jpd80 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Will this be another case of Ford being late to the party and then playing catch-up one again? Not putting the 2010 F150 engnes in Expedition & Navigator was a big mistake. with earlier adoption of 3.5 EB , 5.0 and a 6.2 (Raptor Expedition?), I have no doubt that Expedition would have been as popular as Tahoe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Not putting the 2010 F150 engnes in Expedition & Navigator was a big mistake. with earlier adoption of 3.5 EB , 5.0 and a 6.2 (Raptor Expedition?), I have no doubt that Expedition would have been as popular as Tahoe Given what was going on with the market at the time with gas prices, it was the right thing to do at the time, but perhaps in hindsite it would have been serendipitous if they did do that given how much gas has fallen since then. The Expedition has never sold that well vs the Suburban and its platform mates. The Navigator was dumb luck in the late 1990s and was quickly surpassed by the Escalade in sales soon afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Back to Ranger ..... being 2 years behind the first significant move on the midsize truck market since .... well the exit of Colorado and Ranger is hardly trouble. The Taco has been stagnant for about 5 years, the Frontier is even worse; neither will be better by 2018, so really, Ford will be "the next one to innovate and leva the Japanese behind" .... Ford made its own bets (e.g. hybrids, Fusion), being 2 years behind cutting edge is not late to the party. It's letting others fail, and following colosely if they do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 (edited) Right and the inference by Ford was that 90% dimension makes the Ranger too close to F150 in size. I defy anyone to sit in vehicles with that much difference in width and mistake one for the other... We can say the same silly stuff about Explorer Vs Edge Vs Escape, there's less difference between those yet no one would really entertain the 90% or 95% rule as grounds for exclusion from sale.... I see the new Ranger as more like an Explorer Sport Trac in size with mostly Crew Cab market, something I think Colorado is currently demonstrating (GM's first choice in body styles anyway...) That is far and away different to the last of 2011 Ranger SC which were mostly sub $2k sales. With regards weight and fuel economy for CAFE, imagine narrowed F150 alloy cabs fitted to next gen Ranger such a move could drop Ranger's weight by 400-500 lbs and make the use of an EB 2.0 even more viable and the highway fuel economy up to 30 to 32 mpg without a diesel... I hear you on this, but I would love a somewhat smaller (lower) truck than the T6. The jump from the old Ranger is just too big. Edited August 30, 2015 by igor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Not putting the 2010 F150 engnes in Expedition & Navigator was a big mistake. with earlier adoption of 3.5 EB , 5.0 and a 6.2 (Raptor Expedition?), I have no doubt that Expedition would have been as popular as Tahoe Well, keep in mind the refresh we're seeing now was supposed to launch a few (2?) years ago but both it and the Navigator programs were put on hold, and only more recently did they decide to continue them. So they threw out the intended refresh anyway, even though both are being replaced in the next year or two. Even so, I don't think just updated powertrains would've bumped them up to as popular as Tahoe. Even with the refresh, the Expy still looks basically the same as the 2003 version. The Navigator refresh was far more successful, IMO, but then again, it had a much uglier starting point... I have high hopes for both new models....especially Navigator. I think they'll go all out with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) Well, keep in mind the refresh we're seeing now was supposed to launch a few (2?) years ago but both it and the Navigator programs were put on hold, and only more recently did they decide to continue them. So they threw out the intended refresh anyway, even though both are being replaced in the next year or two. Even so, I don't think just updated powertrains would've bumped them up to as popular as Tahoe. Even with the refresh, the Expy still looks basically the same as the 2003 version. The Navigator refresh was far more successful, IMO, but then again, it had a much uglier starting point... I have high hopes for both new models....especially Navigator. I think they'll go all out with it. Probably right, the time frame left until the new Alloy vehicle is not that long in the great scheme of things so perhaps Ford picks up what it can with EB 3.5 which was an economic make over... Would Ford have picked up more LEV business with EB 3.5 Expy if delivered in 2010? who knows but the LEV Tahoe seems to be very strong with some PDs............just sayin' I hear you on this, but I would love a somewhat smaller (lower) truck than the T6. T6 Ranger is available as a regular height vehicle but everyone picks Hi Riders for pictures. The jump from the old Ranger is just too big. T6 Ranger is 3" wider than US 2011 Ranger - is that really a show stopper when GM made Nth American Colorado 2" wider than T6 Ranger? If anything, Colorado would be closer to Silverado in size than T6 Ranger is to F150... Edited August 31, 2015 by jpd80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 A Fusion is 72.9" wide, a Focus is 71.8". I guess Ford should just stop making the Focus and just sell Fusions, they could beat the Camry in sales then... That's what I get out of this one is too close in size to the other debate.Ran into someone at Ford over the weekend and he said the Bronco will be launching first followed by the Ranger a MY later (that may only be 6 months though). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Not exactly. Cars are on shared platforms with more volume and Fiesta and Focus cater to lower income buyers who can't afford a Fusion. A T6 Ranger would be neither cheap or on a high volume platform. Also the difference in profit margin between a T6 Ranger and F150 is probably a lot bigger than Focus to Fusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PRM Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I calculated it one time, and I believe my 08 Sport Trac was 85-90% the size of an F150. It was a perfect size for what I needed. It was small enough to be handy and compatible with garage parking and city adventures in general, while big enough to remain useful and have a very comfortable interior for four adults. Incredibly useful vehicle. I hope they produce something about the size of the T6. Plenty of differentiation in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Not exactly. Cars are on shared platforms with more volume and Fiesta and Focus cater to lower income buyers who can't afford a Fusion. Or don't want a bigger car. I can afford a Navigator, but hell if you'll see me buying one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Or don't want a bigger car. I can afford a Navigator, but hell if you'll see me buying one. True but that would also apply to T6 Ranger Vs F150. I was pointing out how it was different from Focus/Fusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Ford Nth America pulled out of T6 Ranger project at the start in 2006, while the reasons given were that the truck was too big for its needs, I think that needs to be seen in the context of the time where Ford had huge debts and its bread winners F150 and Explorer were struggling in a then shifting market, the GFC was further proof that Ford needed to control its cash burn as much as possible by consolidating product and ending those not considered core to it survival. Today, we're in a different situation, Ford production is much more efficient and excess production capacity has been significantly reduced. T6 Ranger has proved itself as a valuable rest of world product, something Ford Nth America ha no doubt watched with interest. Unlike Colorado which needed a huge revamp for North America, the only changes really needed for Ranger is the addition of a suitable gasoline engine - either Ecoboost 2.0 or the 2.3 would suffice. and judgung by Explorer, give around 28-30 mpg EPA. While some raise concerns about rising CAFE limits with mid sized trucks , I have a hunch that two things may be possible: 1. That future mid sized truck and small car CAFE targets are reviewed and relaxed slightly to better align with achievable goals. 2. If next gen Ranger was to adopt aluminum bodies, that would reduce weight and increase fuel economy, a benefit to all markets. Derrick Kuzak's said that Ranger is 90 percent of the size of F150 but that was merely self serving dismissal. The Ranger at 72.6" is around seven inches narrower, so that 90% claim loses all credibility...... The real question is how actual buyers view mid sized trucks and is there enough volume to justify a return. Judging by Colorado's return, a healthy Crew Cab market exists in the price range just below half tons and that is a completely different situation to when Ford was selling low cost SC Rangers below $20K. There is zero chance of #1 happening. All the car makers are opposed to changing the rules now. #2 is possible but you have to factor in cost. Ford has to make sure the Ranger is cheaper than F-150 both to make and at the MSRP level. And if you start to customize the T7 Ranger too much for North America, the truck loses relevance in the rest of the world. BTW, the CAFE concern is about compact trucks, not mid size trucks. I don't think you can make a CAFE-positive truck relative to F-150 with a BOF type construction in a compact size. At least not without using exotic materials. In a mid size truck, the CAFE situation is more manageable because you limit the availability of smaller footprint version (e.g. Tacoma and Colorado both not available with single cab). The question is how receptive the US midsize truck buyers will be receptive to diesel engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I'm just looking forward to reading Richard's posts about Ford's eminent wisdom of building a new BOF small(er) truck and SUV after watching him bash those who desired such a vehicle as the "Ranger Mafia" for the better part of the past decade. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I'm just looking forward to reading Richard's posts about Ford's eminent wisdom of building a new BOF small(er) truck and SUV after watching him bash those who desired such a vehicle as the "Ranger Mafia" for the better part of the past decade. Ranger mafia refers to people who wanted the old Ranger unchanged, like the Panther mafia. We still don't know what Ford is planning to do but I have a feeling this truck won't cost the same as a Fiesta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PRM Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 In effect, the Ranger mafia was anyone who suggested anything other than an F150. I am a charter member. Anyway, I don't know if the right answer is something the size of the previous Ranger or the T6, but I do believe there is room for something smaller than an F150. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I'm just looking forward to reading Richard's posts about Ford's eminent wisdom of building a new BOF small(er) truck and SUV after watching him bash those who desired such a vehicle as the "Ranger Mafia" for the better part of the past decade. I'm seeing a pattern here. Seems some of you have comprehension issues. Nobody got bashed for wanting a Ranger - old one or T6. Just like nobody got bashed for wanting a Diesel or a Wagon or a Panther or an Ecosport. What was bashed was insisting that Ford HAD to build those or offer them here and that if they didn't they were making a bad business decision. There is a huge difference between "I want a T6 Ranger" and "Ford could sell 100K of these and make billions". When Richard says a particular article is poorly written it doesn't mean that the conclusion or subjective opinions are wrong or that he disagrees with them, just that the writer did a poor job in conveying the information or used poor logic or inaccurate facts. You can have 2 different articles that say the same thing but one can be written very well and one very poorly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 And for the record, I'd still be skeptical of a T6 Ranger UNLESS they manage to achieve a 6-8 mpg advantage over F150 (maybe with extensive aluminum and some aero and drivetrain trickery). One thing that appears to be changing is that it would have other vehicles to share the platform and share the costs and enough existing factory capacity to build it here - something the original Ranger didn't have. Also - it's possible we were wrong about the smaller truck market not rebounding at all - Canyorado has been far more successful that I expected. Then again, it hasn't been out long enough to ensure it's a sustainable bubble and not just pent up demand or GM using low prices to pull ahead all truck sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) Ranger mafia refers to people who wanted the old Ranger unchanged, like the Panther mafia. We still don't know what Ford is planning to do but I have a feeling this truck won't cost the same as a Fiesta. Pretty sure it was tossed out at anyone who suggested that they'd like to see Ford building something with a frame and smaller than an F150. Nobody was claiming that continuing to sell the old Ranger or Panther indefinetly was a realistic strategy. Some of us just took offense at being left at the alter by Ford when they cancelled an entire market segment without any hope of a replacement product. Edited August 31, 2015 by Sevensecondsuv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I'm just looking forward to reading Richard's posts about Ford's eminent wisdom of building a new BOF small(er) truck and SUV after watching him bash those who desired such a vehicle as the "Ranger Mafia" for the better part of the past decade. Ha ain't that the Truth. I'm seeing a pattern here. Seems some of you have comprehension issues. Nobody got bashed for wanting a Ranger - old one or T6. Just like nobody got bashed for wanting a Diesel or a Wagon or a Panther or an Ecosport. What was bashed was insisting that Ford HAD to build those or offer them here and that if they didn't they were making a bad business decision. There is a huge difference between "I want a T6 Ranger" and "Ford could sell 100K of these and make billions". It doesn't become a good idea simply because Ford decides to do it. Ford's motivations are never as cut an dry as it being a good idea or a good business case for anything, it seems their burden of proof is much higher than other automakers. The problem is when the person mentioned Above, says he is an expert, and that he knows what Ford's motivations are better than other people here. The Messed up thing is he will always try to spin the fact that he was wrong into something else, like that Kid who drops the ball, and blames it on the Sun being in his eyes. You can never be right around him unless you agree with him, and that's not right. Perfect example is The Avon Lake Medium Duty thread where he Simply refused to admit he was wrong. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Nobody got bashed for wanting a Ranger - old one or T6. Just like nobody got bashed for wanting a Diesel or a Wagon or a Panther or an Ecosport. What was bashed was insisting that Ford HAD to build those or offer them here and that if they didn't they were making a bad business decision. I got bashed and called a "dinosaur" and "mafia" simply for stating that I wished that Ford still offered manual transmissions in light trucks. Remember that there are some of us here who have exactly zero financal interest in Ford (i.e. not a shareholder, an employee nor any interest in the industry as a whole). Our interest is purely as a consumer of the products Ford makes. As a consumer, we have every right to tell Ford what we want via this forum or any other means available. Of course, by the same token Ford doesn't have to listen. But I don't think anyone should be bashed for telling Ford what they want. I do imagine that Ford uses this forum, in addition to multiple other sources, as a tool for market research. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) Ha ain't that the Truth. It doesn't become a good idea simply because Ford decides to do it. Ford's motivations are never as cut an dry as it being a good idea or a good business case for anything, it seems their burden of proof is much higher than other automakers. The problem is when the person mentioned Above, says he is an expert, and that he knows what Ford's motivations are better than other people here. The Messed up thing is he will always try to spin the fact that he was wrong into something else, like that Kid who drops the ball, and blames it on the Sun being in his eyes. You can never be right around him unless you agree with him, and that's not right. Perfect example is The Avon Lake Medium Duty thread where he Simply refused to admit he was wrong. You dare not disagree with RJ. He can never be wrong and his band of two cent lackeys will be ever so happy to remind you of it. lol The truly funny thing is the numerous times that he has been utterly wrong over the years on a variety of issues and yet he still has an almost cult like following around here. I can't decide if its sad or funny but I must admit that I find myself laughing at them more often than not. Edited August 31, 2015 by BlackHorse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) I got bashed and called a "dinosaur" and "mafia" simply for stating that I wished that Ford still offered manual transmissions in light trucks. Remember that there are some of us here who have exactly zero financal interest in Ford (i.e. not a shareholder, an employee nor any interest in the industry as a whole). Our interest is purely as a consumer of the products Ford makes. As a consumer, we have every right to tell Ford what we want via this forum or any other means available. Of course, by the same token Ford doesn't have to listen. But I don't think anyone should be bashed for telling Ford what they want. I do imagine that Ford uses this forum, in addition to multiple other sources, as a tool for market research. This X 1000. Just because some of us don't tow the party line around here we are declared "anti-Ford" or "angry" or some other term intended to be insulting or demeaning. It never seems to matter how many times we do give praise to Ford for things that we like about the company or products that we like. Instead all that seems to matter is the few times we disagree with Ford and then all the praise is quickly forgotten and we are subjected to petty ridicule. Edited August 31, 2015 by BlackHorse 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I'm seeing a pattern here. Seems some of you have comprehension issues. Nobody got bashed for wanting a Ranger - old one or T6. Just like nobody got bashed for wanting a Diesel or a Wagon or a Panther or an Ecosport. BS Yes, it's marketing advice from an angry guy in Arkansas. Are you listening Ford? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 he will always try to spin the fact that he was wrong into something else Ahem. Much like Dean's hatred of the Camry, I hate the 2008 focus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts