Ford Ranger sales post another gain in April

[P71_CrownVic]

Of course he is. He's incapable of anything else...

My God...the lengths you drunk :cheerleader: will go to not to criticize Ford is sickening.

 

Maybe you're right. Maybe the thing that Ford needs when gas prices are going through the roof and truck sales are down considerably every month...is another full size truck to lose money on.

 

[Deanh]

My God...the lengths you drunk :cheerleader: will go to not to criticize Ford is sickening.

 

Maybe you're right. Maybe the thing that Ford needs when gas prices are going through the roof and truck sales are down considerably every month...is another full size truck to lose money on.

 

do you not read P?...or are you also incapable of that? now you are critisizing the mid size entry that is probably being built to address THAT exact problem if sales of the "fullsize" F-150 slow due to current gas prices....course they could go ahead and build two spankin new plants for a FULLsize....seems most manufacturers here may have been caught with their pants down...but seems Ford may be a bit ahead of the curve....

[TomServo92]

My God...the lengths you 's will go to say another moronic negative comment is sickening.

 

 

There. Fixed it for you!

[P71_CrownVic]

There. Fixed it for you!

Nope...ya broke it.

[armadamaster]

do you not read P?...or are you also incapable of that? now you are critisizing the mid size entry that is probably being built to address THAT exact problem if sales of the "fullsize" F-150 slow due to current gas prices....course they could go ahead and build two spankin new plants for a FULLsize....seems most manufacturers here may have been caught with their pants down...but seems Ford may be a bit ahead of the curve....

 

 

No, the problem is Ford continually jumbosizing the F-150 in a market of $4.00 a gallon gas and the ingenious solution is NOT to appropriately resize the F-150 back to where it was but to instead add yet another truck to the lineup. So, now there will be TWO trucks doing what ONE did before.

 

Now, on the flip side of the same coin, where are the same old :cheerleader: s to remind us of their argument on how Ford doesn't need TWO large/fullsize sedans in their F/L/M lineup, the D3s and the 's just for the sake of rounding out this stupidity?

Edited May 14, 2008 by Armada Master

[Sixt9coug]

As a Ranger owner, I also dont really feel a necessity for an F100. Who would buy it? Who is the target customer for an F100 vs a Ranger? Small delivery shops will use a Ranger or a Transit. The F100 is the anwer to a question Toyota asked 15 years ago with the T100.

 

And we all saw how well that was recieved.

[TomServo92]

Nope...ya broke it.

 

:boring:

[lfeg]

In regards to pickups, Ford has a perception problem. They cannot "resize" the F150 to make it a true half ton pickup without risking it becoming "less capable" than the competition. So an F100 does fit in the mix. Let it be the half ton, the "bread and butter" of the pickup market. Let the F150 migrate to being the "standard duty" 3/4 ton pickup. This leaves the F250, F350, & F450 to be the heavy duty / commercial use lineup. Remember that before the mid 70s the lineup was F100, F250, F350. The F150 was added to fill the slot as a "heavy half".

[goinbroke2]

In regards to pickups, Ford has a perception problem. They cannot "resize" the F150 to make it a true half ton pickup without risking it becoming "less capable" than the competition. So an F100 does fit in the mix. Let it be the half ton, the "bread and butter" of the pickup market. Let the F150 migrate to being the "standard duty" 3/4 ton pickup. This leaves the F250, F350, & F450 to be the heavy duty / commercial use lineup. Remember that before the mid 70s the lineup was F100, F250, F350. The F150 was added to fill the slot as a "heavy half".

 

Bang on!

Once in a while somebody posts logic.

 

So far this thread has proven however, that people on here will argue just for the sake of arguing. The above quote pretty much sums it all up in a nutshell. Ford is not going to make a candy ass f150 to suit some people so instead they will(MIGHT) build a f100. The ranger will be a little truck that is replaced (as every vehicle is at some point in time) with another little truck and it will probably be called...RANGER.

[P71_CrownVic]

No, the problem is Ford continually jumbosizing the F-150 in a market of $4.00 a gallon gas and the ingenious solution is NOT to appropriately resize the F-150 back to where it was but to instead add yet another truck to the lineup. So, now there will be TWO trucks doing what ONE did before.

 

Now, on the flip side of the same coin, where are the same old :cheerleader: s to remind us of their argument on how Ford doesn't need TWO large/fullsize sedans in their F/L/M lineup, the D3s and the 's just for the sake of rounding out this stupidity?

I think it all boils down to Ford creating problems with their products and then...sometime down the road...they seem like complete genius' when they provide a solution to that problem.

 

Case in point:

Let's make the F-150 so goddamn big, that is becomes less usable. Then, in a couple of years, we will provide a staircase to get into the truck. Or, let's make the F-150 so goddamn big, that, in a couple of years, we need to develop another gas guzzling truck that is smaller than the current F-150, but the size of the 1997-2003 F-150s...wasting valuable money and resources.

 

This F-100 would be a non-issue IF:

 

1. Gas Prices were not through the roof...and showing no signs of slowing down

2. Either the Ranger or F-150 was going away

3. Ford just didn't make the F-150 so big in the first place.

Edited May 14, 2008 by P71_CrownVic

[twintornados]

Hopefully, when Ranger returns...it will be based on the Flex....it would make it lighter and more fuel efficient, hallmarks of a Ranger that it should rightfully reclaim.

[igor]

Hopefully, when Ranger returns...it will be based on the Flex....it would make it lighter and more fuel efficient, hallmarks of a Ranger that it should rightfully reclaim.

WTF?

 

The Range's curb weight is 30xx lbs (36xx lbs in top trims) - the Flex's Curb weight is at least 46xx lbs - it's lightweight alright ...

 

Igor

Edited May 14, 2008 by igor

[silvrsvt]

I think it all boils down to Ford creating problems with their products and then...sometime down the road...they seem like complete genius' when they provide a solution to that problem.

 

Case in point:

Let's make the F-150 so goddamn big, that is becomes less usable. Then, in a couple of years, we will provide a staircase to get into the truck. Or, let's make the F-150 so goddamn big, that, in a couple of years, we need to develop another gas guzzling truck that is smaller than the current F-150, but the size of the 1997-2003 F-150s...wasting valuable money and resources.

 

Your making it out like the F-150 lives in a vacuum, its doesn't! Look at all the other full-sized pickups that it competes against...they became bigger and more capable as time went on also.

 

if the F-150 didn't do the same, the same people bitching about the F-100 would be be bitching about the F-150 not meeting/beating its competition!

 

Ford is catering to the market and what it wants, not rants of assholes on message boards that are only concerned with their needs and wants

 

If Ford proceeds with the F-100 project, its not like its going to be dumping huge amounts of money into it...its going to share many of its components with its bigger brother...

Edited May 14, 2008 by silvrsvt

[campbell53]

Amen...there's no pleasing the internet crowd. Ford has it going on and 2 years from now will look like geniuses. I'm a dealer so I have a huge dog in this hunt. Ford is turning it around. I too am sick of the arm chair Ford CEO's that bitch and have no real solutions for anything.

 

Your making it out like the F-150 lives in a vacuum, its doesn't! Look at all the other full-sized pickups that it competes against...they became bigger and more capable as time went on also.

 

if the F-150 didn't do the same, the same people bitching about the F-100 would be be bitching about the F-150 not meeting/beating its competition!

 

Ford is catering to the market and what it wants, not rants of assholes on message boards that are only concerned with their needs and wants

 

If Ford proceeds with the F-100 project, its not like its going to be dumping huge amounts of money into it...its going to share many of its components with its bigger brother...

[old_fairmont_wagon]

There is a valuable example already on the market of what a potential F-100 would be like. Take the Dodge Dakota for example. It's ratings make it, for all practical purposes, a half ton pickup. It's roughly half way between a ranger and an F-150. How well does it sell? In this era of rising fuel prices, have Dakota sales risen as people realize that they don't need a 6/10ths scale big-rig that gets big rig fuel economy to do what the Dakota could do all along?

 

There's only two potential problems with using the Dakota as an example. The first is that it doesn't get significantly better gas mileage than the regular Dodge Ram 1500 due to the fact that it uses the same engines and is still quite heavy. The second is that it is, unfortunately, saddled with that pesky Dodge emblem on the hood. That's enough to drive most potential customers away.

 

I just hope that ford has much better luck with the F-100 than than Dodge has had with the Dakota.

 

As for wasting a ton of money, I doubt it is as much money as you imagine. They are saving a lot of development money by basically scaling down the F-150 and reusing as many parts as possible. They are also targeting being able to build it on the same line with existing F-150s. Its a way of proofing the manufacturing facilities against ever rising fuel prices. As fule prices continue to climb, and the F-150 market gets increasingly weeded out of poseurs down to its core, this gives Ford something else to build on those same lines that they will be more likely to be able to sell in that tougher market. It isn't going to require dedicated plants. It isn't going ot require that many unique parts, and, a majority of its unique parts will be parts that are easy to develope such as sheetmetal and trim. The drivelines will be taken from existing products with perhaps one unique super-economical setup (think 2.0L EB or a potential hybrid). This is a low risk, moderate reward project.

[JW]

Remember that before the mid 70s the lineup was F100, F250, F350. The F150 was added to fill the slot as a "heavy half".

 

Yes, but even then the F100 was still a full-size. And the F100 lived on through about '82 or so, still as a full-size. The F150 was the same truck with axle and suspension upgrades. The F-Series has always been a full-size (relative to the market; the original F1/F100 was much smaller than the last 35 years of full-size trucks).

 

"Reskin and update" sounds so easy. Up-dating the Ranger requires so many changes to take advantage of tech improvements, that it's easier to start from scratch.

 

NOT true. Most of that work has been done on the current Explorer. New frame/sheetmetal behind the doors and a solid axle, and look! An updated and competitive Ranger! Add the EcoBoost engines to the lineup when they're available. But there I go again... :beatdeadhorse: Dean and other dealers here - how do you think an Explorer-based Ranger would sell?? I'd go buy an extended-cab 4x4 version TODAY if it existed.

 

And if they want to have a small "pickup", the Courier currently available in Mexico and elsewhere (or something along the same lines) would fill that gap nicely.

 

The T100 argument isn't really valid. It didn't sell not because of its size; that thing was a shitbox in any size.

Edited May 14, 2008 by JW

[rmc523]

 

Ford will always need something like the fuel efficeint Ranger for the rest of the world to use, we are all not blessed with very cheap $4 gasoline like you are in the US.

 

IMO, that's not too bad looking.

[rmc523]

Yes, but even then the F100 was still a full-size. And the F100 lived on through about '82 or so, still as a full-size. The F150 was the same truck with axle and suspension upgrades. The F-Series has always been a full-size (relative to the market; the original F1/F100 was much smaller than the last 35 years of full-size trucks).

 

 

 

NOT true. Most of that work has been done on the current Explorer. New frame/sheetmetal behind the doors and a solid axle, and look! An updated and competitive Ranger! Add the EcoBoost engines to the lineup when they're available. But there I go again... :beatdeadhorse: Dean and other dealers here - how do you think an Explorer-based Ranger would sell?? I'd go buy an extended-cab 4x4 version TODAY if it existed.

 

And if they want to have a small "pickup", the Courier currently available in Mexico and elsewhere (or something along the same lines) would fill that gap nicely.

 

The T100 argument isn't really valid. It didn't sell not because of its size; that thing was a shitbox in any size.

 

I believe the next Ranger is meant to be a global Ranger and will replace the Courier and other local market trucks, like the one in South Africa, cant think of it's name and in other places.

[armadamaster]

IMO, that's not too bad looking.

 

Better looking indeed versus versus the current bloated F-150.

[Edstock]

Better looking indeed versus versus the current bloated F-150.

Which looks way better than all the other bloated full-size pickups it competes with: just look at the Turdra or the Titan.

 

When uglier trucks are built, they'll be built by Toyota!