Biker16 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Biker...pipe dream for sure, but wifey and I have discussed numerous times the prospect of purchasing a Pickup and a small Air Stream and roadtrippin.... Love the F150 but if something a tad smaller can tow that beast Im all in... Dean, Go back 6 months ago, and arrogance of some here about the absurdity of a mid sized pickup truck and how "Stupid" people like you were for wanting something the market obviously doesn't want. I Don't think you are stupid for wanting something the meets you needs, I just believe that Ranger to be signfigantly more efifecnet and less expensive than than F-150 to survive long term when fuel prices go back up. A vehicle that can tow up to 5000lbs and payload of 1500lbs can be FWD/AWD, and exceed 32mpg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Dean, Go back 6 months ago, and arrogance of some here about the absurdity of a mid sized pickup truck and how "Stupid" people like you were for wanting something the market obviously doesn't want. I Don't think you are stupid for wanting something the meets you needs, I just believe that Ranger to be signfigantly more efifecnet and less expensive than than F-150 to survive long term when fuel prices go back up. A vehicle that can tow up to 5000lbs and payload of 1500lbs can be FWD/AWD, and exceed 32mpg. I don't think that's an accurate representation of the feelings on a midsize truck. Rather, the opinion of many has been that it hasn't made sense to this point. Ford's existing "option" for a midsize is close in size to the F-150, with fuel economy not being all that different, as well as pricing concerns (do buyers just want cheap transportation, a la the last Ranger, or would they pay more for a nicer truck?). Would it fit better for some than an F-150? Sure, but has it made sense for Ford? The answer obviously is no thus far. Now the next-gen model? I could see either 1) the global Ranger "Americanized" to fit our market, or 2) another alternative to a traditional midsize truck (we've discussed something like this, like Edge or TC based that can haul some stuff, while getting fantastic fuel economy. Now indications seem to be pointing to the former, which gives them an opportunity to introduce a Bronco platform mate. Personally, I think we won't see the global Ranger come here - I think Ford is still concerned about it being too close to the F-150. I think we'll see the Bronco be based on T6 (or T7, whatever the next-gen is called), but downsized from the Ranger's existing size, and offered in 2- and 4-door versions. Then it'll have an accompanying "Bronco T" (available with regular cab or 4-door) that is also smaller than the Ranger, sharing front ends with the regular Bronco. That way you get economies of scale from using a derivative of T6/7, while having a vehicle that complements F-150 (being smaller) rather than competing with F-150 since it's smaller than the 9/10ths Ranger, but still offering decent capability, with better fuel economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I have a new take on Ranger based on 3 things: A few years ago F series was well below plant capacity and the market for a midsized pickup was questionable and there were no plans for other vehicles on that platform nor was a plant readily available. Fast forward and now we have a fairly successful Canyorado, F series has to be approaching capacity and Ranger would therefore represent additional volume rather than simply replacing F150 sales. It looks like MAP will be available and there are at least 2 other vehicles sharing the platform and factory which greatly enhances the business case along with the other factors. It would not surprise me if T7 was slightly smaller - should definitely be a lot lighter. Could it be a unibody platform for a pickup and 2 utilities? Could be but I think T6/T7 makes more sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I have a new take on Ranger based on 3 things: A few years ago F series was well below plant capacity and the market for a midsized pickup was questionable and there were no plans for other vehicles on that platform nor was a plant readily available. Fast forward and now we have a fairly successful Canyorado, F series has to be approaching capacity and Ranger would therefore represent additional volume rather than simply replacing F150 sales. It looks like MAP will be available and there are at least 2 other vehicles sharing the platform and factory which greatly enhances the business case along with the other factors. It would not surprise me if T7 was slightly smaller - should definitely be a lot lighter. Could it be a unibody platform for a pickup and 2 utilities? Could be but I think T6/T7 makes more sense. Yes, that's another thing to consider. Ford didn't have anywhere to even build a Ranger if they wanted to until now. And as you also rightly say, if they're tying Bronco into the project, that gives more volume for amortization of the project. Agree about it being lighter.....another question - do they go aluminum with this "Ranger" and Bronco, not only representing a jump (back) into the segment, but completely leapfrogging the competition from the get go by surpassing that 30mpg threshold. Especially if they're doing an "Americanized" version. Though I realize there are global considerations to make with such a move (unless we do get a unique NA product). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Dean, Go back 6 months ago, and arrogance of some here about the absurdity of a mid sized pickup truck and how "Stupid" people like you were for wanting something the market obviously doesn't want. I Don't think you are stupid for wanting something the meets you needs, I just believe that Ranger to be signfigantly more efifecnet and less expensive than than F-150 to survive long term when fuel prices go back up. A vehicle that can tow up to 5000lbs and payload of 1500lbs can be FWD/AWD, and exceed 32mpg. IMO GM is still stupid for having a dedicated plant that sells only about 105k trucks with another 60k or so Vans each year. A aluminum T7 Ranger and Bronco can sell at least 200k combined between the two of them. I'm not sure of the business case of having the Everest in North America , but that could add numbers also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 As for the F-series weathering increasing gas prices. In 2007, the F-series sold about 690k trucks, down from the year before of 796k. The price of gas then was about $2.70 a gallon. In 2014/15, they sold 753 and 780k trucks with gas costing 3.50 a gallon on average. They don't make as big of impact as you think they do when it comes to gas pricing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 As for the F-series weathering increasing gas prices. In 2007, the F-series sold about 690k trucks, down from the year before of 796k. The price of gas then was about $2.70 a gallon. In 2014/15, they sold 753 and 780k trucks with gas costing 3.50 a gallon on average. They don't make as big of impact as you think they do when it comes to gas pricing. For trucks, not so much. Full size SUV's, perhaps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 IMO GM is still stupid for having a dedicated plant that sells only about 105k trucks with another 60k or so Vans each year. A aluminum T7 Ranger and Bronco can sell at least 200k combined between the two of them. I'm not sure of the business case of having the Everest in North America , but that could add numbers also. I personally don't see the need for Everest here. It won't be as nice as Explorer, and fills basically the same position in the lineup. Especially if next-gen Explorer is RWD as rumored, which would be the main/only alternative selling point for Everest in my eyes. As for the F-series weathering increasing gas prices. In 2007, the F-series sold about 690k trucks, down from the year before of 796k. The price of gas then was about $2.70 a gallon. In 2014/15, they sold 753 and 780k trucks with gas costing 3.50 a gallon on average. They don't make as big of impact as you think they do when it comes to gas pricing. Ford also introduced more efficient powertrains between '07 and '14, which obviously helped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Yes, that's another thing to consider. Ford didn't have anywhere to even build a Ranger if they wanted to until now. And as you also rightly say, if they're tying Bronco into the project, that gives more volume for amortization of the project. Agree about it being lighter.....another question - do they go aluminum with this "Ranger" and Bronco, not only representing a jump (back) into the segment, but completely leapfrogging the competition from the get go by surpassing that 30mpg threshold. Especially if they're doing an "Americanized" version. Though I realize there are global considerations to make with such a move (unless we do get a unique NA product). That's what I'm thinking - with aluminum and maybe some other changes and a 2.0L EB engine/10 speed tranny it might be able to reach the mpg goals without compromising Ranger for ROW. And it could support exports - Australia maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I think the initial drop was due to sticker shock on high gas prices and a knee jerk reaction. The economy also tanked. I think folks now are used to $3-$4 gas so it won't have a big impact. Also - Ranger sales didn't increase so it's not like they were flocking from F150s to Rangers even back then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I personally don't see the need for Everest here. It won't be as nice as Explorer, and fills basically the same position in the lineup. Especially if next-gen Explorer is RWD as rumored, which would be the main/only alternative selling point for Everest in my eyes. Ford also introduced more efficient powertrains between '07 and '14, which obviously helped. Could be Bronco and Troller. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Ok, I just had (another) crazy thought: One truck and two utilities with one not being a Ford brand. What if they're building a CD6 based pickup (like Ridgeline) and the other 2 are Explorer/Aviator - all on CD6? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) Could be Bronco and Troller. What could be? Ok, I just had (another) crazy thought: One truck and two utilities with one not being a Ford brand. What if they're building a CD6 based pickup (like Ridgeline) and the other 2 are Explorer/Aviator - all on CD6? But where does that leave Bronco? There's also the pesky "new nameplates" component to the discussion. Aviator could be counted as 1 - the non-Ford (Lincoln) one obviously CD6-based pickup? That's not an SUV. Explorer isn't a new nameplate. Bronco is one of the 4 presumably, but now in this scenario, it's on a mystery platform if not tied to T6/7 Ranger........unlessssss....... Bronco ALSO goes on CD6, which maybe that thought isn't that crazy.... Haha, at that point, let's throw out the rumor that CD6 replaces T6 altogether! That still leaves 