May 02, 2011
This is the price of driving a Raptor in L.A., as least it is for now. As I watched the numbers climb I asked myself, "Would I be willing to pay this much to drive this truck?"
After deep contemplation, and half a Snickers bar I found in the glovebox, I came to the conclusion that yes, yes I would.
Granted, it's a big expense, but the Raptor is worth it. I enjoy driving it no matter what I'm doing. Obviously, it's hugely entertaining on a fire road, but it's just as enjoyable hauling down the 405. If I had a long commute I'd probably reconsider, but I don't. It's not a truck for everybody, but I would find a way to make it mine.
Ed Hellwig, Editor, Inside Line
April 08, 2011
Our usual goal for a vehicle in our long-term fleet is 20,000 miles over 12 months. This here 2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor just crossed that marker in something like 8 months and 10 days.
It helps that it's already been to Oregon and back and it has towed Jay's championship-winning LeMons car to events a couple times. The desert isn't far away, but it is decidedly farther than going to the movies.
But it's not just the go-anywhere, do-anything nature of the Raptor that has made it a favorite of just about everyone in the office. The Raptor's got attitude, it's got a rip-snorting 6.2-liter V8, it looks badass and, well, if I'm being totally honest and thorough, it's got Sync and it rides OK, too. No one seems put-off by the slight issue of parking the big lug -- not enough to reject the keys, in any case.
It should be said that we've bought just over 1,500 gallons of gas along the way. A Prius would have used somewhere between 1,000 and 1,100 gallons less to cover the same distance. You gotta pay to play.
But even though we've reached our goal, we're not through with our Raptor just yet. No one is ready to send this beast packing. We're going for 30,000 miles, maybe more.
Dan Edmunds, Director of Vehicle Testing @ 20,010 miles
April 02, 2011
Didn't seem like many people noticed but for the eagle-eye among you, yes, the fuel economy numbers that I listed for our 2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor in our Big List of Fuel Economy: March 2011 were, indeed, incorrect. Only on April 1 would the Raptor achieve 18.8 mpg. Picked on the Raptor for that reason. I figured you guys would catch it anyway, but nothing like making someone look twice.
Anyway, here are the real numbers:
2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor
Basically the same as last month, save for the 0.1 improvement in the average.
Caroline Pardilla, Deputy Managing Editor
April 01, 2011
Winner. $100 fill in our Raptor, right here.
It happened over the weekend when I used our longterm 2010 Ford F-150 Raptor to tow my LeMons car from Los Angeles county to
Sears Point Infineon Raceway in Sonoma, CA.
Over the course of that 1,023-mile trek, 90% of which involved towing about 4000 pounds, the Raptor averaged exactly 13.0 mpg.
Jason Kavanagh, Engineering Editor @ 19,421 miles
February 22, 2011
No car or truck in our fleet feels the rising cost of fuel more than our 2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor. James got all excited when his recent fill came in at $88, but my recent desert excursion nearly resulted in a triple-digit fill up.
I should also point out that this tank was burned away at a rate of 10.9 mpg.
Yeah, I did opt for premium, which is recommended for "best performance". It would have cost an even $90 to fill the Raptor with 87 octane, the minimum requirement. Still, with prices inching back up as they are, I'm fully expecting to see a $100 refill this summer, even on cheaper 87 octane.
You've gotta pay to play. If you want a Raptor, this sort of thing had better not bother you.
Dan Edmunds, Director of Vehicle Testing @ 16,884 miles
February 07, 2011
So that's where all the money went.
James Riswick, Automotive Editor
December 15, 2010
I knew this fill-up was going to hurt as I pulled into a 76 Station with our Long-Term 2010 Ford SVT Raptor's fuel warning message blaring at me. The thing's got a monster tank to go with its monster performance -- and thirst.
November 29, 2010
Took the Raptor on yet another motorcycle track day adventure over the weekend. Last time, fellow editor Josh Jacquot and I headed north to Buttonwillow Raceway Park with our bikes squished firmly in the bed of the Raptor.
This time, we headed east to Chuckwalla Valley Raceway, a new track midway between L.A. and Phoenix. But instead of hauling the bikes in the bed, we rented a trailer instead. Why?
Well, the Raptor's ground clearance might help it in the dirt, but it's a pain when you're trying to hoist 400 pounds of motorcycle into the bed. Ramps get real steep when they're perched on the tailgate of a Raptor. The low-lying trailer made loading bikes much easier and saved the Raptor's bed for random stuff like an EZ-up and a cooler -- two things you can't do without when you're hanging out in the middle of nowhere for a whole day.
Oh, by the way, the Raptor still gets terrible mileage. I didn't calculate the numbers just yet, but a quick at the stats says the Raptor got around 10 or 11 mpg for the trip. Gotta pay to play when it comes to this truck.
Ed Hellwig, Editor, Inside Line
November 24, 2010
I thought it was kind of my new bank to reserve a spot right out front for our long-term 2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor. Such convenience shaved 7 or 8 seconds from my ATM run.
And when my fellow banker in the Prius shot me a dirty look as I climbed back into my very black monster truck, I couldn't help but educate him on the Raptor's green credentials. I very kindly pointed out that the Raptor's 6.2-liter V8 does meet emissions requirements in all 50 states and manages 16 mpg (almost) on occasion.
November 15, 2010
I'm snapping a pic of the Raptor at a Shell station -- figured I'd mention the joy of racking up $85 worth of 91 premium on the Inside Line fuel card -- when another gas station patron wanders up to me. He's standing around as his buddy fills his second-generation Integra (going classy with a primered front end, aftermarket wheels in back and black steel wheels in front).
"Hey, what kind of truck is that?" he asks. He's got a skullcap hat and a T-shirt that reads "That's What She Said."
"It's a Ford Raptor," I say.
"Huh. Cool. It looks like a black-ops truck. Or something from G.I. Joe," he says. Long pause. "Does it have any guns in it?" he asks. Hmm. Does he mean hidden machine guns and rockets or "guns" like personal firearms? Either way I'm not really inclined to find out. "Ha ha, no," I say. Time to go.
Still, he's right. Maybe Activision could put a Raptor into Call of Duty: Black Ops in addition to the Wrangler Black Ops.
Brent Romans, Senior Automotive Editor @ 11,786 miles
November 08, 2010
It's a dubious title to be sure, but our SVT Raptor is on its way to earning the worst fuel economy of the long-term fleet since we started keeping track of them on this blog almost five years ago. Based on our last update, the Raptor is averaging 12.7 mpg. And that's with a lot of long-distance driving in the mix. I've been driving around the past few days with the trip computer set to display average economy. It hasn't gone any higher than 12.1 mpg.
I suppose there shouldn't be any surprise. Our other full-size trucks didn't do much better. Officially, the 2007 Sliverado got 13.3 mpg, the 2009 Ram got 14.0 mpg and the 2007 Tundra got 15.1 mpg. Purely on numbers, 12.7 isn't very far from 13.3. But somehow the Raptor's figure seems worse to me than it really is. Maybe it's because the Raptor is just that much closer to getting to single-digit fuel economy. And when you're getting single digits, you know you're really doing the oil-producing countries of the world a really big favor.
Brent Romans, Senior Automotive Editor @ 11,363 miles
October 13, 2010
Ed Hellwig and I found ourselves, our motorcycles and the Raptor refueling in the pre-dawn hours Monday morning on our way to Buttownwillow Raceway park. After a few gallons of Shell's finest and a load of IHOP pancakes we were off for a day of track riding.
September 13, 2010
We took the long way home (by way of Napa) from Yosemite to wrap up our 2010 SVT Raptor mega road trip. Take the jump for beer, jelly beans and fuel economy.
September 09, 2010
Back on the road in the 2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor, we headed further north. Our next stop was Big Pine, home to the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest. Never heard of it? The forest resides in the White Mountains and boasts some of the oldest known trees on earth. The oldest, named Methuselah, is dated at more than 4,700 years old.
And the road heading back to the forest, well, it's fun.
August 05, 2010
In our last Oregon-trip episode, reader rdgdawg1 closed his own capsule review of his friend's 6.2-liter 2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor with these sage words, "...just know you're gonna burn fuel." Truer words were never tweeted, posted, e-mailed or spoken.
But how much, exactly? We'll never get an official figure because, as we touched on before, the 6.2-liter Raptor is exempt from EPA fuel economy testing because it weighs more than 6,000 pounds. So its window sticker lacks those huge City and Highway fuel economy numbers that we usually see. Instead, the 6.2-liter Raptor's window sticker has a big blank spot that proclaims "Fuel Economy Ratings Not Required on This Vehicle" in bold type.
Well, my 1,863-mile Oregon trip is history, so I have a little data. It's mostly highway data, so my results are probably closer to a best-case scenario. Combined mpg, the day-to-day average figure all of us should use for budgeting purposes, will be lower than what I measured. Count on it.
