Ford Raptor- anybody have one?

[deerefan]

I did a small tune to my Lightning and it was a beast. Never ran it against a SRT10 but ran it against everything else including my dads and uncles Corvettes and it would always give them a run. Granted they were stock. It had so much torque it was tough to get the power to the ground. I always wished it was AWD. Forget about driving it in the rain and snow. It would turn the rears over sometimes just taking your foot off the brake.

Chris

What year was your lightning?

 

[timswi]

A boat.

Chris

Is the 6.2 as good on the water as it is on the street?

 

[Diamondpilot]

What year was your lightning?

2001. All black. Only had it for about 7months. First snow was it for me.

Chris

 

[Diamondpilot]

Is the 6.2 as good on the water as it is on the street?

I would take a 383 stroker over it any day of the week but it does make some nice torque. Marine engines are rated at the prop, not the flywheel, so its 320 hp.

Chris

 

[deerefan]

2001. All black. Only had it for about 7months. First snow was it for me.

Chris

My favorite year. Those trucks were sweet.

 

[timswi]

I would take a 383 stroker over it any day of the week but it does make some nice torque. Marine engines are rated at the prop, not the flywheel, so its 320 hp.

Chris

It's dropping almost 100hp in the outdrive? Seems odd...A 383 stoker is a totally different animal to be sure.

 

[toppop52]

Don't be fooled by the 320 hp rating, it will outrun both the 300/330 hp or the 350/365 hp 454 and responds to minor modifications like a race engine. The LSx engines are amazingly easy to get big horsepower numbers with very minor changes and tuning. My Donzi ran twin 540 BBC's but if I were building it today it would get big inch LSx motors, lighter and way more powerful inch for inch.

 

[RobertN]

Curious why BBC's?

My first reaction would be for Hemi's(426 based).

Is it because of the market for marine, out drives etc?

Looked up the Donzi's; cool boats...

My Donzi ran twin 540 BBC's but if I were building it today it would get big inch LSx motors, lighter and way more powerful inch for inch.

 

[Diamondpilot]

It's dropping almost 100hp in the outdrive? Seems odd...A 383 stoker is a totally different animal to be sure.

I am sure a truck with the same motor would go about the same through the tranny, rear end, and drive line.

The 383 stroker is the same weight and foot print give or take. Problem is all that I have seen are carbed and I sure like multi port efi.

Chris

 

[Diamondpilot]

Curious why BBC's?

My first reaction would be for Hemi's(426 based).

Is it because of the market for marine, out drives etc?

Looked up the Donzi's; cool boats...

GM has ruled the marine market go awhile. The are cost effective. Years ago it was Ford and before that it was Mopar. Some high end boats still have Fords and some really high end stuff has Toyota.

I still consider the 6.2 a small block.

Chris

 

[toppop52]

GM has ruled the marine market go awhile. The are cost effective. Years ago it was Ford and before that it was Mopar. Some high end boats still have Fords and some really high end stuff has Toyota.

I still consider the 6.2 a small block.

Chris

GM has ruled the marine market for about 35-40 years now, they owned all the speed records for useable boats. I say owned, because I've been out of touch with the scene for 10 years. The BBC made more power inch for inch than the Hemi in a non boosted application and would live better, the Fords were not even close giving up 30-50 h.p. in any liveable combination. At one time I ran Hemi's in my '68 GTX as well as my flat bottom boat, but reality is what it is. And today "High end" or otherwise the LSx motors are are making more power cheaper than Toyota and Ford. I don't know what brand of boat is using either of those engines but I'll build you a 500 cu in LSx that will outrun and outlive it.

 

[timswi]

GM has ruled the marine market go awhile. The are cost effective. Years ago it was Ford and before that it was Mopar. Some high end boats still have Fords and some really high end stuff has Toyota.

I still consider the 6.2 a small block.

Chris

I also consider it a small block...It looks no different than a 5.3...It just has much more go power all the way around....I personally like the big blocks but if an SB can crank it out, I'll take it...And it does.

 

[deerefan]

I also consider it a small block...It looks no different than a 5.3...It just has much more go power all the way around....I personally like the big blocks but if an SB can crank it out, I'll take it...And it does.

The 6.2 is becoming the choice for drag racers around here. Quickly becoming as popular as the 4 bolt main 350. With very mild upgrades, like a cam and head porting, in a mid size car like a camaro or nova, low 11 to high 10 second 1/4 mile times are the average. These LS motors make great power, especially with turbos. They remind me of the Hemi from the 60s, make good power stock and does not take much to really wake them up. Especially the 6.2.

