Raptor R vs TRX Drag Race

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.

GCATX

King Dingaling
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Posts
8,040
Reaction score
21,667
Location
Central Texas
It's not a bad engine, but there could have been plenty of better options.. I literally average worse mpg than my 6.2L "boat anchor" 12.7 vs 13.1, and of course it's needing phasers done soon..

I'm not a raptoR buyer either but at least they're bringing the engine every one wanted to begin with.
My Gen1 6.2 shows 10 mpg, Gen 2 showed 15.8, Gen 3 shows 15.
 

downforce137

FRF Addict
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Posts
1,848
Reaction score
2,394
Location
In Diana
I can imagine going to bat for an LS but for all the shit you guys are talking , im sorry the 6.2 is a mediocre at best v-8 with completely unimpressive #’s given its size and weight.
It was the best we had. Long tubes and a tune with a CAI and a shortened turn down mbrp exhaust.. even if it didn't go all that great, it sounded awesome and turned heads everywhere..

And not the cringy head turning, like when I start my 3.5 that needs cam phasers..
 

FordTechOne

FRF Addict
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Posts
6,398
Reaction score
12,490
Location
Detroit
It was the best we had. Long tubes and a tune with a CAI and a shortened turn down mbrp exhaust.. even if it didn't go all that great, it sounded awesome and turned heads everywhere..

And not the cringy head turning, like when I start my 3.5 that needs cam phasers..
That about sums it up. “It was the best we had”. And that’s not saying much. Bolt-ons produce little to no gains and it actually loses power with H/C “upgrades”. Who would have ever predicted that could happen on a SOHC cast iron engine designed to power an E-Series.

You were “turning heads everywhere” because of the obnoxious noise coming from your truck. Most people probably thought the exhaust fell off a UPS truck. Joke was on them when they didn’t get their package. Instead, it was you parading around thinking your truck actually sounds good. The 6.2 was never intended to be used in a performance application, period. That is why it has such bad noise characteristics with any aftermarket exhaust; the rasp and drone are terrible.

As far as the 3.5, the cab does not need to be, nor should be, removed to replace VCT sprockets. So maybe try absorbing some information instead of constantly spouting off about things you don’t understand.
 

thatJeepguy

FRF Addict
Joined
Nov 28, 2021
Posts
2,167
Reaction score
3,191
Location
GA
It was the best we had. Long tubes and a tune with a CAI and a shortened turn down mbrp exhaust.. even if it didn't go all that great, it sounded awesome and turned heads everywhere..

And not the cringy head turning, like when I start my 3.5 that needs cam phasers..
I mean… the 6.2 still gets btfo by something like the LS7. Over 500 horse , pushrod (you mentioned cam phaser) and weighs like 450lbs and is way smaller.

Point is theres always something better. Its pointless to go on and on complaining about it.
 

downforce137

FRF Addict
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Posts
1,848
Reaction score
2,394
Location
In Diana
That about sums it up. “It was the best we had”. And that’s not saying much. Bolt-ons produce little to no gains and it actually loses power with H/C “upgrades”. Who would have ever predicted that could happen on a SOHC cast iron engine designed to power an E-Series.

You were “turning heads everywhere” because of the obnoxious noise coming from your truck. Most people probably thought the exhaust fell off a UPS truck. Joke was on them when they didn’t get their package. Instead, it was you parading around thinking your truck actually sounds good. The 6.2 was never intended to be used in a performance application, period. That is why it has such bad noise characteristics with any aftermarket exhaust; the rasp and drone are terrible.

As far as the 3.5, the cab does not need to be, nor should be, removed to replace VCT sprockets. So maybe try absorbing some information instead of constantly spouting off about things you don’t understand.
Stop replying to my posts and put me on ignore, thanks
 

Jakenbake

FRF Addict
Joined
Sep 20, 2017
Posts
1,792
Reaction score
2,448
That about sums it up. “It was the best we had”. And that’s not saying much. Bolt-ons produce little to no gains and it actually loses power with H/C “upgrades”. Who would have ever predicted that could happen on a SOHC cast iron engine designed to power an E-Series.

You were “turning heads everywhere” because of the obnoxious noise coming from your truck. Most people probably thought the exhaust fell off a UPS truck. Joke was on them when they didn’t get their package. Instead, it was you parading around thinking your truck actually sounds good. The 6.2 was never intended to be used in a performance application, period. That is why it has such bad noise characteristics with any aftermarket exhaust; the rasp and drone are terrible.

As far as the 3.5, the cab does not need to be, nor should be, removed to replace VCT sprockets. So maybe try absorbing some information instead of constantly spouting off about things you don’t understand.
Helmholtz clears up the rasp and drone pretty well
 

downforce137

FRF Addict
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Posts
1,848
Reaction score
2,394
Location
In Diana
I mean… the 6.2 still gets btfo by something like the LS7. Over 500 horse , pushrod (you mentioned cam phaser) and weighs like 450lbs and is way smaller.

Point is theres always something better. Its pointless to go on and on complaining about it.

Yeah I understand all that. I loved my 6.2L. It was super reliable, I put 75k on it and I got it with 70k.. as I said, I know there is other better engines out there, but that's what they gave us, kind of like the 3.5HO. Some love it, some hate it.
 

FordTechOne

FRF Addict
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Posts
6,398
Reaction score
12,490
Location
Detroit
I mean… the 6.2 still gets btfo by something like the LS7. Over 500 horse , pushrod (you mentioned cam phaser) and weighs like 450lbs and is way smaller.
It all comes back full circle. What was the engine designed for? What was its intended use? What applications was it implemented in?

The LS7 is obvious; it was engineered from the start to be the ultimate N/A LS for the Corvette, specifically the Z06. The C6 was already impressive enough but the Z06 was truly amazing. Having driven one I can say it’s an absolute monster, probably one of the only engines with a mountain of torque at idle and yet pulls to the 7k redline with ferocity.

The Ford 6.2? It was designed for fleet trucks. Hence the size, weight, output, and poor response to mods.
 
Top