Ranger cab is not a carryover, the front windshield is wider at the top to give
more shoulder room and canopy effect. It seems minimal changes but they’re
more under the skin.
And you’re correct, let’s say that Ford. Followed Tacoma and made Ranger 76” wide,
would that start to become big enough to start attracting some of the F150 super cab
buyers? I don’t know but suspect that T6 was given a brief by Ford North America to
develop more room without making it too wide.
A lot depends on price- Before COVID the big fleets paid around $20K for stripped Transit Connect or big Transit vans, so unless they needed good MPG or had to fit in tight spaces they bought big Transits. Prices have since gone way up and the fleet discounts aren't as generous, so if the upcoming Transit Connect or Transit Custom sells for several $K less than big Transit they'll sell well.
This^. If you do work in a downtown core, you’ll want to run as small a van or truck as you can for parking. A high roof transit doesn’t work in these situations.
I work for a City, we have several serving many needs both in utility van and passenger van specs. Our parking department has a couple to service our parking garages (you don't want a tall van for parking garages), public works has several, and our parks department as well.
Yeah I’m aware of what the specs are, but seeing is believing. I’ve sat in both and there is a difference even though the physical dimensions say otherwise.
I dunno people bitch about the bronco sport having less leg room in the back seat vs an Escape, but I'm 6'2 and haven't noticed a difference with my wife's BS
The back seat on the BS sits up a bit higher then the Escape too, so I'm thinking that helps too.
Easiest way is just to sit in it-the post 2013 Escapes had less room in front passenger area then the pre 2013, though that was addressed with the 2020 update and on the BS by making the dash less massive.
Consider the new Maverick Connect is probably going to be
200” long x 73” wide x 72” high (give or take)
The current SWB Low height Transit F150 is around
215” long x 81.3” wide x 82” high.
For most businesses, it’s an obvious choice whether to go for the smaller more
fuel efficient van or go slightly larger and get a lot roomier vehicle that can
carry those wider, bulkier loads. A lot of Ford’s choices is also about improving
profits, so if a small Transit Connect works, you’re looking at about $27,000
but if the larger Transit 150 works, then it’s about $47,000.
What this boils down to is whether there is a true market need for a ‘tweeter,
a van that’s between 73” wide and 81” wide? Ford doesn’t think so.
would it be easier to make the new Connect van a little wider at say, 76”?
Is that something businesses are actually asking for?
Who buys small vans and why…..
I think many buyers shop for value, and what you describe above suggests Ranger has limited value to too many buyers which limits market; though not necessarily profitability. Agree those on tight budgets or just like smaller vehicles could easily find Maverick a better deal, and those looking for truck capability could easily talk themselves into spending a bit more for a base F-150. People like you in the middle probably do represent a small percentage of buyers. I owned an older Ranger and can’t relate to new one at all. And to be clear, I’m not suggesting there are a lot of buyers like me either.
That all might be true, but spec wise it's virtually identical in rear legroom to the last gen. To be fair I haven't sat in one to see for my own eyes, but interior specs are all within an inch.
This isn’t entirely accurate. They basically modified the Ranger cab to fit on the Bronco underbody, which resulted in better legroom for rear seat passengers.
also, not a refresh. Completely different program number.