Ford listen this is what Ranger People want

[gafry]

Ford listen to the people who have bought Rangers and are telling you what they want.

 

I have owned three Ranger and am looking for another. Build it Ford in the USA and Now.

 

Ranger want list:

 

1. extended cab with bench seat

2. great gas mileage 30 mpg

3. new styling

4. 4 cylinder eco-boost

[RangerM]

As a long time (17 years) Ranger owner, I'd like a crew cab. I bought my Ranger when I was single. Now I'm married with kids. My needs have changed, so my requirements have.

 

The Sport Trac isn't doing it for me. (bed too short, and bedsides too high)

 

If I were to buy an F150, I'd get it lowered (not slammed); a cost that hurts the value equation.

[PRM]

I have been very happy with my Sport Trac. However, I would prefer a bit longer bed and better clearance than the independent suspension on the newer ST offers. The overall size of the ST is fine, but I'd be just as happy if it were a bit smaller overall, certainly no larger. Keep the option for a folding hard tonneau cover, the power rear window, a couple of bed storage areas and the six side attachment points. With a new 4 or 6 Ecoboost engine and a 6 speed tranny they could probably get the mileage up there. I am very interested in what they may come out with.

[GTwannabe]

Here's what I want:

 

- mid-size

- quad cab

- 4cyl turbodiesel

- 6spd manual

- 4wd

[94ranger]

Here's what I want:

 

- mid-size

- quad cab

- 4cyl turbodiesel

- 6spd manual

- 4wd

I concur, but I'll take a supercab instead. I don't need four full size doors.

[GTwannabe]

I concur, but I'll take a supercab instead. I don't need four full size doors.

 

Supercab would be fine... as long as it can fit 4 adults. Doesn't have to do it comfortably; just have real seating in the rear and not jump seats that barely fits a 10 year old.

[94ranger]

Supercab would be fine... as long as it can fit 4 adults. Doesn't have to do it comfortably; just have real seating in the rear and not jump seats that barely fits a 10 year old.

I remember those jumpseats. My dad's 1994 Ranger had them and I spent a good many miles folded up back there. I usually ended up curled up on the floor sleeping as it was more comfortable.

[efy]

I remember those jumpseats. My dad's 1994 Ranger had them and I spent a good many miles folded up back there. I usually ended up curled up on the floor sleeping as it was more comfortable.

Haha, same here!! Except it was my mom's and it was a '99. I rode back there many times from Atlanta to Panama City Beach, and it was pretty miserable. I eventually learned to curl up on the floor and sleep.

The truck was a great truck, though. You couldn't kill it. Well... I did. Flipped it 5 times into a tree. It had about 250,000 miles or so on it when that happened. Never had a minute's trouble out of it. It was so much fun to drive too. Even if it did ride so harshly that it would rattle your teeth out. I think the suspension may have just been worn out.

[94ranger]

Haha, same here!! Except it was my mom's and it was a '99. I rode back there many times from Atlanta to Panama City Beach, and it was pretty miserable. I eventually learned to curl up on the floor and sleep.

The truck was a great truck, though. You couldn't kill it. Well... I did. Flipped it 5 times into a tree. It had about 250,000 miles or so on it when that happened. Never had a minute's trouble out of it. It was so much fun to drive too. Even if it did ride so harshly that it would rattle your teeth out. I think the suspension may have just been worn out.

 

Ours was fun to drive too. It was the reason I was the first of my friends to know how to drive a stick shift. It was killed by a Spirit Turbo running a red light. I do miss that truck.

[Mackintire]

Ours was fun to drive too. It was the reason I was the first of my friends to know how to drive a stick shift. It was killed by a Spirit Turbo running a red light. I do miss that truck.

 

 

Wanted

 

• 
   
  
• Midsized
  
• quad cab
  
• 4x4
  
• 6 speed auto
  
• 250+HP that can make 26MPG on the highway
  
• Tow and stop 3000lb SAE rated trailer with ease and control and 5000lb SAE safely max
  
• 1300lb+ bed capacity when properly equipped
  
• Under $26k
  

[JW]

I always hoped for a Ranger based on the current Explorer (especially now that I have my own Explorer), which is pretty much what is being described here.

[GTwannabe]

I always hoped for a Ranger based on the current Explorer (especially now that I have my own Explorer), which is pretty much what is being described here.

 

The new Explorer is based off the FWD unibody Taurus X platform.

[Mackintire]

Rumors from foreign sources claim we will be receiving the T6 Ranger, just not in the first year of release.

[akirby]

Rumors from foreign sources claim we will be receiving the T6 Ranger, just not in the first year of release.

