Ford F-150 SVT Raptor Outsold Honda Ridgeline in April 2011


Despite gas prices being at their highest point since July 2008, sales of the Ford F-150 SVT Raptor high-speed desert runner reached record levels in April.

Ford sold 1,183 Raptor pickup trucks last month, according to Ford SVT spokesman Henry Platt. That's 231 more than the 952 Ridgeline midsize pickups that Honda sold in April.

Yes, this is like comparing apples to oranges, but Honda had hopes of selling about 50,000 trucks per year when the Ridgeline came to market in 2005 for the 2006 model year. Both trucks appeal to niche buyers, and they've both raced in the Baja 1000 — the Ridgeline even won its class.

The 6.2-liter V-8 Raptor is EPA-rated at 11/14 mpg city/highway, while the 3.5-liter V-6 Ridgeline is rated at 15/20 mpg. It appears that fun outweighs frugality, at least for the Raptor.

Eighty percent of Raptor sales were the new SuperCrew model, and black was the most popular color, Platt said.

Let's hope this sales news is seen by General Motors, which is still dithering whether to build its own off-road pickup based on its all-new Heavy Duty truck chassis, as previewed in last year's GMC Sierra All Terrain HD concept.

Chrysler has started sales of its bolt-on Mopar Ram Runner off-road suspension kit for the Ram 1500.


Ridgeline is not a truck..this is pretty simple.

Ok well the Avalanche sold 156 more then the Raptor. Sure hope Fords watching.

Demand destruction won't occur with the Raptor due to higher fuel prices. The buyers of these trucks are buying them for they're capability...potential truck buyers with a higher sensitivity to fuel rpices have plenty of options on the Ford product line.

GM delayed it's "next gen"'/"updates" silverado due to higher gas prices?? Duuurrr


Yea, but the Avalanche can not go 100 mph in the desert.

I am still looking for a used Raptor!

80% were crewcabs. Wow. Where are all the haters that said a crewcab wouldn't sell?????

The raptor is an awesome truck but no way i'd drive one if I only got 11 to 14 mpg. I'm always happy to hear more good news from ford though. Are they going to have ecoboost as an option on future raptors? I'm really disappointed that the brand new 6.2 gets such poor fuel economy. Its worse than I ever thought it could be. I'm sure the tires must have something to do with it, but even on the other f150s I hear it does terrible.

No doubt, the 3.5L ecoboost needs to be offered as an option on the Raptor. This is a purpose-built truck, but 14mpg hwy will not cut it forever. The 6.2 also needs TI-VCT to bump up the power and fuel efficiency just a tad.

>>Ok well the Avalanche sold 156 more then the Raptor. Sure hope Fords watching.

Only problem (OK, not the only problem) for GM is that the Avalanche isn't a high-performance niche truck like an SVT truck (the "S" in SVT means "Special"). It's supposed to be a volume production model, and it only sold 156 more than Raptor? What, is Fisher-Price plastic going out of style?

Meanwhile, I see that Chevy Volt's sales are rocketing toward the 450 mark. Sure hope SOMEBODY'S watching; car buyers sure aren't.

As long as we're discussing numbers, here's a forumula for you to remember:

GM Failure + $130 billion in taxpayer bailouts = GM Failure

I doubt Raptor buyers care about fuel economy.
I wonder how many of these trucks are actually driven hard?
My fear is that the Raptor will replace the Hummer H1 as the poser vehicle of the decade.

I don't think the EB3.5 would be the most suitable engine for the Raptor. The dyno testing between the 5.0 and EB3.5 showed that the 5.0 pulled harder up to 20 mph. I'm a long way from any 100 mph deserts, but most of the off road places I know would fall into that 20 mph range.
One could argue that I'd be going much faster than 20 mph in the Raptor. LOL

Why would Ford watch the Avalanche? The Raptor and this have nothing in common and the Avalanche is a brand. Raptor is a varient for the F-150 brand. If you are watching sales, F-150 brand sold way way more than Avalanche.

