First Drive Review: 2010 6.2-liter V-8 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor

First Drive Review: 2010 6.2-liter V-8 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor

When the Ford F-150 SVT Raptor was first unveiled in 2008, auto enthusiasts of all stripes were stopped in their tracks by the sheer outrageousness of Ford's off-road pickup truck. There has never been a factory-offered high-performance car or truck engineered to travel at speeds up to 100 mph in places where little more than rocks and sand are the only sources of traction. After several turns behind the wheel of the 5.4-liter V-8 model, we were shocked and awed by how well the Raptor fulfilled Ford's go-fast-in-the-dirt and air-catching promises.

But suddenly, the original Raptor is a base-model truck. A new 6.2-liter V-8 Raptor has arrived with the most powerful engine available in a half-ton pickup, and we've just driven it hard in the unforgiving Mojave Desert of Southern California. reader Matt Davis, who hangs out with the Raptor driving crew at, picked up his 6.2-liter Raptor last week and was kind enough to let us borrow it for a day. Also driving alongside us, our good friend Sean Holman, tech editor at Four Wheeler Magazine (you can read Sean's initial opinion of the truck at the Four Wheeler Blog).

More Power!

For years, if there was one gripe that Ford F-150 owners collectively shared, it was the distinct lack of power (and bragging rights) that come with a large-displacement V-8. The all-new 6.2-liter is meant to answer this glaring hole in Ford's powertrain lineup.


The single-overhead cam 6.2-liter V-8 is rated at a brawny 411 horsepower and 434 pounds-feet of torque. The fact that it's making its debut in today's frugal times is rather odd, like seeing the strongman sideshow freak turn up in a Cirque du Soleil performance. Where Ford's latest gas and diesel engines are modern marvels that feature direct injection, turbochargers, compacted graphite iron engine blocks and slick tech like twin intake variable cam timing, the 6.2-liter V-8 is a bit of a throwback. It has two valves and two spark plugs per cylinder, a cast-iron engine block and aluminum cylinder heads. It also features a cast-iron crankshaft, forged steel connecting rods and cast-aluminum pistons. "Powered by Ford" is proudly embossed on the valve covers.

In addition to the Raptor, the 6.2-liter V-8 can also be found bolted under the hood of the new 2011 F-Series Super Duty, where it's rated a bit lower at 385 hp and 405 pounds-feet of torque.

Before we made a beeline for the California outback north of Edwards Air Force Base to try out the whole truck, we paid a visit to our friends at K&N Air Filters in Riverside to borrow time on their chassis dynamometer to empirically measure the horsepower and torque curves of the 6.2-liter.


With the transmission in third gear, maximum torque was measured at 361.64 pounds-feet and horsepower peaked at 344.52 hp. Both measurements were made at the rear wheels instead of at the crank, which is what Ford uses to claim its advertised rating of 411 hp and 434 pounds-feet.

A 15 to 20 percent power loss from the crank to the rear wheels from friction and rotational parasitic forces is a fair number to use, gauging the relative difference between claimed and dynoed numbers. In that context, the power the 6.2-liter V-8 was able to put on the ground was better than we expected. It's got more horsepower and just a bit less torque at the rear wheels than the legacy 310-hp, 365 pounds-feet 5.4-liter V-8 has at the crank!

Update 1: April-28-2010
We dynoed the 6.2 Raptor using 87 octane regular unleaded gasoline. The 6.2 Raptor makes 411 peak horsepower at the crank using premium unleaded fuel and 401 peak horsepower burning regular. Torque remains the same with either fuel.

On the Road

After K&N, the freeways and backroads from Riverside to Mojave gave us plenty of seat time to see how the 6.2-liter Raptor behaved on the road. After all, you don't need to trailer this desert prerunner from home to OHV park or Baja Mexico.


A spring storm passing through Southern California threw hard rain at us at times, so we were able to drive on asphalt in wet and dry conditions. In both cases, the 6.2-liter Raptor felt very secure and solid on the road despite its tall stance, big 35-inch BF Goodrich tires and long-travel suspension. The ride seemed distinctively better than the 5.4-liter Raptor, though you could feel some chassis float when changing lanes.

