Texasota

The thing about this Ranger PHEV implementation that concerns me is the serious de-rating they did to the 2.3 Ecoboost. When the smallish battery pack becomes nearly depleted on a modest towing trip you now have a Ranger that is handicapped with an under powered ICE the same way that EREVs are. I don't think this Ranger PHEV implementation would be a good towing vehicle for my 4000 lb boat. On a positive note, I don't believe Ford would de-rate the 2.3 on a North American implementation of a Ranger PHEV. If they did, then it would not be received well (at least not for customers that want to tow). I really want a Ranger PHEV, but I would not purchase this one.

It is my understanding that the speed limit recognition system utilizes the connected navigation but it also has camera recognition of the physical speed limit signs. Does the camera recognition of speed limit signs also end after three years?

That would certainly make for a sleek/stylish Escape. But if you want to be able to haul anything in it, then this would not work for most Escape buyers. Our Escape is used for driving to our snowbirding location and this would not work at all. Not practical or utilitarian.

Only speculation on my part, but I am guessing they are frantically tweaking software trying to make this fatally compromised truck work. It likely is not competitive as a BEV truck (short EV range), not competitive as a hybrid truck (grossly overweight) and not competitive as an ICE truck (inefficient and under powered when battery is depleted). Software will not be able to overcome this. I think Ford really got it right with the F-150 Powerboost. It is not compromised in any measure and will run circles around the Ram EREV.

The overall frenzy by the media and climate advocates put immense pressure on manufactures as well. Toyota was crucified for not quickly jumping into the EV frenzy. Turns out they were right about how this was going to play out.

@akirby, can you invite rperez17 back?

Anyone notice the squircle wheel wells? They are not round which is very unusual for Ford. Maybe a first?

This. Unless Ford replaces the Escape HEV/PHEV with something just as good, then Ford no longer sells an efficient and practical vehicle for me. I don't give a rip about the Escape being boring, it meets my needs perfectly.

I gotta say, I think it looks cool!

Which is what Trump is trying to achieve with the Tariffs. Honda and Hyundai are already making similar moves.

This article suggest we might: https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2025/03/27/ford-ranger-pickup-sales-toyota-tacoma/82521315007/ According to that article we may see a conventional Ranger hybrid (maybe similar to F-150 Powerboost) or a Ranger EREV. I think that is likely given that Farley has said all Ford Blue vehicles will have a hybrid version by 2030. I'm guessing we will more likely see a Ranger Powerboost since all the required tech is sitting on the shelf and would be easy to add to the Ranger. A Ranger EREV, IMO, would have to much overlap with the new CE1 BEV pickup. But I could be biased and wrong because of my skepticism towards EREVs.

I had posted a similar thread (my thread). Maybe merge or delete one.

I'll believe 25% across the board tariffs when I see it. Maybe for a short period of time but I'm skeptical of it being a permanent thing.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2025/03/27/ford-ranger-pickup-sales-toyota-tacoma/82521315007/ According to the article we will likely see a conventional Ranger hybrid (maybe similar to F-150 Powerboost) or a Ranger EREV. I'm guessing we will more likely see a Ranger Powerboost since all the required tech is sitting on the shelf and would be easy to add to the Ranger. A Ranger EREV, IMO, would have to much overlap with the new midsize EV pickup coming out of the skunk works project. But I could be wrong because of my skepticism towards EREVs.

This is interesting. A new thread (Ranger gets new 2.3 Ecoboost) suggests Ford is consolidating on the new 2.3. Do you suppose that version of the 2.3 is a prerequisite for the 2.3 based PHEVs? I'm looking for any reason that gives me hope for a Ranger PHEV in North America.

Makes sense to have a single version of the 2.3 Ecoboost. The Port and direct fuel injection is a big plus. Nice improvement.

I sure hope you are right about that. And hopefully it won’t be knobbled (thanks for the new vocabulary word, @jpd80). It ought to be 360 HP and 501 lb-ft of torque.

Adequate, maybe. Exciting, no.

Yes, I have been following the news on the Ranger PHEV for a long time and the early automotive press was saying 360 HP for the Ranger PHEV. I'm still hoping for a non-knobbled Ranger in North America.

It would be interesting to see what percentage of the recalls are due to software. Having worked as a software engineer for 31 years at IBM, I can tell you that bugs get through no matter how much testing you do. Very often it is a timing issue where the stars line up perfectly to cause a problem that even excellent engineers would not have anticipated. It is challenging work.

Yes, no doubt it would have enough torque to get the heavy rig moving, but will be very limited in speed just like the BYD Shark is. Completely agree. I think a PHEV is going to be the far better choice for the average guy that pulls an RV or boat more than 100 miles. It also performs well in city driving for trips under 40 miles. If Ram continues to promote this as a good towing truck for longer hauls it is not going to end well.

Below is a link to an article with some interesting details. It states the generator can produce 174 HP (continuous) of electrical power to feed into the electric motors once the battery is depleted. Ram is boasting that the 7500 pound Ramcharger can still tow 14,000 pounds when the battery is in this depleted state. Anyone want to drive a 21,500 pound rig with 174 HP? For a reference point, the Ford Escape with the turbocharged 1.5-liter three-cylinder produces 180 horsepower. https://www.motortrend.com/news/2026-ram-ramcharger-tech-deep-dive/

I think the Bronco resulted in that kind of “gotta have it” passion. Maybe even the Maverick.

I’m not an automotive engineer, but I suspect cab forward designs like this would be extremely difficult to meet crash safety standards.

Yes, it is going to be fascinating, the RamCharger will be the first one to watch. I think they will be well suited for city/urban use, but very disappointing if used for long hauls. You can't overcome the physics involved with a heavy truck, a heavy load, long distances and a small ICE.