Jump to content

Official '24 Ford Ranger NA Release


Recommended Posts

Ford Ranger PHEV Out Next Year, Coming to U.S. 

https://fordauthority.com/2023/06/ford-ranger-phev-out-next-year-coming-to-u-s-report/

 

2024 Ranger_White_Off-Road.jpg

 

Long before the debut of the all-new next-generation Ford Rangerrumors regarding plug-in hybrid and all-electric variants were already swirling, with some even suggesting that the PHEV version could enter production before 2025, and that the high-performance Ranger Raptor could also eventually get an electrified powertrain option. The North American debut of the new mid-size pickup came and went with no conformation on this front, however, though now, Drive is reporting that the Ford Ranger PHEV is not only coming, but it’s set to launch next year, too.

 

The report claims that the Ford Ranger PHEV is scheduled to launch at some point in 2024 as part of that same model year’s updates, meaning that we won’t have to wait much longer to see the electrified pickup. Ford Australia didn’t confirm this report, but previously stated that the new Ranger was built specifically with electrification in mind, meaning that the automaker clearly planned on offering some sort of hybrid, PHEV, or EV in its life cycle.

As for what that powertrain might look like, this report notes that the Ranger PHEV will utilize the existing Ford 2.3L I-4 EcoBoost base engine, paired with one or more electric motors. This would represent a first in terms of that particular combination, as FoMoCo doesn’t currently sell any PHEV with the 2.3L EcoBoost, though as one might imagine, specifics such as output, electric-only driving range, and other pertinent info is currently unknown.

Edited by ice-capades
Additional Content
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HotRunrGuy said:

Good gosh, less than 20K Rangers sold so far this year.  I hope the '24 brings it back to life,,,,,,

 

HRG

Ford May 2023 sales.JPG

I think it’s a combination of people waiting for the 2024, and Ford intentionally reducing production of the Ranger to catch up on Broncos.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, tbone said:

I think it’s a combination of people waiting for the 2024, and Ford intentionally reducing production of the Ranger to catch up on Broncos.  


You can’t discuss Ranger sales without discussing Bronco and that puts Ford in a totally different position than GM and Toyota.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HotRunrGuy said:

Good gosh, less than 20K Rangers sold so far this year.  I hope the '24 brings it back to life,,,,,,

 

HRG

Ford May 2023 sales.JPG

they stopped building Rangers some time ago, and even then allocation was shockingly bad...when we were allocated a grand total of 1 for an entire month it does nothing to help sales numbers at all....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Deanh said:

they stopped building Rangers some time ago, and even then allocation was shockingly bad...when we were allocated a grand total of 1 for an entire month it does nothing to help sales numbers at all....

 

Looks like they've continued to build a few,,,,,

HRG

 

2023 Ranger production.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ice-capades said:

As for what that powertrain might look like, this report notes that the Ranger PHEV will utilize the existing Ford 2.3L I-4 EcoBoost base engine, paired with one or more electric motors. This would represent a first in terms of that particular combination, as FoMoCo doesn’t currently sell any PHEV with the 2.3L EcoBoost, though as one might imagine, specifics such as output, electric-only driving range, and other pertinent info is currently unknown.


That size PHEV powertrain may also be a great match for other RWD vehicles including Transit.  A larger-displacement NA Atkinson would have been my preference, but this seems a step in right direction.  If combined with Pro Power Onboard, it could make a PHEV Transit a popular vehicle for vanlife and RV applications. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The decision to make a ranger hybrid makes sense. The choice to use the 2.3 doesn't. With midsized hybrids seeming to focus more on raw power than maximum efficiency, the 3.0 hybrid would make more sense imo. That powertrain is isane, seems to be reliable, and shouldn't be too hard to package considering the 3.0 already fits in the ranger. 

 

Out crazing the Tacoma hybrid is the only way to give the ranger a fighting chance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

The decision to make a ranger hybrid makes sense. The choice to use the 2.3 doesn't. With midsized hybrids seeming to focus more on raw power than maximum efficiency, the 3.0 hybrid would make more sense imo. That powertrain is isane, seems to be reliable, and shouldn't be too hard to package considering the 3.0 already fits in the ranger. 

 

Out crazing the Tacoma hybrid is the only way to give the ranger a fighting chance. 

