2005Explorer
-
Posts
3,078 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
21
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by 2005Explorer
-
-
I was reading where this new tax credit for EVs limit the MSRP to $80k for a truck or SUV or $55k for a sedan vehicle. There are many other stipulations for the manufacturers to qualify, but that's a big one that's going to cut a lot of vehicles out of the benefit.
MSRP limits are a joke since vehicle prices are rising extremely fast. It actually forces manufacturers to offer lower priced EVs which in turns hurts their profitability. Looks like a government price control without being a government price control. Within 5 years with those limits few vehicles will qualify for that nice tax credit.
-
I hope Ford works hard to keep the quality of the Ranger class leading when they switch over to the new model. Right now according to Consumer Reports the 2022 Ranger beats the 2022 Toyota Tacoma and a big part of that has to do with the superior reliability of the Ranger.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, maginty said:
The AWD Maverick was designed to tow 4000 lbs, which is adequate for my needs. I am not expecting a more powerful engine to increase tow capacity, just make a more exciting drive.
I know the size of the "compact" Maverick and it has more rear seat legroom and headroom than all the "midsize" trucks, 2.4" more rear legroom than Ranger. The other unibody truck, the Ridgeline is a close second, also more rear legroom than all "midsize", matches max headroom.
The Maverick has a lower entry height, and a smaller turning circle, and is basically a foot shorter than all the "midsize". So for maneuverability it handily beats all the "midsize" trucks.
I don't need the Ranger 7500 lb towing and the dated styling inside and out is reflected in the drastic sales decline this year, and it's remaining unchanged for 2023.
As far as engine power, Ford only offers less than competition in Ranger and Maverick. The F150 and Superduty gas offerings are class leading in HP and Torque. The Ranger had most available torque, basically offset by the HP deficiency it gave up to Colorado and Frontier V6's. Now Colorado has class leading with 310/430 for 2023.
Ford has a 2.3 310/350 they could drop in the Maverick that would give close to the same HP/Torque to weight ratio as a F150 with the 3.5 400/500 engine. It would seem like a no brainer and profitable also, offering it in only Lariat trim.
So much is wrong with this post. First things first. The Maverick does not compete with the Ridgeline. Not in size or in price. It is a compact inexpensive pickup. As far as the Ranger goes you are comparing the current model to the next gen Frontier and Colorado. The Colorado is not even available yet and by the time it is the 2024 Ranger will almost be here. The so-called dramatic sales decline of the Ranger has a lot more to do with MAP trying to build as many Broncos to catch up then it being a bad truck. Of course it isn't going to be as fancy as the next gen midsized trucks, but it is solid and reliable. Consumer Reports just picked the 2022 Ranger over the class leader 2022 Toyota Tacoma.
Have you even driven a 2022 Ranger or 2022 Maverick? I have a 2022 Ranger Tremor and my family also has a 2022 Maverick 2.0 FX4. Both have plenty of power and do exactly what they were designed to do. You are trying to compare the Maverick to a pickup that is in a completely different class and are comparing a current gen Ranger to the next gen from the other manufacturers. The current gen Ranger is simple and tough especially in Tremor trim and I appreciate that. Just go get a Pantyline or Colorado and be happy. It is pretty apparent that you don't want a Ford product anyhow.
-
1
-
3
-
-
5 hours ago, rmc523 said:
Ranger has currently been squeezed from below by Maverick, but I also don’t think Ford is worried about it until The next-gen arrives, as it allows them to make more Broncos to fill that backlog.I have a 2022 Ranger XLT Tremor and my dad (well we bought it for him because he's in his 80s) has a 2022 Maverick XLT FX4 with the optional rims and slightly larger tires. I have driven both back to back and although the Maverick is really nice for it's market and price point it's no Ranger. The Ranger feels a lot more substantial just driving it. The Ranger is quieter and smoother. It's almost hard to explain, but if you drive the two back to back you definitely can tell the Ranger is the more premium of the two. Now this isn't knocking on the Maverick. It's an economy vehicle and feels it. They did a very nice job with it.
-
2
-
-
On 8/1/2022 at 7:17 AM, 70 Stang said:
I hope some of it made it to the cab width. The 2022 has decent blistering at the fenders, and the 2023 gained 2.2 inches over the 2022.
We'll see, but if anything it won't be much because the cab looks to be carryover. They can improve the space some with better packaging inside. I am fine with the Ranger not growing much. If it grew a lot it would be pointless. If you really need a large cab get an F-150.
-
If we are really serious about a transition to 100% BEV vehicles in the next 10-20 years something needs to change. The generation sources and grids are not up to the task right now and the situation appears to be getting worse not better.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/us-power-grid-blackouts_n_62df17bce4b0aad58d1e19a6
-
1
-
-
On 7/15/2022 at 9:17 AM, ice-capades said:
The U.S. can build as many charging stations as it wants but needs to seriously address the power grid issues and how we generate electricity in this country. There's a basic conflict with increased regulations on existing/traditional energy production, blocking efficient increased pipeline transportation of energy, making investment in increased refinery capacity cost prohibitive while pushing the transition to BEV vehicles that will increase the demands on the power grid before enough "clean energy" sources are available in the quantities necessary to offset the costs involved for the transition. Both Federal and State gas taxes are used to fund infrastructure maintenance but as the BEV market share increases, new technology can be expected to be utilized to monitor BEV vehicle usage in order implement new taxes to make up for the reduced traditional gas tax funding.
Governments mandating a rapid transition from ICE to BEV vehicles have to address the real-world, related energy costs of the transition and the impact on the consumers. Market and economic factors in the past two years have continued to drive both new and pre-owned vehicle prices to continuous higher levels. At some point, the market will reach its limit as to how high prices can go before impacting sales. The government subsidies/tax credits for BEV vehicles have given the manufacturers a license to charge premium prices for vehicles in much the same way that Student Loans gave colleges a license to substantially increase tuition fees because the funding was so easily available. Eliminate the BEV tax credits and you'll see a real competitive market that will drive down the costs to the consumer and then increase the BEV consideration rate.
The U.S. has gone from being a net energy exporter to being dependent again on imports. We're reducing our Strategic Petroleum Reserve by a million barrels per day for a minor reduction in gas prices without regard to the cost of replenishing that oil which was intended for emergency use only. Increased solar and wind power will help but are very dependent on climate conditions and the technology for energy storage is still evolving. Germany is heavily dependent on foreign energy after a policy of shutting down nuclear plants, yet France uses nuclear energy to supply 80% of its needs.
Some people don't want to hear this, but to make all of this work when we eventually replace all 275+ million autos in our country with BEVs we are going to need new nuclear power plants and a lot of them. Coal is being phased out and at some point Natural Gas will be phased out as well. Relying on solar, wind and hydro energy to charge all of those cars? Not a chance. Until we rethink our opposition to nuclear power moving to 100% BEV is a pipe dream.
-
1
-
-
Well I hope they don't cut too many of those positions in the quality control department. They really can't afford for quality to get worse right now. Ford blue won't be much of a profit generator if the products become lackluster in the near future.
-
2
-
-
On 7/11/2022 at 9:24 AM, AM222 said:
What annoys me are issues like the windshields of Broncos and North American Rangers that are improperly attached. That's Tesla-level quality issues.
Yes that is an annoying recall and my Ranger falls under the production dates for it, but for now I am just ignoring it. I have a friend who works for a glass company and he says the OEM windshield is always the hardest to get out. More often then not they break them so if the OEM gets broke what will be available to replace it? I've had to change windshields in the past because I did not get the crack fixed quick enough and it ran and I have had issues. One time I had a replacement that leaked. They tried to fix it, but when it kept leaking they had to pull the whole windshield out which broke it and replaced it again. I had a wind whistle with another that they couldn't seem to fix and since I was at lease turn-in I just let it go.
Yeah I am ignoring this recall unless it starts to leak, I get wind noise, or the windshield gets a crack.
-
That's basically a Ranger/Mazda B Series re-style/re-badge like they did in the 90s-00s. It's also pretty close to what VW did to the Chrysler minivan when they made the Routan. I'm guessing you open the hood and will be greeted by FoMoCo stickers all over it. Oh well I didn't expect them to do much more then this and I don't think it's coming to North America anyhow.
-
On 12/5/2021 at 3:46 AM, akirby said:
May of 2023 for a 2023 model? That doesn’t make any sense.
