• 2018 Ford F150 vs Ford Raptor: One Twin-Turbo Truck to Rule Them All!


    2018 ford f150 raptor turbo drag race truck ecoboost fast
    2018 Ford F150 vs Ford Raptor (EcoBoost vs EcoBoost)

    Which truck is faster? Is it the lighter and less powerful 2018 Ford F-150 with the 3.5L EcoBoost V6 or a heavier Raptor with a high-output twin-turbo V6? These two trucks both have a 10-speed automatic transmission, they are both 4×4, and both engines have the same 3.5L displacements and two turbos. However, the engine in the F-150 Lariat crew cab 4×4 is rated at 375 hp and 470 lb-ft of torque. The upgraded 3.5L TT engine in the Raptor is rated at 450 hp and 510 lb-ft of torque. Is the extra power in the Raptor enough to overcome nearly 700 lbs of additional weight?

    We will have to run several acceleration tests to find out! We used 4-wheel-drive automatic setting, Sport mode, and traction & stability control systems disabled in both trucks. We found this is the best way to get a good launch in these trucks. Running them in 2WD causes rear wheel spin that is difficult to control and get a consistent take-off.

    Here are the results for all seven truck comparisons we did this week.

    Drag Race Week results.

    Yep, the F-150 came out of top, although we did experience turbocharger “heat soak” and lower 0-60 MPH times after about three consecutive runs.

    Here are the other matchups:

    Episode 1: Chevy Colorado ZR2 vs Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro.

    Episode 2: Ram 1500 Sport vs Ram Power Wagon.

    Episode 3: Chevy Colorado ZR2 vs Jeep Wrangler Rubicon Recon.

    Episode 4: Ram 1500 Sport vs Ford SVT Raptor.

    Episode 5: Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro vs Jeep Wrangler Rubicon Recon.

    Episode 6: Chevy Colorado ZR2 vs Ram Power Wagon

    Check out this top-of-the-line EcoBoost contest below!


    Andre Smirnov
    Andre Smirnov
    Andre Smirnov is an Automotive Enthusiast, Producer, Reviewer, Videographer, Writer, Software Engineer, Husband, Father, and Friend.

    Similar Articles

    124 thoughts on “2018 Ford F150 vs Ford Raptor: One Twin-Turbo Truck to Rule Them All!

    1. It’s nice to see all these vehicles and their constantly improving capabilities. I’m waiting to see the new 2.7 with 10 speed vs that 3.5.

    2. It is quite surprising how fast the Ford trucks are up at TFL’s elevation. One thing I noticed in this video is there is a lot more smiles going on when they are racing the faster Ford trucks.

      1. Well said by a man who gets paid by Ford.
        And the 6.2 Chevy should have a turn. Maybe it won’t have brake fade and power loss.

        1. Never a day off for the haters at Chevy, it must be exhausting for you to fight for the maker who excels at losing and failing.

        2. It’s already had plenty of turns – its best time at THIS TRACK is a 7.44

          It got beat by a 2.7tt 4×4 Supercab XLT!

        3. Irrespective of brake fade and power loss it won’t be as fast.Would go closer at sea level but no hope where TFL test.

    3. You can’t argue the value of forced induction at altitude! At sea level the Ram would likely be within .5 sec of the f150 instead of losing by 1.5 here!

      1. Don’t make Chevy mad. They will just put their supercharged 6.2 in a truck and show you the real way to do it.

        Really, TFL has already done these drag races and has crowned the nonsupercharged 6.2 their favorite. I agree. I don’t want a 3.5 throw away engine that gets bad mileage.

        Like I say, anyone can cram a lot of fuel and air down into an engine. There is a lot more to making engines than that if you want them to run in the long run.

        1. And when was the 6.2 crowned their favorite? Let’s remember that it has lost to the ford 2.7, 5.0, and 3.5 in 3 straight years in their gold hitch awards.

            1. John T.
              October 12, 2017 at 5:55 am
              Ah, not another newbie who wants me to do his work for him. Look it up, its on video.

              Looks like Hal, real and John T is the same poser. Forgot to switch your loser name Hal

            2. Hal / John T – Lol. It’s one thing to be a fan. It’s another to be a fanboy troll. If I were a newbie, how would I know that the F150 has beaten the GM 6.2 3 straight years in the Gold Hitch? All with different engines? How could this be true if TFL had “crowned” the 6.2 as their favorite?

              The 6.2 is a good engine, but up in the mountains it doesn’t stand out at all. In fact, the Ram 5.7 outperformed it on Ike.

              And since you are such a long-time expert here, I’m sure you’ll have no problem finding the proof of this.

            3. Ha!I’m from P.U.T.?

              I’ve never been on that sit. I have read a bit from it. It seems about twice a year they have something worth reading.

              One time they had a very incorrect article that gave dangerous advice. I haven’t read much from them because of that.

              But keep on thinking old guys, you will need to to figure things out.

            4. John T.
              October 12, 2017 at 9:50 am
              Ha!I’m from P.U.T.?

              I’ve never been on that sit. I have read a bit from it. It seems about twice a year they have something worth reading

              First you you say you have never been on that site. The very next sentence you said you have been on it reading the articles. How can we take you seriously when you lie about yourself in 2 sentences?

            5. Oh my goodness. What are you? Autistic? I have never commented on the site.I have read it. Do I need to think for you too?

            6. John T.
              October 12, 2017 at 9:50 am
              Ha!I’m from P.U.T.?

              I’ve never been on that sit.

              Whatever John,Hal etc. your words exactly. Not my fault you can’t keep your story straight.

            7. Some of you guys haven’t figured out all my names yet. That’s how I can tell you are inexperienced non-registered commenters(old guys).

              And it is not a belittlement to identify someone as an Autistic thinker. Autistic people are just as valid people as you and I if not more. It is just an observation of how someone reads and writes (thinks).

              What are you, Sparky21, a readist?

              Then count me an abolitionist of readism! If need be, I’ll fight in another civil war for readal discrimination.

              And by the way, he was the one going off on a personal tangent when I was just asserting a truth.

            8. Us “old guys” rely on other people to agree with us. You “young dudes” have evolved to be so self-centered that you can be your own community-support-group-of-one.

            9. Daniel, exactly. You are a very good example of error.

              Instead of basing your reality on truth, you base it on agreement of a few light-weights on a truck site.

              How did you say it? It was so perfect.

              “Us ‘old guys’ rely on other people to agree with us. ”

              Yes, yes yes. Exactly. It is the group think mentality. The Lemming mentality that guides so much stupidity. Although vested interest does a lot of it too(there are several paid shills here).

              And a sick need to be accepted by someone–anyone. Even weirdos on a web page.

              And that is why many of you cannot accept truth. Not always. Sometimes you just lack the ability. But many times.

              When you have little close relationships in family and community, you look to this site. Come on, guys. Its O.K. to have some outlet. But don’t let it sway your ability to see truth.

              And try not to affect our truck suppliers from making good tools to support our families and communities. We have a long way to go to achieve a secure electrical grid, communication platform, transportation system etc., which is what the automotive industry is converging to become altogether.

