Kris Kolman

Does that make sense as the E350/450 dominates the class C camper market? Let alone the other commercial applications (i.e. ambulances). I was driving back to the airport on the 101 from a work trip up in Central CA today and passed a bunch of campers (start of spring break). Every single one was a class C which started as a E350/450 chassis cab. Do you think the commercial manufactures will all move to the longer front F-Series SuperDuty? SuperDuty has the capability, but packaging wise isn't ideal with the longer front. And while the Transit chassis cab will find a nice market in the smaller passenger bus (i.e. hotel shuttles) it seems incapable of supporting the RV and medium duty commercial market. With the E-Series platform pretty much paid for and any incremental development easily shared with the F-Series SuperDuty it seems surprising that Ford would abandon the E-350/450 chassis cab models.

Just go back to the post right before mine... Equating small trucks to Mercury is different that what you are saying... Getting beyond that... I've been very understanding of the reality that I'm one of a small minority... And that it is a tentative business case for Ford to bring over the T6 Ranger. As said I don't consider this a vendetta against me personally, but I'm disappointed none the less. To tell the truth as the last few years have developed, and my Ranger has sat more and more I'm perhaps not a buyer in the end. Call it growing up if you will, but demonstrates I have an open mind on this. I will only say based on my set of desires the T6 Ranger seems the best fit... My wish list includes must have 4WD also can carry 4 adults with either a back end full of weekend camping equipment and/or tow 3500 lb (small boat) at altitude. I am inclined to want a open bed so I can load up garden stuff without getting everything dirty. I am also inclined to want the smallest vehicle that meets my desires... Just like the Mountaineer was bought because it was a smaller Expedition/Tahoe in terms of capability. Now I am open to a midsized SUV based "Ford Ridgeline" if you will, but those pushing for a little Brazilian Courier are missing it completely.

Good points... I had forgotten about the stripped chassis, and thus makes no sense to end the gasser option. I would still be inclined to recommend converting the medium duty E-Series, Transit Super-Duty if you will, as it has shown to work in the 24k GCWR F-350. While the 6.2L is not rated to support higher duty loads it should work as well in the class 3 & 4 cargo vans as it does in the same class pickups.

Things in the commercial market seem to be changing quickly... In particular a little over a year ago the Transit (E-150 replacement) appeared to be phased in slowly (one model only). But Ford has surprised everyone by jumping with both feet: three roof heights two wheelbases, and chassis cab. But it does make sense that the 6.8L will hang on in the E-350/450 until they get their turn. Which will come next... Something more along the lines of a MCE, but a re-introduction as a commerically focused platform. In that I'm expecting the E-350/450 to align closely with the SuperDuty to reduce development costs. Not sure where Ford is going with the F-450/550 Medium Duty trucks... I wonder what the take rate of the 6.8L gasser is and if it might be phased out if this is the only application.

If I extend your argument it would lead me to say Ford should only sell the F-150 because they are clearly not making any money on the Super-Duty. Why bother continuing selling F-250 is they only get 103k in sales, or the F-350 with only 70k in sales. Hell why bother selling cars at all, in particular the razor thin profit margin Fiesta... I mean if you can't sell near 1/2 millions vehicles a year it apparently isn't worth pursuing. Ad ridiculum as my response is your argument lacks seriousness... Locking the Ranger or other small truck sales to full sized truck sales is lazy. Small truck success or lack there of isn't really tied to large truck sales. Heck Ford's cancellation of the Ranger is proving that small truck owners aren't simply looking for a cheaper alternative. If so Ford should be seeing a F-150 bump from people trading in their Ranger, and according to many sources that isn't happening. Ford would be the one to know that best as they have access to proprietary sales data, and as these rumors started to circle we hear a Ford official come out and say there is room in the market for a small truck. They proving to be are separate if related markets, just as the F-150 and the F-250/350 are. Small trucks have always operated in an environment with full-sized trucks, and the price differential has always been razor thin. So the collapse of the small truck market has to be due to factors other than what is going on in the full-sized market. To me it is clearly the availability to compact SUVs (RAV4, etc) who's introduction corresponded with the start of the collapse. Another factor I believe has to be traffic safety laws that have forced children to the rear seats... Which if you've noticed has resulted in the near death of the 2-door SUV and passenger car. Both of these were a one-two punch to small pickup trucks, and in particular the Ranger which didn't have a Crew Cab option. And to dispel a myth many of you have... The Tacoma sales are at 14k per month which puts it near the 2006 high (see http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2013/02/where-have-ford-ranger-buyers-gone.html). I understand the Ford has limited resources and must make "hard decisions"... One of which has led to them deciding to not invest in T6 Ranger manufacturing in the US. But its a long extrapolation to be so firm in saying Ford has decided they can't make money on a small truck. Choices based on return on investment, or making choice on priorities doesn't mean what you think it means. In fact by the contrary I remind you again that Ford itself has been talking about room in the market for a small truck, not just the dealers. There is money in the small truck market... The question is more of how to tap into that best.

