Mackintire

There is a rumor that Ford's 3.2 liter I-5 diesel is being considered for use in the 2014+ Ford truck line. In its current form rated at 200HP and 350lbs torque.

Latest rumor over at pickuptrucks.com is that the 2014 F150 may get the 3.2 liter inline 5 cyl diesel. 200 HP 340lbs torque and decent fuel economy..... personally I doubt it, but you never know.

At the moment Kuga is considered a CUV. Ford could try to submit it as a truck...the NHTSA is not obligated to agree with them. The new law has some strange math involved. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy Each vehicle is weighted as its own vehicle against its footprint with a penalty added as the vehicle gets bigger. They did design a sweet spot for engineers to target and it happens to be a similar size to the T6, Edge, Explorer and the Flex. Notice they are all very similar in width. That is, in part, why it is probable that we will see the T6 replace the F150 at some distant point in the future. The only thing that could speed up the process would be for fuel to stay above $4.00 a gallon for the indefinite future.

Escape moves to the Kuga platform...and will be weighted as a car. Ford will be left with the F150, Transit Connect, Cmax. Either way....F150 is a big pig that'll be around for a few more years. E150 is scheduled to be replaced with the transit in 2014. 3/4 ton trucks and vans are here to stay.

I do agree that CAFE 26 MPG is not the same as EPA 26MPG I think you've been misinformed the upcoming 2011 F-150 makes a range of 19-23 mpg toward CAFE. The current Ford Ranger pulls the truck average higher. The 3.7 liter is 23MPG in a 2x4 The 5.0 is 21 MPG in s 4x4 The EB 3.5 is expected to be 22MPG in a 4x4 The 6.2 liter is 19MPG in a 4x4 In 2012 we will not have the current Ford Ranger helping CAFE. We will have the Transit Connect which is helping now and should help even more by then. Again unless Ford has a way to beat the laws of physics, I have no faith that all the 5600lb F150s are going to get 26 MPG or better on the highway. .

Some information on the Global Ranger replacement developed by Ford Austraila has now been released. The most comprehensive article I am ware of is over at www.pickuptrucks.com So now we know that the T6 splits the difference in width between the 2002-2004 Explorer and the newer 2005-2010 Explorer. The easiest way to conceptualize the size of this thing is to examine the 2010 explorer sport trek becuase its somewhat of a similar size. So let review what information has been released and what we can infer. The T6 is smaller than the F150 but not by a huge margin. Packaging and design changes can and will make the difference. For example: The T6 is 1000lbs lighter than the F150. The T6 has a 3000lbs bed load capability The T6 is expected to have a 9000lb tow capacity , when properly equipped The T6 is expected to have engine options capable of meeting or exceeding 30 MPG, when properly equipped The T6 if manufacturered here would almost the same as the F150 in materials The largest engine we know that will be an option in the T6 is the 3.2 liter inline 5 cyl TDCi Duratorq diesel with 200HP and 349lbs of torq The smaller diesel is the 2.2 liter inline 4 cly TDCi Duratorq diesel with 140hp and 270lbs of torq The internal cockpit options are closer to what is offered in the F150 than what we were used to in the Ranger So if it came to the US what would be the issues? #1 Price This is a high tech, well built, capable truck...the rest of the world does not have an F150, so this truck is it. # 2 Market overlap This truck is too close in size and capability to the F150. Bringing this truck to the US would severely harm F150 sales. If you need to tow more than 8000lbs you probably should have an F250 or bigger anyhow. #3 market perception The US market still looks at trucks as if bigger equals bettter. By logic T6, with the right engine options, are probably a better choice for 90% of all the F150 owners out there. But logical thinking is not always profitable, Ford knows this. When are we going to see the T6, how is it going to suceed and why? The current F150 has zero chance of passing the 2016 EPA rules. The T6 brought in as a F100 could keep those customers, but Ford would have to offer three power plants or something similar to keep those customers. Those engines are: The Eco-boost 2.0 with 230HP and 240lbs of torq The Durtech 3.7 liter V6 300HP and 278lbs of torq The 3.2 liter Duratorq i5 200HP and 350lbs of torq The F150 at that point will become a low volume vehicle, however the F100 will meet the 2016 EPA regulations of avg 26MPG

F150 has zero chance of making the 2016 EPA standards. The T6 ranger will be brought in as an F100 at that point. We 'll get the T6 only we 'll have to wait another 3-4 years.

The F150 has zero chance of making the 2016 EPA requirements. The T-6 will probably be brought here and labeled F100 when that happens. Considering its 90% of the size of the F150 and it can tow 7000lbs properly equipped, its the only choice Ford has available.

Blind man meet deaf man. :reading: The plant is dead, the current ranger is dead. No plan, no amount of money, no petitioning is going to save the current ranger. The production line is already shut down. Net year's allocation of trucks are already optioned and built. Now that those facts are clear. The T6 platform can be assembled in Brazil or Argentina and still get around the chicken tax. The only remaining issue is volume and profitability.

If I purchased a new truck now it would be a Sport Trak, Taco or a Frontier. The current Ranger has been neglected for far to long. The T6 is a different beast and is what I would like to purchase. I need a quad cab and to be able to fit a child safety seat. Its like you're saying buy a hot dog now so years later I can have a steak. I can not agree with your suggestion. If I am going to buy steak, sir I am going to buy a decent cut.