Perhaps it's the extra weight from the larger mill or revised suspension tuning, but road feel was our first confirmation that the extra time Ford has taken to deliver the 6.2-liter Raptor has paid off well.

The second indicator that the 6.2-liter Raptor is an improved truck came from the noticeable lack of fussiness from the six-speed automatic transmission, which is the same gearbox paired with the 5.4-liter V-8. In past drives, we noted how the 5.4-liter V-8 tended to hunt for gears, looking for the best balance between speed and fuel economy. Our solution to that issue was to use tow/haul mode to hold gears longer before shifting. There's virtually none of that frequent cog swapping in the 6.2-liter Raptor, which shifted only as needed and used the engine's larger power band to stay in gear.

When it came time to plant the accelerator to pass slower vehicles, the Raptor responded by smoothly dropping a gear and revving up to its peak torque sweet spot that's available from 3,500-5,700 rpm. But the rush of power wasn't EcoBoost shove-you-back-in-the-seat-and-keep-shoving strong, like we've experienced in Ford's latest EB-powered vehicles. Opening the Raptor's throttle produced a confident and steady stream of power instead of urgent torque sent to the rear wheels. Its power nicely patches all the gaps the 5.4-liter has, but not excessively so.

To find out just how fast the Raptor is on the road, instead of relying on our butt dyno, we made a couple of runs with the truck at Willow Springs Raceway north of Los Angeles. During three passes in a stormy crosswind, we measured a best zero-to-60 mph time of 7.61 seconds, according to instrumented testing using the VBOX we brought along. That’s with the truck’s launch-optimized 4.10 rear axle, though that low final-drive ratio is somewhat negated by the Raptor’s very tall 35-inch tires. It's 1.2 seconds faster than what we measured in the 5.4-liter V-8 Raptor, and it's very respectable considering the Raptor 's hefty curb weight tips the scales at more than 6,000 pounds.

In the quarter-mile, we hit 89.04 mph in 15.86 seconds.


All of the runs were performed in two-wheel drive with off-road mode on and stability control off, so throttle interference from electronic nannies wouldn't be a problem, though that apparently introduced rear axle wrap and some wheel hop when we went wide-open throttle from a brake-torqued standing start. That's not surprising, since we've experienced similar behavior before in a standard 5.4-liter F-150.

After leaving Willow Springs, we pointed the Raptor toward the wide-open high desert near Johannesburg, Calif. It's where we recently tested a 5.4-liter V-8 Raptor, so we could put the 6.2-liter Raptor on some of the same trails but still try some new ground.

In the Dirt

We turned off the main road into Last Chance Canyon for a quick excursion up a wash that was freshly covered in spots with large rocks that fell from cliffs during the recent rains. Where possible, we squirted up open sandy sections and dodged boulders, getting a feel for the 6.2-liter V-8's power on loose surfaces. As hoped and expected, the strong engine enabled the Raptor to hunch down in the dirt for traction without feeling or becoming bogged down in excessively silty sections. That same power also allowed us make precise course corrections during rapid turns around water-formed bends in the dry riverbed, which wouldn't have been possible with the slower and lower power response with the 5.4-liter V-8. Deft punches of the right pedal could be used for maneuvering instead of being power-limited and having to brake around an obstacle, risking getting bogged down.


We followed several power line roads and dirt bike trails looking for just the right place to jump the Raptor -- you are supposed to jump the truck, after all -- but we didn't have much luck this time finding the right rise. We didn't want to break the truck, either.

What we did find were some great straightaways with odd and random mixes of hard-packed dirt, old crumbling asphalt and small to moderately sized whoops that proved to be an excellent refresher of how well the Raptor's specialized front and rear Fox shocks handle rapidly changing terrain conditions at speeds up to 50 to 60 mph. The 2.5-inch diameter maintenance-free dampers deliver over 11-inches of front and more than 13-inches of aft wheel travel. Three oil gates inside their barrels control the dampening rate as the shock responds to every surface condition the truck encounters, from pothole to mudhole.

The 6.2-liter V-8 excelled in these trail situations as well. Faced with the on-the-spot decision to immediately brake and crawl at low speeds or, instead, quickly speed up to leverage the suspension to rapidly cross changing surfaces -- like washboards that gave way to wider-spaced dips or whoops that grew deeper troughs -- the extra power rapidly pushed the speedometer to the right so we didn't bounce too hard over stuff that would be tough on the truck and passengers at lower speeds.

What also works well with the 6.2-liter V-8 is the Raptor's specialized off-road mode. Enabled with the push of a button, off-road mode changes the engine’s throttle map to give the Raptor linear throttle response, like a race truck, instead of high power at the beginning and tapered at the end, like a street truck. Off-road mode also changes the transmission’s shift points to hold its gear and not upshift after letting off the throttle at high speeds. It also locks out the sixth-gear overdrive at the top of the transmission to keep the rpm high.


We also spent some time just running the Raptor hard in a wide open desert expanse, drifting and power sliding on the dirt to get further familiar with the 6.2-liter V-8's power band without risk of hitting rocks, bushes or an unexpected deep rut. Flatland isn't part of the Raptor's native hilly and rutted trail-running habitat but it sure is fun throwing the rig around a field.

Adding It All Up

But there's more to the Raptor we tested than just go-fast antics. In addition to the $3,000 upgrade to the 6.2-liter V-8 over the 5.4-liter Raptor's $38,020 starting price, this Raptor also came with the Luxury Package ($1,950) with 10-way power leather heated front seats, power adjustable pedals and a Sony audio system; a moonroof ($995); Ford's Sync entertainment and navigation system ($2,430); a bed extender ($250); tailgate step ($375); and a rearview camera that's a lifesaver backing up off-road ($450). The grand total was $48,445, including a $975 destination charge. Not included: the $1,075 "digital mud" exterior graphics option, so we could decorate the truck with the real stuff.

Are those luxuries worth it? Maybe not the moonroof, but all of the others make sense if this is your ultimate fantasy pickup that can be used for work and play.


One disappointing thing we noticed about the 6.2-liter Raptor was its lack of external differentiation from the 5.4-liter version. Both have the same twin exhaust tips and wheels. On the Ford Racing Raptor XT that was shown at SEMA, there was a cool 6.2-liter V-8 badge that clearly identified the powerplant residing in the truck's engine bay, but on this truck there was nothing. It's an issue that deserves a fix, even one as simple as a small badge.

The last item we measured was fuel economy. We tallied it at two points during the trip. The first part combined freeway and country road driving with off-road driving, and it came out to a lowly 10.4 mpg. The second part only examined highway miles, which were better at 14 mpg but certainly nothing to brag about.

Those familiar with the telenovela development history of the 6.2-liter V-8 powertrain -- which is too long to get into in this story -- know that this engine has been in development since the early part of the last decade. What might have been considered efficient or satisfactory had it arrived around 2006 isn't necessarily the case today. Yes, it has gobs of power, but even a six-speed transmission isn't enough bring mileage up to where it should be. That's the biggest challenge Ford SVT has in front of it with the Raptor because the rest is brilliant.

Compared with the 5.4-liter truck, the 6.2-liter V-8 Raptor is a better balanced package of power and refinement on and off the pavement. There's no doubt that the 6.2-liter V-8 gives the Raptor the extra capability it's been demanding. It's an incredibly good deal for only an extra $3,000.



first! and you are a legend Mike!

Now I will read the article :)

@Alex: We'll always bring you the truck news and reviews as fast as we possibly can.

Sorry it's been quiet on the site the past few days. Now you know why. :-)

Good report!

So Mike you've driven both, whats your choice: 6.2L or 3.5l EB?

And anyway you could chart dyno of this 6.2L vs GM 6.2L?

Power Kid,
I see a 5.0 or EcoBoost in your future. I think you will be much happier with the power and fuel economy.

Yummy Yummy Yummy,

Pretending I am a person with disposable income; I think I prefer the 5.4 better. Other than changing driving dynamics the 6.2 doesnt offer enough over the 5.4 IMO. Although it would be fun to throwdown in it just once.

I like the Raptor and what Ford is doing!!!!

Just a question, why are they going back to rating Horsepower at the crank?????????

I thought that since 1972 they were to be rated in 'NET SAE RATING" instead of Gross!!!!!

Prevous to 1972 most all Detroit engines were rated in Gross or at the Flywheel!!!

Alot of engines would have more power at the crank or flywheel than at the rearend!!!!!!

Charles: SAE horsepower (either gross prior to 1972, net after 1972 and certified after 2005) has always been measured at the crank. However, since reviewers are typically discouraged from pulling the engine and putting it on an engine dyno, they measure it at the rear wheels, and estimate driveline losses (the conventional number is 18-20% lost in the rest of the drivetrain).

I like the Raptor and Ford's moves as of late, but an extra $3k for a gas engine that has roughly the same ratings as Dodge's HEMI, and Chevy's 6.2, that are half the price. Maybe since it is such a huge improvement over 5.4 that it can be justified, but I would expect to pay $3k extra for a light duty diesel. I can see why the LT diesel will never happen, if they can charge this much for another large V-8 and people are willing to pay for it.

@Power Kid
I am with you, lets see a comparison between the three. The HEMI, GM's 6.2, and Ford'd 6.2.

@Power Kid: I think the better question is, would I buy a 5.4-L or 6.2-L Raptor? If you leave the Raptor in Off-Road mode w/out disabling stability control (which cuts throttle and applies brakes if it thinks things are getting too squirelly), I'd probably still get the 5.4-L. They are pretty tough to tell apart in the dirt in the particular case. I'd use the $3,000 I saved to make a few modifications. I also appreciate the few extra mpgs I'd gain. If money is no object, get the 6.2-L.

Awesome article! A few things:

1. God Bless the guy who let you take it out for a joy ride

2. Highway passing power feels like who what now?

3. Just wondering if you guys tried the truck on the track with off-road mode "off" for one go.

4. Why does Mr.Levine not like sunroofs!?

@ Dave

Given you've never driven a 5.0L or EB in F150 form I'm not sure how you can recommend either over the 6.2L. You also make several assumptions of the MPG of the 6.2 vs. the 5.0l & EB. Could you use your powers to pick tonights winning lottery numbers for me? :)

Even if all three are available (only EB confirmed so far) there are several considerations for me, but MPG is way down on the radar. If I need MPG I drive my car. I'm like to know how much lighter the EB pkg is vs the 6.2L. Cause that weight savings will directly benefit real payload #s. (Help the F150 needs)

What we need is 3 identical 2011 F150s. 5.0/EB/6.2 plus a 2010 5.4l with similar config. Then do a full test: heavy tow, drag race, long run and see what they do. They we can make a educated decision. But if Ford won't even give THE dominant truck website a 6.2 Raptor to drive, I can't see this happening. (In a perfect world that comparo would also include the shelved 4.4L Diesel!)

I know the hp/tq chart of the GM 6.2L is on the web, can't someone post a comparo graph? or don't we have Fords actual dyno to compare apples to apples? Could we do a half azzed one where we use a old GM 6.2 dyno vs this new Ford 6.2 dyno? Very curious. This seems like a natural thing to do!

I drove a 2011 SD with 6.2/3.73s last week and I was very impressed. I've driven the Toyota, new HEMI but never the GM 6.2. (try to find one in a GM lot!)

The hemi is half the price, but to upgrade to the 6.2 gm is $5925 according to truck trends best in class.

for $3000 I could put a supercharger on the 5.4 and get close to 500 hp and if driven normal keep close to the same mpg's. I still hope ford comes out with something with the same hp as gm and ram soon and its easier to get than the 6.2 gm, since I hardly see any of those antwhere.

Looks like the lowly Tundra wins in 0-60, gas mileage,and 1/4 mile. But then again who cares..

Wolf Killer- The Tundra wins at those things sure, but it loses in payload, HP/lb/ft, frame strength, off-road prowess and sales numbers.

Bobsled80- The upgrade to the 6.2 is $1500 according to the GM website.

The Raptor is sweet! I would like to see them come with a factory winch like the Powerwagon, though. Still, very awesome truck!

Dodge rates their Hemi at 390hp and 403ft/lbs on 87 octane. They recommend 89 but the ratings are done on 87, so that line about the competitors requiring premium fuels was uneeded.

6.2 liter or 5.4 liter really doesn't matter. Why you ask? it's simple, it's still FUDGED OVER REBUILT DODGE! aka a
f o r d and that simply means it's a pile doggy poo! Frank, Lou, Alex and any other ford lover here don't get your panties in a bind.

found on road dead, aka f o r d!

Seems to me that the EB would be a good fit for this truck, given that the kinds of driving you would do in it would fit the high reving turbo design. The Raptor is pretty cool. If they ever made a crewcab version, I suppose I could envision putting one in my driveway.


Thank you G-Street. Don't know how truck trend got that pricing for the GM 6.2. The max trailering pack, includes 6.2, is $1500 on Chevy website.

Someguy= I think I am right on the Net SAE Horsepower Rating since 1972!
I remember that in the early 1970s all manufacters went from a 'Gross Horsepower" rating system , it was supposed to take in the loses due to powersteering, A/C, discount the pulleys etc!

Look am factoring in the loss of compression, but two barrel carb cars say a Ford 302 in a LTD in 1971 was rated 210 hp then in 1972 it went to aprox 150hp! This was because of the rating system!

Mabe Mike Levine and help us figure this out!

Love this truck!!!

WolfKiller,The Chevy or GMC with a 6.2 blows away the Tundra !! Remember the Tundra has 4.30 rear axle !! If GM,Dodge had those gears,their trucks would record alot faster 0-60,1/4 mile times.

Kind of dissapointed in the performance of the Raptor truck,but then again its a Ford and they dissapoint me alot lately..The Dodge Cummins is a bit faster 0-60 and 1/4 mile than the new Ford 390 hp 725 Torque Diesel !!

Motorweek tested a Dodge Ram Heavy Duty Hemi and got a 7.2 0-60 from a less powerful Hemi and a heavier truck than the Ram 1500 has...

I guess the 6.2 Raptor would be worth ther extra cost,since the 5.4 is a complete least any vehicle that runs 7 second range 0-60 and 15's doesnt feel like its falling on its face...then again my vehicle runs in the 4's 0-60 and 12's in the 1/4 !!

Capit- The objective of these trucks (trucks in general) is not to be quick. I am a firm believer that the 'fast truck sells' state of mind, is what made the Tundra the fail that it is in the sales dept. Also, the Tundra has 4.30 gears?? Since when?

Patrick- No problem. If I were ordering a new Silverado I would definitely get this package. For $1500 you get a hundred more ponies and 2 less MPG. Sounds like a good deal to me.

This truck is more pointless than the Aztec. It fails hard as a truck, looks horrid, performance with the 6.2 is pathetic, and it looks like it was attacked by the import isle at Advanced Auto Parts..or a JC Whitney catalog.

Yet another mediocre appliance from the so-called "new Ford".

IF they are going to continue to pump out complete junk like they have been for the past 5 years...they should do everyone a favor and file for Ch. 7. Once this whole Toyota thing passes and GM gets back on their feet, Ford will have to rely on their products...and not public sentiment. And when that happens...Ford will be losing money faster than they were before.

Their business plan is terrible (if you can call that a plan)
Their management/leadership is terrible
Their products are terrible.

@ Chd

If you'd calm down for a bit you'd realize Mike was talking about the GM 6.2L which recommends premium fuel. Not every ref is directed to your goat. The HEMI in your goat does alright, given its worst in class tranny.

It's a cool looking truck and I hope it does well, BUT I'd still rather a Dodge with the additions that were mentioned on this site a couple of weeks ago. Everyone should just remember that there is no such thing as one perfect truck for every person out there. Everyone has different tastes and likes/dislikes in vehicles.
Go Ford!

But I'd still rather have a DODGE!

@P, i don't know of a so called "New Ford" brand. I have heard of a "New GM." I think you actually mixed Ford up with GM in your post, because Ford is gaining market share, not losing it. Or keep talking crap if you want.

My only issue with the Raptor is I wish it was built on a smaller and lighter weight platform. If it wasn't so large an heavy it would be significantly faster, more nimble, and would probably get better mileage. I mean, I never realized how big the Raptor looks until I saw it in person. It's like a Medium Duty truck in stature, but it has the towing and payload of a small truck.

@Bob - I see you stopped spewing out your Yul Brenner quote.
Does GM/Chev have a package comparible to the Raptor?
I was looking at a GM with the Z71 package and All Terrain package. It was a good looking truck but the bumper and chin spoiler was so low to the ground that it could double as a snowplow.

Dodge has a kit that will allow a Pre-runner to be built. Good for them.

@P -
You have a complete lack of business knowledge.
"GM takes a historic hit"
GM has had a place in the top 10 businesses in Fortune Magazine’s well-known Fortune 500 listing for some 101 years. Well, that reign has come to a sad end with GM now placing at Number 15 due to the economic issues they faced and the bailout."

This ones for you and Bob -
"Beam me up Scotty. There are no signs of intelligent life down here."

I know a few ppl that are getting this truck with the 6.2L . 8 month waiting list here in alberta but it will be worth the wait for them Ford Trucks Are the best of the best!!!

Where is the most important feature, GROUND CLEARANCE numbers?

And are the rear lower shock mounts hanging below the axle line like all domestics?

@G-strt and patrick
The reason truck trend shows that number to upgrade is probably because you have to upgrade alot of stuff just to get it as an option. Plus if you just add a 6.2 to the chevy its $1950. Good luck trying to get the 6.2 chevy in a stock chevy. The Raptor your not having to add abunch of other BS packages to get the 6.2 motor.

@ Bob what you said may have been true in the past, but now Ford stands for:

F- Found
O- Off
R- Road
D- Dominating

Better right?

Capit, you are not considering transmission gearing.
So what, that Toyota offers 4.1 & 4.3 axle ratios.

Speaking of transmissions, does this still have P R N D 3 2 1?
How come Ford couldn't make something modern, considering this has a 6 speed auto?

Also will Ford make a pre-runner Raptor?
Change the axle ratio from 4.1 to 3.73
That should put up some decent mileage numbers.

First off, if you can't say something nice, don't bother saying anything at all. Don't look now, "P", but your ignorance is showing.

I, for one, think the Raptor is pretty darn cool. It kinda makes me wanna trade in my '06 Mustang GT (you can have my 92 GT vert when you pry it from my cold dead hands) just 'cause it's sooooo cool. I've been wanting a p/u for some time since losing my Expedition years ago to a nasty hit n run. I really like the raptor. One thing, i'd like to see it have a aluminum block, aluminum driveshaft, and a little bit of weight savings somewhere.

It's still a little pricey for a p/u, but you do get lots of cool stuff.




Ground clearance is listed at 11.2 inches, which is actually more than both a Jeep Wrangler Rubicon or Dodge Powerwagon.

The shocks are mounted below the rear axle line, however, the mounts are stronger than what is typically used on a half-ton truck and they are also shielded and mounted outboard of the leaf springs (closer to the inside of the tires than typical). Thereby making damaging them more difficult.

Jeff, this truck is a Desert Racer, not a rock crawler. Desertracers need decent clearance but the wont' have to worry about shock monts hanging down as their mostly doing high speed running on relatively flat sandy dunes.

Hay Lou, the Raptor is still a Ford no matter what engine they put in it. The 6.2 liter engine is a very thirsty thirsty engine. Ford stands for Fugged Over Rebuilt Dodge! or
Found On Road Dead.

The 6.2 liter would smoke the 6.2 liter Ford in a drag race.

So let it be written, so let it be done!!!

Fords drool and Chevy Rules!!!!!!!!!

You need to go study 20th century politics. In 1973 all manufacturers engines saw across the board power drops and they were legitimate. An engine that was making 300hp the year before was just barely moving along at 130hp the next. It had nothing to do with SAE ratings changes and everything to do with King Faisal of Saudi Arabia.