Well we finally have some confirmation on model year for the next generation Ranger. 2023 will be a carryover model and the new generation will be a 2024. Not sure when Job #1 for the 2024 will be, but 2023 will probably be a short model run. Looks like the current gen ended up getting a 5 year model run.
https://fordauthority.com/2022/06/2023-ford-ranger-order-banks-to-open-up-next-month/
-
5 hours ago, akirby said:
I thought the Koreans had convinced them they couldn’t compete on price. It looked like they were making progress with Explorer and others by making more things standard like push button start. But I guess it’s still up to each vehicle manager how they do that. This is where Farley needs to step in and make some across the board rules on minimum std equipment, etc. I think the stripper models need to go or be fleet only.The problem is they aren't just stripping features out of the low end trim levels, but in some cases across the line. It's not just the Ranger either. Even the Bronco lost a few things from 2021 to 2022 (for example digital temp display on the temp selectors). Some have said the deletions are being done because of a parts shortage, but will those features ever come back? Doubtful. They haven't hit the Bronco as hard as the Ranger, but give it a couple more years. I would guess with inflation running as it is we will see a combination of more de-contenting along with price increases to maintain margin. What else can they do? They still have to remain price competitive with other mainstream brands.
-
They can make their vehicles more profitable by talking to the Ranger team on how to de-content a vehicle while raising the price at the same time. ?
List of deleted items from 2019 to today.
1. no rear folding headrest
2. no hood struts(as of 2022)
3. no PRNDS light
4. no glovebox damper
5. no RANGER embossed into the Lariat seats
6. no console (pen) cubby
7. no 12V outlet in the console without 110v option
8. no bright trim rings on the 12v covers that matched the radio knobs
9. only 4 bed tie downs instead of 6 (as of mid 2019??)
10. no engine cover
11. no owners manual cover
12. Eco badge on tailgate
13. no plugs in the rocker panels
14. no ignition bezel (has always been missing)
15. steel front fenders (aluminum before) estimated after March 2021 and all 2022
16. no bright button on parking brake
17. no color keyed tailgate handle on Lariat just black plastic without chrome pkg.
18. no aluminum spindles, they're now steel
19. rear passenger doors no longer have external touch lock
20. front seat headrest tilt adjustment
21. (2) 4.2" productivity screens instrument cluster replaced with (1) 4.2" screen in Lariat 500A
22. Floor Mat mounting tabs on passenger side
23. no small cubby inside glove compartment to hold owners manual
24. no removable rubber pad at the bottom of the cup holder
25. no removable rubber mat inside the console storage area
26. Eliminated Auto Start/Stop feature ($50 credit)
27. Eliminated LED headlights on Lariat Trim ($500 credit)-
3
-
-
Yeah that isn't going to do much to improve sales.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, napwife said:
Trying to find a answer for the rear seat question. Our back seat locks in the upright position but when you put it down it doesn't lock. Is it suppose to just sit there or is it suppose to lock in place?
It should lock down. Mine did on my 2019 and also does on my 2022. Give it a good slam down. If it still doesn't lock down the latch might be out of adjustment.
-
16 hours ago, akirby said:
I know but that’s a unicorn that you have to special order and it won’t fit in my garage.That depends on the market. They order quite a few SuperCrew 6.5’ beds in my area, but we are much more rural here so they appeal more to the country folk vs urban dwellers.
-
1 hour ago, akirby said:
Its not a good point. His point is that Ford has terrible products that only sell because of brand loyalty. It’s just the opposite - they have loyalty because of great products and features.Ford has some products that are good values and some that are very poor values versus their competition. I have been around here long enough to remember you arguing anyone who thought Ford should bring out a Jeep Wrangler competitor. You said the future is rounded CUVs and people don't want off-roaders. You also said that the market did not want small "boxy" CUVs when some of us argued that Ford was going in the wrong direction with the Escape and making it too feminine and generic. Look, I am not perfect on my predictions, but you always argue as some industry expert and anyone with a different opinion doesn't have a clue and is stupid. People aren't necessarily looking for cheap, but they are looking for good values in those entry level markets. Maverick is a hot product because it's affordable, but it's also a good value.
Now I expect you to come back at me and said you never said any of that stuff, but I have a good memory and remember small things from years ago. Don't make me go back thousands of pages to find it. Lol
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, akirby said:
Hogwash. Ford gets tons of conquests because they have great products and features that others don’t have or that Ford does better. I think you don’t see it because you’re hung up on things that normal buyers don’t care about like big block v8s.Where did I mention a big block V8? Heck I drive a Ranger with a 2.3 4 cylinder. I buy Ford because I am a loyal Ford customer.