Of all the things to complain about the Escape styling it is the the front end, which is the best balanced part of the design... It is the rear where is all falls apart. But as others have said all of this comes from Bob I replaced the Bronco II with the Explorer... So the man who take credit for turning Ford's Wrangler into the mommy mobile would be dismissive of a monster he created. I still don't get the near love of everything Lutz has done because everything with his name on it seems half-a$$ed.

I got to avoid the Ranger threads... But here I go again... I don't think Ford has a vendetta against me... But you have to admit the talk from Ford's various PR presentations can be interpreted as insulting. It was in Ford's media event that they said Ranger buyers should buy a Fiesta. Getting beyond that me and my Ranger-mafia brothern have a right to be disappointed, and I think you are seeing is the emotion from a very loyal buyer base that feels abandoned. And the attitude from some on this board who have bordered on vendetta against those of us who want the Ranger, and that does nothing but ramp up the rhetoric.

Ford suddenly has a huge hole in the Super Duty lineup without the 6.2L... And considering the success of the Super Duty I've been wondering if the 6.2L usage grows and 6.8L V10 being phased out. But who knows... If the V8 Ecoboost comes to pass I could see it replacing the 6.2L in the F-Series and being an option for the Super Duty.

Doubt it... And it doesn't help my scepticism that this is coming from Motor Trend... I'll stick with my internal gage that says both the Expy and Gator will share the F-150's 5.0L V8 and V6 EcoBoost, with the 6.2L V8 a Gator exclusive.

Ummm... Because the Flex starts at over $30k and Explorer $29k is a start at why it wouldn't work.

To tell the truth the T6 Ranger that most appeals to me probably will never come to pass... Ford bringing the following to NA is as likely as me getting a job with Boeing Australia. Lets see... Call up my buddy in Seattle to get me on the Wedgetail program and then finagle a relocation to Sydney... That is probably more thought out and more likely than Ford bringing the Ranger Wildtrak.

I wonder if having an all Ecoboost lineup plus the classic V8 would be better marketing wise... As the Mustang is Ford's halo car and Ecoboost is Ford's halo technology. Guess it matters if Ford can bring the price point of the 2.3L Ecoboost in line with the 6 cylinder Camaro.

Sure its not perfect, but it is not unreasonable to apply a scale up factor to pre-tax retail prices for similar models... The differences between the markets should scale; in this case 42% increase from UK to US market. It is the closest you can get without knowing the internals. But its not unreasonable for TC and Ranger have similar pricing/profit structure as both utility/commercial vehicles in UK. And there are some conservatism in using these two in the extrapolation... In that TC is built in Spain/Turkey, while Ranger is built in South Africa/Argentina and as such Ranger UK price would have additional shipping/transit costs. And of course the TC in the US has additional costs in that it has to be torn apart in NJ to get around the Chicken Tax. But whatever... Some of you think it is unreasonable for me to think any small pickup worth its metal needs to be capable of pulling a small 18' boat at altitude.

That makes sense... But we are still talking about a bespoke top hat... Much more significant effort than the Fiesta Van which is nothing but a hatch turned panel van Your right... My mistake got my name mixed up... Was thinking Ford Courier Van which came before the Transit Connect

All of this has merit... And as such the Mustang will likely only be a niche product overseas. But its not as if the Mustang is known for being a polished car with high end equipment. The European xenophobic image of the Mustang as a simplistic hammer might actually work in a weird way for a car always been known for cheep thrills. And as for your point about markets... Germany as a market is effectively as nearly closed as Japan or Korea... The Mustang was never going to work there. Overseas sales potential was always going to be based on China, Oceania, British Isles, and Eastern Europe. And in that regard all of these markets have shown to be very willing go with smaller turbocharged engines in place of displacement (i.e. turbo 6 Falcon).

