Mackintire

Probably not possible.... see here for a more detailed discussion http://w11.zetaboards.com/Motorsports_Mayhem/topic/8199296/1/

But you'll probably get a... 2019 Ranger Supercab, 4WD 2.3L Ecoboost, 6 speed auto, buckets, front facing, but flip up / Bench seat tow package, hard folding tonneau cover, reverse sensing system, power rear window.

As I understand it the 6.2 liter V8 is ending up a bit underwhelming when used in the F350 and larger trucks. This is part of the reason the retired V10 was brought back into service. My suggestion is based on: need, cost, inventory and serviceability. Make a taller stronger block based on the current coyote 5.0 and adjust the stroke as needed to gain the additional cubic inches. The current 5.0 heads meet the flow requirements and the 7000 RPM headway could be dropped some in exchange for the additional stroke. Peak power output should be approx 400HP with 460lbs of torque, but the widened power band would be optimized for HD truck applications. Common parts keeps the price low and you may find that you are able to improve parts that are applicable to both motors. The new motor should offer better fuel economy, significantly more area under the curve in regards to power, and be cost effective to produce.

2.7L Eco-boost Fusion SHO AWD might be the sweet spot.

You're sounding rather anti-ranger these days akiby. It's a little depressing. We all know how far hope and change can get us, but this is the rumor mill section of the forum, so please smoke a little with us as we hope and dream.

https://www.google.com/search?q=S5+wagon&client=opera&hs=lfV&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=mdP0U8CXF5aryATI_4DgCw&ved=0CCgQsAQ&biw=1920&bih=1064 https://www.google.com/search?q=S5+wagon&client=opera&hs=lfV&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=mdP0U8CXF5aryATI_4DgCw&ved=0CCgQsAQ&biw=1920&bih=1064#q=Mazda+3+wagon&tbm=isch

I know I will. SUVs are the new wagons, wagons currently don't have the cool factor. Well maybe the Madza 3 and the S5...

I disagree, Akirby. It's the same as the current midsize argurement, is 85% of a 1/2 ton truck enough. I sure know that if it's the difference between being able to own a truck or not, THAT will drive sales. If you work in the city, have a smaller garage, or forced to park inside due to a HOA. It also helps that full size trucks are becoming more capable and the entry price is continuing to climb. For some of us the difference between a full size and a midsize is a body covered in dents when you park in the city. I'll settle for what one considers to be required capabilities. For me it's hauling lumber, mulch, furniture, and being able to tow 4000lb loads comfortably. But an F150 is huge. I can fit it in my garage, but can't walk around it. There's no significant room around it in the smaller parking spots in the city garage, the total cost to own is higher, in a quad cab it costs $6-7k more than a midsize after discounts. If it was a work only truck I could write it off, but I'm not going to buy a SUV as a family vehicle only to trash the interior hauling stuff. The switched to other vehicles comment is amusing as well, as there are plenty of us that are holding onto our old rust buckets, purchased tacos or frontiers. 170,000+ in yearly sales for an outdated platform isn't too shabby.

A midsize truck or smaller will come back as soon as either: A. Fuel prices permanently appear to impact F150 sales B. The chicken tax goes away and Ford thinks it can improve its CAFE rating by biulding one or make a profit by building one. There has been some talk about creating another World Ranger in 2017 that is a little wider than the current one. That one might be made out of a Narrowed F150 frame and if designed that way would open up the doors for a smaller F100 in the US. Such a truck would be aluminum skinned and weight 500lbs-700lbs lighter than the 2015 F150 and leverage the 2.0 and 2.7 liter Eco-boost as the engines. Think 28-34 MPG midsize truck. I don't plan on waiting that long, my 2001 ranger is almost a flintstone vehicle. Assuming its not junk I 'll be driving a loaded Colorado in the spring.

The 6.2 liter or a slightly longer stroked variant (up to 6.6 liter) after DI has been introduced along with a transmissions with 8+ gears to back it up.

The Nano series Eco-boost engines should make that possible. I'd expect the 2.3 liter version (est. 275HP) to replace the 2.0 in the explorer and its Lincoln counterpart as the 2.0 is a little anemic in that vehicle.

A couple of interesting comments Ford has said in the past: They had considered developing a smaller truck based on the F150 platform. But was not able to figure a profitable business model for such a vehicle. This vehicle was still bigger than the T6. The T6 was too expensive to bring to the US. The T6's frame will be widened on the next major refresh, specifically the bed WILL be able to hold a standard size pallet after the next major refresh. To me, it looks like Fords may consider converging the F100? and the T6 projects at the next major refresh. 2016-2018?

The new Mazda 6 has no issues making it stated fuel economy numbers when driven normally, the new fusion in practice only makes them when driving very gently. Reviewers and owners unilaterally agree that this appears to be the new norm for the Fusion and many of Fords other eco-boosted vehicles. Having driven the spent some time in the new 2013 Fusion, I only saw a couple of issues that are deal breakers. The trunk egress is terrible compared to the earlier model. I could easily place office chairs in their new boxes into the trunk of the 2006-2012 Fusions. The opening is too small on the 2013 to do this. The older fusion has the same trunk utility as a full size, the new fusion not so much. The other gripe is that the radio buttons have no sense of texture feel. If I choose to use physical controls, I actually have to look at the radio to use it. Other brands are smart enough to add braille-like markings or raised lines on the buttons so you can feel a differnce between buttons. Ford did not. IMO that was a very poor design decision.

I've mentioned this before but Ford has one BIG card they can still pull out. Create an F100 that is based on a slightly narrowed and lightened F150 chassis. Offer the 2.7 liter V6 Ecoboost engine and the 5.0 liter(25MPG and 22MPG) Beef up the F150 slightly and make a F200 (Needs things like the F250's axle bearings, splines, brakes, transmission and a power steering unit that can be used when plowing) Combine the F250 and F350 into a F300 Get rid of the super heavy duty F350 package and combine it with the current F450.....call it a F400 For towing your choices would be as follows: F100 6,800lbs F200 12,500lbs F300 16,500lbs SRW F400 24,000lbs DRW only If the new F200 costs roughly the same as the old F150, as equal or better equipment, ride and fuel economy no sales should be lost.

4-5 MPG, but you are comparing: A 3.7 Gas F150 at 23MPG against A 3.5 turbo diesel powered T6 at 27 MPG Never mind the 32MPG 2.2 liter turbo diesel option.