ANTAUS Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 LINK-Detroit news Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 LINK-Detroit news i just knew it....if ford canned the ranger in this market with no immediate replacement they deserved to be bought by toyoda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 (edited) Pity the US wasn't already on the current Rest of World Ranger. The truck was previously called Courier and has the 4.0 V6 and gas I-4 as well as 2.5 and 3.0 diesels. The current ROW Ranger only has the diesels available but I'm sure the I-4 and v6 could be made available. Driver and front passenger airbags standard. Side front airbags optional++ Ranger boasts the availability of dual front supplementary-restraint system (SRS) airbags, standard on all models, helping to provide head protection in the event of a frontal collision. And there are optional front side airbags++ to help protect the driver and front passenger from side impacts. Edited June 25, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Pity the US wasn't already on the current Rest of World Ranger.The truck was previously called Courier and has the 4.0 V6 and gas I-4 as well as 2.5 and 3.0 diesels. The current ROW Ranger only has the diesels available but I'm sure the I-4 and v6 could be made available. my neighbor had a then brand new white 1980 courier..its why i bought my ranger in 1990..simple decent truck with good MPG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Reality sets in. The F 150 is not necessary in most applications. Its a great truck, but in many cases the Ranger will work just as well on less fuel. With F 150 sales going down month by month, the Ranger can hopefully salvage some pickup sales ontil its replacement is ready. At least Ford management realize this now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Reality sets in. The F 150 is not necessary in most applications. Its a great truck, but in many cases the Ranger will work just as well on less fuel. With F 150 sales going down month by month, the Ranger can hopefully salvage some pickup sales ontil its replacement is ready. At least Ford management realize this now. what detroit really needs is some smallish diesels in the 2.0 to 2.5 range in these small trucks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 (edited) my neighbor had a then brand new white 1980 courier..its why i bought my ranger in 1990..simple decent truck with good MPG Asian Ranger & US Ranger are now basically same size. T6 will be slightly wider and a bit more car like interior - still BOF though. Edited June 25, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 i just knew it....if ford canned the ranger in this market with no immediate replacement they deserved to be bought by toyoda Yeah...those 6000 Ranger sales a month are exactly what Ford needs to stay afloat in these tough times. :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 regardless of volume - if they can fit in SAB for less than they make on them - why not - it would be a crime not to have an I4 truck offering in the current market. BTW - interesting point about South Africa being the chosen US export plant - now it all makes perfect sense. Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 i just knew it....if ford canned the ranger in this market with no immediate replacement they deserved to be bought by toyoda Hyundai will buy Ford.... They need a truck line. :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 Wouldnt that be ironic...that Ford could stay afloat by most possibly the vehicle they have let languish around the most...that would be interesting to see Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tico Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 "Ford May Keep Building Rangers" Duh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 I too was intrigued by South Africa being exempt from the 'chicken tax', and can't even guess why that is. Was South Africa embargoed when the tariff was passed? If so, what an odd turn of events. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Toyota: We thought Ford was going to Ram the Raptor up our ass? Ford: We never pull through, we just pull out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 (edited) I too was intrigued by South Africa being exempt from the 'chicken tax', and can't even guess why that is. Was South Africa embargoed when the tariff was passed? If so, what an odd turn of events. EDIT, South Africa does Have an FTA with the US not sure about the actual agreement terms. This from the Official US website : http://www.ustr.gov/Trade_Agreements/Bilat...tion_Index.html FTAs Pending Congressional Approval Colombia Panama Republic of Korea FTAs In Force Israel NAFTA Jordan Chile Singapore Australia Morocco Bahrain FTAs Pending Implementation Peru Oman Other FTA Negotiations Malaysia Thailand SACU --- South Africa UAE Edited June 25, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Toyota: We thought Ford was going to Ram the Raptor up our ass? Ford: We never pull through, we just pull out. Nothing has been officially stated about the Raptor. Nothing has been officially stated about the Boss at all for that matter.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Nothing has been officially stated about the Raptor. Nothing has been officially stated about the Boss at all for that matter.... The article said the Raptor is postponed indefinitely, since it used the Boss, and it doesn't fit into Ford's new pc Toyota mentality, I think that means it will never see the light of day, unless we can help a real car guy like Coletti stage a coup at Ford and put the ship back on the right course.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 The article said the Raptor is postponed indefinitely, since it used the Boss, and it doesn't fit into Ford's new pc Toyota mentality, I think that means it will never see the light of day, unless we can help a real car guy like Coletti stage a coup at Ford and put the ship back on the right course.. The article speculated it has been postponed. Hell, all of this is speculation until Ford actually says something about it. Yeesh, do you need a hug or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Yeah. The Raptor used the Boss engine. What official Ford press release said that? In fact, you don't have any solid basis for half the complaints you've tossed out on this forum over the past week. I swear, you need to take a long break from this board and ask yourself whether you should believe every bit of twitter that comes out over the ever loving internet. Last I saw the Raptor was intended to be a serious off-road truck, a "long travel" vehicle designed for off road rallies, not streetlight racing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 regardless of volume - if they can fit in SAB for less than they make on them - why not - it would be a crime not to have an I4 truck offering in the current market. BTW - interesting point about South Africa being the chosen US export plant - now it all makes perfect sense. Igor Why can't Ford keep the St Paul plant open what's wrong with it, they have the expertise, skilled workforce what's the problem there Igor just interested. Why can't Ford get together with the unions and sort the plant out so it could be run as a brand new green field site with maximum flexibilty or what ever it takes to save the plant. It makes me sick to see talent wasted put on the scrapheap when it could be fixed which would be best for Ford and its workforce. Its a sin to close the plant down. http://www.autosavant.net/2008/04/ranger-i...ive-ranger.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Why can't Ford keep the St Paul plant open what's wrong with it, they have the expertise, skilled workforce what's the problem there Igor just interested. Why can't Ford get together with the unions and sort the plant out so it could be run as a brand new green field site with maximum flexibilty or what ever it takes to save the plant. It makes me sick to see talent wasted put on the scrapheap when it could be fixed which would be best for Ford and its workforce. Its a sin to close the plant down. http://www.autosavant.net/2008/04/ranger-i...ive-ranger.html i could easily see the 6.2L being offered in the raptor...or a small contingent of raptors going out with the base ford engine..hell any serious off road organization is going to swap in a full blown race engine anyhow....i still believe you may see 500ish raptors go out the door with the boss...who in there right mind would want the raptor for a daily commuter anyhow?..its designed for off road application...far as 6.2L in boss...i say who cares..could svt offer a few thousand 6.2L for the afficionados...sure...in my estimation the 5.0L is far more marketable in a boss stang or slightly uptuned in a GT350..i am still not a believer the stang GT will see the 5.0L..big reason is cost and stang will survive nicely with the ecobost...i do know i could give a rats ass about HP in a truck..its torque...my old 300six performed very very nicely as a truck...i do not want anything to do with a race truck..that makes no sense..all you bitchers slathering over the yoda go buy one and get over to another web site...as an example "yoda owners who fuck there tundra's"..that should fit the bill for you...i swear..some here have no idea what a truck is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Why can't Ford keep the St Paul plant open what's wrong with it, they have the expertise, skilled workforce what's the problem there Igor just interested. Why can't Ford get together with the unions and sort the plant out so it could be run as a brand new green field site with maximum flexibilty or what ever it takes to save the plant. It makes me sick to see talent wasted put on the scrapheap when it could be fixed which would be best for Ford and its workforce. Its a sin to close the plant down. http://www.autosavant.net/2008/04/ranger-i...ive-ranger.html Besides it being all the way in Minesotta and probably needing a said investment - I think the only problem with the plant is that the South African plant can build the future Ranger cheaper. The reason why Ford is trying ti kill the current Ranger is 2 fold - 1) it reminds everyone that it has not been redesigned wince Bush Sr. (and Ford does not want to invest money into redesigning it) and 2) it does not have the Side Impact Airbags that will be required for all 2010 models (see point 1 parentheses). Ford does not have product to replace the Ranger with once the current one is gone. They could put the new one there, but the Ranger simply does not sell in US in the volume that would keep a whole plant churning at 2 or 3 shifts. The larger Ranger replacement - the F100 will go to MTP, and the smaller replacement will go to South Africa, where it will also be produced for other markets - Europe, South America, etc. Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 2 points. 1. South Africa was not officially announced as the future source of Rangers. That is an assumption. 2. If St. Paul stays open, I would be interested in where they plan on getting some of the components. With the planned demise of the Ranger, some parts that are currently being produced in ACH plants were never outsourced. In Monroe, they currently produce the catalytic converter and sway bars. No supplier wanted to take on the expense of engineering and building these parts only for a limited run, so Ford ordered enough to complete the projected build into next year and all the service parts they thought they would need. Monroe will be done in the next couple of months, so my question is, who would build all of these parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mower Man Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 what detroit really needs is some smallish diesels in the 2.0 to 2.5 range in these small trucks I completely agree. Bring back the Ranger diesel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 (edited) 2 points. 1. South Africa was not officially announced as the future source of Rangers. That is an assumption. 2. If St. Paul stays open, I would be interested in where they plan on getting some of the components. With the planned demise of the Ranger, some parts that are currently being produced in ACH plants were never outsourced. In Monroe, they currently produce the catalytic converter and sway bars. No supplier wanted to take on the expense of engineering and building these parts only for a limited run, so Ford ordered enough to complete the projected build into next year and all the service parts they thought they would need. Monroe will be done in the next couple of months, so my question is, who would build all of these parts. Good post, The other point is that the new F100 is a lighter truck than the existing F150 and a true 1/2 tonner So is a Ranger really needed when the F100 arrives, particularly if it has a diesel? Edited June 25, 2008 by jpd80 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.