FordBuyer Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Your right it is very possible they will re-enter at some point, but I can also understand why Ranger and small truck fans in general are upset. Unlike the minivan market, Ford used to "own" the small truck market. 15-20 years ago no one even came close in the U.S. to the Ranger and I think some people feel like Ford just let the market slip away. True the small truck market shrank a lot over the years, but if Ford still commanded the same marketshare percentage in small trucks today as they did back then they could easily be moving 10,000+ Rangers a month. Toyota does it today with a fairly uninspiring product. They have ended up as the small truck leader pretty much through default, not because they have a great product. It's a sad situation, but it is what it is. How many more times do we have to replow the same ground? Ford has determined that they can't make money or enough money to justify being in this stagnant segment any longer. If you want a minivan, or compact pickup, go somewhere else. I see the light. Ford can't be all things to all people anymore since they can't afford to lose money in segments any longer. If you can't justify the expense, then stay out. I have faith that they know what they are doing and will only spend money on segments where they think they can be very competitive and clear a good profit margin. Let Toyota with its three divisions and GM with its four waste money chasing all segments profitable or not. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) How many more times do we have to replow the same ground? Ford has determined that they can't make money or enough money to justify being in this stagnant segment any longer. If you want a minivan, or compact pickup, go somewhere else. I see the light. Ford can't be all things to all people anymore since they can't afford to lose money in segments any longer. If you can't justify the expense, then stay out. I have faith that they know what they are doing and will only spend money on segments where they think they can be very competitive and clear a good profit margin. Let Toyota with its three divisions and GM with its four waste money chasing all segments profitable or not. How do you know what Ford will do in a few years? If a small pickup is shared worldwide it can still be profitable with less volume just like the world cars and utilities. No one knows where the market will be in 5 years. How can you boldly profess that Ford will never compete in this market again? I don't know if they will or they won't, but I can promise if market conditions become favorable again they will be back. There might come a time when every Tom, Dick and Jane can't afford an F-150 and a door will be opened for a less expensive, yet still capable smaller truck. Ford never did well in the minivan market because quite frankly they just couldn't build a competitive minivan. The Aerostar was an ugly joke and drove the wrong wheels. The old Taurus based Windstar-Freestar was an unreliable rattle trap. The difference is that Ford does know how to build a class leading truck. If they decide to enter again then great... if not... oh well. T6 could do well in North America, but there are a lot of variables and questions to be asked. Could they flex an F-150 plant to build it? How would it effect F-150 sales? Could they re-take the market (I believe they could) and last could it be built using efficient EcoBoost I-4 engines that would give it a true fuel economy advantage over the F-150? I am sure Ford is studying the market and if they feel they can re-enter profitably without taking too much away from the F-150 they will... if not... they won't. Edited January 16, 2012 by 2005Explorer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 I am sure Ford is studying the market and if they feel they can re-enter profitably without taking too much away from the F-150 they will... if not... they won't. Exactly. So why do we have to keep rehashing it over and over and over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) Exactly. So why do we have to keep rehashing it over and over and over? I was only re-hashing it because FordBuyer says it isn't possible. I have changed my mind and now agree with you that I don't think Ford has given up on this market. At least not yet. I guess time will either prove us right or wrong. Edited January 16, 2012 by 2005Explorer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBirdStangSkyliner Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Personally, I think it is a fool's folly to think that the F150 and SuperDuty truck market won't take another big hit in the next two to three years. Pressure on fuel prices from demand seems really likely. China is coming out of the recession and cars sales are also taking off in Russia and India. Political upheaval and uncertain supplies are a reality in the Mid-East. Iran is messing around in the Persian Gulf and with nukes. Their un-piloted drone technology seems likely to soon take-off. Iraq is about as likely to slide into anarchy and civil war than to become a stable, petroleum producing democracy. Having a midsized truck and SUV with the 2.7L EcoBoost would be pretty smart if gas prices soar to about $4.25 to $4.50. It just seems like the world, and parking space size, is heading in one direction and the F150 in the opposite way. The 2004 F150 became too large for many garages, parking spaces, trail-head parking spots and mountain roads. Even living in Montana with lots of CDL experience, these pickups are often size 13 feet trying to live in size 10 shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Even living in Montana with lots of CDL experience, these pickups are often size 13 feet trying to live in size 10 shoes. LOL... As much as I love driving my Dad's 2011 F-150 4x4 SuperCrew with a 6.5" box I will say it's tricky to park in tight quarters! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Personally, I think it is a fool's folly to think that the F150 and SuperDuty truck market won't take another big hit in the next two to three years. Pressure on fuel prices from demand seems really likely. China is coming out of the recession and cars sales are also taking off in Russia and India. Political upheaval and uncertain supplies are a reality in the Mid-East. Iran is messing around in the Persian Gulf and with nukes. Their un-piloted drone technology seems likely to soon take-off. Iraq is about as likely to slide into anarchy and civil war than to become a stable, petroleum producing democracy. Having a midsized truck and SUV with the 2.7L EcoBoost would be pretty smart if gas prices soar to about $4.25 to $4.50. It just seems like the world, and parking space size, is heading in one direction and the F150 in the opposite way. The 2004 F150 became too large for many garages, parking spaces, trail-head parking spots and mountain roads. Even living in Montana with lots of CDL experience, these pickups are often size 13 feet trying to live in size 10 shoes. So do you know the size and weight of the new 2015 F-150, what engines will be offered, and what the mpg will be? I don't. But I will speculate that it will be significantly lighter and more fuel efficient than present F-150 that already leads the Ranger in fuel efficiency and capability. I get that the Ranger has a smaller footprint, but that still doesn't mean that Ford has to compete in every segment just to say it does. As for the Windstar, I do believe a couple years it did hit close to 200,000/year or thereabouts. I would not call those shabby sales. Like the Ranger, Ford didn't do much with the Windstar unless you want to call the minor refresh called the Freestar a major undertaking. I guess as with the Ranger, both their money and heart wasn't in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBirdStangSkyliner Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 So do you know the size and weight of the new 2015 F-150, what engines will be offered, and what the mpg will be? I don't. But I will speculate that it will be significantly lighter and more fuel efficient than present F-150 that already leads the Ranger in fuel efficiency and capability. I get that the Ranger has a smaller footprint, but that still doesn't mean that Ford has to compete in every segment just to say it does. As for the Windstar, I do believe a couple years it did hit close to 200,000/year or thereabouts. I would not call those shabby sales. Like the Ranger, Ford didn't do much with the Windstar unless you want to call the minor refresh called the Freestar a major undertaking. I guess as with the Ranger, both their money and heart wasn't in it. I'm not sure why you are bagging on me about the Windstar. I could care less about that vehicle and don't remember ever bringing it up. I don't want to recall it or any refresh it might have had. I'm not sure what that has to do with the F150 anyway. Ford doesn't have to do anything or compete in anything. They can make a few billion, disperse it all to shareholders and then slowly die. They can compete in only the biggest five segment, with the most common components possible, and hope that they don't become known as an undesirable, fleet based brand. They can then try to rebuild Lincoln from this standpoint. The fleet image didn't work so well for Chevrolet a few years ago. They might have had more vehicles, but they still managed to take on a very fleet-level reputation because of their styling and lack of excitement. If Ford goes too far down this road, they might want to pray that prolonged economic growth doesn't occur. In good times, people want something other than ultimate mass-market efficiency. GM became relevant about 90 years or so ago because Ford became interested in mass-scale of efficiency over the desires of customers to have something a little different and special. Ford had lapped the competition many times until Ol' Henry decided that he knew better what customers should drive than they did. William Crapo Durant stepped into the Texas sized opening and the rest is history. I don't know how far Ford is going to go down the road of "you can have our one limited selections of models in any color you want, as long as it is black, well, unless you want one of our three mid-sized CUV's". With the sheet metal of the new Fusion notwithstanding, they seem to be doing a poor job of communicating a clear, better message, however. Fewer consumer choices is fairly easy to interpret from most of their statements. Every company wants to make as much money possible, while maintaining a simple and cheap to develop, manufacture, deliver and stock line of products. Continually sending customers to other companies who offer more choices makes this hard to sustain in the auto business, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I'm not sure why you are bagging on me about the Windstar. I could care less about that vehicle and don't remember ever bringing it up. I don't want to recall it or any refresh it might have had. I'm not sure what that has to do with the F150 anyway. Ford doesn't have to do anything or compete in anything. They can make a few billion, disperse it all to shareholders and then slowly die. They can compete in only the biggest five segment, with the most common components possible, and hope that they don't become known as an undesirable, fleet based brand. They can then try to rebuild Lincoln from this standpoint. The fleet image didn't work so well for Chevrolet a few years ago. They might have had more vehicles, but they still managed to take on a very fleet-level reputation because of their styling and lack of excitement. If Ford goes too far down this road, they might want to pray that prolonged economic growth doesn't occur. In good times, people want something other than ultimate mass-market efficiency. GM became relevant about 90 years or so ago because Ford became interested in mass-scale of efficiency over the desires of customers to have something a little different and special. Ford had lapped the competition many times