There is something to what you're saying... The Mustang is part of an overall European narrative of stereotypes of the US. Anyone who has watched Top Gear would see it in spades. Just go back and watch any time they got a hold of a Corvette, or a Challenger, or a GT40... You see/hear everything they said about the Mustang in the recent show said about these other cars. Any Mustang will be fighting these headwinds... And no matter what Ford does with the product will change that, and as such they should be careful not putting money for no return.

Intrigued how well the Transit/Tourneo Courier will do... The first Transit Connect was apparently based on the Fiesta (think Bantum with a box). Ford has has a bit of success with the Fiesta Van, but I think that is based on the minimal cost to produce not do to overwhelming sales. The Transit/Tourneo Courier would seem to have a broader appeal than the Fiesta Van, but is a much more costly vehicle to produce. We'll see if the sales are there to justify the cost...

To expand on the idea that there is room below the F-150 price point Transit Connect Trend = $15,825 in UK Equivelent base model in US = $22,425 which is a 42% markup which includes the NJ mods Cheepest T6 Ranger Double Cab = $17,702 in UK Using same 42% markup = $25,084 estimated in US Cheepest F-150 SuperCab = $27,495 Cheepest F-150 SuperCrew = $32,370

Ford continues the not so publicized march to revolutionize the commercial market from the bottom up... I am starting to see a plan coming together. It started with the Transit Connect which the perfect answer for the question no one asked prior... A vehicle purpose build for small businesses and small payload service calls. Proving to doubters that the needs of businesses here in NA are not so different than those around the world. That a computer service company or flower delivery company is better served by a small compact car based van than an over-sized van made for home contractors. Not that Ford has forgotten about the full-sized van market... Following up the TC with the full-sized Transit. We once thought that Ford was going to short-change again NA and only give us a single version. But instead we get the full array of commercial types: 2 wheelbases, 3 roof heights, and now a chassis cab. This is an aggressive move and I think one that has a potential to be as revolutionary as the TC. As it relates to this announcement I could see the Transit chassis cab being a popular choice for shuttle van/bus manufacturers and the multitude of hotel operated shuttles at the airport. Next up is the class 3 and 4 vans... Focusing on the same tweener light/medium duty market as the F-Series SuperDuty does. I wouldn't stray too far from the existing E-Series van design... But I would rebrand the van as the Transit SuperDuty keeping the F-Series and Transit theme going. Keep the van mostly the same in the rebranding except give it a slight face-lift, refresh the interior, but more importantly give it a new engine lineup. Drop the old engine lineup, and go with the same 6.2L V8 and 6.7L Powerstroke as the F-Series SuperDuty.

This is not anything new or surprising... I suspect we'll see the same corporate plan as seen in Fusion, Escape, F-150, and even the Falcon - 4-cylinder EcoBoost - Base Model - 6-cylinder EcoBoost - Volume Model - 5.0L V8 Classic - 8-cylinder EcoBoost - Monster

Pickuptrucks.com has reported on the JD Polk broken out half-ton sales by registration. F-150 had the most individual model sales at 343,186. GMs total reached 394,569 if one adds the Silverado, Sierra, Avalanche, and Escalade sales together. Interestingly this and the previous sales reports indicates Ford is ~50:50 half-ton and heavy-duty sales, while GM is running ~60:40 with half-tons taking the lead. http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2013/02/who-sold-the-most-half-tons-in-2012.html http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2013/01/december-2012-top-15-pickup-truck-sales.html

