Jump to content

Official '24 Ford Ranger NA Release


Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, akirby said:

Ranger debuted in 2019 with 89K sales.  Here are F series sales:

 

2017 896k

2018  906K

2019 896k

 

I don’t think F series lost any market share but it’s hard to tell just looking at sales volume post Covid.

 

I think Ranger could easily hit 150k without constraints and I don’t see F series dropping that much.


I have to believe at one point the company was desperate to make MAP a 3 shift operation but supply constraints prevented it from happening. I also believe they’re growing increasingly hesitant to add a shift now that economic storm clouds are gathering and there’s stories upon stories of unsold F-150s piling up and the third shift at DTP got cut to move to the Lightning plant. 

Edited by fuzzymoomoo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


I have to believe at one point the company was desperate to make MAP a 3 shift operation but supply constraints prevented it from happening. I also believe they’re growing increasingly hesitant to add a shift now that economic storm clouds are gathering and there’s stories upon stories of unsold F-150s piling up and the third shift at DTP got cut to move to the Lightning plant. 

 

Well since "easy money" went away with low interest rates, its going to impact things till the rates drop, which might not be for a few years. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


I have to believe at one point the company was desperate to make MAP a 3 shift operation but supply constraints prevented it from happening. I also believe they’re growing increasingly hesitant to add a shift now that economic storm clouds are gathering and there’s stories upon stories of unsold F-150s piling up and the third shift at DTP got cut to move to the Lightning plant. 


If they can ever get past the supply chain constraints it’s a no brainer to add a 3rd shift.  The first two essentially pay the overhead so the 3rd shift is high profit - assuming there is demand and it doesn’t drop the ATPs significantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, akirby said:

assuming there is demand


And that’s the dicey part. With credit harder to come by I haven’t seen a single expert say anything but demand will start to soften if it hasn’t already in some segments. They add a shift now and demand suddenly falls off a cliff in November there’s 1,500 people you now need to find a place for. 
 

They’ll just do what we did last year and run max OT and select Saturdays and hope production doesn’t fall behind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


And that’s the dicey part. With credit harder to come by I haven’t seen a single expert say anything but demand will start to soften if it hasn’t already in some segments. They add a shift now and demand suddenly falls off a cliff in November there’s 1,500 people you now need to find a place for. 
 

They’ll just do what we did last year and run max OT and select Saturdays and hope production doesn’t fall behind. 


Definitely needs to be sustainable long term.  What’s max capacity with 3 shifts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, akirby said:


If they can ever get past the supply chain constraints it’s a no brainer to add a 3rd shift.  The first two essentially pay the overhead so the 3rd shift is high profit - assuming there is demand and it doesn’t drop the ATPs significantly.

 

The ATF's are insignificant related to Ford profits as the company gets paid based on the Dealer Invoice prices paid by the Dealers which are the direct customers. The ATF's only become a factor when stock inventory is mismanaged and allowed to grow to the point where incentives and rebates are necessary to meet sales objectives. It's not just how Ford manages its inventory going forward but how its forced to react to competitors' actions. If Ford and the competing OEM's fall back into the trap they created in the mid '80's with excessive stock inventory, when they needed the rebates and finance incentives to sell the excess stock inventory, then they'll be back in the same game with the rebates and incentives having a direct impact on company profits. With the pressure of maximizing profits in order to finance the transition to BEV vehicles, it's critical that Ford and the other OEM's exercise discipline in managing their stock inventory.

 

The other factor is the substantial increase in retail factory orders. Many customers have been waiting a year or longer for their factory ordered vehicles due to the supply chain, commodity and plant production constraints. It's to Ford's advantage to have a high percentage of retail factory orders but as the supply chain and constraint issues improve, Ford needs to get to a point where the retail order backlog is substantially reduced and the OTD (Order to Delivery) time is acceptable and reasonable to make retail factory orders attractive rather than necessary.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akirby said:


Definitely needs to be sustainable long term.  What’s max capacity with 3 shifts?


I don’t know what max is. I know we did around 320,000 at the peak of Focus/C-Max and we don’t run quite as fast as we did back then. 

Edited by fuzzymoomoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, ice-capades said:

 

The ATF's are insignificant related to Ford profits as the company gets paid based on the Dealer Invoice prices paid by the Dealers which are the direct customers. The ATF's only become a factor when stock inventory is mismanaged and allowed to grow to the point where incentives and rebates are necessary to meet sales objectives. It's not just how Ford manages its inventory going forward but how its forced to react to competitors' actions. If Ford and the competing OEM's fall back into the trap they created in the mid '80's with excessive stock inventory, when they needed the rebates and finance incentives to sell the excess stock inventory, then they'll be back in the same game with the rebates and incentives having a direct impact on company profits. With the pressure of maximizing profits in order to finance the transition to BEV vehicles, it's critical that Ford and the other OEM's exercise discipline in managing their stock inventory.

 

The other factor is the substantial increase in retail factory orders. Many customers have been waiting a year or longer for their factory ordered vehicles due to the supply chain, commodity and plant production constraints. It's to Ford's advantage to have a high percentage of retail factory orders but as the supply chain and constraint issues improve, Ford needs to get to a point where the retail order backlog is substantially reduced and the OTD (Order to Delivery) time is acceptable and reasonable to make retail factory orders attractive rather than necessary.  


I said high ATPs but what I meant was no factory incentives required.

 

Overall volume isn’t the issue with special orders - if they could get the parts they’d easily be back to 8 week order to delivery times (after catching up the backlog).  But I don’t know when that will happen.

 

What I would like to see is customer places online order, gets guaranteed pricing, selects dealer and is immediately scheduled for the next available production slot.  Allocation isn’t a factor and price is fixed and you know immediately when to expect it even if it might be 8-12 months in some cases.  This is what I expect for BEVs.  For ICE it raises a lot of questions on dealer allocations and pricing and stock inventory, etc.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


Not available at launch. TBD if it comes at all from the mixed signals I’m getting. 

 

I think that's a mistake.

 

20 hours ago, 2005Explorer said:

There are plenty of positives to the new model, but now if you want low range in your 4x4 that is an added cost. Dual range 4x4 used to be standard on all 4x4 models. That is according to a Motortrend article. Auto 4x4 is not available in anything except the Raptor. I have also heard, but cannot confirm XL and XLT still have halogen headlamps. It's 2023... even the Maverick has LED across the board.

 

I didn't know about the new shifter being only on Lariat and above. What does the XL and XLT use for a shifter?

 

EDIT: Nevermind on the shifter. I figured it out by looking at pictures. It's the same mechanical one from the current Ranger.

 

Pictures I saw looked like LED reflectors, but I could be wrong.

 

 

19 hours ago, akirby said:

I just don’t understand the need to have more and more power when you’re already over 300 hp.  There are practical limits and going from 350 to 360 hp is pointless.

 

People like to go fast, and like to have better numbers.  It's as simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akirby said:


I said high ATPs but what I meant was no factory incentives required.

 

Overall volume isn’t the issue with special orders - if they could get the parts they’d easily be back to 8 week order to delivery times (after catching up the backlog).  But I don’t know when that will happen.

 

What I would like to see is customer places online order, gets guaranteed pricing, selects dealer and is immediately scheduled for the next available production slot.  Allocation isn’t a factor and price is fixed and you know immediately when to expect it even if it might be 8-12 months in some cases.  This is what I expect for BEVs.  For ICE it raises a lot of questions on dealer allocations and pricing and stock inventory, etc.

 

 

No problem! We're in basic agreement! The customer order submission process, pricing, etc. is a complex issue with too many factors requiring management time at the dealership level, including retail BEV orders submitted by customers online. Ford keeps creating additional programs with implementation on selected vehicle lines with the burden falling on the dealerships for order management and program compliance. There are too many layers of management at Ford and too many involved and authorized to create and implement new order submission processes, etc. 

 

Even with customers submitting retail orders online, the order management responsibility goes to the dealership level. Fixed pricing for retail BEV orders results in Ford paying a commission to the Dealer and the programs restrict advertised prices yet allow Dealers to set their own prices on retail sales from stock inventory which creates potential problems and compliance issues. There are a lot of factors involved and Ford's relationship with its dealerships has been troublesome at many levels for years.

 

This is just my simple reply as there's just too many factors involved to cover here.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

People like to go fast, and like to have better numbers.  It's as simple as that.


But it’s not about going fast.  There is no measurable difference in 500 vs 520 hp on the street.  It’s a paper thing.  They just think each iteration must have more power (on paper) no matter what it has already or what it has vs the competition.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rmc523 said:

I think that's a mistake.


From a customer choice standpoint, maybe but from a launch standpoint not at all. Simplicity is better, especially given Ford’s recent track record of spectacularly awful launches. 
 

Get the simple builds right first (which in this case is also the more popular choice anyway) then add the more complex builds down the road. It’s worth the risk of turning off a few customers in the short term to make the ones that do stick around happy long term. 
 

As for me the immediate lack of a moonroof is bottom of the list of why I’ll be looking at a F-series instead, if I don’t decide to hang onto the fusion for a while. 

Edited by fuzzymoomoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, rmc523 said:

People like to go fast, and like to have better numbers.  It's as simple as that.


Many drivers certainly like to go fast, but in my opinion many others probably don’t care as much as people associated with industry think.  Car guys are inherently bias towards higher performance IMO.  If we look at a list of the top 25 cars, SUVs, and trucks sold in 2022, many of them are 4-cylinder, and probably not all that fast.  Granted, fast is relative.  Excluding trucks which have V8s and turbo V6s due to high weight and for added towing capabilities, many of the best-selling cars and SUVs like RAV4, CR-V, Corolla, Civic, Accord, Camry, etc. mostly have 4-cylinder engines.

 

The first two cars I purchased as a teenager had V8s, but after those two every other vehicle had the base or standard engine; many of them 4-cylinder and a few V6.  Performance may be popular, but sales data suggest basic power sells well too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2023 at 12:16 PM, ZanatWork said:

Honestly...I'm a little disappointed.  I know that Ford is shoveling most of the R&D money into EV efforts right now (even if not battery assembly pay, apparently), but the 2.3 and 2.7 have been at their respective outputs forever.  Some "bumps" seem overdue, which would also have been cause for more positive bullet points.

They have a tendency carry over engines to new models, which is pretty annoying.  It’s happened with the F150 many times, and really pissed me off with the last Raptor redesign.  Perhaps they want to sell you a tune on top of it, since they have factory tunes available for both of these motors.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2023 at 5:57 PM, blksn8k2 said:

I do have my name at the top of the list for the Raptor at a local dealer so I will investigate that option as well. I don't think $58k is outrageous for what you are getting but ADMs will likely be the killer.

While I don’t think $58k is terrible assuming it basically fully loaded, it’s still pretty pricey.   For perspective, I paid $52k for my first Supercrew Raptor in 2011, however my 22 Raptor stickered for $79k. It goes to show how bad pricing has gotten.  I will say the Ranger Raptor is a bargain compared to the Bronco Raptor.  That pricing has just gotten stupid at this point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2023 at 5:41 PM, 2005Explorer said:

 Auto 4x4 is not available in anything except the Raptor.

 

I have also heard, but cannot confirm XL and XLT still have halogen headlamps. It's 2023... 

 

On 5/10/2023 at 3:26 PM, T-dubz said:

1. No rear AC vents in any trim so far

3. push button start only on lariat and above 

5. No moonroof for fuzzy

6. Doesn’t have the incorporated keypad in the door and instead has one of the stick on ones above the handle


I do believe the new Ranger is a substantial upgrade over the outgoing model, but if I had to put my gripe list together it would include the above mentioned items, as well as the lack of a 6’ box. Some of these items are more important than the others, but they are things that I would consider against the competition, as they are all options I would select.  The lack of LED headlamps is just ridiculous at this point, so I hope that is wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tbone said:

They have a tendency carry over engines to new models, which is pretty annoying.  It’s happened with the F150 many times, and really pissed me off with the last Raptor redesign.  Perhaps they want to sell you a tune on top of it, since they have factory tunes available for both of these motors.  


Not at all.  It’s all about simplifying the launch.  They have enough to worry about with new stampings, new parts, new electronics, new suppliers.   New powertrains adds a lot of complexity.  They got burned awhile back (can’t remember which vehicle) and they specifically said they would limit new powertrains with new vehicle launches as much as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, akirby said:


Not at all.  It’s all about simplifying the launch.  They have enough to worry about with new stampings, new parts, new electronics, new suppliers.   New powertrains adds a lot of complexity.  They got burned awhile back (can’t remember which vehicle) and they specifically said they would limit new powertrains with new vehicle launches as much as possible.


I guess it’s not possible with F-150 and its 6 powertrain options…

Edited by fuzzymoomoo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


From a customer choice standpoint, maybe but from a launch standpoint not at all. Simplicity is better, especially given Ford’s recent track record of spectacularly awful launches. 
 

Get the simple builds right first (which in this case is also the more popular choice anyway) then add the more complex builds down the road. It’s worth the risk of turning off a few customers in the short term to make the ones that do stick around happy long term. 
 

As for me the immediate lack of a moonroof is bottom of the list of why I’ll be looking at a F-series instead, if I don’t decide to hang onto the fusion for a while. 

 

I'm curious what's on the rest of your list?

 

10 hours ago, tbone said:

 


I do believe the new Ranger is a substantial upgrade over the outgoing model, but if I had to put my gripe list together it would include the above mentioned items, as well as the lack of a 6’ box. Some of these items are more important than the others, but they are things that I would consider against the competition, as they are all options I would select.  The lack of LED headlamps is just ridiculous at this point, so I hope that is wrong. 

 

Why do you keep saying lack of LED headlamps?  Upper trims definitely have them (projector style), and I'm pretty sure the lower ones do too in the reflector style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

I'm curious what's on the rest of your list?

 

 

Why do you keep saying lack of LED headlamps?  Upper trims definitely have them (projector style), and I'm pretty sure the lower ones do too in the reflector style.

There has been back and forth on this. I guess someone saw where XL and XLT still have halogen bulbs and a keyed ignition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said:

There has been back and forth on this. I guess someone saw where XL and XLT still have halogen bulbs and a keyed ignition.

Several of the videos I watched mentioned halogens. I’m guessing they are wrong though. On the ROW ranger, it’s extremely obvious which ones are halogen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


Number 1 with a bullet is hybrid so a new Ranger is a complete non-starter for me. 
 

I’ll post a complete list later

I was hoping for a hybrid also. One of the articles I read over the last couple of days said it's definitely coming, but who knows.

It would make sense only to keep the launch simpler. I still think I am going to order one, but not completely sure yet.

I am hoping more colors are added at some point also.

Can't wait to see the rest of your list either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, T-dubz said:

Several of the videos I watched mentioned halogens. I’m guessing they are wrong though. On the ROW ranger, it’s extremely obvious which ones are halogen.

 

Lower models definitely have a reflector setup.......and I could be wrong, but I feel like it's an LED reflector setup like Bronco......to me it looks liek the LEDs would be mounted on the outside wall and reflected toward the inside of the unit.  Hard to tell from the photos, though, these are the best I can find.  We'll have to wait for the order guide in the next 2 weeks.

 

0k2a6665-645a7bc7df7a5.jpg?crop=1xw:1xh;center,top&resize=980:*

0k2a6667-645a7bc89f962.jpg?crop=1xw:1xh;center,top&resize=980:*

 

 

Here's Bronco's for reference:

 

? Factory Broncos: Modular Black Top + Headlight Assembly, Tail Light ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

Why do you keep saying lack of LED headlamps?  Upper trims definitely have them (projector style), and I'm pretty sure the lower ones do too in the reflector style.

My comment was based on the assumption that a previous poster was correct when they suggested that XL and XLT were going to get halogens. If that is not the case, then I stand corrected.

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...