akirby Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Good thing Ford didn't use that logic when they introduced the Edge. Totally different market and vehicles. Not applicable to trucks. That's baloney and you know it. No, I don't know it. Prove it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Good thing Ford didn't use that logic when they introduced the Edge. thanks for proving your a dumbass...the Edge was a totally new product that helped define the mid-sized CUV market when it came out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss444 Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) Totally different market and vehicles. Not applicable to trucks. I didn't think you'd understand. No, I don't know it. Prove it. Is this where I link to Wikipedia? ...the Edge was a totally new product that helped define the mid-sized CUV market when it came out. Exactly. And bravo on the name calling. Classy. Edited January 25, 2012 by Boss444 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Exactly. That's proof you don't get it. Mid-size pickups aren't a new segment. There are plenty mid-sizers out there, but they still sell in small numbers compared to larger trucks. Explain how that relates to the Edge when it came out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTwannabe Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Some numbers: So with no Investment, the Ranger/B-series STILL outsold the Colorado and Canyon And GM's 1/2 ton twins (Silverado 1500 and Sierra 1500) outsold F-150 by 80k units... your point? http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/01/the-ultimate-guide-to-us-pickup-truck-sales-in-2010.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 And GM's 1/2 ton twins (Silverado 1500 and Sierra 1500) outsold F-150 by 80k units... your point? http://news.pickuptr...es-in-2010.html Are you that thick you can't understand the information presented to you? The point is, the Ranger STILL with no improvements outsold the "new" Colorado and Canyon when the market was "hot" and BOTH of them suffered catastrophic sales losses at the same time...which shows that there has been changes in the market that no longer supports huge numbers of mid or small sized pickups...most likely because people moved back to cars or got CUV's which are more polished then a small pickup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTwannabe Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) Are you that thick you can't understand the information presented to you? The point is, the Ranger STILL with no improvements outsold the "new" Colorado and Canyon when the market was "hot" and BOTH of them suffered catastrophic sales losses at the same time...which shows that there has been changes in the market that no longer supports huge numbers of mid or small sized pickups...most likely because people moved back to cars or got CUV's which are more polished then a small pickup. 1st gen Colorado was basically an S-10 reworked by Isuzu... total POS. 2nd gen is a clean sheet in-house GM design. Edited January 25, 2012 by GTwannabe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 The TOTAL U.S. Market for small trucks is no more than 200K right now. In 2011 the Edge and Explorer combined sold 257K. The Escape by itself sold 254K. The crossover market has not declined sharply over the last few years - it may still be growing. And the total market is at least 10 times bigger than the small truck market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 1st gen Colorado was basically an S-10 reworked by Isuzu... total POS. 2nd gen is a clean sheet in-house GM design. Done in Brazil and built primarily for the Thai market. U.S. version is an afterthought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 .Again, new competitive mid-sizes are coming. Chevy is bringing the new Colorado stateside. Dodge is working on a new Dakota. If you want to stick your head in the sand and think F-150 sales numbers will remain rosy forever, go ahead. There is far more profit in F150 than Ranger, would you deny Ford seeking to maximize that profit for as long as they can? Let's see how well those new and improved mid sized trucks do in their market first before writing F150's epitaph.... You may also ask yourself why Toyota hasn't bothered to refresh it's mid sized truck sales leader, the Tacoma while GM is taking production space away form vans to give Colorado a life line in the US... Ford Sees Bigger Profits Exiting Small Pickups GM Embraces: CarsLINK U.S. automakers are split on whether to abandon their small pickups, which buyers have left for dead and regulators may try to revive. Ford Motor Co. (F) is ending U.S. sales of Ranger, the former mid-size pickup leader. General Motors Co. (GM) has committed to the Chevrolet Colorado compact truck past the 2012 model year. Chrysler Group LLC is weighing whether to replace its defunct Dakota that it stopped building in August. Ford is betting it can hold its share of full-size trucks by concentrating resources on the F-Series. GM is wagering that buyers may come back to the mid-size segment if gasoline prices rise, and that it may ultimately entice small-truck owners to large pickups. Mid-size pickups cost almost as much as their full-size counterparts without much boost in fuel economy. "The segment has been in decline for quite a while, so that calls into question whether it's viable," R.L. Polk & Co.'s Tom Libby, who is based in Southfield, Michigan, said in a phone interview. "The trend going in the other direction is fuel-economy requirements and an inevitable movement toward smaller vehicles. It's an unsettled situation." Full-size trucks remained the top-selling vehicles for U.S. automakers as GM and Chrysler reorganized under U.S.-backed bankruptcies in 2009 and Ford lost $30.1 billion from 2006 through 2008 before rebounding to profitability. Ford's F-Series and GM's Silverado rank No. 1 and 2 in U.S. vehicle sales. 'Relentless Efforts' "You really can't argue with the sales numbers here," said Mike Levine, a Ford spokesman. "We have very strong demand for full-size pickups, and that's where we are putting our time and investment." One in five owners of GM and Chrysler's smaller trucks who returned to market for a new vehicle last year moved up into the full-size segment, according to Polk data. The rate among Ford owners was about one in six. If Ford's gamble falls through, it would undo relentless efforts to protect the "crown jewel" F-150 from Toyota Motor Corp. (7203) and Nissan Motor Co., Libby said. "The domestic manufacturers poured everything they had into their products to try and stop Toyota" and have succeeded, he said. Compact trucks have plunged to 16 percent of pickup sales this year through October, from one-third of the market in 2000, according to Autodata Corp. Toyota and Nissan now have 56 percent of the mid-size truck segment and only 7 percent of the full-size market. Buyer's Perspective Ford is on pace to sell fewer than 70,000 Rangers in the U.S. this year, about one-fifth its total in 2000, the year it sold 330,125 Rangers and the last year the industry delivered more than 1 million compact trucks. The Dearborn, Michigan-based automaker relinquished small-truck leadership to Toyota's Tacoma in 2005. Kurt Weaver, 44, a Ranger owner who buys and sells antique car parts for a living, said he bought his pickup this month to replace a Chevrolet S-10 compact truck he owned for eight years. "I was looking first and foremost for fuel economy," he said in a phone interview from Georgia, where he traveled from his home in East Earl, Pennsylvania, to buy parts. "I don't haul anything heavy." Ford is pulling Ranger as the truck recorded a 21 percent gain in deliveries in the year's first 10 months, putting the model on pace for its first annual sales increase since 1999. 'Pricing Gap' GM is throwing the Colorado a lifeline for the U.S. market by shifting output to a plant that makes full-size vans in Missouri. For the Detroit-based automaker to have any success at triggering a rebound in compact trucks, it needs to make its Colorado cheaper and more fuel efficient compared with its big brother Silverado, said Dan Luria, director of research for the Michigan Manufacturing Technology Center. "You need a minimum $4,000 to $5,000 pricing gap and you need a fuel economy gap of at least 4 or 5 miles per gallon" in favor of a Colorado, Luria, who is based in Plymouth, Michigan, said in a phone interview. "And then I think you can sell all of these you want." A base version of Ford's 2011 F-150 started at $22,790, while iterations of Ranger started at as high as $22,425. Rangers with six-cylinder engines get combined city and highway fuel economy of 17 mpg, no better than similarly equipped F-150s. "The relevancy of small pickups has died off as the bigger ones get more fuel efficient," Dave Sullivan, a product analyst at AutoPacific Inc., said in a phone interview. Ram's Value Base model prices for medium- and full-size trucks are usually in the range of $14,000 to $18,000, and the extra size has made full-size trucks the better buy, said Dan Cheng, lead partner of consultant A.T. Kearney's automotive practice. An extreme example is Chrysler's Dakota, which Cheng says is more expensive on a total cost of ownership basis than its larger Ram counterpart because the smaller truck depreciates in value more quickly than the full-size model. GM may still continue to sell fewer than 40,000 Colorado trucks a year when output of a revamped version of the pickup starts, AutoPacific estimates. Production may begin in the second half of 2013, according to the Tustin, California-based researcher. Even at those sales, a shadow of the more than 200,000 compact trucks GM delivered in 2000, the wager may be worth making, Sullivan said. Costs are being spread because the company is making Colorado in Thailand, the world's largest market for mid-size trucks. Ford also is selling Ranger outside North America. Toyota (7267)'s Tundra Regulators are requiring that the average vehicle achieve 54.5 mpg by 2025 in Environmental Protection Agency ratings, a level that translates to about 37 mpg on a window sticker. Automakers need to improve the fuel economy of cars by 5 percent a year and trucks by 3.5 percent most years to meet those targets. With large pickups, Toyota made its Tundra bigger to try to take sales from F-Series, Silverado and Ram and constructed a $1.28 billion San Antonio plant to build the model. So far this year, Tundra has captured only 5.6 percent of the U.S. full-size pickup market compared with F-Series's 38 percent, Silverado's 28 percent and Ram's 16 percent. Nissan (7201) has 1.4 percent share with its Titan full-size truck. Chrysler is still exploring a possible replacement to Dakota, said Dave Elshoff, a spokesman for the Auburn Hills, Michigan-based company. "We believe there is still a substantial market for small pickups," he said. "We're studying the demographics and business case for a small Ram pickup." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTwannabe Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 The TOTAL U.S. Market for small trucks is no more than 200K right now. In 2011 the Edge and Explorer combined sold 257K. The Escape by itself sold 254K. The crossover market has not declined sharply over the last few years - it may still be growing. And the total market is at least 10 times bigger than the small truck market. The market for god-awful, ancient, small, cheap, gas guzzling trucks is 200k. That's not T6. That's not new Colorado/Dakota. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 1st gen Colorado was basically an S-10 reworked by Isuzu... total POS. 2nd gen is a clean sheet in-house GM design. Well it sure was updated more then the Ranger ever was..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTwannabe Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Well it sure was updated more then the Ranger ever was..... 4-speed automatics are so 1970's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 The market for god-awful, ancient, small, cheap, gas guzzling trucks is 200k. That's not T6. That's not new Colorado/Dakota. LOL get off the crack already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 The market for god-awful, ancient, small, cheap, gas guzzling trucks is 200k. That's not T6. That's not new Colorado/Dakota. This is definitely a chicken or the egg scenario. Is it only 200k because of "god awful" trucks? Or is it "god awful" trucks because the market is only 200k per year and nobody wants to invest in it? Frankly, I believe the latter. GM doesn't count since their marketing strategy is based on the "me too" principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) The market for god-awful, ancient, small, cheap, gas guzzling trucks is 200k. That's not T6. That's not new Colorado/Dakota. Which is not going to change for another 18 months, I don't see any appreciable change in that time. and in that case, two years look see is totally justified , the mid sized market won't soar without a huge driver like spiking gas prices and if the US economy keeps improving, the dollar will strengthen bringing down the overall cost of oil... Ford is using it's popular utilities to offset CAFE, so it really doesn't need Ranger for that purpose..... Edited January 25, 2012 by jpd80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenCaylor Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 4-speed automatics are so 1970's. Not to be nit picky, but the first 4-speed automatic (at least from Ford) was the 1980 Thunderbird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTwannabe Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) This is definitely a chicken or the egg scenario. Is it only 200k because of "god awful" trucks? Or is it "god awful" trucks because the market is only 200k per year and nobody wants to invest in it? Frankly, I believe the latter. GM doesn't count since their marketing strategy is based on the "me too" principle. GM's strategy seems reasonable. They're heavily invested in variable displacement pushrod V8 technology; they'd have to scrap it to do something like Ecoboost in their full-size trucks. A Colorado-sized truck weighs 20% less and can be powered by the same DOHC 4-bangers they use in their sedans. If that Colorado doesn't have the usual small truck failings (cramped interior, lousy MPG's, no premium content), they will sell well and help GM's CAFE numbers. Edited January 25, 2012 by GTwannabe 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 The market for god-awful, ancient, small, cheap, gas guzzling trucks is 200k. That's not T6. That's not new Colorado/Dakota. It's not the Tacoma either. It's not small, ancient, cheap or god-awful. And if you think the new Colorado, Dakota or T6 is going to have significantly better fuel economy you're dreaming. You can gripe and speculate all you want but there are no objective numbers to support your position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) GM's strategy seems reasonable. They're heavily invested in variable displacement pushrod V8 technology; they'd have to scrap it to do something like Ecoboost in their full-size trucks. A Colorado-sized truck weighs 20% less and can be powered by the same DOHC 4-bangers they use in their sedans. If that Colorado doesn't have the usual small truck failings (cramped interior, lousy MPG's, no premium content), they will sell well and help GM's CAFE numbers. F150 is going great guns with 50/50 sales of V6 EB and 5.0 V8 so half of their volume is with a V6 spread across Ford's cars and utilities... T6 Ranger doesn't share engines with NA products, its engines come from Transit, so there's another difference between GM and Ford... What works for GM doesn't necessarily work for Ford and vise versa Edited January 25, 2012 by jpd80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 They're heavily invested in variable displacement pushrod V8 technology; they'd have to scrap it to do something like Ecoboost in their full-size trucks. So? The problem is what, precisely? For people who don't want an EB turbo system, there's variable displacement. For people who want the low RPM turbo boost, there's an EB system. This is not difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 What works for GM doesn't necessarily work for Ford Who said Colorado was going to work for GM? I think this is just more of the same old GM strategy of throw 100 vehicles at the wall and some are bound to stick. They still want to be #1 in sales without much regard to profitability. Here is what I think will happen. Colorado will provide a slight fuel economy bump over the current 3.7L: F150. Then Ford will come out with a slightly smaller and lighter (but still full-sized) F150 that gets the same or better fuel economy as the competition's smaller trucks. And there will be similar improvement across the F series line. And if gas prices do go up all of those full sized truck buyers will flock to F series, not to Tacoma or Colorado. The good news is if that backfires then they can always bring T6 here as a backup plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTwannabe Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 It's not the Tacoma either. It's not small, ancient, cheap or god-awful. And if you think the new Colorado, Dakota or T6 is going to have significantly better fuel economy you're dreaming. You can gripe and speculate all you want but there are no objective numbers to support your position. Name ONE thing that's modern on the Tacoma. Or, which of the following Tacoma attributes do you consider modern? - semi-boxed frame - non-direct injection motors - drum brakes - 18mpg highway on 4-door models - circa 1995 interior quality Tacoma is technologically much closer to a 98 Ranger than a 2011 F-150. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackintire Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 What you want and what everyone else wants is two totally different things....you still seem to not to be able to wrap your head around that fact... are you going to endanger your best selling model just to hopefully pickup additional sales from a market that is shrinking? Ford isn't about building a Truck for You...it its that big of a deal move on to another brand... market that is shrinking? You mean the market with NO choice for a modern midsize. Tacoma was modern 6 years, this is 2012. Everything else is even more outdated. Don't you even dare compare the 20 year old Ranger to a 2012 F150. You might as well compare oranges and apples. The upcoming Colorado will be the first modern midsize we've experienced in 6 years. IF GM doesn't screw it up Ford will see the error of their ways...... sadly I know what will occur immediately afterwards. Toyota will update the Tacoma, Nissan will update the Frontier and RAM will release their unibody Dakota. Ford's current trajectory means that those waiting for a midsize truck from Ford are screwed until 2017 when the new CAFE rules force them to bring the second gen T6 here. Come 2018 midsize will be the new fullsize market. I have no doubt Ford will survive, hopefully Ford can pry me away from my new (insert other manufacturer midsize truck here) in 2022. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) Link? Let's compare the F150 to the Dodge, GM, Nissan and Toyota entries that comprise the rest of the segment. Is there a significant difference in size between any of these vehicles? No. These vehicles are within a couple inches of each other in all major dimensions (~1% variation). The most popular nameplate in the segment, the F150, is not significantly larger nor significantly smaller than its competitors. Therefore, it can be reasonably concluded that the F150 is sized appropriately to its competition, as size is not a differentiator among entries in this segment. Furthermore, as a percentage of the overall market, the compact truck segment has declined precipitously, as compared with the full size truck segment. Therefore, the notion that people are exiting the full size segment because entries in it are 'too big' cannot be substantiated, unless they are exiting the segment for a passenger vehicle, in which case that is of no benefit to the midsize truck segment. If truck buyers were dismayed by the size of full size trucks after the most recent upgrades in capacity, one would have expected a noticeable shift into smaller trucks. Yet not only did this fail to occur at Ford, it also failed to occur at GM and Dodge where considerable money was invested in new midsize truck platforms. Again, if we saw a shift to smaller trucks at Dodge & GM while Ford saw no shift, it could be inferred that buyers were avoiding the outdated Ranger. However, Dodge and GM's new entries failed to sustain volume higher than their predecessors, which suggests that there is no correlation between the full size segment and the midsize segment. Will that do as a support for the assertion that 'F150 buyers want a vehicle the size of the F150'? Edited January 25, 2012 by RichardJensen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts