Ford Europe Get New Ranger

[robertlane]

CLICK HERE FOR THE ARTICLE

[Expyfan]

nice, I like it. Now, why Ford doesn't bring it here as the redesign Ranger.

[Blue II]

Because it is too useful of a vehicle, and will steal F-150 sales.

 

That is official policy. The new North American Ranger will be built off the Explorer/Sport Trac chassis.

It would be nice to have the Diesel though.

[blksn8k2]

That is official policy. The new North American Ranger will be built off the Explorer/Sport Trac chassis.

It would be nice to have the Diesel though.

 

What a croc of sh!t!! I assume that means we will also not see a crew cab Ranger. Whoever is in charge of making these types of decisions should have been canned years ago. All this type of thinking does is push customers to a competitor who will build what the customer wants and needs. When that happens Ford gets absolutely nothing. Most people who want a Ranger sized vehicle are not interested in the F150. Assuming that the customer will be brand loyal in this day and age is just plain stupid. :rolleyes:

[Scot T.]

We need that truck here. I still think Ford is placing bets on a free trade agreement with Thailand by the time St. Paul Ranger plant closes. If it doesn't happen, they'll probably build the new Ranger in Mexico. That's where Toyota is building the Tacoma in order to get a good margin on sales.

[bolita]

We need that truck here. I still think Ford is placing bets on a free trade agreement with Thailand by the time St. Paul Ranger plant closes. If it doesn't happen, they'll probably build the new Ranger in Mexico. That's where Toyota is building the Tacoma in order to get a good margin on sales.

 

Even if a FTA is signed with Thailand, I believe that there still is the issue regading the Chicken Tax, right?

 

I would boost up the Argentina plant (that builds the US style crew cab now) and use that as a abse to produce this new Ranger in the Region...

[gafry]

NO DIESEL FOR THE NEW RANGER AND I WILL NOT BUT IT.

 

I WILL BUY THE FIRST SMALL TRUCK THAT HAS A DIESEL THAT GETS GOOD MILEAGE

 

 

 

FORD THE TIME IS TICKING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Larson]

That Ranger is ugly and falls short to the competition in NA. Towing capacity up to 3 tons? The Frontier gets up to 3.25 tons. Even more for the Dakota. If they have a new Ranger here, it needs to kick everyones ass, not fall short in comparrison.

[bec5150]

I don't agree with that. Let's look at the history of small trucks. Why did the small truck market get started in the first place? Because in the late 70's and early 80's, gas was very expensive and people didn't want to have a huge truck just to pick up a refrigerator or some mulch at the garden center.

 

So the little Toyotas and Datsuns (remember that!!??) got over 25MPG and were good for a work vehicle. As gas got cheaper, folks moved up...and the little trucks grew as well.

 

Now I think we're back to the early 80's again. I think if gas stays at the 2.50 to 3.00 dollar range, people are going to go for the standard 4cyl/5spd truck again, much like the "A" and "B" class cars are coming over from Europe and making a splash. Really, can you imagine ANYONE wanting a Honda Fit or Chevy Aveo when gas was a buck fifty a gallon?

 

So a more capable truck to be competitive? Quite the contrary. The Ranger is the highest mileage, most efficient, and YES, smallest truck on the market and I think with an update it will sell like hotcakes.

 

I think that Ford ought to throw a different body on the Ranger and refine the suspension a bit. Then, with the standard 4cyl/5spd model, sell the thing so cheap that people will buy it just for the deal. Then, after they are pleased with the Ford (let's hope they are) they can move to other products.

 

In short, make the small truck what it's supposed to be. The market, which didn't want it as little as two years ago, surely will look at it differently now.

Edited June 2, 2006 by bec5150

[NLPRacing]

I don't agree with that. Let's look at the history of small trucks. Why did the small truck market get started in the first place? Because in the late 70's and early 80's, gas was very expensive and people didn't want to have a huge truck just to pick up a refrigerator or some mulch at the garden center.

 

So the little Toyota's and Datsun's (remember that!!??) got over 25MPG and were good for a work vehicle. As gas got cheaper, folks moved up...and the little trucks grew as well.

 

Now I think we're back to the early 80's again. I think if gas stays at the 2.50 to 3.00 dollar range, people are going to go for the standard 4cyl/5spd truck again, much like the "A" and "B" class cars are coming over from Europe and making a splash. Really, can you imagine ANYONE wanting a Honda Fit or Chevy Aveo when gas was a buck fifty a gallon?

 

So a more capable truck to be competitive? Quite the contrary. The Ranger is the highest mileage, most efficient, and YES, smallest truck on the market and I think with an update it will sell like hotcakes.

 

I think that Ford ought to throw a different body on the Ranger and refine the suspension a bit. Then, with the standard 4cyl/5spd model, sell the thing so cheap that people will buy it just for the deal. Then, after they are pleased with the Ford (let's hope they are) they can move to other products.

 

In short, make the small truck what it's supposed to be. The market, which didn't want it as little as two years ago, surely will look at it differently now.

 

Do you think the market would be ready for this:

 

Personally, I think if styled right (like the Bronco concept) and offer it with 4WD as well as FWD, I think it would sell well and could be built right along side the other B cars that Ford's planning to build.