As far as competitive products that might be true in the traditional truck segment, but can you look at me with a straight face and tell me Escape is the class leading compact CUV?
-
5 hours ago, akirby said:
Nobody here has ever said that. And we weren’t talking about entry level models we were talking about entry level vehicles to bring in new customers. I assume you’re thinking if someone buys a cheap Yaris that makes them a Toyotaphile for life. I think it’s just the opposite - people who buy cheap vehicles have no loyalty - they’ll buy whatever is cheaper next time. Within a particular model, lower end versions boost sales and because they’re just decontented versions of the same vehicle they’re very profitable as opposed to a completely different vehicle.Even so Maverick and Bronco Sport have the lower end covered nicely and because they aren’t commodities they should have decent profit margins. I expect the same for BEVs.
I think you'd be surprised how many new younger customers the Bronco Sport, Maverick and especially Maverick Hybrid are bringing into Ford dealerships. As they push into BEVs this is the group of customers you want coming back to your brand. Ford is a brand that pretty much lives on brand loyalty because to be honest you can get more for less with other brands. If you are selling a brand like Apple sells a brand you need a range of products that appeal to different income levels, age groups and lifestyles.
I'd like to see Ford expand their product portfolio a bit in that Bronco Sport and Maverick market. Since the Escape is facing cancelation according to the CEO it opens up a spot for a more attractive offering in that compact market. My guess is it will be a BEV vehicle, but offering a Hybrid in that market would be smart as well. I guess Bronco Sport could become a standard Hybrid like the Maverick then the Escape can be canceled.
-
1
-
-
This would be an interesting configuration, however it seems you might be getting close to F150 length at that point. If they do design it though no reason not to bring it to North America.
-
7 hours ago, akirby said:
That’s a popular theory but not sure it happens in actuality. Not having Ranger or Maverick sure didn’t hurt F series. If you have really good differentiated products you’ll get sales either way.Then why not just cancel all pickups below the F-150 Lariat? The Maverick, Ranger and lower F-150 trim levels serve a purpose even if they don’t make profit like fully loaded $80k models do. It’s a popular theory around here that Ford shouldn’t be selling any products in the under $50k market, but most forum members on this site wouldn’t flinch at paying $80k for a vehicle. Get out in the real world and you’ll find more hesitation at those high figures.
-
On 6/2/2022 at 11:29 AM, rmc523 said:
So here’s my thought - I get the whole icons and non-commodity idea.
but why can’t they elevate the Escape product to a higher level to where it stands out above the crowd and thus isn’t a commodity?
the answer IMO, can’t be “slap Bronco or Mustang on every product” - at some point you dilute those brands and make them commodities by doing that too excessively.
Oldsmobile put the iconic Cutlass brand on pretty much everything below the Eighty-Eight back in the day and we see how well that worked out long term.
It's hard to elevate the Escape brand because it's been a commodity product it's whole life. It is just being sold in place of a midsized sedan today. It's running into the same exact problem the Fusion did toward the last few years. I called it back when Ford was canceling all sedans. You've got to have some entry level value driven products if you want to bring new customers in the door. Maverick can't be the only offering in that space, but as it stands today Escape is a failed product.
-
There are people on forums that complain about people not putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to complaining about certain products not coming to North America or cancelled products. I will admit to being very vocal about the T6 Ranger not coming to North America in 2011, but I am now on T6 Ranger #2 so I just wanted you all to know I have put my money where my mouth is. Anyhow I am loving my 2022 Ranger Tremor. It is amazing how much the suspension package really transforms the truck. I am really happy with my new Ranger even with the noticeable decontenting that has been done on it since 2019.
-
2
-
-
I was one of those 5,110 Rangers delivered since I picked up mine Apr. 30th. The Maverick is a nice little pickup, but I wanted a real truck with off-road capability and a tough frame. I added a dealer installed spray-in bedliner, red tow hooks to match the grille inserts and a pair of 6" Diode Dynamics light bars so I could put the Aux switches to use.
-
9
-
1
-
Electric Vehicle Discussion Thread - Ford Related
in E.V. Central
Posted
Yes. It seems to me between the income phase outs, MSRP limits and material/supply sourcing very few will ever qualify for these credits. Basically they were written in to say hey look at what great things we are doing for the environment by promoting EVs, yet they'll never have to pay much out. It's a joke.