until Ol' Henry decided that he knew better what customers should drive than they did. William Crapo Durant stepped into the Texas sized opening and the rest is history. I don't know how far Ford is going to go down the road of "you can have our one limited selections of models in any color you want, as long as it is black, well, unless you want one of our three mid-sized CUV's". With the sheet metal of the new Fusion notwithstanding, they seem to be doing a poor job of communicating a clear, better message, however. Fewer consumer choices is fairly easy to interpret from most of their statements. Every company wants to make as much money possible, while maintaining a simple and cheap to develop, manufacture, deliver and stock line of products. Continually sending customers to other companies who offer more choices makes this hard to sustain in the auto business, however. Seriously??? Who makes more vehicles than Ford (not counting GMs rebadges)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 They can make a few billion, disperse it all to shareholders and then slowly die. When you consider that the Ford family has control of Ford's destiny, in the light of Bill Ford's performance and mind-set, as well as the other members of the Ford family, and what they have done to prevail, IMHO, that's a really stupid statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Personally, I think it is a fool's folly to think that the F150 and SuperDuty truck market won't take another big hit in the next two to three years. I hope you noticed that the previous dip in full size truck sales did NOTHING for the small truck market. I hope you also noticed that Mulally and Ford didn't sign a blood oath binding them to keep the Ranger out of North America. It's a straw man argument to assert that, in the future, conditions might warrant reintroducing the Ranger. None of us is saying that the Ranger is gone forever, never to return. Just that it doesn't make sense right now, or over the next year or two, and can you really counter THAT argument? Because if your response to 'no need for the Ranger in '12, and probably not in '13 or '14' is 'Well, something might happen! Eventually! And then where will Ford be?', you really haven't countered the argument. Which, of course, is why it's called a 'straw man' argument. You're setting up a false position ('Ford should never again sell a small truck in the US') and knocking it down instead of addressing the primary argument here, which is that the Ranger, at present, doesn't have much of a business case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Put simply: I agree with you. Ford may need the Ranger at some point, in order to flesh out its truck lineup. However, I haven't seen any evidence that they need that vehicle right now or at any point in the near term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I hope you noticed that the previous dip in full size truck sales did NOTHING for the small truck market. I think the dip in full sized truck sales was more of result of the real estate market and the general market crash back then more so then the increase in fuel prices that added to misery... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTwannabe Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I think the dip in full sized truck sales was more of result of the real estate market and the general market crash back then more so then the increase in fuel prices that added to misery... This. Combined with manufacturers slashing full-size prices via big rebates and incentives to prop up sales. And the fact that the outgoing generation of small/mid-size trucks gets the same MPG's as those discounted full-size trucks. And the fact that the feature set of smaller trucks is artificially limited so as to steer customers who want leather, heated seats, navigation, etc. to full-sizes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Non-competitive? F-150 has grown so much due to the 1/2 ton spec wars that it has blurred with the F-250 capability-wise. SRW F-250 overlaps very badly with F-350 as well. Just engineer the next-gen F-150 to accept HD suspension components for the F-250/F-350 variants. There is much more to making a more capable truck than just slapping on heavier-duty suspension comonents. You have engines, transmissions, cooling capacity, braking ability... A T6-sized F-100 would start a full 1000lbs lighter and have better aero than the equivalent config F-150. Better CAFE numbers, prevents the need to downsize the F-150 and lose the payload/towing crown. F-150 sales would be lower, but combined F-series sales would be higher. Ford has already figured out that consumers will buy smaller cars if they are available with premium content. Why not trucks? Because car buyers != truck buyers. Especially in this economy with higher gas prices when fewer people buy trucks for grocery getters than 5-10 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 There is much more to making a more capable truck than just slapping on heavier-duty suspension comonents. You have engines, transmissions, cooling capacity, braking ability... Because car buyers != truck buyers. Especially in this economy with higher gas prices when fewer people buy trucks for grocery getters than 5-10 years ago. What happened with the truck market the last decade? People used to buy trucks as commuter vehicles and/or cheap transportation. Gas was cheap so fuel economy didn't matter. Then gas prices went up. And trucks got bigger (super crews) and more expensive. So the people who wanted cheap transportation or who couldn't afford gas went to small cars and used cars and they stopped buying trucks altogether. The people who are still buying trucks are the people who need a truck or who want a truck and are willing to pay for it. A new Ranger would not be cheap and it won't get anywhere near the fuel economy of a small car or hybrid. Those buyers are gone for good. People who need or want a full sized truck will continue to buy them regardless of fuel prices. The only people who would buy a mid sized or small truck are the people who don't have room or just don't want to drive a big truck. And that's why the small truck segment is only 200K or so and it's not going to increase very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Then gas prices went up. And trucks got bigger (super crews) and more expensive. So the people who wanted cheap transportation or who couldn't afford gas went to small cars and used cars and they stopped buying trucks altogether. The people who are still buying trucks are the people who need a truck or who want a truck and are willing to pay for it. A new Ranger would not be cheap and it won't get anywhere near the fuel economy of a small car or hybrid. Those buyers are gone for good. People who need or want a full sized truck will continue to buy them regardless of fuel prices. Excellent points...I don't foresee Ford selling 800-900K F-Series any more, but they can still sell at least 600-700K units a year without any big issues. I'd bet that the sales of consumer grade F-150s (I.E. higher end models like the FX4, Lariat, Limited, Raptor etc) are only around 100-200K...with the rest being fleet models or Super Duties..but the profit of those higher end models make up at least 25% of the total profit from the F-series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 What happened with the truck market the last decade? People used to buy trucks as commuter vehicles and/or cheap transportation. Gas was cheap so fuel economy didn't matter. Then gas prices went up. And trucks got bigger (super crews) and more expensive. So the people who wanted cheap transportation or who couldn't afford gas went to small cars and used cars and they stopped buying trucks altogether. The people who are still buying trucks are the people who need a truck or who want a truck and are willing to pay for it. A new Ranger would not be cheap and it won't get anywhere near the fuel economy of a small car or hybrid. Those buyers are gone for good. People who need or want a full sized truck will continue to buy them regardless of fuel prices. The only people who would buy a mid sized or small truck are the people who don't have room or just don't want to drive a big truck. And that's why the small truck segment is only 200K or so and it's not going to increase very much. Precisely! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTwannabe Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 What happened with the truck market the last decade? People used to buy trucks as commuter vehicles and/or cheap transportation. Gas was cheap so fuel economy didn't matter. Then gas prices went up. And trucks got bigger (super crews) and more expensive. So the people who wanted cheap transportation or who couldn't afford gas went to small cars and used cars and they stopped buying trucks altogether. The people who are still buying trucks are the people who need a truck or who want a truck and are willing to pay for it. A new Ranger would not be cheap and it won't get anywhere near the fuel economy of a small car or hybrid. Those buyers are gone for good. People who need or want a full sized truck will continue to buy them regardless of fuel prices. The only people who would buy a mid sized or small truck are the people who don't have room or just don't want to drive a big truck. And that's why the small truck segment is only 200K or so and it's not going to increase very much. People are gobbling up 25mpg small/mid-size SUV's/CUV's; gas isn't that big of an issue. The new mid-size market may be dead, but that's only because the offerings are old crap. There's no reason to buy new when you can buy a 2005 that's exactly the same as the 2012. Look at trade-in values for Tacoma, Frontier, and Ridgeline; they're retaining 75-85% of their value after 3 years. If buyers didn't want mid-size trucks, the used market would have collapsed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 People are gobbling up 25mpg small/mid-size SUV's/CUV's; gas isn't that big of an issue. SUV/CUV's are more flexible (esp when it comes to family type things) then small/mid-sized pickups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Look at trade-in values for Tacoma, Frontier, and Ridgeline; they're retaining 75-85% of their value after 3 years. If buyers didn't want mid-size trucks, the used market would have collapsed. While many things influence use car pricing....all that is reflecting is that the manufactures aren't flooding the market with product, driving down costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTwannabe Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 SUV/CUV's are more flexible (esp when it comes to family type things) then small/mid-sized pickups. So wifey buys a SUV/CUV and hubby buys a mid-size pickup. Can still pick up the kids from soccer when required. Can go hunting/fishing/hauling wood on weekends without screwing up the interior. Decent MPG's and the ability to fit in his parking space at the office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 So wifey buys a SUV/CUV and hubby buys a mid-size pickup. Can still pick up the kids from soccer when required. Can go hunting/fishing/hauling wood on weekends without screwing up the interior. Decent MPG's and the ability to fit in his parking space at the office. Try fitting a rear-facing carseat in that mid-size pickup. Try fitting 3 kids in booster/safety seats across the back seat of that mid-size pickup. Both just barely fit in my F150. Mid-size pickups make $hitty kid-haulers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Try fitting a rear-facing carseat in that mid-size pickup. Try fitting 3 kids in booster/safety seats across the back seat of that mid-size pickup. Both just barely fit in my F150. Mid-size pickups make $hitty kid-haulers. Having owned 2 Rangers and having 2 small kids at the same time - I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 (edited) dupe Edited January 17, 2012 by akirby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts