• 2017 Ford F250 Work Truck vs SVT Raptor: 6.2L vs 6.2L V8 Drag Race Review (Video)

    2017 ford f250 raptor v8 drag race acceleration test
    2017 Ford F250 6.2L V8 vs. 2014 Ford Raptor 6.2L V8

    Can a heavy duty work truck (2017 Ford F250) be quicker at 0-60 MPH than a first generation 2014 Ford Raptor? We wanted to find out in this fun drag race review.

    2017 Ford F250 XL

    The Ford Super Duty is all-new for 2017. It has a new frame and an all-aluminum body. This truck is a base work truck regular cab with a few options. It has power locks, power windows, power towing mirrors with blind spot monitoring, and a towing package. It’s powered by an updated 6.2L gas V8 that now produces 385 horsepower and 430 lb-ft of torque. Transmission is also new. It’s a lighter-duty 6-speed automatic that Ford calls Torqshift-G. It’s not quiet as heavy as their Power Stroke diesel transmission. You can only get in an F-250 with a gas V8.

    2014 Ford Raptor

    This is our very long-term shop truck. It’s an all stock 2014 Raptor crew cab with an addition of a winch up front and a tonneau cover in the back. The older “Raptor-spec” 6.2L V8 is rated at 411 horsepower and 434 lb-ft of torque. Naturally, the Raptor also has beefy 35-inch BFG KO2 tires.

    Both truck are making the acceleration run in 2WD.  Which truck will come out on top?

    Spoiler Alert:

    The F250 surprised everybody with a win and a blistering 7.86 second 0-60 MPH run. This is impressive considering that our IMI Motorsports test track is at a mile above sea level. And all naturally aspirated vehicles are 1.0-1.5 seconds slower than at sea level due to lower air density.

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

    Similar Articles

    55 thoughts on “2017 Ford F250 Work Truck vs SVT Raptor: 6.2L vs 6.2L V8 Drag Race Review (Video)

    1. The Raptor would be so much better if it was smaller. Then we get smaller with the Pro and ZR2 and get low HP to weight again. Pretty bad when work trucks are faster and cheaper than trucks built for fun. But fun video, but the result is rather frustrating.

      1. Thomas, if it makes you feel better the current Raptor smokes this work truck.

        The 2017 work truck is quick because it is stripped and relatively light! It’s running much lighter tires at only 31.5″ tall. It’s lower too. So this win makes sense, along with this new version of the 6.2 seeming to be pretty strong.

        1. It just shows the march of progress. Ford is doing quite well continuing to tweak their 6.2, transmission, and it perfectly demonstrates the advantages of cutting weight out where it’s not needed (steel body panels)

          1. AND did anyone else notice the 17 mpg the work truck was getting! My 2013 f150 lariat (6.2L) has a tough time getting above 15 mpg. Would love to see this 6.2 make it back into an f150!!

        2. Troverman the truck with the 4:30 might be a closse match with the new Raptor. The ratio on that when you multiply it with the first gear in the transmission is ridiculous. The new Raptor is still slow in my opinion for what it is it should have way more motor. Something comparable to a Range Rover with a turbo V8 pushing 550Hp

          1. It might be, but the two turbos are still going to pull harder than the naturally-aspirated V8. The turbo engine will have a nice flat torque curve. You also need to compare apples to apples…the work truck in 2WD regular cab form is going to be the lightest Super Duty built; the Raptor is significantly heavier because it is much more luxurious and of course 4×4. I know you’re still unhappy with the Raptor’s 450hp and 510lb-ft, especially when compared to a top-spec Dynamic mode Range Rover supercharged. But bear in mind the Range Rover is nearly as heavy as the Raptor and despite having a 5.0L V8 actually makes less torque than the little Ford 3.5L V6. And it has an 8-speed instead of a 10-speed. And I’d go right ahead and say a stock Raptor is more capable than a stock RR…with the primary reason being the Raptor comes with aggressive 35″ BFG AT KO2 tires and the Range Rover comes with street performance oriented Michelins that are not quite 31″ tall. The Raptor and the RR come with locking rear ends. But the Raptor comes with a Torsen front differential and the RR only comes with traction control operating on the front. I’d say overall the Raptor is a very hard package to beat. It has its shortcomings in terms of payload and towing, but it is fast, good looking, excellent off-road, rides great, gets *reasonable* fuel economy, and still has the utility of the bed and towing capability.

            1. Raptor is a great looking truck and an awsome machine but I would be happier with a turbo V8 Ranger. Even a turbo V8 in an FX4 package and I would be sold. For now there is no Halo truck for my liking. The F250 is looking like a nice option and I hear the ride is decent for an HD truck. I may give that a try. The F150 is scaring me. Sounds like vibration issues are plaguing them along with GM as well.

      2. Raptor is very heavy. About 500 lbs more than regular F150. At least the new one is. Weighed down with a lot of pretensions. Work trucks always better than fluff trucks.

      3. Your dream is on its way. Ford Australia are testing the Ranger ‘Raptor’ as we speak. It will run the same set up as the current Raptor but in a 4500 pound package.

        1. A Ranger Raptor would never be Rambro’s dream vehicle because we know they will use an ecoboost engine. Those have direct injection or GDI which are more poisonous than the port injection gas engines and even more poisonous than the diesel engines. They burn smaller particles than stay in the lungs. Give it a few years and the EPA will require filters etc. for all GDI engines which is almost all gas engines now. See evidences below:
          1. http://articles.sae.org/13624/2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_direct_injection

          “In 2013, a research by TÜV NORD found that although gasoline direct injection engines dramatically reduce CO2 emissions, they release about 1,000 times more particles classified by the World Health Organization as harmful than traditional petrol engines and 10 times more than new diesel engines. The release happens because direct injection results in uneven burning of fuel due to uneven mixing of fuel and air (stratification) and because direct injection engines operate with a higher pressure in their cylinders than the older engines.”

          3. https://phys.org/news/2016-07-gasoline-direct-green-choice.html

          4. http://webpages.charter.net/lmarz/emissions.html

          5. https://www.transportenvironment.org/press/new-petrol-engines-cause-more-air-pollution-dirty-diesels

          1. Hal you are correct the studies for GDI show more particles are emitted from GDI but on a small scale compared to a new diesel. When the diesel gets old however, then this is a mute point because diesel emits 100 times more particulates when it unfiltered, corroded or not maintained or modified which is whag will happen to all older diesels and therefore pollute at a rate 100 times that of an unfiltered GDI. But yes GDI engines should be filtered as well and likely will be in the future at which point the PM will be near 0. Its all irrelevant because everything is changing to electric motors in the near future. Bringing diesel engines to fruition is just a big giant leap backwards. Efforts are better spent on hybrids.

            1. Diesel hybrids use less fuel and pollute less and are better for human health. As proven above. GDI (gas) hybrids use more fuel and are more hazardous to human health. Battery only electrics could be decades ahead of us still, especially for trucks hauling loads.
              Do, diesel hybrids is what we want. Rambro is having a hard time justifying himself and twisting all over the place.

            2. Diesel vs. gas is all irrelevant, Rambro? Boy, you’ve changed your tune. Can you ever admit when you are wrong.

      1. Yes that would be great. Towing is higher and I would like to see the affect on MPG. To bad Ford did not provide them with both ratios.

        1. I hear the MPG difference is minimal (around 0.5 MPG), but the 4.30 rear end is a big need if towing in the 8k plus range. In the future a 4.30 would be nice to see.

          1. I would be interested in the towing portion. Andre said the 3:73 truck stayed in 6th gear more than the ram. So if it can stay in 6th gear even more, towing MPG may be pretty good.

      2. This is the only F250 V8 gas in the fleet, so it will be very difficult to get a truck with 4.30 gears.

    2. Prime rib or Asparagus all you want but I am now on Ford.ca pricing out F250 and 350’s with 4:30 gears in double cab with an 8 foot box or regular cab. I could go Tundra but the payload is terrible, maybe I will settle for a Regular cab Tundra with just enough payload and wait for one of these knucklehead manufacturers to build me a Halo truck.

      1. Rambro:
        What exactly are you looking for in a truck? What is your ‘halo’ truck? Ya got me curious.

        1. A truck that weighs 2500 pounds that produces 1000 hp (all electric of course) that has a battery life of 3 years per charge and looks like a Ram Rebel TRX with 20″ of ground clearance and an adjustable air suspension for easy entry and exit.

          1. Hahaha but you forgot 4 wheel steering and turbos to produce that low end 1500-ft-lbs of torque at 1000rpm and no to batteries if I can get it to meet emissions and it has to fit in a midsize with a 3000 lb payload capacity capable of towing 20,000lbs min with 4 ride settings with 20-inches of suspension travel front and back and 100% approach and departure angles( just get rid of bumpers) and and and V8 accoustics with a wild cam and a Rambro decal package all for under 100 grand.

            1. I would like to test drive a 4 wheel steer pickup. I haven’t a clue as to if I would like it or not.

              I’ve operated heavy equipment such as large articulated front end loaders.But,that’s way different too.

              But unless some oem brings one out again,I’ll never know if it would be worth it to me to have it.

              Should the chance arise that I can drive an older gm that has it,I will jump at the chance.

            2. The 4 wheel steering is very subtle but very helpful. You wont know its actually on unless you drive it for a few days and then turn it off. Thats when you will hate a 2 wheel steer truck.

            1. Come on Robert, it’s our dream. This truck ne has a range of 50,000 miles between 3 year recharges. Also, @Rambro, of course it has four wheel steering! LOL

            2. 3 year charges plus you can charge it 1000 times before recycling it. So it will last 3000 years which brings the highest resale value.

        2. Lohchief the new F150’s are testing 4 wheel steering. If that comes on a Raptor or an F150 with a turbo charged V8 producing 700HP with a warranty I couldnt complain except for ride control for work or play. Set the suspension up so you can work or play and have luxury comforts. And if the epa is killing that then these manufacturers need to wake up and use batteries because thats where the power is at and they come with better ground clearance and a myriad of other advantages. Drove an electric rail car underground today and I can feel how cool electric will be, has a nice little wind up to it. Reminds me of my Gallop MK 2 RC car which had 4 wheel steering and 4×4, paid a grand for it in 1990, no diffs, nice clean bottom and I would race it in competitions and no other car could handle the corners better. When GM came out with the Denali I found out late about quad steer in 2005 but I still found a good one. Had to have it. Fully loaded truck that had an 1800-lb payload with AWD and 330HP, back then that was top dog for awhile and even by todays standards my payload in 2004 and 10,000lbs towing in a loaded truck is better than most trucks today. Even up to 2011- 2015 No one had adopted J2807 and those trucks still could not match that truck. So coming out of that truck that is now 15 years old gets one, a little bewildered why manufacturers are still cracking the stack and nowhere near the 8 ball. Even had ride control.

          1. Well,that does sound promising.The 4 wheel steering,not the 700hp.I don’t need anything that powerful.Those days are long gone for me.That would be a real first for an off road ranger wouldn’t it.Might even kick a jeeps ass if it had the ground clearance.

            1. You mildly boost the Coyote V8 and you can easily get 600HP. SVT does it with a bolt on supercharger.

    3. Andre you said 450 lb between the two. I’m little bit skeptical on that weight. did you weigh the 2 ? I speculate that 250 might be more than that. Even tho the frame might be more heavier in the 250, but it doesn’t have 4 doors and a 4wd unit and it isn’t lded out like the raptor. Plus aluminum body. Like you to weigh the 250 I’m sure you have data on how much raptor weighs. Just to see the difference.

      I don’t remember who it was that debated about weight. I’ll take a truck 450 lb less weight than one that does.

      1. We weighed the F250 2WD at 5,740 lbs with a full tank of fuel. We do not have an exact weight on the SVT Raptor, but we estimate at least 450 pounds.

        1. I don’t know Andre. That would put the raptor 6100- 6200 lbs is what your are saying. I just think the raptor is little more heavier than that.

      1. That was quite the shootout,thanks. These muscled up boosted V6’s sound like an indy car winding up. I think I could get used to that.

        1. I am with you. Because I primarily drive Tacomas the V6 sound really doesn’t bother me and I don’t need that V8 rumble, albeit sweet to the ears, anymore. Most cars on the road are 4 or 6 bangers anyway and it looks like Ford is all in on the boosted 6. That wouldn’t stop me from buying one but I do wonder, why not a boosted 8?

          1. I starting driving with turbo 4 cylinders and supercharged V6’s so I have always loved the sound of smaller engines. Even my sport bike gave me a woodie when I cranked it up to 14,000 rpm. I had a supercharged V8 and it sounded really good but if it makes power, im a fan.

            1. I have driven my share of turbo German cars and I love a turbo 4. Great power and mileage. I had a turbo 4 Audi that was very quick and got almost 40 mpg on the highway.

            2. I had a supercharged 2.0 for a few years, I never ever got tired of hearing that blower whine. Every tunnel and overpass made me hit it

        2. I’m with you on this one Lohchief. I don’t wat that kind of power in a truck and don’t need it. I do think the four wheel steering has potential and find it odd that Ford, not GM, is looking to bring it back.

      2. Those RAptors really sound terrible. I didn’t realize how bad it is until they turned off all the music and stopped talking in the videos and you really can hear them.

        1. I raced one of the new Raptors in my Tacoma and I was embarrassed for the guy driving the Raptor. He won the race but man Did it sound loud and terrible. I can handle a V6 sound but this is too far out there.

      3. I got that email from Hennessey today too. Looks like in the end the V8 Raptor was gaining ground

      4. Aluminum and ten SPD Automatic transmission played big role in tt v-6 for the win. Looks like maybe at the top end the old raptor might be holding it’s own.

    4. Off topic a bit but with regards to diesels MB is under investigation for defeat devices for 1 million diesels in Europe. Uh oh….

    5. I wonder what the outcome would be if you added the extra 600 lbs the older raptor weighs to the 2017. Not to mention if the test was run at sea level.

    6. Roman, Nathan or Andre, when will the F250 gas be tested up the IKE??? Just curious guys. Thank you

    7. I thought I mention that on the road, driving sane and keeping the speed to 60 mph, I’m getting between 17 and 18 mpg with my ’17 F250 with the 6.2 gas engine. I’m more than happy. And yes, it’s faster than greased lightening.

    Comments are closed.