@Ilikemajo- Aside from an annual trip to Silver Lake, most of the Rptors sold around here were bought for IMAGE. Most of the buyers wouldn't know any different if the underpinnings were exactly like the regular F150. I have no doubt about the truck's capability, just about the owners. Aside from the western deserts, most Raptors will live life just like most H2s.
As for GM- I'd love to see the Avalance back on the HD chassis, sporting 35's (with room for 37s), reservoir shocks and air-bumps.


If you're looking for a used Raptor, we have two in stock. Provided you're from Canada lol


Negative, i'm in friggin Cali!

MrKnowitall, here in the West, the Hummer is just a square Suburban, or a square Colorado. Thus, short of the H1 that wasn't built for a long time, they are all just posers.

And yes, I was heavily involved in heavy off-roading and rockcrawling.

Out here, Raptors are everywhere. A good portion of them are so covered in mud or dirt, that you can barely tell what they are.

The reality is, the vast majority of an vehicle, is not used for what it was built for, the vast majority of the time. To use that arguement against a vehicle like the Raptor, is a bit disingenious.

I agree Lou, Raptor buyers do not care about fuel economy, that's why they bought them. I believe they would sell more Raptors to the people who want it, but still care about fuel economy to some extent. So it is worth doing, but the fuel economy on that thing will never be great with any engine. Maybe a diesel-electric serial hybrid?

If Ford puts the Eco in the Raptor, they would hurt sales IMO. The Raptor is the SVT F-150. It has the best engine in it now, with room to grow. The Ecoboost is a nice engine but it's not a 6.2. Putting a 3.5 in the Raptor is like putting a 3.7 v-6 in a Boss or Shelby Mustang. Makes no sense. If you want a lesser vehicle, then buy a lower model.

The guys on the Ridgeline assembly line must have time to play cards and drink tons of coffee.

The truck (it's not) was doomed from day 1 Honda build small cars and engines they have no expertise on big rig with decent engine.
They try to sell a truck alike with an Odyssey engine with limited capacity and fuel consumption of a V-8 who is stupid enough to buy a crap like that.

When the Raptor was first introduced it had the 5.4L.

EcoBoost is the premium engine and performed well in the Baja.

People said the crewcab Raptor made no sense and now the crewcab is 80% of sales!

the EB whould be the best motor in the Raptor, I'm sure they can get the same power out of it because they wouldn't be rated to tow much anyway, and I'm sure it weighs at least 100lbs or so less!, and taht means more speed! quicker times, better handling, win win for sure!

Ridgeline has same engine, same transmission, same exterior as when it was introduced in 2005.
F-150 has seen major updates.
Ridgeline offers appealing attributes in it's great ride/handling, two way tailgate, and in bed storage that "should" attract buyers to it's niche.
Problems are:
The horrid exterior styling that is even more polarizing than the Subaru Baja. What were they thinking? Just style it generically like the Pilot and the rest of Honda's.
Mileage that was just ok in 2005 and in 2011 is no better than full size trucks.
Full size pricing and no incentives. There are large incentives in the truck market, why buy a Ridgeline for $35K when you can buy a F-150, Silverado, or Ram for less.

Honda had an untapped audience of millions of loyal customers to market a "Sport Utility Truck" to and created a nice product until they styled it like a Mars Lander.
Ridgeline is a much better than it looks, too bad the canceled Element sells more units than the Ridgeline.

Like the Subaru Baja, the best feature (surprisingly) about the Ridgeline may be it's resale value.

If you look at the product cycle for midsize and compact trucks you will see few if any changes since 2005 in the Ranger, Frontier, Dakota, Tacoma, Colorado, and Sport Trac.

Pathetic! No investment in the segment guaranteed dismal sales

I'd have to agree with Ford850.
Performance vehicles need the biggest badest engine available. Sure, an Eb 3.5 would work just fine but it is all about image and perception in the end.
It doesn't have the same brag appeal.
yup - My Raptor with 3.5 V6 really howls through the desert
My Raptor with 6.2 really howls through the desert.
I'd pick the latter.

They should put the 5.3 liter GM engine in the raptor with active fuel management. LOL just kidding just kidding. Good points made about the ecoboost. I think the 6.2 is the best engine for the raptor, but I imagine they would sell more if the ecoboost was an option. like tony said it did fine in the baja 1000. I would only consider buying the raptor if it had the ecoboost. And If i had it, I would jump it..........often. ilikemayo. Some potential raptor buyers DO care about fuel economy(like me). I am also worried that the raptor will become a poser vehicle like the hummer. I'm sure most raptors will hardly even touch the dirt.

The Honda blows!

The sales of the specialty, Ford F-150 S.V.T. Raptor blows...past the sales of the mainstream Honda.

G.M.C. are your reading/watching this? Make the Sierra All Terrain HD!

I hope that Ford does not screw things up by offering the EcoBoost in the Raptor for the sake of increasing sales. They are obviously selling just fine, with the 6.2L. I see enough Raptors on the road as it is. I want to see less of them, making them more exclusive. People that REALLY want one will find a way to get one. I would hate to see people just snatch a Raptor up because they look cool and are only looking for a status symbol.

I love how I see so few Dodge Ram 2500 Power Wagons on the road (or anywhere for that matter). I, and the people that know trucks, know I have something rare and special.

Need vs. Want. I don't get the Raptor. If you want to play in the dirt buy a 4wheeler. I guess there is still a few folks out there with money to waste. Relatively speaking this is still a small number. Resale will be awful.

You don't get the Raptor? I would recommend you don't test-drive one then. They are highly addictive SVT products that make you want to play in the dirt. Relatively, small numbers drive a decent resale....

I guess. That's why there chocolate and vanilla.

But if I were buying one used, I'd be looking for a creampuff that had clearly never been off road as it was intended for. Take one of these off road and tear it up, which you will it's just a matter of time, and you are out some serious cash. That's what I don't get. I guess you have to make that mistake before you can see my perspective. I have torn up my fair share. $40K trucks don't belong off road. You can have just as much fun on a used Honda ATV.

I gotta side with the guys saying no EcoBoost. It would kinda undermine the whole concept. I mean SVT. it;s supposed to be the biggest and baddest offered. And from the fuel economy side, I mean I have 35 BFG's on my F-150. And look around at all the lifted trucks everywhere. Imho, the average raptor buyer isn't looking for a fuel sipper. They are after the most unique factory offered off road truck ever offered.

Now this is the truck that should have the 5.0 in fact a supercharged 5.0 would be best giving this truck the look, speed, sound and off road performance.


$40K trucks specifically built to go off road, such as the Dodge Ram Power Wagon and Ford F-150 S.V.T. Raptor (maybe G.M.C. Sierra All Terrain HD, someday), definitely belong off road. That is what they were designed for. My $42K Power Wagon has the "trail pinstripes" and scratched and bent skid-plates to prove it. My $29K Jeep Wrangler Rubicon has the same evidence.

Not everyone wants to go out in the dry hot sun or cold wet rain/snow in an open A.T.V. Not to mention breathing in all of the dust and dirt. I prefer to be cozy inside my 4X4s, while off roading, with the air conditioner on in the summer or the heater on in the winter. Being comfortable is a nice luxury. Oh yeah, I can bring, 3 passengers along for the ride in my Jeep or 5 in my Dodge. No need for suiting up or hauling equipment out on a trailer. To each their own I suppose.

I am interested in the Raptor too. Regarding the image issue though: I’d go for the “My truck got the most advanced tech and looks mean” rather than just “My truck looks mean, sounds mean”.
It is too bad the EB is not at least an option. Technologically speaking, the Raptor has so many attributes… the current 6.2L is a bit of a let down for a production truck that is a leader in everything else. I say put the EB in the Raptor; that truck doesn’t deserve to limp in any department.

I'm not saying it doesn't sound fun, I'm just saying I hate tearing up nice equipment. It doesn't make sense to ME to buy a $40K truck with the intention of beating it to death. How about a nice used Z71 5.3 beater?

@Gloria- back here, the prospects of squeezing an 86" wide truck down trails isn't what I would call entertaining. A jeep works 1000x better for most off-road opportunities we have here. Out there in your wide open spaces, sure, its different.

@Unclebud, Have you priced new ATV's or mules lately? The prices are outrageous. You can buy a new Ford Ranger for the same price (almost).

I agree 100%. A supercharged 5.0L would be a great option.

