TFL Truck tests Ford Raptor vs Ram TRX towing on I-70

valhalla360 wrote:

Bionic Man wrote:

valhalla360 wrote:

Grit dog wrote:

I suppose if you just do laps pulling it up the mountain "foot to the floor" (whatever that means, I'm pretty sure you couldn't keep your foot tot the floor in a trx with any trailer it's rated for on most any grade without going way faster than you can handle or is even close to legal, lol)all day every day, it will probably affect service life greatly.
And virtually noone will buy these 2 models if their purpose is mostly work. They're hot rods and off road toys that can tow as a side benefit.

That's my point. Pretty much no one is using these for towing...at least not anything significant (sure maybe a utility trailer with a couple dirt bikes).

But climbing big grades regularly isn't that unusual. I'm sure lots of guys living in Denver will pull a trailer west into the mountains most weekends in the summer. If they were floor it to keep the speed up to 70mph thru Vail Pass, that's going to be very hard use for a full hour of continuous output. Heck running that at 45mph with a 10k trailer is pretty hard use...70mph is probably more than double the power demand.

The test is really just silliness.

I'm pretty active on one of the tow boats forums. I'd say that the most most popular single model of tow vehicle is a Ford Raptor. It is popular because (at least in theory) it makes a good tow vehicle for the average wake boat which probably weighs 7000 pounds (+/- 1000 pounds), and absolutely is fun to drive. There is already plenty of talk of some of these folks moving to a TRX. Not once have I heard about an engine/tranny problem with the Raptor (although plenty of complaints that the rear end isn't stiff enough for the tongue weight).

That said, I think a fair number of these trucks will be used for that type of duty.

In response to your comment about heading to Vail from Denver, that is far from an hour of running WOT towing that way. West bound there are three or four extended hills, none of which take more than 5 minutes up. With lots of areas for the engine to cool down between inclines. Eastbound is a little steeper, both up Vail pass and the east side of the tunnel. But none of that requires my Expedition Max with 3.5 EcoBoost to run WOT pulling my 7000 pound boat. And I have half the HP of the TRX.

Moral of the story, I can't think of a on-road situation where you would run the truck in a legal fashion that would put a significant strain on the powertrain.

And if I were looking for a truck to only tow my boat (no RV), a TRX would be HIGH on my list of considerations.

Considering the number of raptors sold and the number I've seen actually out on the road towing...I suspect the sample you are getting on the form is highly distorted. I also suspect most of those aren't thrashing it on big climbs.

Are you towing 7k at 70mph with your ecoboost when you do that climb? I've only been thru a couple of times and both were EB...I didn't see any RVs doing 70mph and maybe not an hour straight working the old V-10 pretty hard doing 45-50mph with a similar weight but easily 20-30minutes continuous. Take it up to 70mph and that's a lot more power output.

I've run everything but eastbound Eisenhower at 65-70 with the Ex towing the boat. Speed limit up Eisenhower is 60. The EcoBoost is actually very impressive - it will run those speeds and not be at WOT (unlike the 6.2 it replaced which would run 50-55).

You are correct in that there aren't any RVs running those climbs at 70. My truck pulls my trailer around 50 MPH up both Eisenhower and Vail, and if another RV passes me, they aren't going more than 5 - 10 MPH faster.

There is NOWHERE on I70 in Colorado that would be a 20 - 30 minute continuous WOT or near WOT run. No need to worry about either of the engines in question.