It is..PDVSA.

So if the Ranger is tapped out, how is an unibody cheaper/less capable truck going to all of sudden sell more then what the Ranger does? Why is Ford going to spend all that engineering money on a brand new product that is basically going to be an ICE powered CE1? A new Midsized pickup would also require a wider width. The Ranger is like 75 and the Maverick is 72-not sure C1 can support a wider product like that   It make ZERO sense.   Notice the graphic below says truck-but its also completely inconstant-the F-150 EREV isn't called a truck, the CE1 isn't called a truck either. "affordable" is nebulous. To be honest the line describing the new product at TTP is a word salad IMO   The only thing that MAY make sense is that they move the next gen Maverick production to TTP, which would check all the bullet points. That would make much more sense then making a bigger unibody truck that would be turned down by people in that market because its not a "real truck"...and BOF is easier to build then unibody...and I'd assume cheaper. They get around the tariff issues that way too.       

They sold 155k Mavericks vs 71k Rangers last year.  I think Ranger is tapped out as far as sales at a reasonable profit margin.     But a unibody ranger that can be sold for $5K less and at a higher margin and double the volume makes all the sense in the world if they can pull it off.   Nothing else makes sense to me for a "new affordable pickup"

They did   https://www.fromtheroad.ford.com/us/en/articles/2026/whats-new-2026-mustang-rtr-package

iI thought they already revealed the RTR Mustang

I still call bullshit on this-people aren't going to buy a Ford Ridgeline...and it makes zero sense to spend all that development money chasing a market that is already been filled by another product or something that has its engineering paid by ROW...plus the Ranger WAS the reason the Bronco came back.    I still see zero benefit to adding a unibody vehicle to replace the Ranger...you'd be better off using that money on something else. 

So I saw one conversation on another site that said the bronco and mustang being revealed are RTR partnerships.

Surprising that CV never received 5.4 3V and ZF 6-speed auto, would have been an easy get from F150 On second thoughts, perhaps a bullet dodged with regards spark plug issue?

And Ford didn’t do that because it is set up to sell as many V6 diesels as it can. For 2026, the biturbo 2.0 diesel is replaced by a Lopo single turbo and V6 diesel across the range. That is not the actions of a company looking to replace diesel anytime soon.   V6 diesel adds a refinement to global Rangerand Everest  that virtually none of its competitors can match.

If the Ranger hybrid in Australia was the Powerboost version (like the F-150) instead of the PHEV, then it would be considerably less expensive. I'm guessing the sales numbers would then look much better than the PHEV?   I keep clinging to Farley's statement that every Ford Blue model in North America will have a hybrid version.