J-150 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 An F150 body on a much lighter frame. A truck very much like what an F150 was like in 1989. Not everyone needs a 3/4 ton frame/payload in their halfton. Make it $5000 cheaper than an F150. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenp77 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 J: I am completely with you I am waiting for the same thing but am afraid I may have to go buy a tacoma before ford does anything slightly bigger than a ranger and smaller than an f-150, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted December 12, 2005 Author Share Posted December 12, 2005 J: I am completely with you I am waiting for the same thing but am afraid I may have to go buy a tacoma before ford does anything slightly bigger than a ranger and smaller than an f-150, I'm think exact same size as an F150 with F150 sheetmetal, but far less payload and a much smaller, lighter frame. Less electronic crap (ie auto dimming interior lights) A very simple truck like we had in 89. Now you still offer it with power windows/locks etc. Again, picture an 89 XLT Lariat as far as trim and interior appointment under current F150 sheetmetal. And thats all. Forget the rest of it. I dont want auto headlights or an overhead rail. ANd loose the other gizmos, like the seat sensors that tell you to buckle up. Can you imagine the 5.4 in a truck 1000# lighter? The key here is not about being a smaller truck. Its the same size. Its not decontented, its minimized. People woul;d still want the XLT/FX4 appointments in a lighter duty full size truck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenp77 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 I'm think exact same size as an F150 with F150 sheetmetal, but far less payload and a much smaller, lighter frame. Less electronic crap (ie auto dimming interior lights) A very simple truck like we had in 89. Now you still offer it with power windows/locks etc. Again, picture an 89 XLT Lariat as far as trim and interior appointment under current F150 sheetmetal. And thats all. Forget the rest of it. I dont want auto headlights or an overhead rail. ANd loose the other gizmos, like the seat sensors that tell you to buckle up. Can you imagine the 5.4 in a truck 1000# lighter? The key here is not about being a smaller truck. Its the same size. Its not decontented, its minimized. People woul;d still want the XLT/FX4 appointments in a lighter duty full size truck. Damn J I wish you were a ford engineer is exactlly what I want and with the sides of the box back like they used to be I can't even load anything over the side of my 04 f-150 fx4 it is so damn tall and ;yes if you knocked off 1000# the 5.4 would be a mover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted December 13, 2005 Author Share Posted December 13, 2005 Damn J I wish you were a ford engineer is exactlly what I want and with the sides of the box back like they used to be I can't even load anything over the side of my 04 f-150 fx4 it is so damn tall and ;yes if you knocked off 1000# the 5.4 would be a mover. given the percentage of F150s that go to fleet and individual contractors, its something that needs to be addressed. Issues you raise like side loading, are an issue for these buyers too. ;yes if you knocked off 1000# the 5.4 would be a mover. this would be great as the frame for the next gen Lightning. Make the truck light enough and they wont need 600 lb ft of torque to let it keep up with the SRT10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 I think an F100 built on the Explorer chassis with a modern interpretation of the 1956 styling would be awesome. Keep it light as possible and keep the bed relatively shallow so you don't have to be 8' tall to reach in from the sides. Who cares if it can only tow 5000 lbs. Use the 4.0 V6 as the base & 3V 4.6 V8 as optional. If you need to tow more, get an F150/250/350. There's my dream truck... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheri/ck Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 I think an F100 built on the Explorer chassis with a modern interpretation of the 1956 styling would be awesome. Keep it light as possible and keep the bed relatively shallow so you don't have to be 8' tall to reach in from the sides. Who cares if it can only tow 5000 lbs. Use the 4.0 V6 as the base & 3V 4.6 V8 as optional. If you need to tow more, get an F150/250/350. There's my dream truck... Lighter weight is the key here. In my opionion, the rather good 4.6 V-8 has never been used in a proper truck designed around it. That engine can be fuel efficient, it has mostly been saddled with too much weight since first introduced in the F-150 in 1997. I also agree that something smaller than the current F-150 should happen. The Ranger is close - it needs to be wider and more comfortable to appeal to those looking at the Tacoma. And, it needs to have at least a 6 foot bed offered although a 4-door crew cab seems to also be mandatory. In other words, a tough mid-sized truck in more than one configuration with a proven engine that would likely deliver the same gas mileage numbers as the over-priced, high-revving, premium-preffered Toyota and Nissan V-6 engines. Ford could do this and have a hit. I would just simply love to see it happen. This vehicle could be similar in size, weight, engine displacement and hopefully get lots better gas mileage than my 1985 F-150 4X4 302 V-8(which was a great truck). We'll see if Ford is listening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 Perhaps Ford should just ditch the Ranger name and introduce another version of the Sport Trac without the crew cab and with a longer bed in its place, and perhaps offer it in a few other configurations. The Explorer name has a strong market presence. It should be utilized to its maximum potential. Perhaps call the other versions the Explorer F-100? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolarBear Posted December 17, 2005 Share Posted December 17, 2005 A Silverado, in other words? :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted December 19, 2005 Author Share Posted December 19, 2005 A Silverado, in other words? :D Pretty much. As the #2 in sales, #1 if you include Sierra, the public obviously thinks that it is sufficient for payload/towing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Pretty much. As the #2 in sales, #1 if you include Sierra, the public obviously thinks that it is sufficient for payload/towing. If it was, I don't think GM would have released a new tow package for the Silverado 1500 that gives it a 10,000 lb towing capacity. Then again, GM also brought us such "must-have" options like Nightvision, Quadrasteer, and a retractable-roof Envoy. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolarBear Posted December 20, 2005 Share Posted December 20, 2005 If it was, I don't think GM would have released a new tow package for the Silverado 1500 that gives it a 10,000 lb towing capacity. Then again, GM also brought us such "must-have" options like Nightvision, Quadrasteer, and a retractable-roof Envoy. :P Oh, trust me- GM understands the 1/2T market extremely well. It's the heavier-duty (some would say "Real") trucks that they struggle with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheri/ck Posted December 20, 2005 Share Posted December 20, 2005 Oh, trust me- GM understands the 1/2T market extremely well. It's the heavier-duty (some would say "Real") trucks that they struggle with. I could not agree more. I see more and more people in my area that had always been Ford truck people buying Silverados. There is a backlash against the new F-150 - too much truck for the half-ton market. Too complicated an engine that people don't trust that doesn't really deliver in terms of power to weight ratio with the heavy chassis. And, of course as we all know - the Ranger has been ignored and is too small. Ford has a big gap here and there are plenty of folks looking at and buying the Chevy product at least in my area - the desert southwest and this is truck country as much as any part of the U.S. If a person needs a heavy-duty towing/hauling machine, then yes the Ford product is the best choice. (Although I also know some die-hard Blue Oval folks that will never buy another Super-Duty after this latest PowerStroke debacle). Most people are looking for lighter weight, quicker machines lately that can do the occasional harder tasks and work well as family haulers when needed. Ford needs to rethink their position in this market. And, I do not agree with dropping the Ranger name - it has been around since the 70's and is well known and recognized. Frankly, I think the Explorer Sport-Trac would have sold more if it had not been named an Explorer. People that shop SUV's are not usually the same ones looking for a 4-door small truck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolarBear Posted December 20, 2005 Share Posted December 20, 2005 Ford needs to rethink their position in this market. And, I do not agree with dropping the Ranger name - it has been around since the 70's and is well known and recognized. Frankly, I think the Explorer Sport-Trac would have sold more if it had not been named an Explorer. People that shop SUV's are not usually the same ones looking for a 4-door small truck. I personally think it's a mistake to name any pickup after a SUV. I can't tell you how often we get asked when Ford is going to bring out a little Crew Cab like the Colorado. And how long has the Sport Trac been around? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02SilverStroke Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I think an F100 built on the Explorer chassis with a modern interpretation of the 1956 styling would be awesome. Keep it light as possible and keep the bed relatively shallow so you don't have to be 8' tall to reach in from the sides. Who cares if it can only tow 5000 lbs. Use the 4.0 V6 as the base & 3V 4.6 V8 as optional. If you need to tow more, get an F150/250/350. There's my dream truck... Why not bring back the dependable I-6's? GM has I-5's. They could pattern a new truck off the old ones of the late 50's and early 60's, let it be the "new" Ranger. If you look at specs of a 1960 F-100, you'll see that the SWB's had a 110" wheelbase and the LWB's had a 118" wheelbase. They had a 223 I-6 or a 292 V-8 and were great vehicles. If you'll notice, Ford (and others) have gone "retro" in the size of SUV's as far as size. Ford started with the Bronco in the 60's, increased it to the size of the F-150 in 78, then came out with the Bronco II, which was enlarged to become the Explorer, then they came out with the Escape, which is getting back to the size of the original Bronco. They should take the Ranger and enlarge it to the size of the F-100's in the 50's and 60's. You all are right, the F-150 has gotten a little "too big for it's britches". 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.