@Ford850 they are insane. We have been picking up used Samurais to hunt out of. You can find a nice used one that has lived behind an RV all it's life for half the price of a new ATV. A used Taco is also a great buy. Unstoppable. And as Buy American points out, you get A/C and heat to boot.

I own a Ridgeline. It's a great truck, but it doesn't get my heart pumping. It's practical. You guys that say a Ridgeline is not a real truck are children. The Raptor is fun.

I'd have to agree with unclebud. Unless you have a significant disposable income, a Raptor would be cool but eventually be pricy to run offroad all the time. Extended warranty would help but you'd have to follow Ford's extreme service guidelines. If you broke something due to outright agressiveness or bad luck, no warranty in the world will cover you.
I see more and more guys buying Suzuki Samurai's and other similar small rigs for offroading instead of quads or UTV's. I know a guy with one. He put a lift kit, bigger tires, and a winch on his and says he can go anywhere his quad can go.
I'd rather buy a UTV like the Polaris RZR. It would be cheeper to run in the long run.
I've done offroading in trucks and you get wet, and muddy too.
You have to get out and check how deep a mud hole is, how boggy an area is, you or your buddies get stuck, or break something, tires go flat etc.
I have a preference for dirt bikes because I've ridden all my life. A large bore KTM 4 stroke would give a Raptor driver fits all day long.
Don't get me wrong, I think trucks like the Raptor or PowerWagon are great. They just aren't in my budget or the budget of most guys.


I just love how Ford can make a truck to fit the needs of different people.

I can't wait to find my used Raptor, pull the trailer full of quads to the desert.

Different strokes for different folks, I like to have fun!

dont worry honda y have a video a ford raptor in a truck pull is nothing to be was a joke,,a normal f150 better puller,raptor only good to play in the sand..

SVT does not mean a V8 is mandatory. The EB-V6 is a highly technological engine that is being extensively promoted by Ford and, with a few SVT tweaks, would make an excellent engine for the Raptor. The 6.2L is also a good engine, but a bit of a dinosaur in terms of design and is a working class power plant. SVT is all about promotion and performance of Ford products and it would not surprise me one bit to see an SVT-EB engine find its way into a Raptor. For those of you who say Raptor owners are not concerned about fuel economy, I am one owner would welcome better fuel economy. If an engine had been available that provided better fuel economy and comparable of better performance, I would have bought it in a heartbeat. There's only two tailpipes on my Raptor. If the performance is there, I don't care if their feed by 8 or 6 cylinders.

Th EB3.5 did well in Baja but a race team was looking after them.
How would they fair in the hands of the ham fisted Mr.Joe Public who thinks maintenance is court ordered child support.
The dyno runs comparing the 5.0 versus EB 3.5 showed that the 5.0 pulled harder up to 20 mph. I'd say most offroaders that don't live close to a desert would be in that mph range.
I am eagerly waiting for the 2011 1/2 ton shootout. I'd love to see 3 equally equiped Ford's show up, but one with a 5.0, one with a 3.5 EB, and one with the 6.2.

@Lyn what kind of tweaks are you thinking SVT would go for to improve the EB?

I see the 6.2L V8 S.V.T. Raptor, as a 1968 Ford Mustang Shelby G.T. 500 K.R. (428 c.i. Cobra Jet).

I see a 3.5L V6 EcoBoost S.V.T. Raptor, as being more like a 1968 Ford Mustang Shelby G.T. 350 (302 c.i. with the Paxton supercharger option).

Both are awesome performers. You can not deny the, in-your-face presence of a big cubic-inch, fuel-thirsty, powerhouse V8. I will take a 6.2L V8 Raptor, thank you!

MMP, There are several simple approaches to increase performance of the base plant such as comp remap, larger turbos, more efficient breathing, fuel delivery, etc. However, while I said I would not mind 6 cylinders provided it could deliver performance, I also said it would not surprise me to see an SVT-EB engine coming in a Raptor, not necessarily though a V6. An EB-5.0L V8 is conceivable with power(500), torque(500), and fuel efficiency under normal driving conditions. We'll see.

Well it makes a lot of sense, the SVT is a way better truck all around. They're very rare up here in Canada though. Great discussion back and fourth in the comments here, ha!


The comments to this entry are closed.