Please link this to your facebook and spread this around.

http://www.change.org/petitions/view/bring_the_t6_ford_ranger_to_the_us

http://www.change.org/petitions/view/bring_the_t6_ford_ranger_to_the_us We have to let Ford know how we feel.

Transit Connect is scheduled to receive the 1.6 Liter EB engine along with a 6 speed transmission at the next major refresh. Europe will also receive the 1.6 liter EB for their Transit Connect.

We aren't getting T6, at least not right away. Agreed TCAP won't be making Rangers after next year. Agreed There is a small market for small trucks. Some people want a small truck and are willing to pay for it. We don't know how many. Agreed A lot of current Ranger sales are just because it's cheap, but we don't really know how many. Agreed Small truck sales do eat into large truck sales but we don't really know how much. We do. Examine the cheapest F150 sales that are within $2k of a Ranger. Assume about 50% of those are someone whom would have purchased a Ranger. Ford wants a more fuel efficient pickup to hedge against a big increase in fuel prices. Of course you would have to be able to afford this new fuel efficient truck. Mulally and others have mentioned "new Ranger" several times in relation to the U.S. Market. Agreed It seems to be a given that Ford will bring a new Ranger and it will be more fuel efficient than a F150 and it won't be built at TCAP. Agreed Everything else is sheer speculation. disagree Part of the problem is the same issue that the Festiva faced and solved. There are no quality comfortable well appointed Rangers. A loaded Ranger is like a bare XLT F150. If the smaller truck doesn't offer the equipment that the customer demands they won't get the sale. I mentioned previously in another thread the three distinct classes of Ranger owners: The bare bones guys: parts runners, cheap transportation, inexpensive truck that can haul 1000lbs if needed. The 4x4 extcab XLT crowd: 30% of all rangers sold fall into this category The sport trek crowd: this is the potential untapped market, these are also the buyers whom would most strongly consider moving up into an F150. The old sportrek was heavy, thirsty and overpriced by near $2k The T6 if brought to America needs to meet the expectations of all three of these groups. Its possible but not starting at the $12k entry point. Few of these guys need to tow over 5000lbs but they do need to be able to actually tow 5000lbs SAE rated. They also need to beat the F150 fuel economy by 3 mpg across the board. I would suggest the EB 1.6 liter, an EB 2.0 liter and the 3.7 liter engines. If they are do some of the same magic to the EB 2.0 that they did to the EB 3.5 and flatten the torque curve they may not even need the 3.7 liter.

That's not a T6 based Ranger. Your argument is invalid .

Just some thoughts: The location of the mosque is in bad taste. The name of the mosque is in bad taste. The size of the building with "THAT NAME" is in extreme bad taste in historical reference. None of the above issues would have been a deal breaker...but the combination of the above list has totally poisoned the buildings chance of being a peaceful success. Sounds like the building will piss off a lot of people, be historically held to standing for something contrary to what its intention was, and generally cause more issues for the muslim community. The solution is simple.... for the moment rename the building and don't put a mosque in it. Long term... Build a more normal sized mosque a block farther away and DON'T use that name. That above solutions would placate the educated more rationale US citizens and defuse the issue on multiple levels.

deleted

Lets say you set up a stopping contest. One explorer with 50 psi in the tires and a second one with 35 psi in the tires. What to bet which on stops first? You know we could just redirect the conversation by inflating the tires with nitrogen. Then the heating expansion is minimal from the inert gases compressibilitiy under heat.

Unfortunately this has fail written all over it. My wife's 06 Fusion is stickered at 30psi, the tires are rated for 40 psi max. Thanks for playing.

You sir unfortunately are mistaken. Currently I am an engineer. I used to sell tires. I was goodyear, bridgestone, BF goodrich, michellin and cooper certifed. I was also briefed by two different automotive insurance carriers on this topic with additional input from the NHTSA. As a company you must set the inflation of a set of tires on factory equipped rims to what is stickered on the vehicle. If the sticker has been removed and the factory wheels and tire size is on the vehicle you go by what is in the owners manual or Chilton of Haynes listing. The only way you are allowed to inflate the tires to any other pressure legally is if you have the customer sign a waver. Otherwise if an accident occurs your company can be held responsible for not inflating the tires to the correct specifications. Our insurance carrier was very verbal about this and used Explorers and Jeep wranglers as the most extreme examples. I was very good at my job and I performed plenty of tire and rim swaps. Swapping P235/75/15s for 31-10.50 15s requires less pressure to have the same weight carrying capacity, I know this as fact of physics and from practical application. The second part that is related to this discussion is most 31 10.50 15s have 6 belt plys (sometimes 4 with 2 nylon plys in the sidewall) and as a result have a stiffer sidewall then the standard P235/75/15s that came on the explorer. Now if you put LT235/75/15s on you could possibly have a stiffer sidewall. 50 psi on your 89 explorer is considered unsafe as per the (NHTSA) National Highway Traffic Safety Administrations findings.

FYI...Diesel hybrid would push the price north of $70k.

Rumors from foreign sources claim we will be receiving the T6 Ranger, just not in the first year of release.

I'm going to have to agree with what's being said here. There's no need for such an engine. Of course the racing guys in the aftermarket may create such a beast.

A pile of hybrids are coming based off the new focus chassis. The first iteration are to be standard hybrids. 48 MPG + Second iteration are plug in hybrids Third gen adds fuel cells to the mix along with better batteries and more powerful electric motors. So in short, Ford has a plan.