Noah Harbinger Posted May 10, 2008 Share Posted May 10, 2008 what can you say? People love being armchair quarterbacks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 Better yet, just buy a P71 Panther. Rides just like a truck and it has a trunk. Damn right... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukoner Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 Here in Northern Canada we are selling more Rangers now than we have for years. If we could get one with an efficient diesel engine that was no more than a $2,000 option, I'm sure we could double our sales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkarlo Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 Funny at the same time the Mazda (same truck) B-series are at an all time sales low. I think they sell less than 100 per month now. I wonder why they don't try to pus that as well. I hope a good F-100 comes out. I think if they put effort into it, they can have some good truck sales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 So you honestly think a midsized (old fullsized) F-100 is going to get SUPERIOR MPG versus the current compact Ranger? None of the other midsize trucks that replaced their compact predecessors are....what's gonna change with the F-100? Leave it Ford to have the last of and best of something on the market and find a way to can it. He never said it would be more fuel efficient than the Ranger, he said it'd be more fuel efficient than an F-150, which it will be. The F-100 is, as Nick said, meant to be a capable, yet relatively fuel efficient truck. For those who will need a Ranger-type small, really fuel efficient truck, they will be able to buy an all-new Ranger in a few years. This will be Ford's truck lineup in a few years: -Ranger -F-100 -F-150 -Super Duty Looks good to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_fairmont_wagon Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Mazda has, for years, intentionally deemphasized their B-series sales. The ONLY reason that they still even do it is to create some volume for a few dealers that need it in particular markets. Now that the Mazda portfolio is much more well rounded, the need to push the B-series is gone. Heck, I'm not even sure if the B-series is still produced, or if they are still just selling off inventory that was created a year or two ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 This will be Ford's truck lineup in a few years: -Ranger -F-100 -F-150 -Super Duty Looks good to me. Of course it does...but there is still the obvious question of: WHY? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Of course it does...but there is still the obvious question of: WHY? why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 why not? Because now is not the time to introduce yet ANOTHER gas guzzling truck to the market. Not to mention that Ford claims they are not killing the Ranger. Why the need for two full-size trucks plus the Ranger? This is another classic example of Ford answering a question nobody asked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Because now is not the time to introduce yet ANOTHER gas guzzling truck to the market. Not to mention that Ford claims they are not killing the Ranger. Why the need for two full-size trucks plus the Ranger? This is another classic example of Ford answering a question nobody asked. If only you ran Ford. Then things would be "right." :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Because now is not the time to introduce yet ANOTHER gas guzzling truck to the market. Not to mention that Ford claims they are not killing the Ranger. Why the need for two full-size trucks plus the Ranger? This is another classic example of Ford answering a question nobody asked. Because you didn't ask it doesnt mean that other people haven't... As for the F-150 vs F-100, 1/2 ton market has grown too big for its own bitches and I'm sure that people who buy an F-150 would downsize into a F-100 if it got over 20 MPG and keep the overkill F-150 for people who want it and still let the F-SERIES keep its sales crown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Hyundai halts pick-up truck production plans due to high oil prices http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNew...EO3184220080509 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 If only you ran Ford. Then things would be "right." :rolleyes: You have already proven the uselessness of this truck. You haven't answered the question yet... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Because you didn't ask it doesnt mean that other people haven't... As for the F-150 vs F-100, 1/2 ton market has grown too big for its own bitches and I'm sure that people who buy an F-150 would downsize into a F-100 if it got over 20 MPG and keep the overkill F-150 for people who want it and still let the F-SERIES keep its sales crown. Great. If you don't want the F-150, get a Ranger. Is that concept so hard to understand that Ford needs another gas guzzling truck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Great. If you don't want the F-150, get a Ranger. Is that concept so hard to understand that Ford needs another gas guzzling truck? Maybe thats not enough. Thats quite a downgrade, going from an F150 to a Ranger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 CNBC done a story on arson today how it is on the increase as folk caught up in the housing mess, and have now resorted to setting fire to homes, and setting fire to their gas guzzlers seems an easy way out as they can no longer afford the payments or to fill them up with gasoline. http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=738673397&play=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goinbroke2 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Because now is not the time to introduce yet ANOTHER gas guzzling truck to the market. Not to mention that Ford claims they are not killing the Ranger. Why the need for two full-size trucks plus the Ranger? This is another classic example of Ford answering a question nobody asked. And here is the post that starts the new thinking/bullshit that the sheep can follow! " Not to mention that Ford claims they are not killing the Ranger." BULLSHIT!!! No ford has NOT said they won't kill the ranger, the same as they did NOT say they would! Only fucking negatards ON HERE have stated that they would/wouldn't! How about this; Ford said the new mustang will be 1000+hp. There, now everybody has something to screem about. for/against Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8 Ford Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 You have already proven the uselessness of this truck. You haven't answered the question yet... A truck that will be better on fuel than an F-150 but be more capable than a Ranger is useless? Ford sold full size trucks during the oil embargos, they're still going to sell them now. A more fuel efficient, albeit less capable, full size truck built along side of the F-150 on the same platform seems like a good way to profitably increase market share and help CAFE numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 (edited) A truck that will be better on fuel than an F-150 but be more capable than a Ranger is useless? Ford sold full size trucks during the oil embargos, they're still going to sell them now. A more fuel efficient, albeit less capable, full size truck built along side of the F-150 on the same platform seems like a good way to profitably increase market share and help CAFE numbers. it will suck, small ecoboost, better fuel economy, more modern underpinnings, better ride, drive , handling, asthetics, styling interior, comfort, capability, just plain superior in EVERY comparison with the ranger, AND be slightly larger to boot...no, theres no need for a superior product than a vehicle that has basically been the same and lacked upgrades and developement for ....how long....man, the lack of foresight here by the Doom and Gloom Gang is sometimes pretty hilarious...and they wonder why the barbs are directed.....and before whomever resorts to the baseline :beatdeadhorse: he makes sense so he must be a :cheerleader: cop out, look in the mirror for a sign of an IQ. This makes PERFECT sense. Edited May 12, 2008 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Oil hit another new record today with food prices also sky rocketing the consumer will be looking to cutback and downsize, Focus & Ranger sales are going to continue to grow. http://www.cnbc.com/id/5990617/for/cnbc/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 it will suck, small ecoboost, better fuel economy, more modern underpinnings, better ride, drive , handling, asthetics, styling interior, comfort, capability, just plain superior in EVERY comparison with the ranger, AND be slightly larger to boot... Fine...then call the silly F-100 a Ranger replacement. Then the truck makes sense. But the truck is utterly useless if it has an F-150 above it and a Ranger below it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Fine...then call the silly F-100 a Ranger replacement. Then the truck makes sense. But the truck is utterly useless if it has an F-150 above it and a Ranger below it. In your opinion of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 (edited) Fine...then call the silly F-100 a Ranger replacement. Then the truck makes sense. But the truck is utterly useless if it has an F-150 above it and a Ranger below it. why P, next up a true Ranger replacement, smaller again about the current size, hopefully on a modern platform, smaller AGAIN powerplants eco 2.0 maybe...then you have ALL bases covered....youth ( Ranger )...everyday driver muliti-purpose ( F-100 ) and f-150 ( workhorse or heavy duty recreational ).....hell i had a Ranger, mileage was WORSE than my f-150...guess what I missed the most, Ranger was antiquated to say the least and too small inside bordering on semi claustrophobic....basically outgrew it, but good truck for the youth market....think of it as a version of Fords car lineup, compact, midsize, fullsize and then the Superdutys for the REAL HD stuff.... Edited May 12, 2008 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 The F-100 is, as Nick said, meant to be a capable, yet relatively fuel efficient truck. So...rather than just tweak the F-150 to make it more efficient, you think it is a better idea to literally waste a TON of money on yet another truck? Maybe if the F-150 didn't weigh just short of an adult elephant, it would be more efficient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Fine...then call the silly F-100 a Ranger replacement. Then the truck makes sense. But the truck is utterly useless if it has an F-150 above it and a Ranger below it. I guess the F-150 itself is utterly useless, since it has a Ranger below it and a Super Duty above it. The Camry must be utterly useless too. After all, it has the Corolla below it and the Avalon above it. I'm sorry, P71, but in this fragmented auto market, one size does NOT fit all. Plenty of people will want a truck bigger than a Ranger without the total bulk and ineffeciency of an F-150. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.