Lets see... 1000 lbm payload and 3000 lbm towing is a joke. Lets think this through... Lets say me and three buds want to go to the airport and check 2 bags (fishing or hunting trip to Alaska). We would overwhelm the 1000 lbm payload (200x4 + 8x50 = 1200 lbm > 1000 lbm). Lets say I want to buy a 18 foot Four Winns Runabout (smallest available). I would overwhelm the 3000 lbm towing (2500 lbm boat + 900 lbm trailer = 3400 lbm > 3000 lbm). And doign anything at altitude is such that those of us up here generally apply a 50% margin to assure enough power to climb up the mountain roads. A compact SUV can get around not meeting these easy challenges, but a manufacturer should be ashamed to put out a pickup truck that is this useless. There is a reason the 3000 lbm payload and 5000 lbm towing "standards" were settled on. It isn't a matter of who's ___ is bigger at the various car companies.. It is what people actually expecting to use a pickup truck to do as a minimum. And I would only point out that despite the collapsed compact/midsized pickup the Ranger until its death outsold the Transit Connect everyone is gushing over. And last year without the Ranger in the fold the Tacoma, Frontier, and Colorado all did the same. And don't tell me everyone is buying the cheep version... Every newish Tacoma and Frontier I see here out west (Colorado, Washington, and California) is a lifted Super or Crew Cab which start over $25k.

Agree, but there is a difference between the GC and the Edge in the showroom. GC effectively has the showroom to itself, no real internal competition while he Edge has internal showroom pressure from the Escape below it and the Explorer above it. Edge to succeed I believe needs to stand out a bit more and be the most aggressive/stylish of the three. Escape as the value option could turn off potential sales from people stepping down (i.e. empty nesters), while the Explorer as the family option needs to have the widest appeal. As such these two will be nature want to have conservative styling... Of course I'm thinking of the NA and some Asian markets where the Explorer is available. In other markets the Edge equals the Explorer... As such its understandable that it would have a more conservative face, and can see your view point. Not sure Lincoln is as hobbled by sharing production facilities if planned properly... To me the key in reducing risk is for the company to reduce the time between the Ford and Lincoln launch. It also needs to phase in the production switch-over as much as possible and stock-pile old models. The word above from Oakville is that they are starting the switch-over on an unused part of the plant. Which allows Ford and Lincoln to work thru pre-production issues before committing to the whole plant. The key is during this initial pre-production phase to work on both Ford and Lincoln products. This is all seems reasonable to accomplish if properly planned and if the company knows the value-stream and projects sales well. And some availability gap during the switch-over is desirable as well as a way to prop-up old model sale prices and assure not too many are left on the lot when the new ones roll in.

Opps double post

Uhhh… Ranger is already available in a 2-door RegularCab model… Available Ranger models and prices are easily researched on the Ford Aussi or UK website. Just remember you can’t do a currency exchange rate to determine an equivalent USA price (too many variables). As for cutting down on the wheelbase… It is fairly easy if done aft of the cab as it a simple decrease in the frame rail and driveshaft length. Proposed 30.3-in shorter WB T6 Ranger RegularCab – 179.6 in Length, 96.4 in WB, 60.9 in Bed (new Bronco?) T6 Ranger RegularCab – 209.9 in Length, 126.7 in WB, 91.2 in Bed T6 Ranger SuperCab – 209.9 in Length, 126.7 in WB, 72.7 in Bed T6 Ranger DoubleCab – 209.9 in Length, 126.7 in WB, 60.9 in Bed Tacoma RegularCab – 190.4 in Length, 109.6 in WB, 73.5 in Bed Tacoma AccessCab – 208.1 in Length, 127.4 in WB, 73.5 in Bed Tacoma DoubleCrew – 208.1 in Length, 127.4 in WB, 60.3 in Bed Tacoma DoubleCrew LWB – 220.3 in Length, 140.6 in WB, 73.5 in Bed F-150 RegularCab SWB – 213.2 in Length, 125.9 in WB, 78.8 in Bed F-150 RegularCab LWB – 231.9 in Length, 144.5 in WB, 97.4 in Bed F-150 SuperCab SWB – 231.9 in Length, 144.5 in WB, 78.8 in Bed F-150 SuperCab LWB – 250.4 in Length, 163.1 in WB, 97.4 in Bed F-150 SuperCrew SWB – 231.9 in Length, 144.5 in WB, 67.0 in Bed F-150 SuperCrew LWB – 243.9 in Length, 156.5 in WB, 78.8 in Bed Tired of the BS too big argument... T6 Ranger is right on top of the market leader Tacoma and 2 ft shorter than the similarly equipped F-150. T6 Ranger steps on the toes of the F-150 as much as the Focus steps on the toes of the Taurus.