Earlier reporting has said that this hybrid combination will produce 360 HP and 500 lb-ft of torque. That will be plenty insane (less HP than the Raptor but lots more torque). You can bank on this being the same hybrid system as in the F-150 Powerboost and the hybrid Explorer where the electric traction motor is encapsulated inside the 10-speed automatic transmission.

Edited by Texasota
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

The decision to make a ranger hybrid makes sense. The choice to use the 2.3 doesn't. With midsized hybrids seeming to focus more on raw power than maximum efficiency, the 3.0 hybrid would make more sense imo. That powertrain is isane, seems to be reliable, and shouldn't be too hard to package considering the 3.0 already fits in the ranger. 


If not for fuel efficiency, and associated reduction in emissions, why bother with HEV or PHEV?  Only other reason I can think of would be higher-capacity Pro Power Onboard, but if looking mainly for “raw power”, why not just go with 3.0L V6  400 HP EcoBoost and call it good?
 

In my opinion HEV and PHEV are a step towards conversion to BEV, and pushing efficiency over raw power seems more advantageous.  The hybrid Maverick’s success is an example of bias towards efficiency, versus F-150 Power Boost which seems to emphasize performance to greater degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Rick73 said:


If not for fuel efficiency, and associated reduction in emissions, why bother with HEV or PHEV?  Only other reason I can think of would be higher-capacity Pro Power Onboard, but if looking mainly for “raw power”, why not just go with 3.0L V6  400 HP EcoBoost and call it good?
 

In my opinion HEV and PHEV are a step towards conversion to BEV, and pushing efficiency over raw power seems more advantageous.  The hybrid Maverick’s success is an example of bias towards efficiency, versus F-150 Power Boost which seems to emphasize performance to greater degree.

Because a more performance oriented ranger hybrid seems to make more sense to me. The maverick hybrid has the ultra fuel efficient market on lock, ours has gotten insane fuel economy. Our personal best was an average of 89 mpg over a short trip. 

 

The 3.0 ranger hybrid has about 500 hp, and 630 lb ft of torque, a significant increase over the none hybrid 3.0, while being more fuel efficient that a 3.0 none hybrid would be if it was boosted to that same power level. 

 

Plus Ford is open about wanting to eventually make a bronco hybrid. If Ford makes the ranger hybrid a performance monster, that powertrain would be perfect for a future bronco hybrid with minimal changes. A hybrid that could be more fuel efficient and practical, but that could also blow the doors off the wrangler 392. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A key goal of a PHEV is to enable short commutes and city driving to be accomplished with minimal (or none) use of the ICE. But, with that same Ranger PHEV you can also go on long road trips without the range/charging restrictions associated with BEVs while at the same time having greater power/torque when you need it, such as towing, and getting better MPG at the same time.

 

A PHEV is a great bridging technology during the transition to BEVs. Pro Power Onboard is icing on the cake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What it boils down to is hybrids aren’t really that more fuel efficient without giving up other things that wouldn’t be practical in a truck. Like using a CVT transmission like the Maverick does. 

Even though the F-150 hybrid gets a decent increase with city driving MPG wise, there is no increase highway and using the EPA calculations on fueleconomy.com, your only saving $450 bucks a year in gas, which is roughy less then $10 bucks a week in gas. 
 

so that is part of the reason why hybrids are being sold as performance enablers or other things like powerboost on the F-150. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

The 3.0 ranger hybrid has about 500 hp, and 630 lb ft of torque, a significant increase over the none hybrid 3.0, while being more fuel efficient that a 3.0 none hybrid would be if it was boosted to that same power level. 


I mostly question if that would be a volume vehicle?  The idea of 500 HP and 630 lb-ft Ranger sounds fun, but how many buyers want a Ranger with more power than an F-150 PowerBoost?  The HEV F-150 is rated 430 HP, 570 lb-ft, and can tow up to 12,700 pounds.

 

For a Ranger meant to tow around 7,500 pounds max, a 2.3L should be enough, particularly if powertrain has significant “electric” power boost.  The bigger issue I see is that F-150 PowerBoost improves fuel efficiency some in city, but not highway driving.  The combined rating is better for PowerBoost versus say a 2.7L EB F-150, but not by that much in my opinion.  Is it worth cost and complexity?

 

Because I’m biased towards cost and fuel efficiency, combining EcoBoost and HEV or PHEV is what doesn’t make sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rick73 said:


I mostly question if that would be a volume vehicle?  The idea of 500 HP and 630 lb-ft Ranger sounds fun, but how many buyers want a Ranger with more power than an F-150 PowerBoost?  The HEV F-150 is rated 430 HP, 570 lb-ft, and can tow up to 12,700 pounds.

 

For a Ranger meant to tow around 7,500 pounds max, a 2.3L should be enough, particularly if powertrain has significant “electric” power boost.  The bigger issue I see is that F-150 PowerBoost improves fuel efficiency some in city, but not highway driving.  The combined rating is better for PowerBoost versus say a 2.7L EB F-150, but not by that much in my opinion.  Is it worth cost and complexity?

 

Because I’m biased towards cost and fuel efficiency, combining EcoBoost and HEV or PHEV is what doesn’t make sense to me.

 

 

There really isn't any need for a hybrid 3.0L ecoboost. The 2.3L Hybrid would be the smarter bet because it would allow for an extra 40HP via the Hybrid setup, allowing it slot around the 2.7L in power numbers, but hopefully offering better MPGs around town and powerboost options. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd mostly be interested in the pro power thing with a PHEV, the extra power is cool too. If I was concerned purely about efficiency I'd probably be looking at a BEV, though options are still fairly limited.. but that will be changing quickly over the next several years. The F150 phev is intriguing to me for my superduty replacement, but I have concerns about longevity pulling my work trailer putting it at close to max capacity while the superduty is probably much more comfortable around 10k lbs, especially every day. Not really interested in making compromises on power with a hybrid to use less gas, personally. More power and a tiny bit more efficiency plus the additional features is cool, BEV would be ideal for me but sounds like Ford isn't interested in pursuing that in superduty class for some time. I don't really have any use for a ranger size truck, but my feelings would be the same if that's what I wanted.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

BEV would be ideal for me but sounds like Ford isn't interested in pursuing that in superduty class for some time. I don't really have any use for a ranger size truck, but my feelings would be the same if that's what I wanted.

 

For my family's business, a BEV Ranger would be ideal, and also what we're looking for as an eventual replacement for the 2019 Ranger we have now.

 

Hopefully by mid decade, Ford will have a solid plan to produce BEV versions of every pickup truck in their lineup from Maverick to Super Duty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

 

There really isn't any need for a hybrid 3.0L ecoboost. The 2.3L Hybrid would be the smarter bet because it would allow for an extra 40HP via the Hybrid setup, allowing it slot around the 2.7L in power numbers, but hopefully offering better MPGs around town and powerboost options. 


40 HP of electric boost (hybrid) on top of nearly 300 HP ICE is better than nothing, but to make a real difference there has to be much greater electric-to-engine power ratio.  The Maverick Hybrid with its eCVT and Atkinson engine is a good example of what’s needed in my opinion, which is much closer to successful hybrids from Toyota and other manufactures.

 

Since F-150 PowerBoost only gets 23~24 MPG highway, I expect a Ranger of similar design won’t crack 30 MPG.  To me that just doesn’t seem good enough for great success. 
 

IMG_0794.thumb.jpeg.ed842e132cfc36af4f891714a2855d6f.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

What it boils down to is hybrids aren’t really that more fuel efficient without giving up other things that wouldn’t be practical in a truck. Like using a CVT transmission like the Maverick does. 

Even though the F-150 hybrid gets a decent increase with city driving MPG wise, there is no increase highway and using the EPA calculations on fueleconomy.com, your only saving $450 bucks a year in gas, which is roughy less then $10 bucks a week in gas. 
 

so that is part of the reason why hybrids are being sold as performance enablers or other things like powerboost on the F-150. 

 

Exactly, plus I think the rangers biggest enemy is the maverick. The maverick is just too good for people looking for a fuel efficient, reasonable truck. Instead of trying to make the ranger hybrid efficiency oriented, and ending up with an inferior maverick, why not use that hybrid system to develop something nuts that's going to take people by surprise? 

 

Get some distance between the ranger and maverick by taking two unique approaches to the hybrid system rather than trying to copy what the maverick did, but doing a worse job at it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Exactly, plus I think the rangers biggest enemy is the maverick.


No, it’s still Bronco. As long as Bronco remains as hot as it is, Ranger production (and likewise sales) will also suffer. The only remedy is adding a third shift and trust me, I absolutely do not believe that is happening any time soon. 

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...