Which do you think will happen first?

[mrjones944]

Which do you think will happen first: The 3.5L v6 finding its way in the current version of the Ranger or the Euro Ranger coming stateside? If the Euro version was to come here, which I hope it does, do you think Ford would resist putting the 3.5L v6 in it considering it has more HP than the 4.6L v8 in the current F150?

[Watchdevil]

Which do you think will happen first: The 3.5L v6 finding its way in the current version of the Ranger or the Euro Ranger coming stateside? If the Euro version was to come here, which I hope it does, do you think Ford would resist putting the 3.5L v6 in it considering it has more HP than the 4.6L v8 in the current F150?

 

Neither... I think Ford will commit to building the Ranger as it is with some needed updates.

[cheri/ck]

And, then - why not simply make the 4.6 V-8 optional in the Ranger? It's been available in Explorer and SportTrac for a while now. Personally, I think the 4.0 V-6 engine in the current Ranger is a strong engine for a small truck. But, some of us both need and want something with more power for occasional towing needs. With the proper gearing and tranny, the 4.6 V-8 would likely get about the same unloaded highway mileage as the 4.0 V-6.

 

I don't see a lot of reason to change the current Ranger all that much. It's a very strong little truck. Simply needs an updated, more comfortable interior with the ability to carry more than two adults at least for short trips. And, an optional 4.6 V-8 would make this vehicle very competitive in today's market - in my opinion.

[OregonX14]

A modified sport trac chassis with a solid rear axle would be a quick and easy way to do it....

[GT40 2]

that sounds good.

[mrjones944]

A modified sport trac chassis with a solid rear axle would be a quick and easy way to do it....

 

Hell I would say be unique in the compact class and retain the independent setup. I know it wont happen from Ford based on the current Euro Ranger but I can see it happening soonish from Honda if they decide to release a smaller truck.

[stegomon]

have to remeber...if htey put in a v8..it will have to be a mis size ruck..and the compac truck will be no more...the ranger was made for the fuel crisses in the 80s...came with a 2.0 4 banger the first year then a 2.8 v6...105 hp...25+ mpg

 

2.9 140 hp 25+ mpg

then you got the 4.0 ohv 165 hp maby 20mpg

4.0 sohc 205 hp 17 mpg on a good day?...were as a 2.9 will turn 32s...with 3.73 gears and still get 23mpg....

so think ford needs to go back with the roots of the range...drop in the 3.5...make the hp guys happy...and m,ake the gas savy guys happy

[cheri/ck]

Or, since Ford has decided to make the F-150 a three-quarter ton truck -they really need another truck slotted in between the small Ranger and the big F-150. I suspect that if gas prices stay between $2 and $3 per gallon on the low side, many people will be looking for something that doesn't weigh what the current F-150 weighs - 5,800 pounds in 4x4, lightly trim loaded. Most F-150 buyers are like I have been for many years. Need the vehicle on a daily basis and then need it to tow 5,000 pounds on the weekends without breaking a sweat. Gas mileage and power and fun to drive matter too.

 

Something needs to be done with the huge difference now between the Ranger and F-150. Like I have said many times, I would be happy with a 1997-2003 generation F-150 again. They weighed 800 pounds less and with the now more powerful engines, the trucks would be the class of the half-tons.

 

Ford will lose more and more customers if they don't fill this void in their most important truck line-up.

[JW]

Yeah...keep the small truck nobody's buying, and build another one to compete with the new and updated compact class. Yeah, that makes sense...

[cheri/ck]

The Ranger is on track to sell around 90,000 units this year. That will likely outsell quite a few other Ford brands including 500 and Expedition. I do not call that a situation of "nobody" buying the little truck. In my mind, the Ranger is doing amazingly well for no more updating than Ford has chosen to give it.

 

And, lots of us will continue to say that the SporTrac is is not an answer for a 4-door Ranger. And, the F-150 is too heavy, too big and too thirsty for many of us now that have previously enjoyed the F-150. Ford needs to build a nice half-ton truck again and based on the competition, that may very well mean a new truck slotted in between the Ranger and the F-150.

 

The current Tundra is a nice sized vehicle. I would like to see Ford make something similar with the 4.6 V-8 as the top engine choice.

[mrjones944]

The Ranger is on track to sell around 90,000 units this year. That will likely outsell quite a few other Ford brands including 500 and Expedition. I do not call that a situation of "nobody" buying the little truck. In my mind, the Ranger is doing amazingly well for no more updating than Ford has chosen to give it.

 

And, lots of us will continue to say that the SporTrac is is not an answer for a 4-door Ranger. And, the F-150 is too heavy, too big and too thirsty for many of us now that have previously enjoyed the F-150. Ford needs to build a nice half-ton truck again and based on the competition, that may very well mean a new truck slotted in between the Ranger and the F-150.

 

The current Tundra is a nice sized vehicle. I would like to see Ford make something similar with the 4.6 V-8 as the top engine choice.

 

This would be a good start:

 

[JW]

The Ranger is on track to sell around 90,000 units this year. That will likely outsell quite a few other Ford brands including 500 and Expedition. I do not call that a situation of "nobody" buying the little truck. In my mind, the Ranger is doing amazingly well for no more updating than Ford has chosen to give it.

 

And it sold 300,000 just a few years ago. A 70% drop in anything is classified as failure, no matter what you're referring to. If my kid was getting A's a few years ago and F's now, I wouldn't pat him on the back and say, "That's OK, the work got a lot tougher." Like in so many other areas of their business, Ford needs to stop turning in F-grade work when it comes to the Ranger. In reality, they started ditching class entirely in about 2003.

[cheri/ck]

I understand the complaints, but continue to think that Ford has a rather outstanding product in the current Ranger. It is literally the only compact "real" truck left and there is obviously a market for compact trucks with 90,000 units still being sold on an annual basis.

 

When the Ranger sold three times it's current numbers, there was a level system out there in Ford's product line - Ranger/F-150/SuperDuty. Now the F-150 is simply a nice light-duty 3/4 ton truck. If you read the Ford truck sites, you'll come across a lot of confusion on the part of buyers. Which one to choose? The F-150 or the F-250 - what's the difference? Some of us simply want a nice half-ton truck from Ford again with a small V-8 that really moves the truck nicely unloaded with good fuel economy and can tow a boat or small camper when needed easily. The 4.6 V-8 could do this in the right vehicle if it is not weight challeneged.

 

The Ranger is still a nice truck. I have a 2003 fully loaded 4.0 V-6/XLT/4X4 extended cab and I am completely happy with it. The little truck does exactly what I need it to do and returns 19 mpg on a daily basis which includes about 70% city/rural slow driving. It feels tough as nails. But, then there are only two of us and we have no need to carry additional people in this vehicle. The room behind the seats in the Ranger extended cab is great storage though - works nicely.

 

What I need is a replacement for our 1999 F-150 XLT 4X4 - another great example of a Ford truck. It is getting old and approaching 100,000 miles although completely problem-free to-date. Would like to think that Ford offers something for its replacement but it really does not. I want something that is a little smaller that runs strongly with a small V-8 - like my 1985 F-150 4X4 with 302 V-8 (EFI) was able to do. That truck hauled our boats without compromise and returned excellent gas mileage for its day. Sold it with 175,000 miles and it kept running a long time after.

 

I'm not the only one out there that wants to continue to be a Ford customer. We have owned Ford trucks for a very long time - nearly 35 years of mostly new ones. I am disappointed that my only options are a too small Ranger and a too big F-150.

[mrjones944]

You bring up some good points and I am in a similiar situation. I have an 01 Ranger and have been completely satisfied with it in terms of durability and performance. The problem arises when I look at the odometer and see 115K miles and think to myself that I wouldnt mind getting a replacement truck. I refuse to go with something as big as an F150 and will not buy a replacement that is the exact same thing I bought 6 years ago. Ford is letting the japanese slip into a market again virtually unchallenged just as they did with the car market.

[01FOCI]

Ford should have never made the F-150 different from the rest of the F-series trucks, though perhaps a good idea at first. Ford now has been forced to make the 150 bigger and more capable to compete with the crapaneese onslaught. This however could have been possibly avoided had the f-250/350 gotten the same refinements as the 150. Guy goes to a stealership looking for an F-150, tells salesman he wants to haul his 3-foot overhang camper aka portable mansion along with his 20ft 500hp cuddy cabin "cruiser" to the lake everyonce in awhile. Salesmen says oh sorry the 150 is too small how about a 250hd? Guy says no its to truckish want refined interior etc the 150 offers. What I am getting at is that while Ford needs the tough truck ie the 250/350hd it needed to keep the looks the same so that they could upsell the 250 and 350 without alienating buyers who want to haul to much with a 150 and really need a bigger truck. The 250/350 09's are finaly getting an inteior that may help with this but the pleasing exterior is not there.

 

Oh and I think they should keep the ranger a true compact pickup. Since the 150 is essentially a 3/4 ton they need a f-100 for in between the ranger and 150.