        2. Hmmm…”Real” says the EcoBoost engine is a throwaway engine while the GM 6.2L is a long-lasting engine. Real, tell me about why you think the GM engine would last longer? The way I see it, both engines have aluminum blocks and heads. The EcoBoost engine has reinforcements that don’t exist on the GM V8. The GM 6.2L uses direct injection, while the EcoBoost uses direct AND port injection. This means that over time, the GM engine could experience the common problem of carbon deposits building up on the back of the intake valves, leading to some power loss, poor running conditions, and a Check Engine light. The EcoBoost will not experience this problem. Interestingly, if an injector fails on the EcoBoost engine, the engine can operate perfectly smoothly on the “other” system, albeit at reduced power. If an injector fails on the GM engine, it will misfire and run very poorly. The EcoBoost has a forged crank, piston oil squirter jets, a superior diesel-like piston connecting rod design as well as a superior fractured offset bearing cap. The EcoBoost engine makes power with turbos; the GM engine makes power with displacement. Unfortunately, the GM engine cannot match the power curve of the EcoBoost, which means it actually does not pull as hard or particularly tow as well. Peak horsepower is at 5600RPM and peak torque is at 4100RPM. Of course, it makes less horsepower and torque when compared to the Raptor engine; and both the Raptor and standard 3.5L EcoBoost produce peak horsepower at 5000RPM and peak torque at 3500RPM.

          The turbos are very well integrated into the EcoBoost engines, unlike “bolt-on” supercharger or turbocharger kits. They are 100% electronically monitored and regulated by the engine PCM. There is absolutely nothing about the EcoBoost engine to suggest it would be a “throwaway” motor nor anything about the 6.2L GM engine that would make it seem like it would last longer. In fact, the EcoBoost engine has a much higher oil capacity per liter than the big GM V8.

            1. Yep, one guy paid by Ford who “says” something well, but history and statistics (facts), deny. And other Ford guys that fall for it. That is called a “sales job”.

          1. Troverman – – –

            Thorough and detailed, as usual. Good comment: Very specific and knowledgeable.

            I have become weary of just the superficial “brand sniping” that often occurs on vehicle websites. (PUTC, I am looking at you.)

            While being a “Ram guy” in my purchases for personal and historical reasons, I can nonetheless list a bunch of issues with Ram trucks that drive me nuts. I imagine that “Ford guys” could do the same for Ford trucks; and “Chevy guys” could do the same for Chevy trucks.

            Reality: There is no perfect truck for everyone’s particular needs and wants; and those often change. That’s why we buy news ones, in hopes of finding some sort of “trucky nirvana”. And even then, when the trucky honeymoon is over, we roll over and ask, “Good grief: I ‘married’ that?” (^_^)…

            ====================

          2. Excellent Comment.

            I mentioned before I ‘lean’ GM, but I am not brand loyal. One should give any manufacturer credit when credit is due, and I am of the opinion this would be the time, for me, to do such with Ford’s engine offerings in their EcoBoost product line.

          3. @Troverman
            “The GM 6.2L uses direct injection, while the EcoBoost uses direct AND port injection. This means that over time, the GM engine could experience the common problem of carbon deposits building up on the back of the intake valves, leading to some power loss, poor running conditions, and a Check Engine light. ”

            When I said long time on ago,that DI engine on the preport ecoboost era has this problem , backup my claim with tons of videos, I have been called a troll,this problem doesn’t exist and many was saying,that ecoboost will outlast my HEMI with port injection, OR GM’s V8.
            That’s not the case from what you are saying in here , but I am not surprised. Ford customers always drive their trucks in distorted reality field and you are not exception. What would be the next thing to improve ecoboost reliability and life time, like they did in past 7 years ? Do you dare to elaborate ?
            Ford never gets the thing right at the first time. Not a Raptor’s frame, not an ecoboost.
            They use ford customers for guinea pig all the time.
            In my point of view,based on your comment , the first generation of ecoboost is throwaway engine, compare to my HEMI 5.7

            1. Zviera- here we go again. The original Ecoboost is no more susceptible to DI carbon buildup than any other DI engine. Direct Injection is Direct Injection no matter who builds it. Yet all you do is bash Ford.

              “distorted reality field” HAHAHA are you calling out somebody else for living in a distorted reality? As someone who’s paid to sit back and just bash anything that’s not Ram all day long? Your view is reality?

              “Ford never gets the thing right at the first time.” This is just a pathetic statement that once again, nobody believes.

            2. Well, Troverman’s comment is clear and I agree with him partially.
              I don’t work for automotive industry and you confirmed by your post , exactly what I said.

          4. Agree with most of it.
            However, were a injector to fail on the ecoboost it can still miss, depending on the degree of failure. If fuel mixture is off it will miss regardless of the # of injectors-there is no provision for one injector to make up for another.
            That the engine is boosted means that it has higher specific loads and would imply earlier failure, all things being equal. All things are not equal however-the ecoboost being beefed up somewhat to handle the higher loads. They’ve been out long enough now that we have a pretty good idea that they seem to be pretty reliable. That being said, the 6.2 seems to be doing quite well also.
            Both engines are considered “throwaway” engines-at least when compared to medium duty engines. Neither are designed to be rebuilt (doesn’t mean it can not be done for either however).

        3. these gm guys they just hate to see ford win with a v6 lol ,just think the ford v6 is just about ( half ) cid of the 6.2 gm engine ? and its faster in the mountains and at sea level lol ,cry cry cry , i know i have one lol

        4. “Like I say, anyone can cram a lot of fuel and air down into an engine. There is a lot more to making engines than that if you want them to run in the long run.”

          Hal, I’m really curious how you think the 6.2 makes it’s power. Honestly, how many cfm of air and grams of fuel does it take to produce 400 lb/ft of torque?

          If you don’t have a compressor (turbo, supercharger roots or centrifugal) to move the necessary air into the combustion chamber, how do you do it? OH YEAH! YOU INCREASE THE DISPLACEMENT!

          You will discover that the standard 3.5 Eco and the 6.2 ingest nearly the same amount of air and fuel when making 400 lb/ft of torque. The difference is that the turbo engine is doing it from about 2200-5500 rpm and the NA 6.2 is doing it only from about 4000 – 6000rpm.

      2. Daniel, car and driver reports the 2017 F150 is 1.3 sec faster than the ram where they test. I doubt there will be much performance difference in the 2018’s.

      3. It’s been tested many times. At normal elevation it’s a minimum if 1 second, usually more. These Ram numbers are an anomaly compared to every other test of the Ram by various publications.

    4. @TFL – Next year’s drag week should really be run elimination style, I mean you ARE drag racing! 😀

      You would have had four first round match ups, two semi finals, and one final round to crown your champ.

      If you drew up the order in random, you could have had the Raptor go out in the first round if it had matched up against the f150 like here!

        1. I’ve had 3 F150s with the vacuum actuated hubs. Never had a problem. What’s your personal experience with the “issue”?

      1. Daniel – – –

        D: “@TFL – Next year’s drag week should really be run elimination style, I mean you ARE drag racing! 😀”

        Absolutely agree. This would be a real hoot! And increase the anticipation along the way.
        Good suggestion…
        TFLT, are you listening?

        ====================

    5. I knew it and so many argued that the Raptor was way faster than the F150. You can also get the platinum F150 with 400HP and 480 torque which will further beat the Raptor. As for the GM 6.2 even the 365HpF150 beat it in many showdowns.

      There is also the F150 with 3:73 gears but even this version of the F150 beats the Raptor. And all Raptor fans clearly said the F150 had no chance against the so called fastest truck ever built, the Raptor. Let the crickets sing their tunes.

      1. The 6.2 to my knowledge has never lost to the 3.5tt and I have seen a lot of tests. The 2018 Platnium may be different as that hasn’t been tested I don’t think. Only at elevation like this does the EB eek out a win.

        1. Mike, I believe you are correct. In all the stuff I have read the 6.2 will edge out the 3.5L by a tenth or two. Even though the 6.2L makes 45 more HP than the 3.5L they are really really close in performance.

          1. Mike and Jimmy Johns there are two or three examples of the old 3.5EB with 365HP beating the GM 6.2V8 on the same day on the same track. Just seek it out and you will find it. Don’t make me do it. I have done it enough times already. The new 375HPEB will destroy the V8’s any of them and the 400HP version will beat them at half throttle because they are turboed with superior HP and torque throughout more of the rpm range.

            1. And don’t forget what else I said, the F150 can be had in a regular cab 4×2 or 4×4 with the 8 foot box with the 3.5EB and 10 speed. This is surely the fastest current truck on the planet that you can buy with a warranty from a manufacturer. The only thing that might beat the 4×2 or 4×4 XL version is the 400HP F150 Platinum but that only comes with the 3:55 Electronic Locking axle, you can get a 3:73 gear set in the XL regular cab 8 foot bed. Those are the two fastest contenders on the planet right now.

            2. What is this 400 hp platinum you are talking about. I’ve only ever seen that engine in the platinum Expedition, not the F150.

            3. TFL stated the F150 Platinum will have a bump in power to 400HP and 480 Torque vs 375HP and 470 Torque

            4. That would be sweet. I dont know if you saw but the Platinum Expy has 480 ft-lbs at 2250 rpm. That is awesome. Wonder if the F150 will be the same.

        2. Car & Driver shows the 2016 Sierra 1500 does a 0-60 in 5.6 seconds and the 2017 F-150 with the 10-speed does it in 5.7 seconds. The GM truck is slightly faster in the quarter mile, too.

          But C&D tested the SuperCab Raptor for 2017, which weighs 200lbs more than a Crew Cab King Ranch F-150…and it clocked a 5.0 second 0-60 run and a 13.7 second quarter mile. Both times obliterated the GM 6.2L truck. Granted, we do not have a crew cab Raptor that has been officially tested, but I guarantee it would be at least slightly quicker than the Sierra with the 6.2L.

          1. Agree, I would have to believe the Raptor would be quicker even though it is heavier and has 35” off road tires. But the power curve of that 3.5L TT should help make up for it.

      2. You can get the 400hp 500ftlbs in any 17-18 F150 3.5tt – just run all the 87oct out of it and fill it up with 91-93oct and your there!

        1. That’s not true. If you run premium gas, you’ll get the advertised 375 / 470. On 87, you’ll get less. Most drivers won’t notice. The Raptor has an even more noticeable loss of power, particularly while towing, running regular.

          1. Wrong Troverman,

            Ford rates all F150 Ecoboosts on 87oct except for the 3.5tt Raptor.

            I’ve shared the main Ford Gasoline Engineer’s report before and I’ll do it again if needed?

            1. Here you go Troverman and anyone else that doesn’t believe Ecoboost ratings.

              This link is an interview with Steve Gill. He is the Chief Engineer of Ford Powertrains!

              I think I will believe his information over unknown sources throughout this website and the Internet!!!

              The octane/power ratings is at the 22:00min mark if you want to skip, but the Engineer is very well spoken and quite interesting.

              https://youtu.be/3S9jVjZ1Kn8

              Obviously this was recorded before the new Raptor was released and tuned for 91oct.

            2. Troverman,
              This is why your Raptor looses power on 87oct like you’ve noticed – it’s rated on 91oct.

              This could also be why this particular Raptor ran 6.73 vs a 6.12 that the last Raptor TFL tested on this track ran???

            3. So you are going to believe a Ford engineer rather than an independent source? Man, you Ford guys haven’t figured out life yet. Of course he is well spoken. He is trying to keep his job.

    6. the raptor has been tested in the1/4 mile in crew cab form at 14.1 at 99 supercab at 13.7 at 101 I wonder what the f150 1/4 mile time would be, can the raptor catch it the end of the 1/4. dam these r fast trucks

    7. Theses test just show that nowadays you cant hardly go wrong with any of these trucks and brands. They are all light years better than 10 to 15 years ago.

    8. The fastest time I found TFL got with the 6.2 was 6.96. The 5.3 was around 8.4, but I believe that was the 6 speed and the 8 speed is faster.

    9. What do they mean buy heat soak power loses.

      Is it detuning by the computer?

      Is it poor turbo cooling. Isn’t it cooled by water cooled oil?

