTR's.
The Factory BFG's and the MTR's get the best MPG but the Generals were not run at 58 they were run at 50psi.
My Raptor with 35x18 MTR's at 58psi, CAI, 5 Star 93 tune, Magna Pak (did have regular Magna Flow) gets at 55 in no wind 16.8, 65 in no wind 14.8.
Worst I ever got was going to the ranch in NM fighting a 30 to 50 mph headwind for 9 hours driving 70 to 75 got 10.5!!
This truck gets better mpg with some tires---I have had 4 sets so far. The factory tires and wheels for a couple of weeks, then Trail Grapplers one trip to NM, General Red Letter lasted 5k but started to vbrate at 55 to 65 and finally the MTR's.
The Factory BFG's and the MTR's get the best MPG but the Generals were not run at 58 they were run at 50psi.
svtjackal
Member
I am just a newbie but I guess that the "Z" is the other raptor forum that name ends with a Z.
K-9
Full Access Member
I test drove the eco-boost f150 and though all the dyno charts etc show a wider range under the curve i did not care for the low end lag. No one else seems to think anything about and everyon dis agrees with my opinion but I felt the lag down low. Specifically driving off the lot and at idle speed rolling into an intersection then needing to move and hitting the gas pretty good. I did it again intentionally to see if i really felt it and it's there.
Once up to speed the motor is fine. No issues at all and I can get over the V6 vs v8 thing etc. In the end though i didn't personally care for that low end lag and would opt for the 6.2 vs the current ecoboost options even if available. If they made a 5.0 or bigger ecoboost then i may have something to thing about but if in the end I really don't like turbo lag even if really minor only at the low end. For me having that on a 50K vehicle is just not what i want so i would not buy it. If anyone else didn't feel the same I would not fault them for being wrong
Once up to speed the motor is fine. No issues at all and I can get over the V6 vs v8 thing etc. In the end though i didn't personally care for that low end lag and would opt for the 6.2 vs the current ecoboost options even if available. If they made a 5.0 or bigger ecoboost then i may have something to thing about but if in the end I really don't like turbo lag even if really minor only at the low end. For me having that on a 50K vehicle is just not what i want so i would not buy it. If anyone else didn't feel the same I would not fault them for being wrong
I have driven 3 ecoboost equipped pickups, I still prefer my 6.2. Not saying it was bad, it felt okay, I just didn't feel the torque was as impressive as its advertised to be, that's all.
I would be happy if they went even larger in the Raptor. I would put my vote in for say a 8 or 9 liter V10.
I would be happy if they went even larger in the Raptor. I would put my vote in for say a 8 or 9 liter V10.
I just wanna throw this out there. If they offer a twin turbo 5.0 it will not be an ecoboost. Why its called ecoboost is it can behave like a v6 and be eco friendly or when it's under boost it behaves like a v8. There's nothing eco friendly about a twin turbo'd v8 lol.
A 429ci all aluminum DOHC with 11:1 compression and individual throttle bodies for me please.
Or, an LS7 with a set of TEA heads, F.A.S.T. intake and a huge comp cams bumpstick and valvetrain support kit.
Either way, 700+bhp n/a on pump gas
Or, an LS7 with a set of TEA heads, F.A.S.T. intake and a huge comp cams bumpstick and valvetrain support kit.
Either way, 700+bhp n/a on pump gas
why not?
Ecoboost I4 - power of a V-6 with the fuel economy of a 4
Ecoboost V6 - power of a V-8 with the fuel economy of a 6
Ecoboost V8 - power of a V-10 or supercharged V8 with the economy of a V-8
why not?
Ecoboost I4 - power of a V-6 with the fuel economy of a 4
Ecoboost V6 - power of a V-8 with the fuel economy of a 6
Ecoboost V8 - power of a V-10 or supercharged V8 with the economy of a V-8
Haha I guess it all depends on your view of things
exactly, it's all relative!
I'm sure they'd keep the ecoboost name, to show you can get high performance with reasonable mileage if they ever did do an ecoboost V8.
I don't think that'll really become an option though. The 5.0 heads have casting indents for adding DI, but just because they add DI doesn't necessarily mean they'll also add TT.
I wouldn't be one bit surprised to see an ecoboost I4 or V6 mustang in the next generation mustang, or a DI version of the 5.0, but I don't think we'll see an EB V8 anytime in the near future.
I'm sure they'd keep the ecoboost name, to show you can get high performance with reasonable mileage if they ever did do an ecoboost V8.
I don't think that'll really become an option though. The 5.0 heads have casting indents for adding DI, but just because they add DI doesn't necessarily mean they'll also add TT.
I wouldn't be one bit surprised to see an ecoboost I4 or V6 mustang in the next generation mustang, or a DI version of the 5.0, but I don't think we'll see an EB V8 anytime in the near future.
Similar threads
