Jump to content

2024 US Ranger Without Camo Spotted


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Hugh said:

I feel it depends on the footprint of the overall powertrain and if it's robust enough for the truck. Off-roading with possible snorkeling might be a show-stopper. I wouldn't complain if Ford figures that part out. 494 is a very nice number.


weight would need to be a consideration on a vehicle like this as well

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, ausrutherford said:

So, I wonder if Ford would cook up a Bronco and Ranger Raptor R with the 3.5 EB?


I’ve wondered the opposite extreme, whether there is demand for an entry-level naturally aspirated engine option for the base models?  Ford offers F-150 with NA 3.3L V6 and then offers 2.7L EcoBoost V6 as upgrade; but I’m not sure Ford has an engine that would be comparable to F-150’s 3.3L V6 in smaller displacement proportional to Ranger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Rick73 said:


I’ve wondered the opposite extreme, whether there is demand for an entry-level naturally aspirated engine option for the base models?  Ford offers F-150 with NA 3.3L V6 and then offers 2.7L EcoBoost V6 as upgrade; but I’m not sure Ford has an engine that would be comparable to F-150’s 3.3L V6 in smaller displacement proportional to Ranger.


Why? There’s nothing that could be accomplished in the Ranger by the 3.3 that the 2.3 doesn’t already do better, plus you’re adding build complexity for little to no gain whatsoever. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


Why? There’s nothing that could be accomplished in the Ranger by the 3.3 that the 2.3 doesn’t already do better, plus you’re adding build complexity for little to no gain whatsoever. 

Literally the only benefit or perceived benefit from adding the 3.3 is that some people prefer NA engines for their durability and longevity, that's about it. But the 2.3 seems to be pretty reliable already, hence why I said perceived benefit and not actual benefit. 

Edited by DeluxeStang
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


Why? There’s nothing that could be accomplished in the Ranger by the 3.3 that the 2.3 doesn’t already do better, plus you’re adding build complexity for little to no gain whatsoever. 


He wasn’t suggesting the 3.3 but asking if something smaller would work in Ranger.

 

The only option would be the 2.5L NA and other than being cheaper there wouldn’t be any advantage over the 2.3Leb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, T-dubz said:

That’s really the question isn’t it? If Raptor is above ZR2, then this is kinda how I see it.


Chevy - Ford

Z71 = FX4

Trail Boss = Tremor XLT

Nothing comparable = Tremor Lariat

ZR2 = Nothing comparable

Nothing comparable = Raptor

 

80hp is a big difference between the two.

 

Z71 is trim level above LT/Trail Boss... like the old LTZ where as FX4 and Tremor are packages available across most Ranger trim levels. This is the major difference between Ford and Chevy... Ford lets you buy Lariat with or without FX4 (or Tremor) while on Chevy Z71 the suspension lift is bundled with higher equipment list. You can't even buy a Z71 2WD.

 

Looking at the 2023 configurator, I think it is more like this:

 

WT = XL

LT = XLT

Trail Boss = XLT FX4 

Z71 = Lariat FX4

ZR2 = Lariat Tremor

n/a = Raptor

 

Of course Ford could change everything when it lanches the new Ranger so this is a bit of apples and oranges comparison right now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akirby said:


He wasn’t suggesting the 3.3 but asking if something smaller would work in Ranger.

 

The only option would be the 2.5L NA and other than being cheaper there wouldn’t be any advantage over the 2.3Leb.


Is that engine even still in production? I thought it died with the Fusion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, bzcat said:

 

Z71 is trim level above LT/Trail Boss... like the old LTZ where as FX4 and Tremor are packages available across most Ranger trim levels. This is the major difference between Ford and Chevy... Ford lets you buy Lariat with or without FX4 (or Tremor) while on Chevy Z71 the suspension lift is bundled with higher equipment list. You can't even buy a Z71 2WD.

 

Looking at the 2023 configurator, I think it is more like this:

 

WT = XL

LT = XLT

Trail Boss = XLT FX4 

Z71 = Lariat FX4

ZR2 = Lariat Tremor

n/a = Raptor

 

Of course Ford could change everything when it lanches the new Ranger so this is a bit of apples and oranges comparison right now.

The trail boss has a 2” lift and is 3.5” wider than the z71. IMO strictly looking at off-road ability, it’s a step above the Z71. It’s like a base-squatch bronco. I’d still guess the ZR2 is above the Tremor. I don’t know much about fox shocks vs multimatic, maybe one is better then the other, but the zr2 seems to add much more then the tremor package does, including a completely different front end.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


Is it the exact same though? I was under the impression the hybrid version was almost totally different. 


It’s an Atkinson cycle design but that just changes the intake valve timing.  Not drastically different.

 

Just a theoretical discussion anyway - it’s not happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, akirby said:


Demand?  Of course assuming it’s cheaper.

 

Profit?  Nope.


Yeah, there is probably no current naturally-aspirated engine powerful enough for the Ranger that would not add cost above 2.3L EcoBoost.  Just noticed Chevy Colorado had 2.5L I-4 (200 HP) and 3.6L V6 (308 HP), and both were replaced with 2.7L turbo I-4s.  I expect the previous Chevy NA I-4 did not make enough torque to be competitive, and the 3.6L DOHC V-6 probably cost as much or more than turbo I-4.  

 

F-150 seems different in that the base NA 3.3L V6 must be cheaper to manufacture than a V6 EcoBoost, so a lower-cost naturally aspirated engine option makes more sense.  In the 90s I purchased a new Ranger and went with base NA 2.3L I-4 which served me quite well for many years, and it only had around 100 HP.  Most of the time I was glad I did not spend more for an optional V6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Rick73 said:


Yeah, there is probably no current naturally-aspirated engine powerful enough for the Ranger that would not add cost above 2.3L EcoBoost.  Just noticed Chevy Colorado had 2.5L I-4 (200 HP) and 3.6L V6 (308 HP), and both were replaced with 2.7L turbo I-4s.  I expect the previous Chevy NA I-4 did not make enough torque to be competitive, and the 3.6L DOHC V-6 probably cost as much or more than turbo I-4.  

 

F-150 seems different in that the base NA 3.3L V6 must be cheaper to manufacture than a V6 EcoBoost, so a lower-cost naturally aspirated engine option makes more sense.  In the 90s I purchased a new Ranger and went with base NA 2.3L I-4 which served me quite well for many years, and it only had around 100 HP.  Most of the time I was glad I did not spend more for an optional V6.


My first truck was a 90 Ranger 2.3L manual.  It was fine.  But the 3.3L is strictly a marketing tool.  It allows Ford to charge more for the 2.7L and 3.5L and give fleet buyers a cheaper option.  Actual cost of the engine doesn’t really matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, T-dubz said:

The trail boss has a 2” lift and is 3.5” wider than the z71. IMO strictly looking at off-road ability, it’s a step above the Z71. It’s like a base-squatch bronco. I’d still guess the ZR2 is above the Tremor. I don’t know much about fox shocks vs multimatic, maybe one is better then the other, but the zr2 seems to add much more then the tremor package does, including a completely different front end.

True. The ZR2 has more upgrades than the Tremor, from its ZR2-specific front suspension (unique knuckles and wishbones), and 33-inch diameter 285/70R17 tires, same size as the Ranger Raptor's.

I think the ZR2 is aimed somewhere between the Tremor and Raptor, but probably closer to the latter.
2023-chevrolet-colorado-zr2-front-angle.

It's definitely got more off-road upgrades than the Tremor. 
2021-ford-ranger-tremor-exterior-front-q
2024-ford-ranger-tremor-front-view-spy-p

Edited by AM222
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, akirby said:


Escape hybrid

That reminds me, in some markets like Argentina, the 2022 and earlier rest-of-the-world Ranger had a 2.5L Duratec option.

PS: The next gen Ranger still hasn't been launched in Argentina, so I don't know if the Duratec option will be dropped. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you guys are over thinking this.

