Procharger's Battle - 6.2 Raptor vs 6.2 Sierra
12-26-2013, 02:56 PM
#1
Procharger's Battle - 6.2 Raptor vs 6.2 Sierra
Procharger's 6.2L Battle - Ford Raptor VS GMC Sierra - Boosted - Truckin Magazine
My brother who owns a 6.2 HD Ford sent me this. After a quick glance I thought it was neat and the stock numbers seemed fine to me then my wheels started turning. A couple things I noticed that raised the red flag.
1. Prochargers huge decal on the Ford compared to a plan-jane GMC. Ummm OK, whatever
2. They put a D1 on the Ford and a P1 on the GMC.
3. Procharger's site says the Ford D1 kit is for 8-9 psi, while the GMC's P1 is 7-8 psi. I understand putting both at exactly the same boost would be difficult but a comparison like this they should both be the same because 1 psi could be a 20rwhp difference alone.
4. Raptors intercooler was installed in prime location while the Sierra's is under the engine parallel to the frame. Sure both work but putting a 3 foot diameter fan in front of the truck on the dyno, the front mounted intercooler on the Ford would see a lot better air flow and cool the charge more than the Sierra's mounted under with a 4 inch "air scoop". For you procharged guys with Front Mounts, did the kits originally come like that under the front support?
Besides what I noticed, the comparison at the bottom is really nice. Stock vs Stock the Ford won on max power but I would still like to see the dyno graphs. I think the Sierra's numbers would be a little different if it had the D1, like the Ford, at the same amount of boost and same placement of the intercooler. If they are going to compare same size motors from the two big guys, make it as fair as possible.
Results from the Dyno
Ford Before:
348 hp @ 5650 rpm
369 tq @ 4550 rpm
GMC Before:
332 hp @5650 rpm
344 tq @ 4250 rpm
Ford After:
517 hp @ 5750 rpm
481 tq @ 5450 rpm
GMC After:
477 hp @ 5950 rpm
430 tq @ 5550 rpm
Total Gain:
Ford
169 hp or plus 49%
111 tq or plus 30%
GMC
145 hp or plus 44%
86 tq or plus 25%
Either way both trucks made awesome power with a bolt on kit from Procharger, that gets my thumbs up.
My brother who owns a 6.2 HD Ford sent me this. After a quick glance I thought it was neat and the stock numbers seemed fine to me then my wheels started turning. A couple things I noticed that raised the red flag.
1. Prochargers huge decal on the Ford compared to a plan-jane GMC. Ummm OK, whatever
2. They put a D1 on the Ford and a P1 on the GMC.
3. Procharger's site says the Ford D1 kit is for 8-9 psi, while the GMC's P1 is 7-8 psi. I understand putting both at exactly the same boost would be difficult but a comparison like this they should both be the same because 1 psi could be a 20rwhp difference alone.
4. Raptors intercooler was installed in prime location while the Sierra's is under the engine parallel to the frame. Sure both work but putting a 3 foot diameter fan in front of the truck on the dyno, the front mounted intercooler on the Ford would see a lot better air flow and cool the charge more than the Sierra's mounted under with a 4 inch "air scoop". For you procharged guys with Front Mounts, did the kits originally come like that under the front support?
Besides what I noticed, the comparison at the bottom is really nice. Stock vs Stock the Ford won on max power but I would still like to see the dyno graphs. I think the Sierra's numbers would be a little different if it had the D1, like the Ford, at the same amount of boost and same placement of the intercooler. If they are going to compare same size motors from the two big guys, make it as fair as possible.
Results from the Dyno
Ford Before:
348 hp @ 5650 rpm
369 tq @ 4550 rpm
GMC Before:
332 hp @5650 rpm
344 tq @ 4250 rpm
Ford After:
517 hp @ 5750 rpm
481 tq @ 5450 rpm
GMC After:
477 hp @ 5950 rpm
430 tq @ 5550 rpm
Total Gain:
Ford
169 hp or plus 49%
111 tq or plus 30%
GMC
145 hp or plus 44%
86 tq or plus 25%
Either way both trucks made awesome power with a bolt on kit from Procharger, that gets my thumbs up.
12-26-2013, 06:05 PM
#5
Hardly a comparison if the same head unit and similar intercooler efficiency wasn't even used.
Like has been mentioned... Pulley them down and see which one lasts.
Someone needs to write Truckin' and blow this one out of the water. Yet another reason I don't waste my time or money reading that publication.
Like has been mentioned... Pulley them down and see which one lasts.
Someone needs to write Truckin' and blow this one out of the water. Yet another reason I don't waste my time or money reading that publication.
Trending Topics
12-26-2013, 09:02 PM
#8
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is it bogus? They tested the parts they were sent with the trucks they had and posted the results for each. Is it apples to apples? No...but it was as close as they could get at the time.
I know Maxwell...he's not trying to bullshit anyone. Just trying to get a magazine out.
I know Maxwell...he's not trying to bullshit anyone. Just trying to get a magazine out.
12-26-2013, 09:26 PM
#9
How is it NOT bogus....
Why even publish a comparison of the two if they aren't equivalent kits?
Look, it's nothing personal against someone you may know. But this article is the very reason I stopped reading magazines in general. There's always some sort of angle on an article, there's always someone getting paid to pimp some new shiny product. I got my fill of it and don't feel like I miss out on a thing.
My comment was simply made as a result of this particular article being like all the rest. One-sided, lop-sided comparisons that really compare nothing...
Why even publish a comparison of the two if they aren't equivalent kits?
Look, it's nothing personal against someone you may know. But this article is the very reason I stopped reading magazines in general. There's always some sort of angle on an article, there's always someone getting paid to pimp some new shiny product. I got my fill of it and don't feel like I miss out on a thing.
My comment was simply made as a result of this particular article being like all the rest. One-sided, lop-sided comparisons that really compare nothing...
12-26-2013, 09:54 PM
#10
I agree w you guys which is why I posted it. If I was the shop doing the compare you bet I would have told procharged to send the same kit and make it as equal as possible. They aren't hurting themselves doing a real comparison, if u have a ford buy this part number if u have a chevy buy this one. It'd be a win win.
Lol at spin em till one gives
Lol at spin em till one gives