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.
I'm guessing the engineers had a pretty tight budget on the Ranger refresh and that's why the cab was carried over, however if you start stretching the cab way out without widening it it'll look goofy. If you also widen it a few inches while stretching it what's the point? You basically have built a 98% F-150. The Maverick actually has a little more cab room than the Ranger if you want a bit more.
The new Ranger is likely not doing that well because of a few reasons. Supply is probably the biggest one, but when lots are full of F150s discounts are available on them. Throw a more affordable Maverick under it and discounted F150 STXs above it and it has a very narrow market lane. I have a Ranger because it's what I consider to be the perfect size and capability for me, but I'm not your average customer.