 

Chevy guys aren’t buying Fords and vice versa.


For the Ford loyalists the question is whether to spend the extra to go from tremor to Raptor.

 

For everyone else I think it comes down to styling first and price second.  You’re not buying a truck that you don’t like the looks of no matter the price.

 

And over $50k if you prefer the looks of one over the other I don’t think a few thousand dollars will matter.

 

All that to say I don’t think Ford needs to compete with GM on price or options.  I think they’ll price it based on Tremor and their market experience with F150 and Bronco and not worry about what GM does or doesn’t do.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, akirby said:


My first truck was a 90 Ranger 2.3L manual.  It was fine.  But the 3.3L is strictly a marketing tool.  It allows Ford to charge more for the 2.7L and 3.5L and give fleet buyers a cheaper option.  Actual cost of the engine doesn’t really matter.


It seems Tacoma may be the only truck left with NA 4-cylinder — the 2.7L.  It is about $2k cheaper than V6, so maybe a good deal for those not needing to tow much.  It appears Frontier has 3.8L V6 — I don’t see previous 4 cylinder listed any longer.

 

I’m curious how many of these compact trucks are loaded and in $50k range versus those around $35k or lower?  As you mentioned before, there is more profit for Ford on loaded ones, but like expensive BEVs, is volume too limited for lack of affordability?  I just can’t see that many $50k Rangers or Colorados compared to XLT or similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:


It seems Tacoma may be the only truck left with NA 4-cylinder — the 2.7L.  It is about $2k cheaper than V6, so maybe a good deal for those not needing to tow much.  


Cost is the only advantage there.  Mpg is almost identical.

 

On the 95 Rangers it was 20 vs 17 if you chose the 4 cylinder.

5F11CCAA-4870-4088-A86F-2487D4D722D8.png

Edited by akirby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, akirby said:


Cost is the only advantage there.  Mpg is almost identical.

 

On the 95 Rangers it was 20 vs 17 if you chose the 4 cylinder.

5F11CCAA-4870-4088-A86F-2487D4D722D8.png


 

Looking at 2023 Tacoma specs, I learned that Toyota list the 3.5L V6 as an “Atkinson” engine.  That may explain how fuel efficiency is nearly the same as the older 2.7L 4-cylinder.  That and also displacement difference is only about 30%, not as much as old Rangers going from 2.3L I4 to 4.0L V6.


What I find interesting is use of an Atkinson engine in a non-hybrid vehicle, though I’m not certain it is equivalent to more traditional Atkinson engine designs due to lower compression ratio.  With use of variable valve timing, Toyota may be blurring the line on what constitutes an Atkinson cycle.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rick73 said:


 

Looking at 2023 Tacoma specs, I learned that Toyota list the 3.5L V6 as an “Atkinson” engine.  That may explain how fuel efficiency is nearly the same as the older 2.7L 4-cylinder.  That and also displacement difference is only about 30%, not as much as old Rangers going from 2.3L I4 to 4.0L V6.


What I find interesting is use of an Atkinson engine in a non-hybrid vehicle, though I’m not certain it is equivalent to more traditional Atkinson engine designs due to lower compression ratio.  With use of variable valve timing, Toyota may be blurring the line on what constitutes an Atkinson cycle.

 


“Simulated Atkinson cycle using VVT”.  Not a full Atkinson cycle design.  But probably provides better mpg by sacrificing a little low end torque.

 

The reason AC is used on hybrids with smaller engines is because the electric motor makes up for the loss in low end torque.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/29/2023 at 7:10 PM, silvrsvt said:

 

Chicago opens up in about two weeks. NYIAS opens before the 17th of April

 

I'm well aware of when each show opens up, but I didn't mention them since I figured everyone here knows already. Only passing on the order bank opening date, nothing else. NYIAS is possible, based on that date. 

 

On 1/30/2023 at 2:44 PM, blksn8k2 said:

 

April 17th. Hmmm, that sounds more like a Mustang thing than Ranger...

Yeah, but what I mentioned before has nothing to do with the Mustang, as that's opening of orders for the 2024 Ranger from what I've seen. Not Ranger reveal specifically. Mustang starts production around that time anyway for June delivery, but ordering dates are different. I'm definitely referring to orders opening and nothing else.

 

I don't have concrete knowledge on the reveal date nor do my Ford sources---or at least they say...

On 1/30/2023 at 3:11 PM, pffan1990 said:

 

Agreed with everything you said above about Brett and auto journalists in general. One of the things that gets me is that despite evidence to the contrary, which can be easily looked up in a matter of minutes, the so-called auto journalists continued to say the 7G Mustang was going to be CD6-based, even if most of us already knew this was not the case. Some of the writers were still saying that all the way up until the reveal last September. While this is the only auto forum I am active on with an account, I do lurk many other forums without accounts. Those include the Mustang 6G/7G, Bronco 6G, Bronco Sport, and the F-150, Lightning, F-Series Super Duty, and Maverick of those forums. I read the posts and check out pics but don't have accounts to participate. I'm shocked at how quick users attack one another over an opinion, gatekeeping, and whether or not a user is an insider. This happens on few of these forums but mostly on the Bronco6G that I've seen. Some Mustang ones too. There was one guy on the Bronco6G who claimed to work for Webasto and warned, quite some long time ago, that the top was not in good shape and to prepare for bad news. They ridiculed him but he was right. The Webasto top problems occurred and users there suddenly realized they had a legit user there but ran him off. There are too many Debbie Downers there and other forums too, where the sun just won't come up in the morning over any news, and Ford just can't win.

That's why I'm glad to only be active on this forum. It's really bad on the Mustang 6G/7G where some users are really full of it. One guy, whose name I won't say here, has the tendency to refer to his username as a third person, acts as if he's an insider. He ridicules others and acts smug whenever he's right but backtracks and insults when he's wrong. He said there was going to be a shorter wheelbase version specifically for the new Shelby variant with no back seats. Well, interesting that isn't happening. I have seen your posts there and enjoy reading them as I enjoy reading yours here. So insightful and knowledge that the posts are well-written as a long book chapter, with words and lots of photos. You were right with your inside info, especially with guessing timeline of public prototype testing, reveal, production, all based on past history of Mustang development. Of course some there ridiculed you on that but you were still correct on that. Back to Brett though, it is infuriating that he gaslit the Mustang forums with that horrible article with the alleged window sticker sheet that had the supposed 450hp figure for the 5.0L V8. Some considered it a legit article and said 450 horsepower was enough. Then came debate on whether or not 450 is needed or should it be around 480, etc. Brett done divided the Mustang community with that article which we now know as false. Ford then announced the correct power figures, which I wonder whether it was a direct response to that horribly-written article. I won't link it here but if you find it, the original article is still there on the FA site without any edits or revisions. Lots of readers roasted Brett in the reader comment about the lack of editing and for causing quite a stir. I'm surprised he even still writes for Ford Authority after that.

 

 

 

 

I appreciate this a lot, but lost my previous response to you. Thanks a billion.

 

I get the impression my comments are not really respected (mutually) here anyway among most regulars, but I share my 2 cents anyway and give kudos to other users, in the somewhat aloof atmosphere. (I only disappear, after the post editor errors cause my time-consuming drafts to get deleted.)

 

I could say the same information first, but let another user on here repeat it, it's like they cured cancer.

 

In spite of that, I greatly respect the attempts made on this forum to not post misinformation about Fords and stay on track, which a lot of other Ford related forums struggle to do so, by not weeding out bad faith posters or Debbie Downers as you mentioned.

 

It bothers other guys I know personally who comment from a professional perspective online, but I get past it since my info is thirdhand and secondhand at best. I'm not worthy LOL like those insiders.

 

 

If I was the firsthand source, I'd be more upset and give up entirely, like many of them already do. I'm part of the general public, they're not, so I get their frustration.

 

One source of mine who posted on those truck forums, put in a lot of effort to keep everyone up to speed and gave up eventually for a similar reason. Guys there would doubt him endlessly, felt entitled to proof of his relationship with Ford (or etc) and ignored his insight about Bronco stuff.

 

I think he said another Ford contact on B6G triggered him on possibly doxxing or ratting him out at Ford, so he permanently left.

 

I guess he still comments on other stuff, but says he's done everywhere and will "leave it to middlemen" going forward. He's been generous enough from what I can see over many years.

 

I also can see why some Ford guys here are silent, as it's dangerous fire to play with against a well known Fortune 500 with huge legal arms willing to destroy employees' lives, that don't respect their privacy against competition.

 

Anyway, the auto writers are really lazy from what many of these experts tell me and it's too much of a headache to rebut their lazy reporting, even if misinformation.

 

I've noticed this pattern for years and as someone on the outside (but informed), I often find early info the dumb writers struggle to discover and only get confirmation if an insider vets my discoveries. Then, these writers often steal credit for finding something new, which would happen on M7G with my info posted to the forum.

 

I really did my best in 2020-22 to continue stressing how CD6 no longer had anything to do with things S650 Mustang, but you have to give up at some point. Anyone dumb enough to believe it and just trust em without question, shouldn't be taken seriously as a functioning enthusiast. I get people are busy...but come on.

 

If you can't bother to be on the same page, then why are you entitledly commenting out of ignorance?

 

I love watching YouTube for entertainment, but it's become really obvious how bad it's gotten and I hate giving anyone the adsense $$$ views.

 

Like my cousin often says, everyone wants to be a cut rate Clarkson, Hammond, or Leno on YT, without the credentials to back it up. Yet also dip their hands in other pots (mixing opinion takes with reporting objective news).

 

I don't watch those idiots to see them speculate on what "they think" Ford is doing (with no insight), simply because they copied another vlogger who doesn't know much either and just want easy clicks from ignoramuses who don't know better.

 

Too many dumb bros looking for their monster energy or red bull fix in image trucks and muscle cars, with nothing working upstairs. The social media posts reflect it so much, it's a double face palm on the matter. I'm happy to be a geek/nerd in the enthusiast sense, I don't need my truck or car to speak for my identity.

 

Giving those types a platform to BS is a really bad idea, but outta my hands. We get to deal with a lot of them in the 4x4/muscle car forums anyway, but almost none of them post on here and it's very obvious. They're outwitted.

 

I know you're referring to "thePill" by the third person guy and yeah I take leave of absence on Mustang forums whenever he shows up, to just blather about complete BS.

 

Couldn't get stuff right about S550 in 2012-13, so I peeped his game very quickly and dismissed him on S650 years later, even though several clueless types on M6G gave him an audience and kept attacking me for putting him in his place. I told em to go pound sand. 

 

Those types really don't help the stream of credible information and I hope by now everyone has wised up and know better than to trust "the Pill" .

 

I post as amk91 and consider myself much smarter than he is, in my efforts to listen to good insight from experts and put research skills to work.

 

Brett Foote at Ford Authority is just a dolt and the parent company of the forums/sites he posts on, are just asleep at the wheel. I saw what he posted on the S650, but I knew otherwise and left him to sink himself.

 

I don't want to come across as a know it all on those forums (like the experts), because some dudes are probably getting tired of me correcting or forgetting to reply to them.

 

Unfortunately replying to you in this thread required way too much text LOL and might be too off topic, so I think I want to cut it off right here and maybe PM the rest not related to the Mustang Stampede (below). Thanks a billion again. 

 

On 1/30/2023 at 3:11 PM, pffan1990 said:

I wasn't aware you attended the Mustang Stampede event. Hope you enjoyed it despite some disappointments. Clearly they didn't rehearse the event as one woman on stage, who works at the Mustang plant, was so nervous that she couldn't say what she actually did at the plant. She was so nervous while also announcing the start of the reveal where the new Mustangs were driven in. But I tell you, I was irked seeing StangMode standing on stage being interviewed by the host. He claimed for a long time on his YouTube that he had inside info that there was going to be a 4-door ICE Mustang sedan which isn't happening. At the event sometime prior to the Stampede, he claims that they were going to reveal the new Mustang, but it was just a camoed prototype under the tarp. That right there destroyed his whole credibility along with many other things he said which wasn't true. Out of all the brilliant Mustang YouTubers, they had to have him? I won't say any more as I don't want to derail this thread, but I'm sure you know about him and how many fans don't like him.

 

I did attend the Mustang Stampede on September 14, 2022 (plus NAIAS Charity Preview) and it was very disappointing, if not alienating in some respects, where being made to feel third class at times.

 

I attended as just a Mustang owner, not the extended relative of a mid-level white collar Ford employee. I really paid for that and won't take that risk again.

 

I waited in line to get food for 2 hours at Huntington Place (nee Cobo Hall) and by the time of the reveal, when I had finally gotten my BBQ order, I unfortunately found out I would not be sitting in the bleachers nor would much of anyone else, despite being invited as a Mustang owner to watch the reveal live.

 

I would be barred access, as I was magically not on the huge list. I had email confirmation of my invitation and much more.

 

Due to this, didn't even see the S650 up close in the flesh until the pricey Charity NAIAS event where all of them were locked and some had tinted windows on the NAIAS stand. (Photos to large to upload)

Screenshot_2023-02-04-14-52-03-97_92460851df6f172a4592fca41cc2d2e6.thumb.jpg.29a54af247a731fdaf49273680131c1b.jpg

 

Sure they were prototypes, yet influencers were allowed to see them unrestricted at the media day of 9/15? SMDH

 

Felt no different than attending the general public show, other than being in a tux. Nice to see Niles Rodgers live, but I won't do that ever again. Very embarrassing and humiliating as an owner of F-150 Raptors and an S550.

 

People who regularly crap on Ford were given preference, over an owner who spent thousands to make the show.

 

Back at the Mustang Stampede, the displeasure of watching those influencer idiots on the Huntington Place overhead big screens, being interviewed (down there) and blustering about nothing tangible, annoyed a lot of us up there blocked from going down.

IMG20220914200314.thumb.jpg.643a41c4cb2234a7b080e832b5bb6879.jpg

The host wasted so much time talking to pointless individuals (excl FRAP worker & Ford staff) and many of us were physically over it, standing on our aching tiptoes to see past a wall of 6'5 to 7 footers blocking any of us of below 6'2. The photo I posted is an example, because 95% of my Mustang Stampede coverage was MP4 video and not JPEG stills.

 

 

It makes it hard to consider a new Dark Horse or another Raptor, after that unfortunate experience, having traveled all the way from West Texas and spending so much to attend these events.

IMG20220914191641.thumb.jpg.c97dfe11ee4cc16ff80113dc9242fa72.jpgIMG20220914213225.thumb.jpg.3c671add54e22fd1ee6fe7271cb5b0b9.jpg

Outside of those events, it was nice to see parts of Greater Detroit and visit my cousin in Bloomfield Hills, once he returned from a trip (missed the events). If he was there, none of this would've happened, but why should I need him to get through a Mustang event I was invited to independent of him? I avoid nepotism if I can.

 

I actually met both Jim Farley and William Clay Ford Jr and wife Martha Ford, but politely minded my business as they were occupied. Farley is much smaller in person, so cameras really do add pounds. (Good for him honestly.)

 

Ford execs chatting below. (Meeting them was on video, so I cannot post that.)

IMG20220914191602.thumb.jpg.ee0e5d18f906e12c8cafacb204550666.jpgIMG20220914191631.thumb.jpg.2864bfbfcd8d667c2627d0acc058c801.jpg

 

Anyway, you get a good idea of what it was like and since this is the 2024 Ranger thread, I'll try to not veer it off topic any further than I have (not the only one per recent discussion). I expect this to be moderated, due to sheer length.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...