Official '24 Ford Ranger NA Release

[ANTAUS 649]

Ford Motor Company

[ANTAUS 649]

Autoblog.com

[ANTAUS 649]

Ford Authority

 

Debuts with the 2.7L Ecoboost

[ANTAUS 649]

Motortrend

[ANTAUS 649]

YoutTube-RangerReady

[fuzzymoomoo 7,988]

32 minutes ago, ANTAUS said:

YoutTube-RangerReady

Did anyone else notice they used still shots of the outgoing model a couple of times? 

[ANTAUS 649]

Tech Spec

[ANTAUS 649]

Detroit News

[ANTAUS 649]

Road and Track

[silvrsvt 4,778]

Glad I was wrong about the 2.7L…waiting to the fall isn’t a huge delay 

[2005Explorer 676]

So the Ranger grew in size outside, but the passenger volume inside the cab is virtually unchanged. 97.6 cubic feet on the '19-'23 and 98.3 cubic feet on the 2024 . In comparison the Maverick has slightly more interior volume. The SuperCab is gone and SuperCrew 5 foot bed is the only configuration. It also appears the Tremor model is gone so if you want more off-road capability you have to buy the Raptor which is likely to be a much more expensive model. Fuel tank capacity is unchanged at 18.8 gallons.

 

XL, XLT and Lariat only trims available. The 2.3 EcoBoost has the same exact power specs from the current Ranger. About the only surprise is that you can get the 2.7 V6 (late availability) as an option in the XLT and Lariat. I figured that would be Lariat only.

 

Anyhow I won't be running out anytime soon to trade up my 2022 Ranger Tremor for this one. Glad they didn't make it that good so I won't feel the need to. lol

 

[brucelinc 505]

Based on the spec sheet, it appears all models are crew cab with the short box.  That will not work for me but otherwise, it seems to be a well thought-out offering.

[fuzzymoomoo 7,988]

32 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said:

It also appears the Tremor model is gone

Im sure it will be back, just not at launch. 

[70 Stang 43]

40 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said:

So the Ranger grew in size outside, but the passenger volume inside the cab is virtually unchanged. 97.6 cubic feet on the '19-'23 and 98.3 cubic feet on the 2024 . In comparison the Maverick has slightly more interior volume. The SuperCab is gone and SuperCrew 5 foot bed is the only configuration. It also appears the Tremor model is gone so if you want more off-road capability you have to buy the Raptor which is likely to be a much more expensive model. Fuel tank capacity is unchanged at 18.8 gallons.

 

XL, XLT and Lariat only trims available. The 2.3 EcoBoost has the same exact power specs from the current Ranger. About the only surprise is that you can get the 2.7 V6 (late availability) as an option in the XLT and Lariat. I figured that would be Lariat only.

 

Anyhow I won't be running out anytime soon to trade up my 2022 Ranger Tremor for this one. Glad they didn't make it that good so I won't feel the need to. lol

 

All interior dimensions have grown though......especially rear seat leg room by almost 4".......that's huge.

The Motortrend article said the supercab is coming, and I'm sure Tremor will be also.

I'm going to put an order in, but not completely sold yet though.

[2005Explorer 676]

57 minutes ago, 70 Stang said:

All interior dimensions have grown though......especially rear seat leg room by almost 4".......that's huge.

The Motortrend article said the supercab is coming, and I'm sure Tremor will be also.

I'm going to put an order in, but not completely sold yet though.

That's interesting where they found 4" with the cab virtually the same size. With no Tremor available and the Raptor which will likely be $70k I'll keep my '22 Tremor for now.

[GearheadGrrrl 195]

Another evolutionary failure... Almost no improvements and further loss of cargo capacity. Ford, thanks for giving me motivation to fix my '98 Ranger with it's 7 foot long bed!

[akirby 18,114]

3 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

Glad I was wrong about the 2.7L…waiting to the fall isn’t a huge delay 

I think I called that one although it sounds like it’s only delayed by a few months.

[fuzzymoomoo 7,988]

56 minutes ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

further loss of cargo capacity

Wut?

[2005Explorer 676]

It better be a hell of a lot better then the current model. According to TFL prices are going up about $3,000 over the current model when you compare like models.

[akirby 18,114]

2 hours ago, brucelinc said:

Based on the spec sheet, it appears all models are crew cab with the short box.  That will not work for me but otherwise, it seems to be a well thought-out offering.

Very disappointed there is no 6’ bed option.  Hoping they add it later.  5’ is just not long enough for 10’-12’ lumber without adding a rack.

[fuzzymoomoo 7,988]

Holy crap they actually brought a pair over here to body for us to check out. They didn’t even do that for Bronco. 
 

Naturally I didn’t know about it until my break was over so I’ll go check them out during lunch if they’re still here and give my first impression after. 

[DeluxeStang 613]

2 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Another evolutionary failure... Almost no improvements and further loss of cargo capacity. Ford, thanks for giving me motivation to fix my '98 Ranger with it's 7 foot long bed!

Yeah, no offense, but consumers like you are part of the problem. I always see you engaging in what about ism for ford's products. Ford should do this or that to get my business. Regardless of what they do, people like you find a justification no matter how minor not to buy the product. 

 

Your ranger might have a 7 ft bed, but I can practically guarantee it has those trash ass sideways sitting jump seats in the back, or no backseats at all. Two door long bed cabs don't really sell anymore. Even fleet work trucks are transitioning to mavericks over two door base model midsized trucks. 

 

I can't remember the last time I saw a two door truck on either a job site or in a drive way. No-one wants those anymore. You could offer a midsized truck with a crew cab and a 7 foot bed, but then everyone would complain about it being too big. 

Edited May 10 by DeluxeStang

[ESP08 114]

1 hour ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Another evolutionary failure... Almost no improvements and further loss of cargo capacity. Ford, thanks for giving me motivation to fix my '98 Ranger with it's 7 foot long bed!

 

It appears there were across the board improvements.   

Upgrades made to frame, suspension, rear seat leg-room, and interior plus an available V6 in a non-Raptor model

 

I'm considering a 2.7 EB Ranger and I never even considered the last gen Ranger.  

I've always liked the T6 platform but didn't care for the last gen Ranger's tiny back seat and 2.3-only powertrain.  

 

A longer bed option should be made available though

[ANTAUS 649]

I have to wait till the order banks open the 26th, my main concern was the length. My garage can only fit 217in Lengthwise (I added it on when I remodeled but I was limited by property setbacks)..as it is, I have to almost kiss the rear wall (I have rubber cushion there) when I park the MkZ. If it wasn't for that, I would have gotten an F150 long ago.

[akirby 18,114]

2 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Another evolutionary failure... Almost no improvements

That’s a ridiculous statement.   Spare us the trolling and take a 2 week vacation.