A few questions... Price & MPG

[comagt]

load of crap on mileage.

my fiance's 2011 5.0 gets 26 mpg highway, 20 around town, and she flogs that car everywhere. 3.73 gears which aren't the ideal gas saver gear, and the car runs 12.00 @ 117 in the 1/4 with an amature driver.

You CAN have good mileage and great performance. Not happy at all about the gas mileage of the Raptor that's about the same as what my 1985 F-150 gets, pretty pathetic IMO. Yeah yeah it has a lot more power, more reliable, yadda yadda yadda. Point still remains the mileage sucks and I'm just not going to blankly accept it with a lame coverup, and no it's not a valid point of "if you're concerned about mpg then the Raptors not for you". Bullchit!

The mustang story is exaggerated. If the car really is flogged then it's more like 20/16 Unless the air is really that much different in your area. My 2012 5.0 usually averaged 14/16 with city driving, and on cruises would sit around 21-23 mpg. This is with the 3.73s.

As for the Raptor, your expectations are off for a vehicle like this. Physics are completely against the truck when it comes to MPG. if the stuff I've seen is accurate, the wheels weigh ~90 lbs. It is also 6,000 lbs, shaped like a brick, and has a TON of unsprung weight. I would say it's rating is pretty damn efficient considering these factors.

Not hating, just countering observations

 

[TheJoker]

Who is Randy?

Enough out of you!

load of crap on mileage.

my fiance's 2011 5.0 gets 26 mpg highway, 20 around town, and she flogs that car everywhere. 3.73 gears which aren't the ideal gas saver gear, and the car runs 12.00 @ 117 in the 1/4 with an amature driver.

You CAN have good mileage and great performance. Not happy at all about the gas mileage of the Raptor that's about the same as what my 1985 F-150 gets, pretty pathetic IMO. Yeah yeah it has a lot more power, more reliable, yadda yadda yadda. Point still remains the mileage sucks and I'm just not going to blankly accept it with a lame coverup, and no it's not a valid point of "if you're concerned about mpg then the Raptors not for you". Bullchit!

I feel ya bro.

The mustang story is exaggerated. If the car really is flogged then it's more like 20/16 Unless the air is really that much different in your area. My 2012 5.0 usually averaged 14/16 with city driving, and on cruises would sit around 21-23 mpg. This is with the 3.73s.

As for the Raptor, your expectations are off for a vehicle like this. Physics are completely against the truck when it comes to MPG. if the stuff I've seen is accurate, the wheels weigh ~90 lbs. It is also 6,000 lbs, shaped like a brick, and has a TON of unsprung weight. I would say it's rating is pretty damn efficient considering these factors.

Not hating, just countering observations

What he said!

 

[Reptar]

The mustang story is exaggerated. If the car really is flogged then it's more like 20/16 Unless the air is really that much different in your area. My 2012 5.0 usually averaged 14/16 with city driving, and on cruises would sit around 21-23 mpg. This is with the 3.73s.

As for the Raptor, your expectations are off for a vehicle like this. Physics are completely against the truck when it comes to MPG. if the stuff I've seen is accurate, the wheels weigh ~90 lbs. It is also 6,000 lbs, shaped like a brick, and has a TON of unsprung weight. I would say it's rating is pretty damn efficient considering these factors.

Not hating, just countering observations

Not exaggerated at all. We've seen a lowest of 18 mpg flogging it after the track on the display, but never ever anywhere close to 16. It's always 25-26 highway, and 19-20 DD'ing it to/from work. Double checking the trip meter by hand calculations and its always pretty darn close. 3.73 gears and manual. And okay she's not racing people every light, but she does romp that sucker harder than when I even drive it for DD use lol. She likes hearing the roush muffllers rip through the gears haha

And my expectations are not off for the raptor IMO. I expect it to get slightly less than a regular f-150 of course, but for the advancements they've made in horsepower from the 80's with V8's making 150 hp to now making 411 hp, I'd expect more than 11-14 mpg lol. And what Ford is doing with the 3.5 Ecoboost and 3.7 V6 are showing that it's not just physics if such small engines can get such great fuel economy along with pushing so much weight from a small engine. They're getting 20+ mpg, and yeah while the power isn't the same, i still think there's margin for improvement. I'll accept the mpg the raptor gets and won't cry about it, but I don't need to be happy about it and say it should be better. It's identical to what I get now in my 00 HD F-150 so I won't notice any difference on my wallet, but I won't notice any improvement either lol

 

[comagt]

On a simplistic scale, HP = fuel consumption. The trick to mpg is making the motor work less to achieve and maintain the same speed. Everything about the Raptor is in the opposite direction. The ecoboost achieves better mpg because the unsprung weight is lower and things are engineered differently.

And on the Mustang point, our definitions of flogging have to be different

 

[whtrapta]

Also just the fact of 6 vs 8 cylinders uses less fuel under normal performance.

 

[Reptar]

On a simplistic scale, HP = fuel consumption. The trick to mpg is making the motor work less to achieve and maintain the same speed. Everything about the Raptor is in the opposite direction. The ecoboost achieves better mpg because the unsprung weight is lower and things are engineered differently.

And on the Mustang point, our definitions of flogging have to be different

HP = fuel consumption isn't exactly the case, not cut and dry anyway.

I own two identical 00 HD trucks. They weigh within 100 lbs of each other. One puts down 700/784 and runs 10.3 in the 1/4, the other puts down 372/450 and runs 13.5 in the 1/4. They BOTH get 15 mpg highway. Now when I romp down and open up those 700 ponies on the beast, it'll spray raw fuel from the tips LOL, so it's probably gpm not mpg, but for the regular street driving and highway, the trucks get identical mileage when driven the same. Why? You need to be more efficient to make more power. You can just dump more fuel to overcome inefficiencies to make power, or you can make things more efficient to free up available power. Both have 5.4L engines with a blower. One is just much more efficient so it's capable of making huge power, yet still retain decent mpg.

So I still stick by my guns, with technology today, the mileage should still be better. Heck just look at 5.0's. They've gone from mildly crappy mileage on the old pushrod 5.0's to excellent mileage on the new mod motor 5.0's and just as much of a hp jump as the truck motors have made, yet some of the truck motors skipped the mileage bump.

 

[comagt]

HP = fuel consumption isn't exactly the case, not cut and dry anyway.

I own two identical 00 HD trucks. They weigh within 100 lbs of each other. One puts down 700/784 and runs 10.3 in the 1/4, the other puts down 372/450 and runs 13.5 in the 1/4. They BOTH get 15 mpg highway. Now when I romp down and open up those 700 ponies on the beast, it'll spray raw fuel from the tips LOL, so it's probably gpm not mpg, but for the regular street driving and highway, the trucks get identical mileage when driven the same. Why? You need to be more efficient to make more power. You can just dump more fuel to overcome inefficiencies to make power, or you can make things more efficient to free up available power. Both have 5.4L engines with a blower. One is just much more efficient so it's capable of making huge power, yet still retain decent mpg.
.

That is re-enforcing my point. They both get 15 because they take the same amount of effort to drive around. However, when you produce more hp and go faster with Hyde your fuel consumption rate plummets.

BTW, what does the 6.2 get in the new Harley truck?

 

[KaiserM715]

BTW, what does the 6.2 get in the new Harley truck?

12/16, 13 combined. It also has a much lighter wheel / tire package and reduced frontal area compared to a Raptor.

 

[Reptar]

That is re-enforcing my point. They both get 15 because they take the same amount of effort to drive around. However, when you produce more hp and go faster with Hyde your fuel consumption rate plummets.

Not really, that shows you can make MORE power without losing mileage. City and highway both trucks get the same. Flogging on it hard mileage drops more on the one than the other, but there's no fuel ecomony rating for "flogging" lol. It just debunks the arguement of you have to expect crap mileage just to make big hp. Yes in my particular case I'm not making better mileage with the higher hp, but it's the same exact powertrains. Ford can make better mielage and better hp with improved drivetrains, just as they've shown with the progression the 5.0 has made in both mileage and power in the mustang platform.

 

[KaiserM715]

As a point of comparison, the '09 Ram with the 5.7 is rated for 13/18. PickupTrucks.com reviewed a Ram Runner and reported that their average mileage was 12-13 - the same as the Raptor. Adding rotating weight and adding frontal area will kill mileage regardless of the vehicle. I bet an eco-boost in the Raptor would improve the mileage, but hoping for 20 mpg @ 70mph is a pipe dream for this truck.