2 Year Review of Ranger Raptor by TheTopher

[Twiigg]

For those on the fence regarding the Ranger Raptor, check this 2 year review out… I have a bad car/truck addiction buying and selling for something different- that said, I’ve had my RR 9 months and absolutely love it and agree with most everything The Topher said.

Sponsored

 

[Lion77]

Just some food for thought,
10k miles / 16mpg * $4 gallon = $2,500 annual fuel cost.
10k miles / 16mpg * $5 gallon = $3,125 annual fuel cost.

15k miles / 16mpg * $4 gallon = $3,750 annual fuel cost.
15k miles / 16mpg * $5 gallon = $4,687 annual fuel cost.


Your saving only ~$1k at best depending on yearly mileage by running low octane on the stock cal. and losing 40~50 hp on top of that due to how far the timing gets scaled back on the factory cal. So your 405 hp 3.0l is down to 350-360 at best.

Most people run 91+ even with the factory cal due to Fords recomendation and the performance hit from low octane....im just not seeing the merits in flashing back to stock just to run lower fuel grades to save less than ~$100 a month on gas with all the trade offs.

Your down almost 90~100 hp between a stock cal on 87 and a pro cal on 91~93. Thats generally the case with most turbocharged engines period, they really take a performance hit on lower fuel grades.

Then he said he is going to try 89 cause 87 on the stock tune sucks so bad...now your at even less savings. Why not just run premium + pro cal and call it a day? The 3.0L is a performance variant of the 2.7L, it was optimized for premium where the 2.7L was optimized for 87 as a work truck engine. In my view, low octane makes no sense aside from a situation of absolute necessity (emergency), so give it up and run a pro cal on 91+.

I only keep my FP programmer in the truck in case of said emergency or for OBDII diagnostics if an issue crops up.

Its there in case I had no choice but to run 87 or 89, I can flash back to stock for that situation, then refill with 91+ and flash back to pro cal. once available.

I never had that option with my 2016 Mustang GT PP with stage 2 power pack from FP since there was permanent hardware changes with it (different throttle body and MAF sensor with the power pack that would not work with the factory cal).

With the RR at least there is a "safe mode" option thats only software by going back to stock, so your not really at risk of being stranded due to fuel grade availability either with a pro cal RR.

Im really trying to understand the logic in buying a $60k high performance offroad truck, then a pro cal tune for another $600 to $800 all to go back stock and sacrifice nearly 100 hp so you can run 87 octane for a measly savings of less than 1k in fuel annually.

 

[Lion77]

 

[superj]

I tried running my 2.3 stx without the tune, after having it on for 10k miles and it was such a bummer. I went home and put it right back on.

The price difference for premium versus regular is so slight that i ended up running premium in all our vehicles.

 

[Medic 6]

I run premium fuel in all my vehicles too. Price difference is negligible for the amount of return. My wife’s RR has the procal tune and the difference is night and day compared to stock.

Sponsored