Deanh Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 I agree...but no matter how behind the 8-ball the Ranger is, it is still the best small truck on the market. And like I said with new engine and trans optiona and a dab of advertising, it would sell...and I think it would sell very well. well the new 2.5 is replacing the2.3 in the Fusion and Escape...Ranger next? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 I agree...but no matter how behind the 8-ball the Ranger is, it is still the best small truck on the market. And like I said with new engine and trans optiona and a dab of advertising, it would sell...and I think it would sell very well. You are absolutely correct. My fear, frankly, is that Ford will do this, and then just further delay bringing the global ranger here. We need it NOW. 80 percent of the contractors driving around in Silverados and F-150/250/350's could easily switch to the Ranger with modern engine and tranny options (would it be that hard to get the 4.4 diesel into it as the premium engine?) 2-3 more years is just about a decade too late, as usual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 You are absolutely correct. My fear, frankly, is that Ford will do this, and then just further delay bringing the global ranger here. We need it NOW. 80 percent of the contractors driving around in Silverados and F-150/250/350's could easily switch to the Ranger with modern engine and tranny options (would it be that hard to get the 4.4 diesel into it as the premium engine?) 2-3 more years is just about a decade too late, as usual. try and fit an 8 x 4 piece of plywood in a ranger, or tow the diesel compressor........sure some would swap...no where near 80%...10 MAYBE.....perhaps even less if the F-100 has a full size bed and capability.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 is that Ford will do this, and then just further delay bringing the global ranger here. We need it NOW. 80 percent of the contractors driving around in Silverados and F-150/250/350's could easily switch to the Ranger with modern engine and tranny options Ford drags their feet to do anything, so simply swapping the engines and trans would be a stop gap until they (eventually) get the global Ranger here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 Ford drags their feet to do anything, so simply swapping the engines and trans would be a stop gap until they (eventually) get the global Ranger here. not so much dragging their feet p, the Ranger is not a major priority right now, it WILL gather more steam obviuosly in reflection of the consumers reactions to the pump, but even you have to admit Ford has an awful lot on their to-do list right now...of MORE potential importance are their B cars/ or lack of.....it is merely a case of priorities right now, and i don't think ANY manufacturer was wholey prepared for our current state.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 not so much dragging their feet p, the Ranger is not a major priority right now, it WILL gather more steam obviuosly in reflection of the consumers reactions to the pump, but even you have to admit Ford has an awful lot on their to-do list right now...of MORE potential importance are their B cars/ or lack of.....it is merely a case of priorities right now, and i don't think ANY manufacturer was wholey prepared for our current state.... With the cdurrent state of their truck sales (or lack of), the Ranger should be a high priority. Andit is not like I am asking them to completely redesign the whole thing, I am asking that they ditch the current engines and replace them with the 2.5/3.5 and 6-speed. Why would Ford not want to take advantage of a market that is being handed to them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critic Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 With the cdurrent state of their truck sales (or lack of), the Ranger should be a high priority. Andit is not like I am asking them to completely redesign the whole thing, I am asking that they ditch the current engines and replace them with the 2.5/3.5 and 6-speed. Why would Ford not want to take advantage of a market that is being handed to them? It's called SUPPLY. You arm-chair experts expect Ford to start tomorrow with these eco-boost's in every vehicle, have NO IDEA how a company runs... It's much better to sit and act like you know thou, isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 With the cdurrent state of their truck sales (or lack of), the Ranger should be a high priority. Andit is not like I am asking them to completely redesign the whole thing, I am asking that they ditch the current engines and replace them with the 2.5/3.5 and 6-speed. Why would Ford not want to take advantage of a market that is being handed to them? they already have the market...why fix what isnt broken.....focus is elsewhere.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 It's called SUPPLY. You arm-chair experts expect Ford to start tomorrow with these eco-boost's in every vehicle, have NO IDEA how a company runs... It's much better to sit and act like you know thou, isn't it? No, I am not saying that Ford put those silly ego-boost engines into the Ranger. We want fuel economy here. Just the N/A 2.5 and 3.5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 they already have the market...why fix what isnt broken.....focus is elsewhere.... Because if they spend a few pennies on swapping the engine and trans, they will sell a lot more and thus rake in the money. But why would Ford want to be profitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 (edited) Because if they spend a few pennies on swapping the engine and trans, they will sell a lot more and thus rake in the money. But why would Ford want to be profitable. why...right now 2.3 is fine...and truthfully sales are NOT setting the world on fire anyways....and P...several years ago they were literally going to dis-continue the Ranger due to LACK of profitability...THAT is the true reason for the lack of developement...and that was straight from our Zone reps mouth answering our queries.... Edited June 13, 2008 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 several years ago they were literally going to dis-continue the Ranger due to LACK of profitability... Prove it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 (edited) Prove it... Why don't we ask the line workers? :rolleyes: Edited June 14, 2008 by suv_guy_19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 I agree...but no matter how behind the 8-ball the Ranger is, it is still the ONLY small truck on the market. And like I said with new engine and trans optiona and a dab of advertising, it would sell...and I think it would sell very well. Fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 Because if they spend a few pennies on swapping the engine and trans, they will sell a lot more and thus rake in the money. But why would Ford want to be profitable. People aren't buying the Ranger due to its engines, they aren't buying it because people aren't buying small trucks. If you were to put the more expensive 3.5 in place of the prove 4.0 and get a mile or two better MPG's, people are NOT going to start flocking to the Ranger. That's the reality, face it. People want a full size (or near full size like the rumored F100) crew cab pickup that gets 30 MPG (4.4L Diesel in an F100 maybe...). As soon as someone makes one, it will sell like hotcakes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 (edited) Prove it... Hey P71, I found this review from 2005: Consumer Guide Automotive - 2005 Ford Ranger News Word is that the 2006 Ranger will be yet another update of the vintage-1993 basic design. Ford still said to be mulling the future of its compact pickup, due to low profit margins in a declining market segment. There's talk of Japanese affiliate Mazda being tapped to design a new Ranger, but sources don't see any action on this front before 2010. Although the second half of that news was proven wrong, FoA won the lead design engineering contract on the Global Ranger but that wasn't announce until mid 2006. Edited June 14, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 There are so many variables in gas mileage on any one day. The wind, traffic conditions, timing the lights or getting caught by everyone, sudden hazards that come requiring braking, and on and on. Also, rental cars suck, never maintained well, beat up, and so on. I will go with the more stringent EPA ratings on the new Taurus which say it will deliver 28 highway as an average, better than the 500 with more power. My 2002 Taurus gets 22mpg in mixed driving with 3.0L 24 valve V6 and smaller than present Taurus with two less gears and 65 less hp. So if you can pull 22+mpg in new Taurus in mixed driving, that is impressive in my book with so much more car and power. I can see how they would get lower gas milage: The EPA tests are conducted with exactly the same acceleration curves, but when you're driving the Taurus, you are able to accelerate much faster if you choose to do so, therefore using more gas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critic Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 People aren't buying the Ranger due to its engines, they aren't buying it because people aren't buying small trucks. If you were to put the more expensive 3.5 in place of the prove 4.0 and get a mile or two better MPG's, people are NOT going to start flocking to the Ranger. That's the reality, face it. People want a full size (or near full size like the rumored F100) crew cab pickup that gets 30 MPG (4.4L Diesel in an F100 maybe...). As soon as someone makes one, it will sell like hotcakes... Exactly... Ford knows this.. and P doesn't drive one, so why he's so concerned is beyond me, other than it's made near him.. The ones that own and use a Ranger are the urban cowboys, who need to haul something once in a while.. it's great to drive to work for a second vehicle. Run to the hardware store on weekends for a home project. Carry a wheelbarrow or ladder to someplace. Then your choices are: 4 cylinder for economy and light hauling or 6 cylinder for 4 WD and a little more power. Pass it down to your son, so he can play with it.. it's a toy. No offence, it's a great truck, I'd rather drive one everyday than an Explorer actually. But your not gonna buy one to tow a big boat or trailer for a lawn mowing business, slap a cement mixer or welder onto the rear, put a blade on it to push snow. Give it up P.. Ranger is here only until the F-100 arrives. Then people will replace older F-150's for WORK vehicles and better economy. You don't see Farmers driving a Ranger, or Utilities or Construction using them. F-100 will be right-sizing for a lot of new reason's and one will be better fuel economy.. much like Ranger gets right now. In the F-100 P will be getting everything he wants now in the Ranger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 Europe gets by with just a Ranger as it's only pick-up truck from Ford, most tradesmen would go out of business pretty fast in Europe with high fuel prices if they had anything bigger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 (edited) Europe gets by with just a Ranger as it's only pick-up truck from Ford, most tradesmen would go out of business pretty fast in Europe with high fuel prices if they had anything bigger. Most tradesman here would go out of business with anything smaller than what they use. Most here use 3/4 ton trucks. Edited June 14, 2008 by suv_guy_19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 crew cab pickup that gets 30 MPG (4.4L Diesel in an F100 maybe...) What a pipe dream... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 16, 2008 Share Posted June 16, 2008 Why don't we ask the line workers? :rolleyes: Best response ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 16, 2008 Share Posted June 16, 2008 Prove it... dude...that is STRAIGHT from a Zone managers mouth after we questioned the lack of changes....sheesh....as blatant as it gets.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted June 16, 2008 Share Posted June 16, 2008 dude...that is STRAIGHT from a Zone managers mouth after we questioned the lack of changes....sheesh....as blatant as it gets.... It's heresay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 16, 2008 Share Posted June 16, 2008 It's heresay. ?....it was going to go the way of the Prev Taurus and seriously.....sorry if the truth hertz..... 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.