Edited December 24, 2006 by 01FOCI

[bri719]

This would be a good start:

 

 

 

agreed. nice one

 

I think unlike previous management, Mulally will not allow this one to dangle out there on the tree forever. the guy made it a point to drive every vehicle Ford offers the first few weeks he arrived, and I'm sure he noticed the Ranger is formerly the most popular truck that now nobody wants. I think we will definitely hear something in 2007. hopefully this ^^^^ coming here

[red07ranger]

Ford can sit there and say well we don't see a market for the "compact truck" anymore. Thats because as soon as they stopped doing anything of real importance to the ranger to keep up with the emerging competition thats when the sales started to drop! it was just 7 years ago that the ranger sold over 200K units! yes it is true that the market has slowed down, mainly because of gas prices, etc. But that doesn't mean that you leave the market altogether especially when your trying to restructure the company, thats not good business sense! Ford owned the truck market for many years with the ranger and F-150, 18 for the ranger and 27straight with the F-150. Why is it that you don't hear them talking about ditching the F-150 because its "old" or whatever, because it makes the money plain and simple! I mean its not like they can't use other platform's for the ranger to udpate it, like use the explorer or some other model for that matter, hell they could use the 3.5 thats going in the edge for the engine!, which gives more power and is more efficient! a plus for both who want the power and the mileage! and why not use the interior of the F-150, modify and tweak it a bit to make it different from the F-150! adding 6-8 inches to the cab could make it viable for four fulll size doors without losing that truck look with the bed and all! my point to this whole shebang is that ford still has an opportunity to compete in this market by updating the ranger, by sharing similar platform's and parts from similar models and so on! Thats what Toyota and them do with the Tundra and Tacoma, which allows them to save money, the question is does ford have the guts to stick their neck out there and do it!

[red07ranger]

Ford can sit there and say well we don't see a market for the "compact truck" anymore. Thats because as soon as they stopped doing anything of real importance to the ranger to keep up with the emerging competition thats when the sales started to drop! it was just 7 years ago that the ranger sold over 200K units! yes it is true that the market has slowed down, mainly because of gas prices, etc. But that doesn't mean that you leave the market altogether especially when your trying to restructure the company, thats not good business sense! Ford owned the truck market for many years with the ranger and F-150, 18 for the ranger and 27straight with the F-150. Why is it that you don't hear them talking about ditching the F-150 because its "old" or whatever, because it makes the money plain and simple! I mean its not like they can't use other platform's for the ranger to udpate it, like use the explorer or some other model for that matter, hell they could use the 3.5 thats going in the edge for the engine!, which gives more power and is more efficient! a plus for both who want the power and the mileage! and why not use the interior of the F-150, modify and tweak it a bit to make it different from the F-150! adding 6-8 inches to the cab could make it viable for four fulll size doors without losing that truck look with the bed and all! my point to this whole shebang is that ford still has an opportunity to compete in this market by updating the ranger, by sharing similar platform's and parts from similar models and so on! Thats what Toyota and them do with the Tundra and Tacoma, which allows them to save money, the question is does ford have the guts to stick their neck out there and do it!

[lukemullen]

A modified sport trac chassis with a solid rear axle would be a quick and easy way to do it....

 

I've heard that's more what the next Ranger will be, rather than the global Ranger. A solid axle equipped reinforced Explorer chassis, probably available with the Explorer's 4.6L V8, and no 4-door version (wouldn't want to infringe on SportTrac sales). It sounds good to me, especially if they up the 2.3L to about 175 hp, drop the Vulcan 3.0 and the Cologne 4.0L, put the 3.5L as the volume engine, and add the 6-speed automatic. It would be a real coup if Ford was able to offer a torquey 4-cylinder diesel, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Blueblood]

I have afeeling Jesus will return before Ford builds an all new Ranger..

[Blueblood]

Who is this Jesus fellow you speak of, and why will he be here before 2010?

 

Looks like he'll be here soon since Bush is hell bent on starting WW3..

[Fomhoire]

Ford can sit there and say well we don't see a market for the "compact truck" anymore. Thats because as soon as they stopped doing anything of real importance to the ranger to keep up with the emerging competition thats when the sales started to drop! it was just 7 years ago that the ranger sold over 200K units! yes it is true that the market has slowed down, mainly because of gas prices, etc.

 

Part of it is gas prices and part of it is due to Ford's insistence of selling what they want to sell, not what consumers want.

 

There is nothing wrong with a fully-loaded compact pickup, however, the compact pickups appealed to people with simple needs. A light-duty work truck with good fuel economy (most of us don't need or want a 4.0L V6 to carry tools around), better ability to drive on unpaved roads (cars don't cut it and we really don't need a 4X4), and general overall usefulness for almost everything short of hauling kids around.

 

The overwhelming majority of people buying compact trucks in the early 90's did so because they were reliable, simple, and inexpensive to own. Probably the most common option people wanted was air conditioning and carpeting.

 

I've been considering a new Ranger/Mazda B-series. If you go on a dealership's lot and tell them you want a 2.3L, manual transmission, air conditioning and carpeting, and really don't want to pay for anything more, half of the sales people will walk away. A good percentage of the rest of them direct you toward the 4.0L V6, then try to make you feel like an idiot if you tell them you don't want or need a V6, and they are a waste of gas respective to your needs. Then there is that problem of trying to get the rest of them to understand that you don't want an F-150 in any shape, form, or for any price. I almost bought a ranger last summer, or so I thought. When we sat down the salesman got some other clown to come in and sit down with me. The first thing this clown said was, "before you make the final decision, we can get you into an F-150..., F-150 this, F-150 that, you don't need a Ranger, and F-150 is what you need, F-150, F-150, F-150 . . . " After I finally got him to shut up about the F-150 he said I was there to waste his time, and refused to talk about the Ranger. So, one less Ranger was sold for 2006.

 

If Ford makes more money per widget selling fully-loaded Rangers of 2.3L Standard Cabs, or selling F-150's over selling Rangers, hey, that is great. However, they are leaving behind a large number of people that aren't interested in their upselling. They either don't buy, or they go buy a Tacoma. There is money to be made in selling volume. The simple inexpensive nature of compact trucks is what made them so popular in the 90's.

 

And this thing they have with continuing to insist people buy larger gas-guzzling engines SEVEN years into escalating gas prices is insane. It is hurting their sales, so why do they continue to do it?

 

They have also discourage people from buying base model Rangers by restricting availability. I checked local availability earlier this month for a 2.3L manual transmission XLT. XLT is hard to come by with those specs. 44 2.3L/manual transmission Rangers were available locally at that time. All of them were Oxford White, one of them had air conditioning in an area that gets quite warm in the summer. They use the excuse that white is their most popular color due to fleet sales. I don't want a truck that looks like a fleet vehicle. I hate white and I will not buy a vehicle that is white or does not have air conditioning. Mysteriously, you can find any color you want if you are interested in a 4.0L V6.

[PathTreker]

I've been considering a new Ranger/Mazda B-series. If you go on a dealership's lot and tell them you want a 2.3L, manual transmission, air conditioning and carpeting, and really don't want to pay for anything more, half of the sales people will walk away. A good percentage of the rest of them direct you toward the 4.0L V6, then try to make you feel like an idiot if you tell them you don't want or need a V6, and they are a waste of gas respective to your needs. Then there is that problem of trying to get the rest of them to understand that you don't want an F-150 in any shape, form, or for any price. I almost bought a ranger last summer, or so I thought. When we sat down the salesman got some other clown to come in and sit down with me. The first thing this clown said was, "before you make the final decision, we can get you into an F-150..., F-150 this, F-150 that, you don't need a Ranger, and F-150 is what you need, F-150, F-150, F-150 . . . " After I finally got him to shut up about the F-150 he said I was there to waste his time, and refused to talk about the Ranger. So, one less Ranger was sold for 2006.

 

 

When I was shopping for a Ranger, I specifically wanted one without carpet. I wanted the 2.3L with an automatic and was finding a lot of them (relatively speaking) with the manual. This is in Houston. I finally found a 2006 XL equipped the way I wanted and bought it. You might have better luck shopping Mazda as I don't believe they have any B-Series models without carpet. Then it would just be a matter of finding the manual transmission. The other upside is they don't have anything like an F-150 -- so no pressure with that either. I will really be glad when Ford loses the truck sales title because then maybe they won't be so obsessed with killing the Ranger sales.

[Fomhoire]

When I was shopping for a Ranger, I specifically wanted one without carpet. I wanted the 2.3L with an automatic and was finding a lot of them (relatively speaking) with the manual. This is in Houston. I finally found a 2006 XL equipped the way I wanted and bought it. You might have better luck shopping Mazda as I don't believe they have any B-Series models without carpet. Then it would just be a matter of finding the manual transmission. The other upside is they don't have anything like an F-150 -- so no pressure with that either. I will really be glad when Ford loses the truck sales title because then maybe they won't be so obsessed with killing the Ranger sales.

 

 

It isn't much better with the Mazdas. I've been looking for one with an SE5 package. So for the only ones available have been white and gold metallic. One dealer found a black one, but the other dealership didn't want to do a trade because a Ford dealership inquired about it. I went to a local Mazda dealership and the person handling trades at the dealership with the black truck remembered it and had still wouldn't trade based on some principle.

 

 

Really, does Ford want to sell vehicles or not? One way around this would be to warehouse vehicles regionally to get around stupid stuff like this.