Igor, Whats the word on Ranger?

[one2gamble]

The music industry apparently. Where the hell is the originality these days? It has been the same recycled garbage on mainstream radio for the past 15 years.

 

Sorry, off topic rant.

 

 

the music industry is in much worse shape than ford

[ANTAUS]

Thats true, waaayyy too many remake songs currently..really nothing original, but of course now the excuse of them not being very profitable is being blamed on P2P internet downloading. Gotta blame someone I guess...

[Topgun]

They are dropping it. They are closing the St Paul plant and selling the land.

False,True,True...Check out Wards Auotomotive News to see where Ranger is going.

[Roadrunner]

I don't agree with that at all...there is an un-tapped market there for sure...we sell a BUNCH of Rangers...usually work trucks or loaded Supercabs for the youth market....

 

I concur.

 

Some members of the younger crowd -- the ones who actually use their trucks -- like the versatility of a smaller truck.

 

Then again, I'm that guy thinking of getting a cheap Crown Vic as a winter and towing car.

[Noah Harbinger]

Small trucks are just out of style.

 

When my dad wanted a new truck, he couldn't believe that the ranger was a "compact" truck -- he wanted something even smaller.

[stegomon]

lets look at the stuff....dealers have nothing in stock....the new fords or boring anf fugly...and for any thing decent you have to give up your first boren child.....if you want a ranger...go used...i can pick up some nice gen 1s with the great 2.9...put an other 50,000 on in and throw it away when i am done...but even thought i still have my first one

 

i love the ranger....i want it to stay....people loved the broncos...but they are gone.....land owners are gettin really meen about people going on there land....so that leaves the off road area kind of in the dark.....the feds want poeple to basicly have a modle t...something boreing and safe....all go the same direction so that we dont hurt our selfs.....we as in the u.s. are getting to soft...to many damn yuppies....we will not get what we want...we will get that they want use to have....if you think about it....we are slowly gettin surpressed

 

ok rants over

[Gejal2007]

It's another case of Ford shooting itself in the foot.

With the current change in Cafe regulations, the fuel cost explosion a small utilitarian truck with a fuelefficient engine and decent, rugged looks should sell very well. It is the bigger is better pipe dream that has caused Ford vehicles to metamorphose into dinosaurs destined for extinction. A small, fuel efficient truck, diesel option, decent ride, minimal options and affordable price would sell thousands of units. Four wheel independent suspension, progressive coil over shocks with lots of wheel travel and capable of carrying 750 to 1000Lbs in 2 and 4 wheel drive would be my vehicle of choice.

Pipe dreams..never should have sold or 95XLT-V6

 

2000-F350 Dually, Crew-7.3

2001 ZX3 Focus stick

2004 LS V8

Edited December 17, 2007 by Gejal2007

[D-dave]

I had a '97 Ranger and then graduated to an '02 SuperCrew. I loved them both but the mileage on the SuperCrew was killing me. (We now drive an '04 Explorer and an '07 Focus 5-door ... I still have some accessories for my SC ... e-mail me if you are interested.)

 

I feel that the market is ripe for compact pick-ups again ... IF you could get awesome mileage to make up for the downsizing of the truck in general, and one's ego for not having a big, bad truck ... after all, we love excessiveness in America, don't we? But seriously, I think Ford exiting the compact pick up market would be a mistake. People still want/need capable trucks to haul and tow ... but we also need to feed our families too and not give all our disposable income to the oil companies.

[mrjones944]

I think if people took some time and lost some weight then the Ranger wouldnt seem so small....just a thought

[RangerM]

I think if people took some time and lost some weight then the Ranger wouldnt seem so small....just a thought

 

My uncle in CA is about 300 lbs and drives a Miata; can you say cold fusion?

 

I've never asked him if he 'greases up' before driving.

[Mackintire]

If you want to add fuel to the fire, start here: http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index...showtopic=19522

[ray101988]

"

Anyway, the only brand new Rangers I ever see are fleet trucks. The youth market of 1986-97 that loved mini-trucks has grown up and today's 20-somethings are not interested. [Who still thinks that 90's era anything is in style?] I never see any brand new compact trucks driven by under 40 y/o people. In fact, it is rare to see ANY new compact/mid size truck [licensed and owned], period.

 

um, idk if you noticed, but there is a market for Rangers.. I barely see any fleet Rangers. Most of the rangers I see are owned as a 2nd vehicle, however many ppl still use Rangers as their primary vehicle. Also idk if you considered that there is a considerable market for compact trucks for ppl from their 40's on, especially in the middle class where ppl can not always afford a full sized truck. Also there is still a large youth market. I know many ppl around my age (late teens early 20's) who would buy a compact truck. I also know many people in their mid to late 40's and in their later yrs (60's- 70's) that want a truck but do not want a full sized truck. There is much opportunity to be taken advantage of. Ford just needs to realize this and use technology (such as diesels or twin turboed v4/v6's) to get good power and good fuel economy. Address this problem and make the ranger a little bigger to allow for more passanger space, and Ford should be well on its way to controlling that segment. It would be nice to see a new Bronco too :shades: But if they bring back Bronco it should follow the legacy of the original, they shouldnt just use the name, they should make it tough.

[jonas1022]

You guys have all seen the concept Explorer right? Think in terms of that SUV being a PU! Unitbody PU!

 

Yummmoooohh!

 

Not bad idea for an around the town go getter. Wouldn't want to pull anything with it, but it would be efficent(sp? doh!). Turbo four/turbo 6....light wieght, it'll move! And handle!

Edited January 10, 2008 by jonas1022

[8A4RE]

I barely see any fleet Rangers.

 

Actually, the Ranger seems to be the fleet small truck of choice. Here around Chicago, the major gas and electric utility providers use Rangers among their fleets; in fact, franchises such as Autozone, Advanced Auto, and Napa stores keep a fleet of base model rangers. I also see utility surveying companys such as JUILE use the Ranger. I am sure their are more to add to the list, this is just what comes to mind at the moment. On the other hand, I also see high volumes of people driving new, high end model Rangers for personal use too. I currently drive a 2006 Ranger XLT extra cab 4x4 and could not be happier, the trucks towing abilitys have exceed my expectations. I really wish the Ranger could be updated and be kept alive.

[ray101988]

Actually, the Ranger seems to be the fleet small truck of choice. Here around Chicago, the major gas and electric utility providers use Rangers among their fleets; in fact, franchises such as Autozone, Advanced Auto, and Napa stores keep a fleet of base model rangers. I also see utility surveying companys such as JUILE use the Ranger. I am sure their are more to add to the list, this is just what comes to mind at the moment. On the other hand, I also see high volumes of people driving new, high end model Rangers for personal use too. I currently drive a 2006 Ranger XLT extra cab 4x4 and could not be happier, the trucks towing abilitys have exceed my expectations. I really wish the Ranger could be updated and be kept alive.

 

Im from South Jersey. I guess there is just a different balance of fleet and private owned near me.

[Gejal2007]

Here is a quick and dirty retouch of the EXp.concept morphed into a ranger.

[povertyknob]

Here is a quick and dirty retouch of the EXp.concept morphed into a ranger.

I realize I'm guilty of being redundant , having started a thread under "wishes" , but some buyers want a pick up for the utility it provides. The Sport Trac is the most viable option. If only the bed were a bit longer. At a "town hall" meeting at our plant I asked a company VP why the Ranger was being dropped and he answered that it was unprofitable. Okay the 09 F-150 should not have a problem there. How about if we stop limiting content on the smallest F-150 , the regular cab? Some folks ,including myself , would like to have the choice of driving a smaller truck with decent options. I'd like to think it wouldn't be prohibitivly expensive to manufacture and offer a well equipped F-150 regular cab. At least until , or if , a mid size pick up is offered again. I understand the argument against spending a ton of money on developing another midsize truck. The appeal of the smaller F-150 would be to suburbanites who enjoy the utility of a real pick up but are concerned about the ever growing dimensions. I'm not speaking so much to price or capability as dimensions. I think we could steal some sales from the competitions mid size offerings.

[ray101988]

I realize I'm guilty of being redundant , having started a thread under "wishes" , but some buyers want a pick up for the utility it provides. The Sport Trac is the most viable option. If only the bed were a bit longer. At a "town hall" meeting at our plant I asked a company VP why the Ranger was being dropped and he answered that it was unprofitable. Okay the 09 F-150 should not have a problem there. How about if we stop limiting content on the smallest F-150 , the regular cab? Some folks ,including myself , would like to have the choice of driving a smaller truck with decent options. I'd like to think it wouldn't be prohibitivly expensive to manufacture and offer a well equipped F-150 regular cab. At least until , or if , a mid size pick up is offered again. I understand the argument against spending a ton of money on developing another midsize truck. The appeal of the smaller F-150 would be to suburbanites who enjoy the utility of a real pick up but are concerned about the ever growing dimensions. I'm not speaking so much to price or capability as dimensions. I think we could steal some sales from the competitions mid size offerings.

 

They are supposedly developing a Ranger replacement in Austrailia. Its rumored to be a global model, so the U.S. would also get it.

[OAC_Sparky]

I think if people took some time and lost some weight then the Ranger wouldnt seem so small....just a thought

I have an '08 extended cab Ranger FX4. This is my third Ranger, I've had a standard cab Sport and an extended cab XLT. I'm 160 pounds and not exactly tall and I find a standard cab Ranger too small. I need the extended cab to keep my head from resting up against the backlight.

 

I like the size of the Ranger in general just fine -- I still insist that the Ranger's bigget problem is its fuel consumption vs. power. A diesel would do wonders. Often I wonder whether a small V8 wouldn't have been a better choice than the 4L V6 because it wouldn't need to work as hard as it does.

[Gejal2007]

The problem as I perceive is that the Ranger offers little price nor mileage advantage over the cheapest F150.

Secondly, any contractor, who has need for a truck is generally better served by a bigger vehicle. What a Ranger should aspire to be is a light duty vehicle with decent ride, decent price advantage, some utility and durabilty. A vehicle that would see intermittant and use of generally short trips would not ned to be loaded with a plethora of gizmos and gadgets but should concentrate on providing economical utility with some panache and decent ride.

Consider that a vehicle that can be towed behind an RV, used to make infrequent Home Depot, Grocery, Costco runs. Such a vehicle, with modern suspension, a small, clean diesel engine, available in AWD or ?? would hit a niche now not adressed by any other manufacturer.

The rendering of the Xplorer morph is in my opinion still a bit too big. However someone wanted to see what something like that looked like.

 

Just an opinion from a person who is now retired and who cannot find a vehicle that would fit my needs. There are millions of us who now near the retirement age and whose needs are not being addressed. It is not the 20 and 30 somethings that are now in the majority and who spend money, the rest of us also have specific nees.......

That is not to say that such a vehicle should offer these gizmos but it should be an option not a given......

 

an old fart.

[ray101988]

I've also heard that the new ranger will be a bit bigger, more like a midsize I guess. Competition for the Dakota? Maybe..

[OAC_Sparky]

The problem as I perceive is that the Ranger offers little price nor mileage advantage over the cheapest F150.

It depends if you are comparing apples to apples.

 

The cheapest F150 (standard cab, 4.6l 8 cylinder) is about $22G here. The cheapest Ranger (standard cab, 2.3l 4 cylinder) is $16G (both excluding special incentives). So you save $6G and the Ranger has way better mileage.

 

However, for $24G you can get a fully loaded Ranger Supercab FX4 4WD. The cheapest 4x4 Supercab F150 (bottom package XL) is $32G. And at that level, the Ranger's gas mileage is still better.

 

What you have to do is analyze what you need the truck to do. I wanted a relatively well equipped 4WD truck with an extended cab that I could throw my hockey bag or golf clubs in the bed, cart home anything I want from Home Depot, and not pay an arm and a leg for or not pay $100 to fill it up at the pump. So I got the Ranger.

 

If I needed a strictly 2WD for hauling around heavy auto parts or building materials, a plain-Jane F150 would have sufficed.

 

Apples to apples.

Edited February 14, 2008 by OAC_Sparky

[Gejal2007]

I understand your point, however if one needs a truck for work a ranger just won't fit the bill, so in the end it is really a secondary vehicle for many of us. We opted for a F350 DRW diesel for work which on trips has netted a bit over 20mpg and is averaging nearly 16mpg according to the computer in the truck. So the "way better" mileage is somewhat overblown. Our Focus averages between 27 an 29 mpg and the LS averages 22 to 24.........so if mileage is the only criterion then personally, I see little advantage in a Ranger. My point is that for the amount of work a Ranger can do when compared to it's bigger sibling makes the small price advantage negligible..

I regret selling our 1996 Ranger Supercab with the 4 liter V6 in late 1999, trouble is that todays Ranger is essentially no different than that years model with no integral improvements. One gets the feeling that most of the options are afterthoughts with little integration. Seemingly just placed randomly with little concern as to ergonomics.....I most certainly do not want the Ranger to be dropped at all, it just needs some rethink to not open the niche to other manufacturers. There is a point when streamlining and product offerings reach a point where a diminishing return accentuates a downward spiral. While certain divestitures make sense, narrowing the product line too deeply can eventually lead to a dearth of product choice, further alienating loyal customers.......

In any case I wish Ford the best. Have been a loyal Ford Customer since 1964-1/2 with the first 289 Mustang. since then only one non-Ford product was ever in our stable.

[FordFanForEver]

Standard engine on the F150 is the 4.2 V6, not the 4.6 V8.

[stegomon]

im 26 and own a Ranger.

arrrghh.... im horribly out of style.

 

hey i am 23 with an 87 ranger with a 302 swap. a 90 ranger with a 4.o swap and a stock 97 with a 3.0 and will have some else besides that...and i guess i am out of style too...hmmm

 

 

 

 

 

all i know that is all i wil own is the rangers...i have a 95 bronco and a 2000 zx2 s/r..both great autos..but i have to stick with my rangers!!!!!