ice-capades Posted June 3, 2023 Share Posted June 3, 2023 11 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said: 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. So much for ramping up production! Let's rebuild MAP, re-introduce Ranger, add the Bronco, make a complete mess of the Bronco introduction, prioritize Bronco production to fulfill unanticipated demand backlog, prepare to introduce the next-generation Ranger, yet plant production constrained indefinitely and primarily by lack of a third shift. And even adding a third shift at some point in the future, it's unlikely that there won't be enough production capacity to meet demand. What's wrong with this picture? A lot of Ford failures in planning, anticipating and making adjustments as needed to maximize plant utilization and profits. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted June 3, 2023 Share Posted June 3, 2023 1 hour ago, ice-capades said: What's wrong with this picture? A lot of Ford failures in planning, anticipating and making adjustments as needed to maximize plant utilization and profits. Or consider this-they rather keep demand high with little to no incentives offered and the reason a third shift isn't being added is due to manpower/recruiting issues and BEV versions being offered five years from now, that will divide demand for these products. Long term, does anyone think that between the Ranger and Bronco that they can actually sell 300K plus of them a year? I think 250K is much more reasonable. Bronco demand might start to wane after a few years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 3, 2023 Share Posted June 3, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, ice-capades said: production constrained indefinitely and primarily by lack of a third shift. The lack of a third shift is due to supply issues. Every time we run any kind of OT at all there’s enough parts that are short to send us home early by Thursday or Friday. It even happened this week with the holiday on Monday. I was home by my normal lunchtime yesterday. Edited June 3, 2023 by fuzzymoomoo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 3, 2023 Share Posted June 3, 2023 40 minutes ago, silvrsvt said: Or consider this-they rather keep demand high with little to no incentives offered and the reason a third shift isn't being added is due to manpower/recruiting issues and BEV versions being offered five years from now, that will divide demand for these products. Im sure that’s what the spin from the glass house will be. It’s not necessarily a manpower issue. 40 minutes ago, silvrsvt said: Long term, does anyone think that between the Ranger and Bronco that they can actually sell 300K plus of them a year? I think 250K is much more reasonable. Bronco demand might start to wane after a few years. I’m not sure we could build 250k at the rate we run. We don’t build as fast as we did in the days of the Focus as far as I know. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice-capades Posted June 4, 2023 Share Posted June 4, 2023 5 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said: The lack of a third shift is due to supply issues. Every time we run any kind of OT at all there’s enough parts that are short to send us home early by Thursday or Friday. It even happened this week with the holiday on Monday. I was home by my normal lunchtime yesterday. The supply chain issues are understandable from the industry-wide experience the past few years. What's interesting is that the plant is running OT, at times, yet shutting down early and sending everyone home. That's an interesting Ford management technique for plant operations! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 4, 2023 Share Posted June 4, 2023 16 minutes ago, ice-capades said: What's interesting is that the plant is running OT We aren’t running any OT though. Every time they try it ends in cutting hours short by the end of the week. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice-capades Posted June 4, 2023 Share Posted June 4, 2023 13 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said: We aren’t running any OT though. Every time they try it ends in cutting hours short by the end of the week. Okay, thanks for the clarification! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blksn8k2 Posted June 4, 2023 Share Posted June 4, 2023 Got to see and sit in a 2024 Ranger Raptor at the Ford Nationals in Carlisle, PA on Saturday, June 3rd. I was also able to talk to Ford Performance chief engineer Carl Widmann. Anyone who is seriously considering this truck is probably already aware of its performance capabilities. While all of that is great and I hate boring vehicles just as much as anyone, I am just as concerned about its livability. After all, this might be my next daily driver. I was pleasantly surprised by the seating comfort both front and rear. Much better than I expected. Awesome truck overall and it looks fantastic in Magnetic! BTW, I think Carl was a little pissed when I asked him to demonstrate the folding capabilities of the rear seat. He was probably thinking why is this jackass even interested in this thing. I didn't want to ruin it by telling him what my other vehicles were. LOL. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 On 6/3/2023 at 8:35 AM, 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. Ranger hybrid would have to be a global product and there is absolutely no chance a 3.0 hybrid will find market acceptance outside the US. 2.3 hybrid makes all the sense in the world and will be the way forward. Remember, it is replacing the 3.0 V6 diesel for the most part... so it will be a significant improvements on many fronts for buyers opting for the hybrid (or PHEV) vs. the diesel. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 isn’t Tacoma hybrid a 2.3l turbo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70 Stang Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 19 minutes ago, akirby said: isn’t Tacoma hybrid a 2.3l turbo? Toyota is doing something similar to GM.......3 or 4 versions of the 2.4 turbo with the hybrid being at the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 3 minutes ago, 70 Stang said: Toyota is doing something similar to GM.......3 or 4 versions of the 2.4 turbo with the hybrid being at the top. I don’t think we’ll see a high mpg RWD hybrid due to lack of an e-cvt so using the base engine makes more sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 On 6/2/2023 at 1:01 PM, fuzzymoomoo said: How sure of that are you? the only units we are getting were ordered 8 -9 months ago and the 2023 order banks closed some time ago as well... so if they are still building some 2023s its catchup I guess... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 On 6/3/2023 at 10:32 AM, fuzzymoomoo said: 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. isnt the 2024 Ranger utilizing the Broncos upgraded chassis? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 9 minutes ago, Deanh said: the only units we are getting were ordered 8 -9 months ago and the 2023 order banks closed some time ago as well... so if they are still building some 2023s its catchup I guess... I work on a Ranger line now so if we stopped building them I must have been living a dream since January ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 8 minutes ago, Deanh said: isnt the 2024 Ranger utilizing the Broncos upgraded chassis? Im not 100% sure about that. Best answer I can give is maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 39 minutes ago, akirby said: I don’t think we’ll see a high mpg RWD hybrid due to lack of an e-cvt so using the base engine makes more sense. I don’t follow what you mean by this? I expect a relatively low MPG rating for Tacoma Hybrid will be mostly due to high weight/mass and poor aerodynamics like most pickup trucks. Motor Trend speculates MPG numbers should be a little higher than those of an F-150 Hybrid, but nothing to write home about. That’s understandable given the vehicle itself. As far as lack of e-CVT, there are some very-efficient hybrids using dual-clutch transmissions that achieve high fuel-efficiency ratings; based on smaller size, aerodynamics, lower weight, and Atkinson-cycle engines. I’m not certain e-CVT is only way to maximize hybrid fuel economy, though a popular hybrid feature. I’m just saying that even if they had an e-CVT for RWD pickups, I wouldn’t hold my breath for exceptional fuel economy as long as pickup is that large, heavy, and boxy in shape. It doesn’t help that Tacoma is a big truck compared to what it was originally. https://www.motortrend.com/news/2024-toyota-tacoma-i-force-max-hybrid-engine-details/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rperez817 Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 2 hours ago, akirby said: isn’t Tacoma hybrid a 2.3l turbo? 2 hours ago, 70 Stang said: Toyota is doing something similar to GM.......3 or 4 versions of the 2.4 turbo with the hybrid being at the top. 2024 Tacoma uses T24A-FTS engine, which has a displacement of 2393 cc. It's the same engine as that used in Highlander/Grand Highlander, Crown, Lexus NX, and Lexus RX with different tuning and power ratings as 70 Stang mentioned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said: Im not 100% sure about that. Best answer I can give is maybe. Yes because the old Ranger chassis couldn’t fit a v6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 1 hour ago, Rick73 said: I don’t follow what you mean by this? I expect a relatively low MPG rating for Tacoma Hybrid will be mostly due to high weight/mass and poor aerodynamics like most pickup trucks. Motor Trend speculates MPG numbers should be a little higher than those of an F-150 Hybrid, but nothing to write home about. That’s understandable given the vehicle itself. As far as lack of e-CVT, there are some very-efficient hybrids using dual-clutch transmissions that achieve high fuel-efficiency ratings; based on smaller size, aerodynamics, lower weight, and Atkinson-cycle engines. I’m not certain e-CVT is only way to maximize hybrid fuel economy, though a popular hybrid feature. I’m just saying that even if they had an e-CVT for RWD pickups, I wouldn’t hold my breath for exceptional fuel economy as long as pickup is that large, heavy, and boxy in shape. It doesn’t help that Tacoma is a big truck compared to what it was originally. https://www.motortrend.com/news/2024-toyota-tacoma-i-force-max-hybrid-engine-details/ Of course that’s only one piece but Ford’s e-cvt is far more fuel efficient than the RWD 10 speed which wasn’t designed for hybrid duty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 13 minutes ago, akirby said: Yes because the old Ranger chassis couldn’t fit a v6. No, that was the body. Wouldn’t fit between the aprons. No aprons on the new model. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 7 minutes ago, akirby said: Yes because the old Ranger chassis couldn’t fit a v6. The frame was all new in 2019 for the North American model because the previous ROW Ranger did not have a fully boxed frame. From everything I've read, the frame has only been modified slightly to fit a V6 in front and change the mounting of the rear shocks outboard. It's still almost the same with Ford calling it a T6.2 internally. So there isn't really an old or new chassis. It's the same chassis with some minor modifications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 3 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said: The frame was all new in 2019 for the North American model because the previous ROW Ranger did not have a fully boxed frame. From everything I've read, the frame has only been modified slightly to fit a V6 in front and change the mounting of the rear shocks outboard. It's still almost the same with Ford calling it a T6.2 internally. So there isn't really an old or new chassis. It's the same chassis with some minor modifications. If nothing else the biggest difference between the Ranger and Bronco chassis, not frame, is Ranger still uses leaf springs where Bronco doesn’t. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 3 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said: No, that was the body. Wouldn’t fit between the aprons. No aprons on the new model. Then it's possible other then the rear shock mounts the actual frame is carryover. I read somewhere that small modifications had to be made in front for the V6, but they might not have been talking about the frame. Under the sheet metal I doubt there is much change since they already put the engineering into a new frame for the 2019. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted June 5, 2023 Share Posted June 5, 2023 2 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said: If nothing else the biggest difference between the Ranger and Bronco chassis, not frame, is Ranger still uses leaf springs where Bronco doesn’t. Other then the changes to the rear suspension isn't the Bronco chassis for the most part just a chopped down T6? 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.