 

Just like the Fiesta, eh? Makes sense.

[dtpbody]

Ours was fun to drive too. It was the reason I was the first of my friends to know how to drive a stick shift. It was killed by a Spirit Turbo running a red light. I do miss that truck.

 

Yea, I had a 95 ranger flair side, it was a good truck!.. No more Rangers for me. Too small!.

[jc21]

Yea, I had a 95 ranger flair side, it was a good truck!.. No more Rangers for me. Too small!.

 

I think Ford is making a big mistake discontinuing the Ranger. In my view it's not a matter of if but when we have another gas price spike and Ford will be caught with their pants down in the truck segment. I'm looking at a 2010 Ranger. I seriously thought about going back to a full size truck (I've had two F-150's) but given the state of the economy and experience with my current Edison built Ranger if I buy it it will be another Ranger. My '02 went 100,000 on the original tires and still has the original brakes at 129,000 miles- it has served me well, especially when the jobsite was 500+ miles away and gas was $4.00/gal.

 

I had the pleasure of taking the plant tour at TCAP in '02 and came away very impressed. The tour guides were TCAP retirees; they and the people on the line cared about what they were doing. I was surprised how clean it was, much cleaner than a jet engine plant I worked at decades ago. Probably not possible but I wouldn't mind going again before they close.

 

The new T-6 Ranger may not be a good fit for this market; it might canibalize F-150 sales but but I think a revised version of the current Ranger would be. If Ford had a lick of horse sense they'd do it, have TCAP build it, and promote the heck out of it ............. something the current Ranger hasn't seen in a long while. Leaving the compact truck segment will come back to bite Ford in the arse.

[akirby]

I think a revised version of the current Ranger would be. If Ford had a lick of horse sense they'd do it, have TCAP build it, and promote the heck out of it ............. something the current Ranger hasn't seen in a long while. Leaving the compact truck segment will come back to bite Ford in the arse.

 

I don't think Ford can afford to keep TCAP open just for the Ranger. I think it will have to be co-located with other vehicles. But I do think they'll keep it (or bring it back after a short hiatus).

[ffracer]

What I want, as I am looking at a 2011, own a 1995 4cyl 5-speed manual longbed 2wd with 200k. Only rust is the reason to get a new one:

 

 

4 cyl - current 2.3L gas is fine, a turbodiesel would also be a good option for torque and mpgs; continue to offer a high torque motor for those who want to off road. I want real world gas mileage in a usable truck.

 

Manual transmission - the US car makers need to stop telling me how great automatics are now, they are not as good as manuals, I don't live in gridlock, and I know how to drive. they get real world better mileage and far better control, if you know what you are doing. Most of the world outside of the USA drives manuals, by choice, not cost. Number of Formula 1, Indycars, NASCAR Cup cars with torque converters = 0. For a reason. No manual, no sale.

 

Get rid of the RSC and all the electronic stuff (ESC, TC, tire sensors, etc.) that doesn't do anything but guess wrong and cost a lot when it fails. I know, some bureaucrat in DC thinks an 'app' on an iPhone can drive better than a human - wrong. At least make it totally defeatable at all speeds.

 

Bring back the 7' bed for the reg cab. Most useful low cost truck in the USA with a manual and 4cyl. Tows a lot too with a class 3 hitch. I don't get the point of the regular cab 6' bed - I had one. Long bed is much more useful.

 

Keep the SuperCab.

 

Get rid of the high riding, 4x4 wannabe ride height look for 4x2. I want a truck that handles well, not a high chair on wheels. Drop the ride height 2-3" and lower the seats, so my head doesn't hit the roof. Lower= safer and better handling, just the old Rangers.

 

Keep the Ranger size the same. Don't want a midsize (everyone else does that), don't want a heavier truck - a waste of gas and payload. Don't want a full size or an F-150. They are WAY too big: lousy mileage, hard to park, hard to get into the bed, handle like a house on wheels. I get why they are made, I still don't want one, because I don't need one, not because I can't afford one.

 

Change the styling and the dashboard just to do something new and it will sell again, especially at $15k and $4/gal. It was a great design for decades, just needs an update.

 

 

 

I hear this from many Ranger owners, who's trucks are now 10+ years old and ready for a new one, too.

Edited February 23, 2011 by ffracer

[Mackintire]

What I want, as I am looking at a 2011, own a 1995 4cyl 5-speed manual longbed 2wd with 200k. Only rust is the reason to get a new one:

 

 

4 cyl - current 2.3L gas is fine, a turbodiesel would also be a good option for torque and mpgs; continue to offer a high torque motor for those who want to off road. I want real world gas mileage in a usable truck.

 

Manual transmission - the US car makers need to stop telling me how great automatics are now, they are not as good as manuals, I don't live in gridlock, and I know how to drive. they get real world better mileage and far better control, if you know what you are doing. Most of the world outside of the USA drives manuals, by choice, not cost. Number of Formula 1, Indycars, NASCAR Cup cars with torque converters = 0. For a reason. No manual, no sale.

 

Get rid of the RSC and all the electronic stuff (ESC, TC, tire sensors, etc.) that doesn't do anything but guess wrong and cost a lot when it fails. I know, some bureaucrat in DC thinks an 'app' on an iPhone can drive better than a human - wrong. At least make it totally defeatable at all speeds.

 

Bring back the 7' bed for the reg cab. Most useful low cost truck in the USA with a manual and 4cyl. Tows a lot too with a class 3 hitch. I don't get the point of the regular cab 6' bed - I had one. Long bed is much more useful.

 

Keep the SuperCab.

 

Get rid of the high riding, 4x4 wannabe ride height look for 4x2. I want a truck that handles well, not a high chair on wheels. Drop the ride height 2-3" and lower the seats, so my head doesn't hit the roof. Lower= safer and better handling, just the old Rangers.

 

Keep the Ranger size the same. Don't want a midsize (everyone else does that), don't want a heavier truck - a waste of gas and payload. Don't want a full size or an F-150. They are WAY too big: lousy mileage, hard to park, hard to get into the bed, handle like a house on wheels. I get why they are made, I still don't want one, because I don't need one, not because I can't afford one.

 

Change the styling and the dashboard just to do something new and it will sell again, especially at $15k and $4/gal. It was a great design for decades, just needs an update.

 

 

 

I hear this from many Ranger owners, who's trucks are now 10+ years old and ready for a new one, too.

 

 

GM verified that they are bringing their next generation Colorado to the US in 2014.

 

Ford has only three options at this point.:

 

Option A Bring the T6 Ranger to the us.

Option B Build a unibody truck on the D3 replacement

Option C Do nothing and let the others fight for the midsize/compact truck market.

 

Modifying the F150 for better milage will not work, as the F150 would have to lose over 1000 lbs using the current engines or half that weight along with using the 3.0 diesel to hit 30 mpg. And even then.....there is still the issue of the final build cost.

 

Also the latest reports show the Midsize/Compact truck market stabilizing and possibly growing.

Edited February 23, 2011 by Mackintire

[Mackintire]

Lastly....

 

 

A T6 Ranger could easily out class the current ranger in every metric.

 

Its slightly bigger.... Think Tacoma sized.

It gets better fuel economy. 30 mpg with the small gas engine, over 30 mpg with the smaller diesel

More payload, 3000lb bed payload in the euro model....That's more than the US built F150!

Can tow more, 9000lbs with the large diesel and the right gearing. That's a testimony to the design strength of the frame and axle bearings.

Better comfort, its coil over shocks with a modifed hotckins rear leaf...the same as the current F150.

Handles great, in euro spec.

 

 

The ONLY issue is cost period.

[NLPRacing]

I have been very happy with my Sport Trac. However, I would prefer a bit longer bed and better clearance than the independent suspension on the newer ST offers. The overall size of the ST is fine, but I'd be just as happy if it were a bit smaller overall, certainly no larger. Keep the option for a folding hard tonneau cover, the power rear window, a couple of bed storage areas and the six side attachment points. With a new 4 or 6 Ecoboost engine and a 6 speed tranny they could probably get the mileage up there. I am very interested in what they may come out with.

 

A longer bed, but a bit smaller? That would be hard to do...

[akirby]

What makes the most sense to me is to take the T6 platform and hang F150 style sheetmetal on it as a 1/4 ton F100. It has to be significantly smaller and lighter than the F150 to accomodate smaller more fuel efficient engines.

[Kris Kolman]

For note the T6 CrewCab bed is pretty close to 61in x 61in square, which is a good foot longer than the SportTrac. Ground clearence is only slightly higher at 9in. No reason to change the T6 sheet metal at all... It compares well with the F150 and SuperDuty... Just add "F-100" badging at the side vents and tailgate.

 

 

 

[Mackintire]

For note the T6 CrewCab bed is pretty close to 61in x 61in square, which is a good foot longer than the SportTrac. Ground clearence is only slightly higher at 9in. No reason to change the T6 sheet metal at all... It compares well with the F150 and SuperDuty... Just add "F-100" badging at the side vents and tailgate.

 

 

 

 

 

What he said