akirby

Motor Trend????? Seriously???? Go down to your local Toyota dealer and tell them you want to lease a new Tacoma with a 75% residual. Let me know when they quit laughing. BS.

The Tacoma is not old crap - why isn't it selling 200K+? I call BS. Tacoma resale is no better than 55% after 3 years. The used car market for Panthers was huge but that didn't translate to sales of new ones.

dupe

Having owned 2 Rangers and having 2 small kids at the same time - I agree.

Bah - it's just a Fusion.........anybody can see that.

You can get the 2.5L with a manual today so that makes sense. The question is whether they'll offer it in an upgraded model or restrict it to SE like the Focus.

Except in this case I agree with him. Ford already proved that people are willing to pay a premium for a better vehicle.

What happened with the truck market the last decade? People used to buy trucks as commuter vehicles and/or cheap transportation. Gas was cheap so fuel economy didn't matter. Then gas prices went up. And trucks got bigger (super crews) and more expensive. So the people who wanted cheap transportation or who couldn't afford gas went to small cars and used cars and they stopped buying trucks altogether. The people who are still buying trucks are the people who need a truck or who want a truck and are willing to pay for it. A new Ranger would not be cheap and it won't get anywhere near the fuel economy of a small car or hybrid. Those buyers are gone for good. People who need or want a full sized truck will continue to buy them regardless of fuel prices. The only people who would buy a mid sized or small truck are the people who don't have room or just don't want to drive a big truck. And that's why the small truck segment is only 200K or so and it's not going to increase very much.

Not exactly. He was saying that there were enough people that would be willing to pay extra for such a great car that it would not significantly impact sales. Of course they would sell more at $25K than $28K because some people shop price alone but Pete is saying that Ford will be able to hit its sales targets with a premium vehicle at $28K.

The point you're missing is that Ford would rather build a great car and price it appropriately and sell 200K than decontent it or compromise the styling to lower the price and sell 300K. To put this in context - would you rather work 40 hours per week and get paid $50K/yr or would you rather work 30 hours per week and get paid $50K/yr? You can take the other 10 hours per week and do something else. Likewise, Ford can take the extra capital and invest it in some other vehicle that also returns profits rather than artificially increasing sales of one vehicle just to win a sales crown.

Bzzzttt. Wrong answer. GM sold more vehicles than Ford but Ford made more profit. Each vehicle has a sweet spot where the vehicles can be sold for maximum profit. If you produce too few vehicles you lose out on sales and profits. But once you exceed that sweet spot and you start adding production cost (more plants/shifts, more options, etc.) or worse - incentives - then your per vehicle profit starts to erode. If you can be #1 and be efficient in production without huge incentives - that's great. But when you start chasing the sales crown by adding production costs and incentives then you start losing money. Therefore if Chevy decides they want the #1 truck sales crown and they're willing to lose money to do it - Ford won't care and they won't counter it. They'll just keep making F150s they can sell at maximum profit. So while Ford would like to be #1 in sales for each segment they will not sacrifice profits to do it.

He was referring to looks and styling. Last time I checked you can look at a car without actually driving it.

Ford doesn't care if they're #1 in sales volume. They care about profits.

Seriously??? Who makes more vehicles than Ford (not counting GMs rebadges)?

Exactly. So why do we have to keep rehashing it over and over and over?

Yet. We don't really know what Ford has planned for U.S. small trucks in the future. It may or may not include T6. Regardless, they're not going to tip their hand even if they have something in the works. Again you're assuming that they're not working on something just because it hasn't been announced and that's a terrible assumption. We didn't know there was going to be a Fusion plug-in-hybrid until it was announced last week. Besides - T6 is readily available if market conditions change. But I think they'll have something even better by then.

Some of the more recent F150 ads with Denis Leary have taken potshots at the Ram. I don't remember the wording but they showed a Ram head when they said it. But overall Ford doesn't do that as much as others. It's generally regarded as bad advertising to mention your competitors.

I guess BMW and Mercedes and Porsche are doomed because they don't sell pickups or minivans. Why do you people think that Ford MUST build a vehicle in EVERY segment? They're probably MAKING money by shutting down Ranger production altogether.

How did Lexus get its current reputation? It wasn't because they had a RWD flagship. It was because they had cars that looked like luxury automobiles with plush appointments, features, styling and a great dealership experience. So yes - that's exactly what Lincoln should do. And there is a lot of performance to be had with up to 400 hp ecoboost engines and electronic drive control. We're not talking about 200 hp FWD cars here.

You haven't been paying attention. http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/11/chevy-launches-max-and-al-online-campaign-for-silverado-heavy-duty.html

Nobody is implying that there isn't a market for small trucks or that everyone who bought Rangers in the past are moving to cars or F150s. Market share tells the story and don't bring up that crap about the market being so small because nobody builds a small pickup worth buying. The current small trucks are good enough that if buyers really wanted them they'd be buying them. 1.5M plus full sized trucks vs. 200K small trucks. When gas prices went up and full sized truck sales tanked, small pickup sales did not increase. Ford has to prioritize where they spend their limited resources and given the market sizes and trends it would be foolish of them to put Ranger high on the list right now. The good news is T6 is available should the market or business case or resource issue change. Griping about it and trying to rationalize it won't help.

That's what they said about the Panthers, too, but that sure hasn't hurt market share or the bank account.

Because everyone SAYS they want a small truck but then they either buy a F150 or a small car or hybrid.

Gee - maybe that's why they're giving the Lincolns a longer warranty, more upscale dealer service (even if they're co-located), totally unique styling, better interior materials, Lincoln exclusive powertrains and features like drive control, adjustable suspensions and retractable glass roofs.

I probably shouldn't have called it a "work truck" - what I meant was people who want and need a full sized truck, and there are 600K of them that buy Fords (1M in the past). Add in the GMs, Rams and the imports and you have a market of at least 1.5M, probably more. Small trucks might be 200K. While a more fuel efficient, modern T6 would be desirable, the same thing in a F150 would be even more desirable and more profitable. And they can build it with current facilities whereas the T6 requires importing or a new plant. It's such an easy business decision for Ford that arguing about it is silly.