      Or is it too small of a intercooler.

      Thanks in advance for answers.

      1. Heat soak is when the Intercooler gets heated up from the compressed air being forced through it and no airflow going past it – not moving enough after each pass to cool off!

        This makes perfect since between these two trucks because the Raptor has an integrated special cooling fan just for the Intercooler that the regular F150’s don’t get!!!

      2. Heat soaking is not unique to turbo engines. It’s a term that describes what happens after an engine is run hard and parked. With no air or coolant moving the heat from the exhaust manifolds, valves, and other hot spots equalizes throughout the engine. This increases temperature in the intake manifold and the intake ports in the head. Performance usually suffers in subsequent tests if the engine is not allowed to re-establish it’s normal temperature variation. Drag racers usually cool the intake in between runs to help with this phenomenon.

        1. I should state that boosted engines may be more susceptible as drifter pointed out, but NA engines are still subject to heat soak.

    10. Agreed William,

      I’ve seen serious drag racers pack bags of ice on top of their engines between runs just to counter this known loss!

    11. Heat soak is why,back in the day at least,when we brought our trucks in from a one week run and pulled up to the fuel pumps,we left the engine running so it would,in our phrase,”warm down”.

      It’s still a good practice with anything turbocharged after pulling or just running it hard.Give 5 or 10 minutes to warm down before shutdown.

          1. And good engineering is dissipating heat. Not Ford’s strong point. Good engineering, that is. There are many, many vehicles that make as much and more horsepower as this little 3.5, and TFL Truck and TFL Car have not mentioned power loss from any other brand other than the Ford 3.5.
            Mmm, wonder why? I don’t really wonder. We all know why, and the people employed by Ford are trying to cover it up or in denial.

            1. Thank God for TFL, for telling the truth about the Ford 3.5!

              Since the Ford 3.5 cannot dissipate heat, which we all warned against when we saw that they wanted to produce a lot of power out of a small displacement, the smart ones of us will never buy Fords. But that has usually(not always) been true of Fords.

              They are throw away vehicles, and TFL has proven it again.

              And so has M.T. about the Raptor!

              God bless America, and free speech, and TFL!

          2. Not at 5000′

            It’s down 15% 420hp = 357hp for GM 6.2v8 at this track!

            Which explains why its slower, but inot a whole second at 7.44.

            Hopefully it should be closer despite the elevation power loss with the 10spd

      1. That Supercharged Tundra was a 2007 with a lot of miles. AT 550 Torque and 504HP that number should be a lot smaller and you could have bought that in a regular cab version as well which posted the fastest time of any truck ever built at just 4.4 seconds on MT

    12. Yep, John T is johnny doe, Michigan Bob, sierra,gmsgreat,brick,among many others. You can always tell by the way he writes his or her post. And he loves talking about plastic in Fords hubs. Anything to put Ford down is his mission. Nothing but a sorry troll breathing air someone who really needs it could have.

      1. Ha! there are so many retarded people on this truck site. I have never commented on P.U.. I don’t believe in their product. They published a very dangerous article a long time ago, and I have not gone to their site more than twice a year since.

        But, these comments sure tell us the quality of you Ford fans’ sense of judgment.

        You are the ones always asking us why so many people buy Fords. Well, we have been saying it is the peoples’ sense of judgment.

        Its not good to be dumb. Its worse not to realize it.

        And yes, this is a truck subject because we would have better trucks if we had better consumers that were more discriminating. That’s not a racial think, if you Ford guys couldn’t figure than out.

        1. “hey published a very dangerous article a long time ago”

          Any chance you can post the article link? I’d like to inquire.

        2. How stupid can you get. Please go back to PUTC gmctnt,johnny doe, Michigan Bob, sierra,gmsgreat,franks old lady, do I need to go on as you did not deny what I said. Just go back home where you don’t belong either. Some people are choking right now cause you are using the good air they need to breath.Give em a break and take your trolling elsewhere.

    13. Wow some of you guys are exhausting to read about whose faster or what. Not a Ford fan but the numbers don’t lie. Anything in the 6’s at 0-60 is moving really fast. SC Tundra would be my choice though..

    14. A reality check here. I recently purchased a 2017 F150 3.5 EB. The reason I choose the F150 is its availability in all trim levels. I really wanted a 6.2, 8 spd. but its price vs the EB was out of sight. When you could even find one! Towing over 3500 miles in the last 2 months, has shown me how strong and smooth this truck is. Being fast sure doesn’t hurt! End of story.

      1. Yeah, wait till you have pulled that much for 150 k and craaaaaaazy things start happening to your motor and you will go back to a large displacement engine.

        1. Please explain how the void space inside an engine directly equates to longevity. Would you agree that metallurgy, bearing surface area, and tuning more directly influence engine longevity?

          (The correct answer is yes.)

        2. You should go tell the guy with 350,358 miles on his 2011 Ecoboost, who tows almost everyday for work, all about how his engine is gunna get funny after 150k.

      1. If that comment was in response to mine, then no.

        My personal experience with all domestic brands drives my viewpoint. I’m not a fanboy.

          1. I have personal workplace experience with the big 3. That forms my opinion not yours. Your post was difficult to comprehend so I’m not sure if you are being sarcastic or not. I’m not going to respond to anything personal towards you because I have better use of my time. Please extend that favor towards others as well.

            1. You said, your ford works better than competition. Because you have a personal experience with all 3, I’d like to know, what works better,so I can buy a Ford next time.

    15. Excuse me? Can someone tell me who will pay me to come on this site and troll Ford posts? It seems to be a booming business and I want to get my cut.

    16. Just an update off subject, I have a 2011 crew cab f150 ecoboost fx4 and currently have 133,327.1 miles on it. I tow sometimes and drive it everyday, it’s been the best truck I’ve owned. I was skeptical of a v6 at first but now I’m a believer. Anyone who is a skeptic, just drive one.

            1. You lie again. Ford Troll trolls on Ford article. New level of trolling. Here we go again. Ford horde, ask your dog to sit down and don’t ruin this forum, like you asked anyone else.

            2. Uh, Jimmy Johns has been caught twice at my count as being paid by Ford corporation. So, are you trying to distract us by calling this other guy a FCA employee? He has never been proven to be an auto worker.

              Plus, Jimmy Johns has proven to be one of those guys that just says off topic blasts of untruths trying to prop up Ford.

              so be warned.

            3. Man you trolls are funny. Look at Hal aka Pete aka John t aka Sean and other usernames what’s the matter pussy, don’t like getting called out? Things a little lonely in your moms basement.

            4. Well, his 2011 ford has 5 recalls. One of them is for transmission sudden downshift. Exactly,like my neighbor experienced and bought Tacoma.

        1. No, I’ve never had any problems with it, and I’m not brand loyal, if I like a truck and need a new one I just get what I like. I owned 2 Nissan Titans before a 2004 and 2008, I liked them both but when I drove the Ford it was in a different league in my opinion, passing a slow car while empty or hauling a load is a breeze and seems to not even break a sweat. When I get to 150,000 I’ll probably buy another one. Before I bought the Ford I drove them all because I wanted to see what was out there and the Ford just won me over.

          1. That’s all right , if you like your truck. I have a different priorities.
            You needed to fix all the recalls , if you had a problem , or not.
            I enjoy mine and I don’t have to see the service center for recalls.
            218,000 kms and counting. I will keep it for 2 more years and buy a RAM again.

            1. Good for you.

              My priorities are to have a modern, capable pickup that uses the latest technologies. Even if i did have to sacrifice a little reliability I wouldnt care because the Hemi is so unappealing/uninteresting in the truck world these days.

              I mean, I was willing to purchase the engineering marvel that is the Jeep Liberty CRD regardless of knowing its a raging piece of crap and I would constantly wrenching on it, it was worth it to me to have a unique diesel powered SUV with offroad capabilities. Not everyone is you.

    17. Whew! My head is spinning reading the TFLT comment section of recent.

      TFLT: I would gladly pay a subscription for a “Premium Account Comment Section”. Maybe it would take the fun out of it though. Hmmm…

      Another way to look at it, TFLT is just getting a great presence on the internet, which is excellent. I will admit, the comment section has grown tremendously, as it is nice to see many viewpoints, however, the quality of some (not all) discussions (of recent) would increase on a comment subscription basis. The downside, you wouldn’t get as many viewpoints. In addition, I do see some comments as a form of entertainment and really tests my ability to navigate and determine on my personal sliding scale of Fact – Opinion based.

      Keep up the content though TFLT (and TFLC), excellent job!

      1. I agree. But come to think about it, any article that is about drag racing pickup trucks; which is probably the least important performance measure of such a vehicle, is bound to bring out the least thoughtful and silliest points of view. I don’t fault TFLT for these tests. I like them. It’s pretty fun to see what happens and somewhat interesting, but it’s hardly worth heated discussions whether one brand gets 5.7 and the other 5.6 zero to 60.
        I like all the technologies being proposed for increasing efficiency and reliability and maybe both at the same time. I don’t see any of these power trains as “garbage” as some are guaranteeing us. There have been no clunker engines in quite some time based on anything real, but some people think if they say, it’ll be true it.

        I like reading about the next-generation cylinder deactivation, which will almost assuredly be included in the 2019 GM 1/2-ton pickups called DSF. Just like with downsizing and turbo charging, I see this technology as useful but limited. They both seem limited in the same way though they are completely different approaches. They improve mpg when the engine is under light load only. One is actually a smaller engine that uses boost to make it perform like a bigger engine when called upon to do so. The other is a big engine that will run like a small engine under light load. Folks can argue about which technique is better, but since so many experts are so sure of themselves yet come up with opposite conclusions with each having his or her own set of facts to back them up, it’s hard to take anything to heart that’s told in these comment sections.

        I do have one REAL complaint about GM and their marketing/production strategy. They tend to design and build their best and most advanced engines; advertise them as “best in class” or whatever; and then try their best not to sell them through trim and configuration limitations. Three examples: 6.2 V8 Ecotec; 2.8 baby Duramax; new for 2018 5.3 V8 Ecotec eAssist. So far Ford and Ram haven’t practiced this deceptive technique in the last few years; even the Ram Ecodiesel was being sold at a rate of 8300/month at one point, although Ford is getting ready limit sales of the new diesel. It’s already known that it’ll be limited to SCab and Screw for the 2WD in only short beds only; and for 4WD it’s much worse; only Screws and only the short bed. So much then for Ford always allowing choice. At this time, one can get Ford’s top-of-the-line 3.5 EB in a std cab long bed in XL trim at just over $30K or they can choose three other engines for it. Ram lets you have their top bill; but try and get the 6.2 V8 Ecotec in a work truck.

        As for the reliability debates from all these engineers with completely opposite opinions with all their so-called facts to back them up; now this is something that is getting very tiresome on these forums.

    18. Good Lord, I liked the video, does it prove anything, not really. I bought a F150 with the 2.7 and 10000 miles later I still love it, power, economy if you drive it easy and quietness. Mine is the XL STX Crew with 4wd and it was 33 brand new, dealer discounted it 10 grand, that’s still a lot of money to me, but I love the truck. Best truck ever? Probably not, but being my first full size truck I couldn’t be any happier. My favorite thing is to get her washed and drive downtown admiring the race red beauty in the reflection of store windows. I see a lot of great looking RAM and Chevys on the road, but I love my gal, she’s plenty good enough for me. Occasionally I like leaving them big ole v8’s at the light, but I’m getting over that, at 54 I’m finally growing up a little, maybe.

    Leave a Reply

    Top