The Ranger is Dead – Long Live the Ranger (www.autosavant.net)

[NickF1011]

Downsizing the F-150 back to the size of the 1980-1996 version makes more sense to me than adding a F-100 to the current F-150 lineup.

 

Might make sense from the perspective of what the trucks will actually be used for, but it would quickly become a marketing nightmare, as the F-150 would quickly lose every single comparison test it was ever in.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

So, a "slightly smaller version of the 97-03 F-150 would be, roughly, like the gen 1 Toyota Tundra in size. That is just about right. My brother-in-law has an 05 Tundra with the 4.0L and 5AT and gets decent mileage around town while still having more than enough power to do anything he really needs to do with the truck. A vehicle that size could share all of the non-dimensionally constrained components of the F-150 (obviously axles, drive shaft, cross-members, etc wouldn't work, but much of the rest could). It could even have an interior that is similar vertically, while being somewhat shrunk horizontally. Their goal with that project should be to make a capable vehicle for hauling a decent bed load (maybe a true half ton), towing a reasonable amount 6-7000 when equipped with a v8, and have a version that offers almost 30 mpg on the highway and over 20 in the city.

 

As for the smaller global ranger, sure, bring it in for those that need a runabout that can work fine on a 4 banger, gets great mileage, and can carry the odd sized load.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Downsizing the F-150 back to the size of the 1980-1996 version makes more sense to me than adding a F-100 to the current F-150 lineup.

 

Kind of funny you mentioned downsizing, we used to have YUPPIE's back in the 1980's these people are now changing into ARPPY's in the UK.

 

They no longer want to own or drive new cars most are trading the cars in public transport its going to be a big problem for Ford in the future.

 

ARPPY's a growing trend in the UK.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article....mp;in_page_id=2

[Edstock]

ARPPY's a growing trend in the UK.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article....mp;in_page_id=2

 

Interesting article. Worth the read.

[wescoent]

I said this over a year ago.

 

An F-100 only make sense if costs (both engineering and manufacturing) are low. I don't see how an F-100 can be shortened and lightened and still have "numerous shared components".

 

Assuming it is a "scaled down" F-150 (so narrower also)

• Upper and lower front control arms and spindle ? Probably not.
  
• Rack and pinion ? Maybe.
  
• Front 4wd axle ? Probably not.
  
• Rear axle. No
  
• Trans and driveshaft? No (unless they have a V8 version)
  
• Interior and dash ? No
  

Or is this just going to be a short wheel base 2 door F-150 ?

 

"Global" Ranger is a "must" for the company. Whether it is built and/or sold in the US is a different question

 

Scaled-down and lightened is how it was described to me. Frankly, my engineering knowledge is too limited to say HOW they would accomplish this. This program (Ranger/F-100) was started back when they were planning the 2004 F-150. The best relationship I can think of is Frontier and Titan, and as I understand it, the current Explorer's front end is related to the F-150, but obviously scaled down, so it is indeed possible.

 

As far as different cab and bed options go, I would think we'd see a nice range, from a short-cab short-bed all the way to a full double-cab type arrangement.

 

We might see an EcoBoost I4, but the mainstay engine will be the truck 3.7L V6. Diesel and V8 options seem likely, at least at first.

 

I am looking forward to seeing how the market is going to react to the F-150 and F-100 being sold alongside each other. The F-100, in my opinion, will be a "right-sized" truck that bucks the "big-rig" trend as of late, and I think it's going to divert a lot of F-150 customers who don't want to feel cramped in a Ranger, but also don't need a truck that can tow away their house. I expect many conquest sales as well for people on the lookout for this "right-size" truck.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

This is just my speculation, but this is how I would do it...

 

Start with the blueprints for the F-150.

Reduce all dimensions to about 7/8ths current.

Spec a lighter capacity steel for the frame (roughly 80% of current) to reduce frame weight (on top of the reduction of the dimension of said rails).

Try and re-use as much drivetrain and suspension componentry as possible.

Reduce the height of the bed sides to more human levels.

 

That's about where I'd stop. The specs would neatly fit in between the existing ranger specs and the F-150 specs, which would likely result in the return of a true half ton pickup to the market.

[mackinaw]

In today's market, meaning the era of constantly-rising gas prices, there's absolutely no sense in bringing out an F-100 type of truck unless it would get substantially better gas mileage than the F-150 (or Silverado). I'm talking at least mid-20s' on the highway with a 2WD model and high 20s' would be even better. I doubt that a 7/8ths size F-150 could come anywhere near that.

[MERKURXR4Ti]

In today's market, meaning the era of constantly-rising gas prices, there's absolutely no sense in bringing out an F-100 type of truck unless it would get substantially better gas mileage than the F-150 (or Silverado). I'm talking at least mid-20s' on the highway with a 2WD model and high 20s' would be even better. I doubt that a 7/8ths size F-150 could come anywhere near that.

 

With a modern transmission and 3.7L V6 or EcoBoost I4 I think these numbers are easily possible if the weight is reasonable

Edited April 19, 2008 by MERKURXR4Ti

[armadamaster]

Ford already overprices the Ranger (other than fleet regular cabs) so that people will be forced into the F-150 anyway. So now, there are going to can the last compact pickup in the segment, the Ranger, and opt for a Dakota sized replacement under the F-series instead with rising gas costs and and a flooded midsized truck segment. Hey, while we are at it, let's go ahead and make D3 Rancheros, because SOMEBODY'S gotta wanna buy a D3.....ANYBODY?

[Sixt9coug]

Ford already overprices the Ranger (other than fleet regular cabs) so that people will be forced into the F-150 anyway. So now, there are going to can the last compact pickup in the segment, the Ranger, and opt for a Dakota sized replacement under the F-series instead with rising gas costs and and a flooded midsized truck segment. Hey, while we are at it, let's go ahead and make D3 Rancheros, because SOMEBODY'S gotta wanna buy a D3.....ANYBODY?

 

 

Rangers top out at around 27.5K. is that so out of line for a 4x4/ 4.0L with the high end stereo, leather, auto and a bunch of other stuff? thats before rebates even. A TRD 4x4 4.0L Tacoma Access Cab (no Ranger Crew Cab of course... gotta be sorta fair) was 29.5K. They didnt have leather on an option on that model.

 

Of course, theres always the crew cab Tacoma in the same config... at 32K.

[armadamaster]

Rangers top out at around 27.5K. is that so out of line for a 4x4/ 4.0L with the high end stereo, leather, auto and a bunch of other stuff?

 

It's well known that Ford has overpriced the Ranger, with ANY desirable options, to "encourage" buyers into the F-150. They advertise new F-150 Supercrew around here all day long for $19,995....but yeah that extended cab 2wd Ranger is cheaper at $19K....right?

[P71_CrownVic]

Rangers top out at around 27.5K. is that so out of line for a 4x4/ 4.0L with the high end stereo, leather, auto and a bunch of other stuff?

 

For a Ranger??? Yes...FAR out of line.

 

But Ford knows that they have to whore the Ranger out to sell it. The following is from a member on another site I frequent:

 

My buddy Jeremy bought a BRAND-NEW 2008 Ford Ranger this past weekend in Houston, TX (Champion Ford, IIRC). Sticker price was $16,725 for a base model with automatic trans and AC. Between the $4,500 factory rebate, a $3,000 dealer discount, and $500 off for his full-time student wife, he paid $8,725 for a BRAND NEW truck! Not a demo, not a trade-in, NEW (20 miles on it).

[theoldwizard]

This is just my speculation, but this is how I would do it...

 

Start with the blueprints for the F-150.

Reduce all dimensions to about 7/8ths current.

Spec a lighter capacity steel for the frame (roughly 80% of current) to reduce frame weight (on top of the reduction of the dimension of said rails).

Try and re-use as much drivetrain and suspension componentry as possible.

Reduce the height of the bed sides to more human levels.

 

That's about where I'd stop. The specs would neatly fit in between the existing ranger specs and the F-150 specs, which would likely result in the return of a true half ton pickup to the market.

I like what your saying especially the "return of a true half ton pickup to the market", but as far as I can see, re-use of components will be almost zero !

 

Engine and trans, sure. Maybe the rear axle out of the Mustang or current Explorer. But what are they going to do for the front suspension ? And if there is a 4WD option (which there had better be), that will be unique, unless they can use the one out of the current Explorer.

 

Hey, maybe Igor was off a bit ! Turn the current BOF Explorer into a pickup ! This makes a lot of sense and at one time this was the plan for the new Ranger. Maybe it came back to life as the F100. Keep the same front and rear suspension, lengthen the frame a bit, put a pickup truck cab and box on it and your done. Makes more sense than "downsizing an F150".

[silvrsvt]

Hey, maybe Igor was off a bit ! Turn the current BOF Explorer into a pickup ! This makes a lot of sense and at one time this was the plan for the new Ranger. Maybe it came back to life as the F100. Keep the same front and rear suspension, lengthen the frame a bit, put a pickup truck cab and box on it and your done. Makes more sense than "downsizing an F150".

 

I was under the impression that the 05+ Explorer was already sharing its frame with F-150

[Sixt9coug]

It's well known that Ford has overpriced the Ranger, with ANY desirable options, to "encourage" buyers into the F-150. They advertise new F-150 Supercrew around here all day long for $19,995....but yeah that extended cab 2wd Ranger is cheaper at $19K....right?

 

 

19,995 after rebates of course. as P said under you, they often have big rebates on the Ranger too. The 27.5 figure i quoted was without rebates. In fact, going to town with the rebates you can get that top of the line 4x4 Ranger with the auto and 4.0L for less than 25K all day long. Hell, i think checked on one with the X-Plan and the local rebates of 3K and it was around 22K for the 4 door, FX4 4.0L auto. and leather interior. Thats not a bad deal at all. Rebates or not on that F150 supercrew, i bet it still wasnt even a 4x4. with the rebates and the X-plan the Ranger started around 11K. 19K for a supercab is the MSRP. before you quote a discounted rebate price for an F150, check and see that the Ranger gets them most of the time too. so 19K might easily mean 16K.

 

 

There is also the size issue. I have a Ranger because i dont want or need a vehicle as big as an F150. I can afford an F150, thats not an issue, but i dont want or need something that big or thirsty. the 21mpg im used to getting out of the Ranger cant be touched in the F150. the fact that the Ranger i have now barely fits in my garage is an issue too. if it were any bigger it wouldnt fit at all.

[NickF1011]

the fact that the Ranger i have now barely fits in my garage is an issue too. if it were any bigger it wouldnt fit at all.

 

Damn cookie cutter houses and their tiny garages. After putting a 3'x7' workbench and toolchest in the back of the garage in my townhouse, there's barely even enough room in there for my MUSTANG. Good thing I don't own a truck of any kind.

Edited April 20, 2008 by NickF1011

[Sixt9coug]

Damn cookie cutter houses and their tiny garages. After putting a 3'x7' workbench and toolchest in the back of the garage in my townhouse, there's barely even enough room in there for my MUSTANG. Good thing I don't own a truck of any kind.

 

 

Ive got a one car garage here in a condo complex. Still live at home, but momma gave me use of the garage because she kept scraping the Mustang trying to get in sometimes. Im a more precision parker i guess.

 

Heres the Cougar in it it barely fits, and i have 2 roll away chests in front to the right. yes ive hit them before.

 

[theoldwizard]

I was under the impression that the 05+ Explorer was already sharing its frame with F-150

Common misconception.

 

Similar but different.

[NickF1011]

Common misconception.

 

Similar but different.

Heck, even the more similarly-sized Expedition doesn't use the exact same frame.

[JW]

Turn the current BOF Explorer into a pickup ! This makes a lot of sense and at one time this was the plan for the new Ranger.

 

Sheesh, I've been saying this for HOW long now (see link in signature)? They already have the drivetrain, much of the interior, much of the exterior, some of the glass, a big portion of the frame, etc. etc. etc.

 

I should probably clarify my earlier rant a bit. I'm part of a very large Ranger enthusiast community. Not owner, enthusiast. Given the membership of the top Ranger-specific sites out there (over 200,000 people, considering some membership overlap between sites), I'm not alone. Believe it or not, Rangers aren't just used to run auto parts or haul lawnmowers. There are plenty of people who take as much pride in our Rangers as anyone you'd find in the Mustang enthusiast community.

 

I totally support a redesign of Ford's compact/midsize truck, something else I've been shouting about for years. The thing that pisses me off is that a Ford-built compact/midsize truck has ALWAYS been a Ranger (the Courier was built by Mazda). Ford's only changing the name to F100 so they can bundle it in with the rest of the F-series sales. It's sneaky, disingenuous bullshit. Plus, if it's as big as Igor says it will be, it's WAY too big to fill the void that will soon be open.

 

With all the smart moves Ford has been making (despite the numerous attempts hacks such as pcsario keep attempting to force on us to the contrary), this is one I just flat-out do not get.

[Sixt9coug]

I totally support a redesign of Ford's compact/midsize truck, something else I've been shouting about for years. The thing that pisses me off is that a Ford-built compact/midsize truck has ALWAYS been a Ranger (the Courier was built by Mazda). Ford's only changing the name to F100 so they can bundle it in with the rest of the F-series sales. It's sneaky, disingenuous bullshit. Plus, if it's as big as Igor says it will be, it's WAY too big to fill the void that will soon be open.

 

With all the smart moves Ford has been making (despite the numerous attempts hacks such as pcsario keep attempting to force on us to the contrary), this is one I just flat-out do not get.

 

 

I agree with that for the most part. there are alot of Ranger enthusiasts out there that i kinda knew about before buying mine. They are tough little trucks and it takes alot to kill one. I dont think it should grow much if any at all. However i know that is the trend in the industry. make it bigger till it stops selling. then kill it. Hopefully they keep it a RANGER, give it an Ecoboost engine, and dont make it Tacoma big.

 

Please, i know i may be in the minority here, dont put a V8 in it.

Edited April 21, 2008 by Sixt9coug

[theoldwizard]

I totally support a redesign of Ford's compact/midsize truck, something else I've been shouting about for years. The thing that pisses me off is that a Ford-built compact/midsize truck has ALWAYS been a Ranger (the Courier was built by Mazda). Ford's only changing the name to F100 so they can bundle it in with the rest of the F-series sales. It's sneaky, disingenuous bullshit.

But that is how "the marketing game" is played !

 

They know an F100 will steal sales from the F150. They can not afford to loose the "Best Selling Truck" crown, especially at their own hand. That crown is one of the few things that they can still brag about !

 

Actually an F100 would give Ford some "breathing room" !

[Blue II]

I like what your saying especially the "return of a true half ton pickup to the market", but as far as I can see, re-use of components will be almost zero !

 

Engine and trans, sure. Maybe the rear axle out of the Mustang or current Explorer. But what are they going to do for the front suspension ? And if there is a 4WD option (which there had better be), that will be unique, unless they can use the one out of the current Explorer.

 

Hey, maybe Igor was off a bit ! Turn the current BOF Explorer into a pickup ! This makes a lot of sense and at one time this was the plan for the new Ranger. Maybe it came back to life as the F100. Keep the same front and rear suspension, lengthen the frame a bit, put a pickup truck cab and box on it and your done. Makes more sense than "downsizing an F150".

 

There are several cobbled together mules like that. Been around for some time.

One even has a TTDI 3.5 in it. Goes like stink. It would still be an F-Series and not hurt any overall sales. It should add sales.

[Biker16]

Where the fuck is the I4 pickup market going to go?

 

 

I have to say I don't buy it.

 

with CAFE and the uncertain price of fuel, we are going to eliminate our most efficient P/U.

 

My gut tells me we will see the international ranger here sooner or after the F100 bombs.

[igor]

Where the fuck is the I4 pickup market going to go?

 

 

I have to say I don't buy it.

 

with CAFE and the uncertain price of fuel, we are going to eliminate our most efficient P/U.

 

My gut tells me we will see the international ranger here sooner or after the F100 bombs.

 

You do know that the I4 Truck market is just for show right? Sure some businesses buy them as parts runners, but that is it - VAST majority of the trucks sold are V6 - if Ford can muster good FE from the F100 V6 it will do just fine.

 

And the Thai Ranger does not have ANY I4 in it - only a V6 diesel.

 

as usual CAFE and consumer demand are MILES apart.

 

Igor

Edited April 25, 2008 by igor