fuzzymoomoo Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 46 minutes ago, Anthony said: I gotta say my MAP built Ranger is light years ahead in fit and finish than my wife's Oakville built Edge (even though it has been an absolutely flawless vehicle). Every panel is misaligned as if they had someone putting it together by Braille. No offense to anyone who works at Oakville, but damn...go buy a straightedge or something. Funny you should say that. My Flex has the best fit and finish of any Ford I've ever owned. The 2015 Focus I had used to hold that title. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 3 hours ago, Anthony said: All new drivetrain, major frame changes, suspension changes, moderate electronics changes, and not to mention an all-new factory and a crew that has never worked with this platform either. The chances for a fuck up were well within bounds. The MAP guys have a big hand in the success of this truck. Didn’t mean to dis MAP. They did good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 14 minutes ago, rmc523 said: It's light, sure, but I don't miss that big crash/bouncing sound/action when dropping the tailgate. First world problems, eh? ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 18 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said: First world problems, eh? ? Lol yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 Next you'll be wanting heated and cooled cup holders in the bed..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, jpd80 said: Next you'll be wanting heated and cooled cup holders in the bed..... Duh. Obviously. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 22 minutes ago, jpd80 said: Next you'll be wanting heated and cooled cup holders in the bed..... I want my cup holders to have cup holders 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 26, 2020 Author Share Posted June 26, 2020 On 6/24/2020 at 6:29 PM, jpd80 said: Whisper is that next gen Ranger has increased dash to front axle length, they pushed the front axle forward a bit and widened the track slightly. Very slight dimensional changes are ok, but I think the Ranger is the perfect size and Ford would be smart not to let it “bloat” until it’s almost F-150 sized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
probowler Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 33 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said: Very slight dimensional changes are ok, but I think the Ranger is the perfect size and Ford would be smart not to let it “bloat” until it’s almost F-150 sized. Surely they can't?? The whole point of the ranger is to be smaller and fit into more overhead compartments. I don't know how you could justify a second f-150 sized truck, unless you took a bronco/escape approach and i doubt a more feminized ranger would make anyone happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 (edited) 57 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said: Very slight dimensional changes are ok, but I think the Ranger is the perfect size and Ford would be smart not to let it “bloat” until it’s almost F-150 sized. Just an inch or so here and there. Ford is comfortable with the current size, they’re just massaging a few measurements to stay with the competition.. Edited June 26, 2020 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 The current size is perfect. However, if they were able to add an inch or two in legroom to the backseat, it would be even perfect-er. ? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
30 OTT 6 Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 Too bad Ranger doesn't offer the long box with the crew cab. The Colorado had that configuration available, so that's what I got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 1 hour ago, 30 OTT 6 said: Too bad Ranger doesn't offer the long box with the crew cab. The Colorado had that configuration available, so that's what I got. You got what you needed, that's what important. The Colorado is a nice truck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 26, 2020 Author Share Posted June 26, 2020 12 hours ago, jpd80 said: Just an inch or so here and there. Ford is comfortable with the current size, they’re just massaging a few measurements to stay with the competition.. I just hope they are very careful about increasing the size because one of the things that killed the 3rd gen Dakota is size bloat. By the end the Dakota was within an inch of the Ram in width and almost as long. I suppose an inch or two of more rear leg room would be nice, but they need to be careful not too add too much to the outside. They also need to be careful about adding width. Widen it too much and all of the midsized advantages in size go away. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 4 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said: I just hope they are very careful about increasing the size because one of the things that killed the 3rd gen Dakota is size bloat. By the end the Dakota was within an inch of the Ram in width and almost as long. I suppose an inch or two of more rear leg room would be nice, but they need to be careful not too add too much to the outside. They also need to be careful about adding width. Widen it too much and all of the midsized advantages in size go away. Ranger is narrow enough now it could gain half an inch and still be fine. It sounds as if they’re only messing with the actual wheelbase and not the overall length. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 26, 2020 Author Share Posted June 26, 2020 (edited) 11 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said: Ranger is narrow enough now it could gain half an inch and still be fine. It sounds as if they’re only messing with the actual wheelbase and not the overall length. An inch or less added in width would be ok, but you don't want to end up like the Dakota did in the end being only an inch or two narrower than the full-sized Ram. Right now the Ranger is 6 inches narrower then the F-150. It really shouldn't get any closer then 5 inches difference IMHO. Edited June 26, 2020 by 2005Explorer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 12 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said: An inch or less added in width would be ok, but you don't want to end up like the Dakota did in the end being only an inch or two narrower than the full-sized Ram. Right now the Ranger is 6 inches narrower then the F-150. It really shouldn't get any closer then 5 inches difference IMHO. I agree. An extra inch of width would probably help with some of the handling characteristics it's gotten knocked a little bit for in reviews. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 42 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said: I just hope they are very careful about increasing the size because one of the things that killed the 3rd gen Dakota is size bloat. By the end the Dakota was within an inch of the Ram in width and almost as long. I suppose an inch or two of more rear leg room would be nice, but they need to be careful not too add too much to the outside. They also need to be careful about adding width. Widen it too much and all of the midsized advantages in size go away. Remember, they're also adding a compact pickup below Ranger too, so they have to account for that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 26, 2020 Author Share Posted June 26, 2020 7 minutes ago, rmc523 said: Remember, they're also adding a compact pickup below Ranger too, so they have to account for that as well. I understand that, but I’ve witnessed a lot of vehicle bloat in my lifetime. Everything went from land yachts in the 60’s and 70’s to small and trim in the 80’s and 90’s and now it seems they just keep getting bigger. At some point the Canyonero is a real possibility. ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 The other thing to consider is the 2021 F150's track is 3/4" wider and the front clip higher. It's not a massive increase but perhaps enough to match the new GM and Ram trucks. Ford lengthening Ranger's wheelbase and track is probably more about handling but perhaps it's also about a slightly bigger footprint for CAFE - I'm just guessing here.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 4 hours ago, 2005Explorer said: An inch or less added in width would be ok, but you don't want to end up like the Dakota did in the end being only an inch or two narrower than the full-sized Ram. Right now the Ranger is 6 inches narrower then the F-150. It really shouldn't get any closer then 5 inches difference IMHO. I'm not trying to pick a fight (please don't take it that way), but I also remember when the last-gen Dakota was released it being bigger than the previous generation and comparisons being made to the Ram, but in reality, it was never really that close. I parked next to a last-gen Dakota last weekend and my Ranger was noticeable bigger. For comparison, The 2019 Ranger is almost 2 inches wider (73.3 in) than the last-gen (2005 and up) Dakota (71.7 in). Both measured with no mirrors. The 2005 Dodge Ram at the time was 79.5 inches wide (no mirrors). Which would make it almost 7+ inches wider than the Dakota at the time. Note I linked each manufacturer specs direct from the manufacturer (not a 3rd party site). (The Dakota specs I linked were for the 2009 model which is the same as the 2005) It just shows what we thought was too big 10 years ago is the norm now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 27, 2020 Author Share Posted June 27, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Anthony said: I'm not trying to pick a fight (please don't take it that way), but I also remember when the last-gen Dakota was released it being bigger than the previous generation and comparisons being made to the Ram, but in reality, it was never really that close. I parked next to a last-gen Dakota last weekend and my Ranger was noticeable bigger. For comparison, The 2019 Ranger is almost 2 inches wider (73.3 in) than the last-gen (2005 and up) Dakota (71.7 in). Both measured with no mirrors. The 2005 Dodge Ram at the time was 79.5 inches wide (no mirrors). Which would make it almost 7+ inches wider than the Dakota at the time. Note I linked each manufacturer specs direct from the manufacturer (not a 3rd party site). (The Dakota specs I linked were for the 2009 model which is the same as the 2005) It just shows what we thought was too big 10 years ago is the norm now. Ok fine. It just seems that the last Dakota became bloated compared to what it originally was meant to be. I know there are plenty of people that want to see the Ranger grow quite a bit from it’s current size, but I’m not one of them. If they grow it a few inches in length and width the whole idea of a Ranger becomes pointless. If people want a bigger truck get an F150. One of the arguments for not bringing the T6 to the US and Canada when it came out in 2012 was because it was 90% the size of an F150. Now if you park a Ranger and an F150 side by side there is a considerable size difference, but there needs to be. I don’t see how making it 98% the size of an F150 helps it. It needs to stay “about” the same size going forward to make sense in the line-up. Edited June 27, 2020 by 2005Explorer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
probowler Posted June 27, 2020 Share Posted June 27, 2020 The F-150 could grow a bit bigger (and by extension the Ranger) but the F-150 is so close to maxing out what you can comfortably fit on the road and in parking spaces that the growth can't go on much longer. I've never been a fan of growing vehicles out of their class. The Ranger should have remained a compact truck and if Ford wanted a true midsize truck, they should have made that the Maverick or called it an F-100. It's so silly how large the Ranger and explorer have gotten, only for their original incarnations to have been replaced with new smaller nameplates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 27, 2020 Author Share Posted June 27, 2020 37 minutes ago, probowler said: The F-150 could grow a bit bigger (and by extension the Ranger) but the F-150 is so close to maxing out what you can comfortably fit on the road and in parking spaces that the growth can't go on much longer. I've never been a fan of growing vehicles out of their class. The Ranger should have remained a compact truck and if Ford wanted a true midsize truck, they should have made that the Maverick or called it an F-100. It's so silly how large the Ranger and explorer have gotten, only for their original incarnations to have been replaced with new smaller nameplates. The new Ranger has grown a lot compared to the old one and I’m personally fine with that. It’s a really nice sized truck IMHO. One of the most trim midsizers you can buy right now. I just have an issue with it getting much larger in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 27, 2020 Share Posted June 27, 2020 (edited) 15 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said: The new Ranger has grown a lot compared to the old one and I’m personally fine with that. It’s a really nice sized truck IMHO. One of the most trim midsizers you can buy right now. I just have an issue with it getting much larger in the future. It needed to grow a touch in width because the Transit Connect based compact pickup is going to be around 72" wide. That bit extra width is a big selling point with buyers. Edited June 27, 2020 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.