2 unaccounted for SUVs..... EcoSport replacement for US could be one, but then what would be the last? I still don't think Everest makes sense. What if we go out of the box completely and say a next-gen Galaxy coming as an indirect Flex replacement?? Edited January 20, 2016 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Ok, I just had (another) crazy thought: One truck and two utilities with one not being a Ford brand. What if they're building a CD6 based pickup (like Ridgeline) and the other 2 are Explorer/Aviator - all on CD6? That's what I'm thinking. Personally, I don't think the 'Ranger' in the US will be a BOF vehicle. I think it will be a unibody truck, possibly based on CD6, or CD4, or some mix thereof. However, this goes against 'One Ford', but if the trucklet is actually built off the same platform as several other vehicles, does it really? Sure, it's a different vehicle than the ROW Ranger, but it shares a platform and a lot of common parts with other vehicles, so it should fit just fine. I'm just not sold on the ROW Ranger coming to the US unless it drops in size, which I don't see happening. I think the Bronco will be based on the same. Remember, the Bronco does NOT have to be BOF to be offroad-capable. The Jeep GC is not, and it does fine off-road. I doubt the Wrangler will be much longer as it will need to share a platform to remain viable. The other option is a Troller. The Bronco and Ranger don't have to be the same with the Troller being available as well. That still leaves 2 unaccounted for SUVs..... EcoSport replacement for US could be one, but then what would be the last? I still don't think Everest makes sense. What if we go out of the box completely and say a next-gen Galaxy coming as an indirect Flex replacement?? Agree. I think there will be a CUV replacement for the Flex while the Explorer is more SUV, both built off the same platform, obviously. Isn't this fun! The next few years should be really exciting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 That's what I'm thinking. Personally, I don't think the 'Ranger' in the US will be a BOF vehicle. I think it will be a unibody truck, possibly based on CD6, or CD4, or some mix thereof. However, this goes against 'One Ford', but if the trucklet is actually built off the same platform as several other vehicles, does it really? Sure, it's a different vehicle than the ROW Ranger, but it shares a platform and a lot of common parts with other vehicles, so it should fit just fine. I'm just not sold on the ROW Ranger coming to the US unless it drops in size, which I don't see happening. I think the Bronco will be based on the same. Remember, the Bronco does NOT have to be BOF to be offroad-capable. The Jeep GC is not, and it does fine off-road. I doubt the Wrangler will be much longer as it will need to share a platform to remain viable. The other option is a Troller. The Bronco and Ranger don't have to be the same with the Troller being available as well. Agree. I think there will be a CUV replacement for the Flex while the Explorer is more SUV, both built off the same platform, obviously. Isn't this fun! The next few years should be really exciting! Honestly, this unibody CD6 truck idea seems more plausible than them downsizing ROW Ranger to fit US needs (for it to not be so close to F-150 size wise) and just became a front runner for me. So assuming it's on CD6 - then they throw Bronco on CD6 too, and suddenly the entire CD6 program gains a conservative 150,000 units a year between CD6 "Ranger" and Bronco in addition to the existing/planned Explorer and Aviator volume, not to even mention more if it extends "downward" to Continental, Taurus, if not further down with Fusion/MKZ/Edge/EdgeL/MKX) which are roughly 635,000 units. I mean if they're able to put all of those vehicles on one platform, suddenly that's roughly 758,000 vehicles on a single modular platform, just in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 The 2 door Bronco, and 4 Door are counted as separate vehicles, even though they will share the majority of parts. EcoSport, 2 Door-Bronco, 4 Door- Bronco and Lincoln Mid/Large 3 row SUV. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Yeah I forgot about Bronco. I did say it was a crazy thought. So we're back to Bronco, Everest (4 door) and Ranger on T6/T7. These could also be exported I presume. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 The 2 door Bronco, and 4 Door are counted as separate vehicles, even though they will share the majority of parts. EcoSport, 2 Door-Bronco, 4 Door- Bronco and Lincoln Mid/Large 3 row SUV. The Mid/large SUV would be CD6 based...the MKExplorer aka Avator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Ok, I just had (another) crazy thought: One truck and two utilities with one not being a Ford brand. What if they're building a CD6 based pickup (like Ridgeline) and the other 2 are Explorer/Aviator - all on CD6? at the 'elsewhere' forum, I speculated about a part frame solution like maybe the Falcon/Ute-truck method is one of the Keys to cD6 ...But where does that leave Bronco?...&... *IF* a cD6 is uber-flex enough for Mustangs/STARstangs,could there be a small(ish) truck(ish) using it too? & as said yet-elsewhere-other, imho *IF* there's a semi-Everest-like thing, that it will have mostly nothing to do with the current one (don't expect that Name used in the U.S either) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.a7ce979b6b5e2dc34f47465a1e30e031.jpg)
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.