[bec5150]

Yes. Give me that truck. Absolutely perfect. Give me a 4cyl/5speed Fusion or even more suitable, an Escape with a bed behind the front seat. PERFECT!!! And NO!!...I don't need seating for anymore than the one seat and I don't even need a huge extended cab, but rather just enough room to throw a shopping bag or two behind the front seat, which is what I have now in my Ranger standard cab.

 

There were a LOT of people that were critical of the 80's FWD trucks from VW and Dodge (Rampage) but for my uses, they would be perfect for what I do.

 

99% of the time my truck only has 1 person riding in it...that's me. 99% of the time, the bed is empty except for ballast weight in the winter (not needed if it's FWD). And, 99% of the time, my truck is my commuter vehicle on my 50 mile round trip 5 days a week.

 

So, when I do use the truck that 1% of the time, it's usually small stuff like a washer/dryer, or furniture, and (of course) friends borrow it as well. The heaviest things I have ever hauled with my truck has been about 1500Lbs of junk to the dump or 1500Lbs of topsoil. I have only towed with it once, and that was a small chipper/shredder that I towed from the rental place. That's it.

 

I think a little FWD truck like you have displayed above would be the cat's butt for that sort of work.

Edited June 2, 2006 by bec5150

[Larson]

I don't agree with that. Let's look at the history of small trucks. Why did the small truck market get started in the first place? Because in the late 70's and early 80's, gas was very expensive and people didn't want to have a huge truck just to pick up a refrigerator or some mulch at the garden center.

 

So the little Toyotas and Datsuns (remember that!!??) got over 25MPG and were good for a work vehicle. As gas got cheaper, folks moved up...and the little trucks grew as well.

 

Now I think we're back to the early 80's again. I think if gas stays at the 2.50 to 3.00 dollar range, people are going to go for the standard 4cyl/5spd truck again, much like the "A" and "B" class cars are coming over from Europe and making a splash. Really, can you imagine ANYONE wanting a Honda Fit or Chevy Aveo when gas was a buck fifty a gallon?

 

So a more capable truck to be competitive? Quite the contrary. The Ranger is the highest mileage, most efficient, and YES, smallest truck on the market and I think with an update it will sell like hotcakes.

 

I think that Ford ought to throw a different body on the Ranger and refine the suspension a bit. Then, with the standard 4cyl/5spd model, sell the thing so cheap that people will buy it just for the deal. Then, after they are pleased with the Ford (let's hope they are) they can move to other products.

 

In short, make the small truck what it's supposed to be. The market, which didn't want it as little as two years ago, surely will look at it differently now.

 

The Ranger doesn't get that much more milage than the competition, not nearly enough to make a difference. People will see it as out dated and lacking. I never said it had to grow in size, just in capability. A stronger, boxed frame, more powerful engines that are also more fuel efficent, 6 speed automatic trannys to further the fuel efficiency, possibly even a 6 speed manual instead of the 5 speed, a NEW interior, and a Hydraulic Hybrid model(That should easily get 40-50mpg!) Given all this, and it can either top or at least match others in other catagories like towing, payload, hp/tq., then it will sell like hot cakes. This CAN be done, especially with things like DI.

[bigblueford]

What a croc of sh!t!! I assume that means we will also not see a crew cab Ranger. Whoever is in charge of making these types of decisions should have been canned years ago. All this type of thinking does is push customers to a competitor who will build what the customer wants and needs. When that happens Ford gets absolutely nothing. Most people who want a Ranger sized vehicle are not interested in the F150. Assuming that the customer will be brand loyal in this day and age is just plain stupid. :rolleyes:

 

 

So if the Ranger will be built off the Explorer/Sport Trac chassis, then you don't think there will be a 4-door Ranger? I was thinking the opposite - the last I saw the Sport Trac and Explorer have 4 doors. I think it is hopeful that we'll see a 4 door Ranger if Ford wants to remain competitive in the small/mid-size truck market if it will built off that chassis. Add a small V8 or a little diesel and you got a best seller on your hands.

 

Diesels make up about 50% of overseas markets, but us Americans love our gas-guzzling horsepower! Once we get our minds away from that mentality and start buying vehicles for function/transportation, then the manufacturers will build to what the public wants. I have an F250 Diesel (15mpg) and a Chevy Metro (50 mpg). Obviously a small 4-door pickup with great economy (read: diesel) will meet my two in the middle!

Edited August 22, 2006 by bigblueford

[twintornados]

The EU Ranger can and should be brought over here as a truck that can fit between the F-150 and smaller segment....instead of calling it Ranger....label it as F-100, then deep six our current Ranger platform and bring the Mexican Ford Courier up north and relabel it the Ranger.....Ranger should return to her roots as a small affordable truck that appeals to urban prospects and rural uses.

 

Also, can the Explorer Sport-Trac and have the new Ranger(F-100) in a double cab setup. If that is not possible, there is always the option of having a Mazda B-series twin with the double cab since Mazda does not share the Explorer/Sport-Trac line.

[Watchdevil]

That Ranger looks like it was designed 20 years ago.

[Roadrunner]

That Ranger looks like it was designed 20 years ago.

 

You mean the Thai Ranger?

 

The new Ranger looks decently modern, although it could be styled better.