BORG Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 The cost of importing anything literally "overseas" makes this scenario extremely unlikely. Any global Ranger product will have to be built regionally. I just build/priced a Ranger and I'm surprised to see that you can now buy a Ranger Supercab with the 2.3L engine. Since my Dad has been buying Rangers, he could never get the I4 in the Supercab variant, only the 3.0L or up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 (edited) The cost of importing anything literally "overseas" makes this scenario extremely unlikely. Any global Ranger product will have to be built regionally. Depends how many the end up selling once the F100 comes. If numbers stay around 6,000 maybe importing from South Africa or Thailand is possible (both have FTAs) If Ford puts its A into gear and pushes diesel and 2.5 I-4 for increased volume, local production is a must. Edited June 26, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabfordeb Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Depends how many the end up selling once the F100 comes.If numbers stay around 6,000 maybe importing from South Africa or Thailand is possible (both have FTAs) If Ford puts its A into gear and pushes diesel and 2.5 I-4 for increased volume, local production is a must. If Ford would just invest in putting the 2.5L I-4 in and sell the 4 door Supercab with automatic trans and the 2.5 L I-4 there would be a lot more Rangers sold, including one to me. That's the one shortcoming it has compared to the competition today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 (edited) Saw something perplexing on the road the other day, a current NA 4-door bodied Ranger. NOT the Sport Trac either, the actual Ranger body. Was scratching my head at it til I saw the Mexico license plates. It's about time Ford woke up about the Ranger, now if they'd just wake up about the strengths of the and the failures that are the D3 sedans. Edited June 26, 2008 by Armada Master Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 It's about time Ford woke up about the Ranger, now if they'd just wake up about the strengths of the and the failures that are the D3 sedans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7upMustang Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 The ranger is the perfect truck for most homeowners who want a truck. There are 2 things I believe the new one needs aside from the obvious such as new styling and updates to the chassis. 1. 4WD models need to be more fuel efficient. The 2WD with the 2.3 is the most fuel efficient truck, while the 4wd S-Cab requires the 4.0 and with auto tranny is no more efficient than an F-150. At least you can still get a stick which helps a little, but I fear that will be gone with the new model, just like the F-150. A 4 cyl with enough power to motivate the super or crew cabs, or a more efficient V6 would be great. 23 MPG+ highway is what I am looking for. 2. Needs a super-crew. The Sport Trac is too expensive, probably due to the explorer badge it has. I can build a nicely equipped 4wd s-cab Sport Ranger for under 25k, a comperable Sport Trac is around 30K, WOW. Also, the Sport Trac gets the Explorer's higher price, but not it's big rebates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 The point has been made that they cannot keep building the Ranger past a certain year due to lack of side airbags (or something like that). Assuming that they can't simply install another Ford model's seats that integrate them (if there is one), couldn't they just build up enough inventory to sell a certain model year over two years? Granted, this isn't exactly an optimum solution for those (like me) that don't like to simply buy "off the rack", but it may suffice until the new model is available. Isn't this what Mazda did with the Miata for 1998? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 (edited) I'm actually surprised the Sport Trac is still in production at the moment, sales have got to be minuscule. From my perspective, the Ranger, like the Panther cars, no longer belong in a Ford dedicated to safety and quality, both vehicles are Ford's biggest under performers in those areas. Please, let them pass, better is on the way. Edited June 27, 2008 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 From my perspective, the Ranger, like the Panther cars, no longer belong in a Ford dedicated to safety and quality, both vehicles are Ford's biggest under performers in those areas. Please, let them pass, better is on the way. Pffft.....yeah those unsafe Panthers in a crash and those unreliable Rangers need to go yesterday! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixt9coug Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Pffft.....yeah those unsafe Panthers in a crash and those unreliable Rangers need to go yesterday! I swear we had this discussion before. Its not that the Ranger or Panthers are unsafe, its just that the bar has been raised all around them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 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. http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=27579 FORD OF SOUTHERN AFRICA TO INVEST MORE THAN R1.5 BILLION FOR NEW GLOBAL EXPORT PROGRAM Manufacturing will be realigned by 2011 to produce next generation small pickup Johannesburg – 30 January 2008 – Ford Motor Company of Southern Africa (FMCSA) today announced plans to invest more than R 1.5 billion to expand operations for the production of Ford's next-generation compact pickup truck and Puma diesel engine. The investment will commence in 2009 and be split between its assembly plant in Silverton, Pretoria and engine facility in Struandale, Port Elizabeth. Production of the new diesel engine is scheduled to begin in 2010, followed by production of the new pickup in 2011. No they do not mention which markets (and so whether or not US will be included) - but the production of T6 in South Africa has been announced. Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolphy Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 What kind of gas mileage does a late model 2.3L 2wd Ranger get? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 What kind of gas mileage does a late model 2.3L 2wd Ranger get? I think it's 20/26 on the new test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richardmayo Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 What kind of gas mileage does a late model 2.3L 2wd Ranger get? There's a good fuel economy tool at http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaylonJennings Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 What kind of gas mileage does a late model 2.3L 2wd Ranger get? Auto: 25 City - 34 HWY Manual: 29 City - 38 HWY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_fairmont_wagon Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Hmm, thought the auto was around 19/24 or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 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? A Ranger would be smaller than the F-100, though, so it would have it's own market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tango_28 Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 My friend has barebones 08 Ranger and he averages 32mpg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 (edited) Pffft.....yeah those unsafe Panthers in a crash and those unreliable Rangers need to go yesterday! The panthers crush like a tin can in side-impacts, making it Ford's worst performing vehicle. Compare this to the Five Hundred. The cab stays completely in tact while the Crown Victoria dashboard is obliterated by catastrophic structural failure. Edited June 27, 2008 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 The panthers crush like a tin can in side-impacts, making it Ford's worst performing vehicle. Compare this to the Five Hundred. The cab stays completely in tact while the Crown Victoria dashboard is obliterated by catastrophic structural failure. What the high speed (75+) rear crash tests like for the Five Hundread BTW? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 (edited) The panthers crush like a tin can in side-impacts, making it Ford's worst performing vehicle. Compare this to the Five Hundred. The cab stays completely in tact while the Crown Victoria dashboard is obliterated by catastrophic structural failure. Panther's B pillar deformed badly because the bottom rail started separating from the frame, Ooops!!!! You can only put so many bolts in a frame........something that doesn't happen in a modern unitary construction vehicle. Also the BOF construction doesn't allow the force to dissipate as well through the rest of the frame, this vectoring is an important frame design consideration brought to Ford Nth America by Volvo and Ford Europe. Finally, all five star crash rated vehicles are not equal, they achieve their rating through aggerated point scores but the emphasis is on survivability, not the severety of injuries if you survive. A rating five means you survive a crash at a certain speed but you could be badly injured all the same!! Edited June 28, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 The current Ranger, like the chassis is living on borrowed time, the Ranger is getting a short reprieve due to it's renewed popularity as a fuel sipping truck. The chassis trio are dying and are way out of step in todays marketplace. Bring on the global RWD replacements for the . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 (edited) Oh, and if the F-100 is slotting in as a quasi-replacement for Ranger, then Ranger should follow the Ridgeline idea and become a D3 based unibody truck. The Ridgeline is popping up in the parking lot of where I work in alarming numbers.... Edited June 28, 2008 by twintornados Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 (edited) What the high speed (75+) rear crash tests like for the Five Hundread BTW? There is no comparison data but the D3 cab is substantially stronger than the flimsy frame bolted onto the panther chassis. And besides, you're ignoring the data I've presented here which is substantive and not speculative. In terms of frontal crash teting, the Panther performs good but not as good as the Five Hundred. You still see cab failure while the 500 is completely undisturbed, the windshield doesn't even crack! Five Hundred Lincoln Town Car Edited June 28, 2008 by BORG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mlhm5 Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 The #1 truck in the ROW is not sold in the USA. More than 12MM have been sold and if you look in the dictionary under indestructible vehicle, you will find this picture 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.