Raptor overall trip average: 13.9 mpg.
More details after the jump.
Worst tank: 12.1 mpg -- Rural two-lane, a couple of low-speed highway trips to town -- much less stress than a pure urban city loop.
Best tank: 15.7 mpg -- This was the very last short leg of my trip, with a net downhill elevation change. No gridlock, but speeds dropped as the freeway entered the city. At 119 miles, this was not a full run to empty. I filled when I got home because I wanted to end all fuel calculations at the endpoint of the trip.
Best range: 364 miles -- As you can see in the photo, I ran deep into the warning, too. I added 25.33 gallons to the 26-gallon tank. Yikes!
I played around with octane, too. I ran 91 octane on the northbound leg and 87 octane coming home. Either fuel is OK by Ford, but 91 octane is associated with the horsepower claims.
Northbound, 809 miles, 91 octane: 13.7 mpg average
Southbound, 839 miles, 87 octane: 14.5 mpg average
I'm not sure I can call this definitive. Jay says that if it changes at all, it should go the other way. I wonder if it matters enough to measure during low-stress part-throttle cruising. The routes weren't exactly the same, as evidenced by the small difference in mileage. The northbound leg included a little traffic near San Francisco, and the southbound leg featured higher freeway cruising speeds. It's probably best not to read too much into this.
Total trip fuel cost: $461.21 -- Still cheaper than airfare for two, airport parking (or a shuttle), a rental car at the other end and the gas I'd have bought for it.
Because of its size and weight, it stands to reason that a Raptor would burn more fuel than a standard 2010 F-150 4x4 with the 5.4-liter V8 that's rated at 14 City/18 Highway/15 Combined.
That base truck comes with a 3.31 diff ratios and P235/75R17 tires. Ford would have chosen the lightest 5.4-liter 4x4 version for the official EPA test, and that's the regular cab 6.5-foot bed model, which has a listed weight of 5,083 pounds. Aerodynamically, one of these is 78.9 inches wide and 76 inches tall.
The Raptor comes with 4.10 differential gears and 315/70R17 tires, which works out to 170 additional engine rpm (11% more) while cruising in 6th gear at 60 mph. A Raptor also punches a much bigger hole in the air because it's 7.4 inches wider and stands 2.4 inches taller. And all Raptors (so far) use the Super Cab, and they're well-equipped. Add in the SVT suspension, tires and body add-ons and it all adds up to between 800 and 1,000 pounds more than that base regular-cab short bed 4x4.
So our 6.2 Raptor's official curb weight is 6,006 pounds, a very convenient number because it means that Ford didn't have to test the new 6.2-liter engine for fuel consumption and factor the results into their official CAFE average.
Meanwhile, the 5.4-liter Raptor (5,863 pounds) escapes its own EPA test for an entirely different reason. It's considered a small-volume variant of the regular 5.4-liter F-150 4x4 described above. That means it gets to wear the same 14/18/15 ratings on its window sticker, even though that's wishful thinking due to the weight, gearing, aero and other Raptor factors.
So how much lower will the Raptor's fuel economy be, over time? I'm thinking we'll be very lucky if our 6.2-liter Raptor's observed fuel economy, the combined average we see after a year of use, is in the 13 mpg range. I'm betting it will come in at 12-point-something, maybe less, even if we mathematically remove the results where we were towing something. The lifetime average stands at 13.1 mpg right now, but almost all of that data came from this single highway road trip.
So, yeah, you're gonna burn fuel. About $50 extra per month over a regular 2010 F-150 4x4, by my estimate. That shouldn't come as a surprise. Any performance variant is going to be thirstier and more expensive. It's part of the deal. If fuel economy is that important to you, then you're simply not Raptor material.
Dan Edmunds, Director of Vehicle Testing @ 2,780 miles
July 28, 2010
This year's Oregon trip came up quickly, with little fanfare. That's partly because the usual ruminations over which vehicle to take became unnecessary when my wife and youngest daughter had to stay behind due to a last-minute schedule conflict. With just myself and eldest daughter Shelby making the trip, any vehicle was going to work.
And then the 2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor arrived at the office--the 6.2-liter version with 411 horsepower, no less--and the decision became easy. Shell and I would have a pair of comfy seats up front, with Sync and Sirius to keep us entertained, and our stuff could ride safely inside the cab behind us.
With just two of us, a single-day banzai run would be easier to pull off. In fact we're here already, sitting in Dad's driveway near the Pistol River/Carpenterville/Brookings tri-city area. Here's a little of what we saw along the way.