 

[toppop52]

The 6.2 is becoming the choice for drag racers around here. Quickly becoming as popular as the 4 bolt main 350. With very mild upgrades, like a cam and head porting, in a mid size car like a camaro or nova, low 11 to high 10 second 1/4 mile times are the average. These LS motors make great power, especially with turbos. They remind me of the Hemi from the 60s, make good power stock and does not take much to really wake them up. Especially the 6.2.

The naturally aspirated 7.0 (427) in the Z06 makes 505 h.p. by the more stringent newer rating from SAE J1349. GM was the first to volunteer to use the system the others waited until it was mandatory. By the way Chevy only planned to rate it at 500 h.p.' but SAE said no, the number has to be accurate as tested, so 505 it is. Not bad for an easily drivable push rod "old tech" as some like to call it when it whips their ohc motors.

 

[deerefan]

The naturally aspirated 7.0 (427) in the Z06 makes 505 h.p. by the more stringent newer rating from SAE J1349. GM was the first to volunteer to use the system the others waited until it was mandatory. By the way Chevy only planned to rate it at 500 h.p.' but SAE said no, the number has to be accurate as tested, so 505 it is. Not bad for an easily drivable push rod "old tech" as some like to call it when it whips their ohc motors.

50+ year old tech and still rather easy to work on. I am not a big fan of modular or ohc motors. Pain to work on and have very tight tolerances, especially Ford.

 

[RobertN]

If it runs that good, I wonder if it will be regulated to death like the 426 series Hemi's. Nobody in large circle track or drag racing could keep up with the 426 series Hemi till it was heavily restricted... That motor was the first restrictor plate motor.

The 6.2 is becoming the choice for drag racers around here. Quickly becoming as popular as the 4 bolt main 350. With very mild upgrades, like a cam and head porting, in a mid size car like a camaro or nova, low 11 to high 10 second 1/4 mile times are the average. These LS motors make great power, especially with turbos. They remind me of the Hemi from the 60s, make good power stock and does not take much to really wake them up. Especially the 6.2.

 

[JESSE1]

I have had several Ski Nautique inboard ski boats. All my boats had 351 Ford based Pleasurecraft marine engines. The last boats had the GT40 rated from 300-310 hp. They stopped using Ford engines because the 351 was not being built and had been replaced by the OHC modular engines. These engines were wider than the 351's and wouldn't easily fit in the boats. The new engines are all built by GM.

 

[Superduper]

It is a very capable engine. I towed 10k lbs + over 300 mile round trip and was impressed. Averaged 8.8 mpg. I won't go as far to say it would walk away from the other trucks. The 3/4 ton GMC with the 6.2 pulled the same weight as I was and got a little better mileage, around 9.3.

Is that about normal for these? It doesn't seem like 8.8 is all that great.

 

[RollingsFarms]

While the 6.2 may LOOK like a 5.3 the towing power is night and day between the two. The 5.3 I owned was not a very good tower, it was a screamer to be honest, loved to have the crap revved out of it. The 6.2 is a totally different animal. I've towed 8,500 lbs with mine and while my 5.3 would have felt like it was going to blow up, the 6.2 just chugs along nice and smooth. I don'tg plan on modding mine or anything like that, perhaps a blackbear tune years down the road when the warranty runs out. the surprising thing though is the gas mileage of the 6.2 BETTERS my 2004 Z71 averaging mid 17's. sometimes it'll hit 18, on a road trip once it was bumping 20 (19.6). my 5.3 would get 16 mpg whether driving in town, interstate, driving like a grandma or a race car driver, towing, not towing, uphill, downhill, wind behind me, wind in my face, no matter what it ALWAYS got 16 mpg....give or take a few tenths.

 

[deerefan]

While the 6.2 may LOOK like a 5.3 the towing power is night and day between the two. The 5.3 I owned was not a very good tower, it was a screamer to be honest, loved to have the crap revved out of it. The 6.2 is a totally different animal. I've towed 8,500 lbs with mine and while my 5.3 would have felt like it was going to blow up, the 6.2 just chugs along nice and smooth. I don'tg plan on modding mine or anything like that, perhaps a blackbear tune years down the road when the warranty runs out. the surprising thing though is the gas mileage of the 6.2 BETTERS my 2004 Z71 averaging mid 17's. sometimes it'll hit 18, on a road trip once it was bumping 20 (19.6). my 5.3 would get 16 mpg whether driving in town, interstate, driving like a grandma or a race car driver, towing, not towing, uphill, downhill, wind behind me, wind in my face, no matter what it ALWAYS got 16 mpg....give or take a few tenths.

Comparing an 04 5.3 to a 11 or 12 is tough. With the new trans, it is completely different. I had an 05 Z71 with the 5.3 and understand exactly what you experienced with your 04. My 2011 5.3 Z71 tows like a dream. No high rpms or excessive revs.