@smtrthnu: EPA regs, too.

Okay some of you guys are acting like little kids but as long as some of you are burning ford i might as well make fun of other brands.



FORD-First on race day!
FORD-Flies over rough ditches!
FORD-For off road driving!

Great Article! Congrats Mike on getting the first true review of the 6.2L. I smell a 6.2L street truck in the works at svt that can run the 0-60 in less than 6 :)

Well all I will say is I have towed 3 Chevys this year and picked up 2 friends who broke down (Chevy and Dodge) respectfully. You will have problems with any vehicle no matter what the brand. My pinion seal just started to leak but the truck (2004 F150) has over 100K miles. I really think these crybabies like Bob on here are just jealous of what Ford has become and what GM once was. It is this simple. If GM management was better and they made the best products than they would have never had to file bankruptcy would they? I will answer this for you NO! Ford did not have to go through bankruptcy nor take any handouts from you, me or any other person in this great country did they? (not counting EPA grants for better MPG's and Electric cars which every other manufacture including GM has took to) So for you to get your panties in a bunch and criticize Ford. their products, and their management just shows how low you are. Classic GM Fanboy right there!

First off the raptor is an awsome truck and for a truck that you can go to dealer and buy and take to the desert for some offroading it has NO competition , As for the chevy lovers on here that just like to bash ford, GROW UP chevys are for kids that dont know any better, i work on excavating sites that beat the hell out of trucks no other truck holds up like the fords, I laugh everytime I see a guy that thinks his chevy is such a great truck, I mean if you think that your supposed to pick the door up an inch to close it or the knobs fall off dash because you can see the dash flexing your wrong its just that generic motors builds crap and loves the idiots that think there great man do they have you fooled gm is professional grade alright a professional grade P.O.S that relys on marketing gimmicks to sell vehicles to people that dont know any better..Have a nice day

@ Mike.

Have you driven a EB in a car? ;) You probably know where I'm going with this....

@Power Kid: I've driven the EB Flex and another EB vehicle that I can't discuss my impressions about.

@Bob - if your IQ was octane , your engine would ping when it was shut off !
I thought you were a Honda Ridgeline fanboy!

It will be a big mistake if Honda drops the Ridgeline. Honda also mis-stepped on their first-gen Odyssey, but they went back to the drawing board, and now their minivan is arguably the gold standard in that market segment. They can do the same with a next-gen Ridgeline.

This vehicle was never meant to do commercial-grade work. It was aimed at Harry Homeowner, who does yard work and who needs to haul/tow some outdoor toys—and who wants a family truck. In that role it's the perfect vehicle.

It matches, or is in the ballpark with most 1/2-tons in terms of payload, and can tow 5K—which is more than enough for most homeowner's needs. If you need to tow 9+K, look elsewhere. It's also the only mid-size truck (it's not full size truck) that can lay 4x8 paneling flat on the bed floor.

Finally, I get a big chuckle from all the Ridgeline critics, as those who actually own these vehicles love them.

Posted by: Bob | Apr 10, 2010 10:12:29 AM

I think this sums up the whooooollleee article! "One disappointing thing we noticed about the 6.2-liter Raptor was its lack of external differentiation from the 5.4-liter version."

Austin Powers has a device that just may help.

FORD-First on race day!
FORD-Flies over rough ditches!
FORD-For off road driving!

In NASCAR, Ford has not won a race yet...

Any vehicle can fly over a ditch...

Your gravel driveway does count for off-roading...

Also will Ford make a pre-runner Raptor?

The Toyota Tacoma PreRunner was a great idea when it first came out last decade with the first generation Tacoma, so why hasn't any other make come out with one?

When I raced my 86 Toyota pickup in the desert I simply gutted the front diff., removed the front axle shafts and the prop shaft and grabbed the bearing cap from a Tacoma PreRunner to seal that up, mounted the lower front shock mounts on the upper control arm, made a custom over engine bar for the upper mounts and felt a world of differance with the less weight up front!

The comments to this entry are closed.