GTwannabe Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Huh? :confused: Let me try it this way: If the demand is so high for small trucks, and there are not enough good choices out there, why would Toyota need to artificially limit demand for the Tacoma to keep prices high? Shouldn't they be able to sell every one they can make at a high price? Yes, because Ford has a better track record of profitability than Toyota... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Yes, because Ford has a better track record of profitability than Toyota... What a way to dodge the question... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Yes, because Ford has a better track record of profitability than Toyota... So, you're saying that Ford should imitate Toyota and produce an obsolete vehicle with a 'crappy 90s interior'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I mean here's what you've got: A generally successful car company investing minimally in the segment (Toyota) A recently successful car company leaving the segment (Ford) And a car company that appears to still be mismanaged (less debt, more volume, more revenue, less profit than Ford) spending gratuitously on the segment. Explain to me how GM knows something Ford & Toyota don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTwannabe Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 What a way to dodge the question... In 2010, Toyota sold 106k Tacomas. Ford sold 313,000 F-150's. GM's combined Silverado and GMC Sierra 1500 sales were greater than F-150. If Toyota is making money on the Tacoma @ 100k/year, why should they change that formula? The 700k number that gets tossed around in this thread is inaccurate because almost half of those sales are NOT F-150. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I think this has reached such a level of absurdity that there is only one sane way to respond to these arguments...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 In 2010, Toyota sold 106k Tacomas. Ford sold 313,000 F-150's. GM's combined Silverado and GMC Sierra 1500 sales were greater than F-150. If Toyota is making money on the Tacoma @ 100k/year, why should they change that formula? The 700k number that gets tossed around in this thread is inaccurate because almost half of those sales are NOT F-150. And if Toyota has to limit Taco sales to 100k/year in order to make money, then the market isn't big enough to support more sales, and Ford shouldn't be entering the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I think this has reached such a level of absurdity that there is only one sane way to respond to these arguments...... Ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havelock Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Huh? :confused: Let me try it this way: If the demand is so high for small trucks, and there are not enough good choices out there, why would Toyota need to artificially limit demand for the Tacoma to keep prices high? Shouldn't they be able to sell every one they can make at a high price? The 6 year old TMMTX makes all US tacomas and tundras and is "officially"at full capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 The 6 year old TMMTX makes all US tacomas and tundras and is "officially"at full capacity. So then that means his statement about artificially lowering production is false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 So, you're saying that Ford should imitate Toyota and produce an obsolete vehicle with a 'crappy 90s interior'? a vehicle that handsomely outsells Tundra, don't be looking at Toyota for a worthwhile truck plan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheri/ck Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 In 2010, Toyota sold 106k Tacomas. Ford sold 313,000 F-150's. GM's combined Silverado and GMC Sierra 1500 sales were greater than F-150. If Toyota is making money on the Tacoma @ 100k/year, why should they change that formula? The 700k number that gets tossed around in this thread is inaccurate because almost half of those sales are NOT F-150. Yeah those F-series numbers are a little ambitious, but makes for good commercials and most folks don't know better.. The F-150 is a very nice truck, it's just too big for (my) personal use and now we don't have any other Ford option. I have just gone to the local Nissan dealer and test drove both a Frontier and Titan. Their dealer stock was very limited but the test drive told me enough. Ford definitely has some competition out there at both levels. And, according to the salesman both vehicles are due for upgrades (Frontier) and total revamp (Titan) soon,. The engines and tranny in both are exceptional performers. Interiors are not up to Ford standard but that is not a big priority for me. So, I feel a little better knowing where I'm probably going next. First time I have shopped outside of the Ford store in 30 years. No choice there any more for us though. Still monitoring the used truck market. But, the only F-150 I want is 2008 and that is almost unavailable except overloaded supercrews (not for us) and the Rangers are way too high due to lack of availability. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) Yeah those F-series numbers are a little ambitious, but makes for good commercials and most folks don't know better.. Are you sure about that? F150 normally makes up around two thirds of all F Truck sales and since F Truck sales were even higher in 2011 at 584,000, that F150 figure may have grown substantially, perhaps it's now closer to 350,000... Edited January 18, 2012 by jpd80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kris Kolman Posted January 18, 2012 Author Share Posted January 18, 2012 At times this board is almost as easy to poke as the Spartans on the Big Ten blog I frequent (what is that 3 BB games in a row?) Let me say that I understand and don't argue with Ford's decision to currently sit on the sidelines when it comes to the midsized pickup market segement. And I say this dispite it being a "dagger" at the heart of a product I really want to buy again... But I don't hold grudges and the Edge is still on my list as I try to work my head around what to purchase next... Not sure if I want a road-oriented CUV (Edge), offroad-oriented SUV (Liberty), or midsized pickup (RangerFrontier). With the Mountaineer in the garage I have the option of going with a less capable "tall-wagon" as my daily driver, and then borrow the wifes Mountaineer for more challenging duty. But then my wife is getting tired of me borrowing her truck... But one thing I wanted to note is that with all this talk of F150 sales vs Ranger sales talk... It seems a little NA centric. It not that I don't agree that with the current market forces the Ranger has 100,000 sales ceiling in NA. But what is the sales ceiling worldwide? The F150 is almost entirely NA based with a few overseas penetration. While the Ranger is going to be built in three plants worldwide (Thailand, Argentina, and South Africa)... Of the 550,000 F-Series sales the F-150 is probably only ~330,000, which is probably much closer to the worldwide Ranger sales than many have considered. And one last thing... Damn the chicken tax! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kris Kolman Posted January 18, 2012 Author Share Posted January 18, 2012 Australian pricing for Ranger XLT Double Cab: Drive away price° from $57,711.......LINK Rule of thumb: Aussie pricing = US price +50%, therefore an I-5 diesel XLT Double Cab in USA would be $38,000 but that's without additional Bluetec after treatment needed to meet US Emissions. Possibly the US could fit a 3.7 V6 and get the price down to $34K but probably not much below that. Could this be a possible reason why Ford didn't buy into T6 in 2006, the cost/price structure didn't suit the market? Different pricing structure on the otherside of "the pond"... So which is right. Ford UK pricing for the Ranger is: T6 Ranger CrewCab XLT with 22TDi = 19,361 pounds UK Ford UK to Ford USA price comparison of Transit Connect: Transit Connect LWB Trend = 15,725 pounds UK vs. 22,053 dollars US Which would extrapolate the T6 Ranger price to ~$27,000... Which is compatible to my mindset of ~$29,000. In the UK the 32TDi is only available in Limited trim... The XLT 22TDi and Limited 32TDi difference is 3,000 UK pounds which would elevate the scaled price from $27,000 to over $31,000. We're getting close to your $34,000... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_spaniard Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 I think the mid-size market is weak, given the pricing of the vehicles (knocking on the doors of full-size). My father's 2010 F150 is an aircraft carrier, and I would never need/buy a vehicle that big. I had a 2000 4x4 Lariat and I didn't use 1/5 of that trucks capability. . But most people will opt for a larger vehicle with size and capability they will never need if it is a perceived value over something smaller. I'm also a Nissan guy, and if I'm not mistaken the current Frontier is relatively unchanged from 2005. I bought my Xterra in 06, and it is also relatively unchanged. My point? Nissans current investment in the midsized market is an old effort. I love my Xterra for it's off-road ability, power, and utility, but it has never gotten over 21MPG since I had the thing. It's not modern by any stretch. Both the Frontier and Xterra are still based on the original Titan platform. (I find it funny because from my experience in Nissan circles the Frontier and Xterra have been pretty much rock-solid reliable vehicles and the old Titan was a train wreck of poor reliability). As recent as 2008/9 I recall rumors Nissan was going to kill of all models based on the previous-gen Titan. A recent sales spike changed that tune, but I don't expect them to invest new money into that market, and neither will Toyota (and they lead the segment). The first-gen Colorado was garbage with a garbage 5-cylinder. If Chevy wants to invest in a redux, let them. Between you, me, and the wall, Chevy (nor Dodge) don't have a track record of sound judgement. Anyone looking at the Frontier (or Xterra) as an option please drive the rare 6-speed manual versions. The old 5-speed automatic is still butter, but the 260HP DIV6+6-speed manual = FUN. Just don't expect fuel economy. If Ford released a new ranger or dropped the current ranger prices to fire-sale numbers, I would get another one (I had a 88 ranger that was a good little vehicle). Then again, I would also get a new Bronco (considering a 1970 right now). Will Ford make them? Not likely. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 The 6 year old TMMTX makes all US tacomas and tundras and is "officially"at full capacity. So selling 150K or so units a year is considered "full" capacity...are they taking a page out of GM's playbook? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgts Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) I think the mid-size market is weak, given the pricing of the vehicles (knocking on the doors of full-size). My father's 2010 F150 is an aircraft carrier, and I would never need/buy a vehicle that big. I had a 2000 4x4 Lariat and I didn't use 1/5 of that trucks capability. . But most people will opt for a larger vehicle with size and capability they will never need if it is a perceived value over something smaller. Why are people forced to a larger truck these days and say bs about "its such a good truck with tons of power and good mpg" my example is I live in a big city with limited parking but use my smaller Bof truck for towing 5000+lb and it use as a personal car sometimes , I dont need a cute ute or a monster truck. The only vehicles that can fit that criteria are most Jeeps, crew cab Colorado, Tacoma, Smaller Nissans even the Dodge Nitro. Lack of size do matter to buyers. Edited January 18, 2012 by Fgts 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Why are people forced to a larger truck these days and say bs about "its such a good truck with tons of power and good mpg" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 which is probably much closer to the worldwide Ranger sales than many have considered. And one last thing... Damn the chicken tax! That's the real issue. NA production (except, possibly, Mexico) is too expensive for global Ranger export, and there's not enough volume to keep a factory humming on NA volume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Why are people forced to a larger truck these days and say bs about "its such a good truck with tons of power and good mpg" my example is I live in a big city with limited parking but use my smaller Bof truck for towing 5000+lb and it use as a personal car sometimes , I dont need a cute ute or a monster truck. The only vehicles that can fit that criteria are most Jeeps, crew cab Colorado, Tacoma, Smaller Nissans even the Dodge Nitro. Lack of size do matter to buyers. It does matter to some. But if it matters to so many, then why aren't those smaller vehicles flying off the lots without rebates while the larger 1/2 tons sit on the lots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 So selling 150K or so units a year is considered "full" capacity...are they taking a page out of GM's playbook? WTF...Toyota is planning on adding more Shifts at the Texas Plant....hmmmm http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120117/OEM01/301179788/1290 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgts Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 It does matter to some. But if it matters to so many, then why aren't those smaller vehicles flying off the lots without rebates while the larger 1/2 tons sit on the lots? 1/2 tons always come with discounts which temp some buyers to supersize(I really want a Raptor crewcab but have no money or space to put it). Now why do smaller trucks have to "fly off lots" in order to have a market in the U.S.?. Another example is since the T-6 is a world truck Ford may sale 300,000 Rangers worldwide per year to make money on it, that may allow 40-50,000 T-6 to be sold in the states. 50,000 trucks pales in comparison to the F150 but the T6 is still a money maker due to overall world sales. Imo this is where GM is going with the Colorado/Trailblazer next year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_spaniard Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 It does matter to some. But if it matters to so many, then why aren't those smaller vehicles flying off the lots without rebates while the larger 1/2 tons sit on the lots? Exactly. I worked in downtown Santa Monica for over a year, and had to park my F150 in a micro-sized underground parking lot. It was not fun. I want a small truck too, but the numbers simply are not there to support it. Sometimes you have to accept that just because you want it doesn't mean there is a business case for a manufacturer to produce it. And while we shouldn't have to be "forced" into a larger vehicle, the market dictates whats available. I would love to see someone take a chance on bringing a small diesel pickup to market here, but the market (and yes ever fatter Americans play a small role) currently say "nope." I could see more frustration if you were fiercely brand-loyal to Ford, but mid-sizers are grabbing the buyers they should be. The old ranger just is not competitive to a Tacoma or a Frontier (neither of which are setting sales records), so they killed it. I just built and priced a Ranger on the Ford site vs. a Frontier on the Nissan site. The Frontier was priced $2000 less than the Ranger. That alone sounds like a good reason to kill the Ranger. I like the size of the Ranger, but the Frontier is a helluva lot more truck in every way for less money. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Sometimes you have to accept that just because you want it doesn't mean there is a business case for a manufacturer to produce it. THIS. ^^^ The people who are complaining are only concerned with what THEY want and they either don't understand or don't care about Ford from a business standpoint. And this is where the trouble usually starts with certain people saying what Ford needs to do or not do as opposed to what they would like Ford to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts