But Ridgeline isn't a hybrid.  And you're completely ignoring that it would be a new lighter, cheaper platform that would probably replace Maverick as well.     The point here is the same as ce1.  Cheaper to make, cheaper to sell, higher volume and higher margins.

Something like this??

I'll use the Honda Ridgeline as a best case example for Fuel Economy:   The Ranger and Ridgeline are virtually identical in weight and overall size also..they are around 4500 lbs depending on trim.    The Maverick is nearly 1000lbs lighter and 10 inches shorter then both, so I don't think there is going to be any major savings in MPGs with a unibody truck that is the size of a Ranger, unless Ford wants to give up capability with it, not to mention the CE1 is going to virtually the same size given the info so far put out.    IMO it would be just easier to rebody the Maverick to make it look like the Bronco vs going through this exercise to make a slightly larger truck that won't get as good gas mileage nor be as capable 

They dumped Heavy Truck because it "only" made 4% profit....

2 big reasons that make perfect sense.  Price and fuel economy.   Throw $5k rebate on Ranger and sales would probably double.  Price sells.  Applying ce1 cost savings to a unibody ICE pickup could easily yield a $5k price reduction and likely higher margins to boot.  It wouldn't be much bigger than Maverick just more rugged like bronco sport but with more capability than Maverick with more towing and payload and a larger engine option with the 2.3L plus a hybrid.     Ranger hybrid would be lucky to see 26-28mpg.  A lighter unibody would likely be in the 35-38 mpg range using the Maverick powertrain.   So you'd have a bronco sport style pickup capable of towing 5k+ with a 1500 lb payload and a hybrid option getting 38 mpg starting at $32k with higher trims and bigger engines available. Keep Maverick on the low end but move it to the same platform. Keep Ranger too if the factory space isn't needed for Bronco for those who want BOF.     And being unibody this would essentially be c3 for ICE crossovers too.  I just think the potential cost savings of this new platform is the ticket for Ford to increase volume with more affordable vehicles  and increase margins at the same time.  Same thing they're doing with CE1.   May not happen but you can't say it's a bad strategy.

Waiting for the 1971 Challenger Hemi to get sold as "new" from Dodge....

....and?

Yes, offering air brakes on gas powered 650/750's seems like such a no-brainer.  That option probably wouldn't set the world on fire sales-wise but one would think that the incremental sales increase air brakes would likely generate would justify the cost of offering it.  And, you may recall Ford showing pictures of a 650/750 trimmed 7.3L engine with an air brake compressor on it, so Ford did spend time and money to engineer it.  Since it would appear Ford has dropped the idea completely I wonder if the current 650 and 750 are on the way out.   BTW, has anyone seen the 2027 650/750 order guide yet?  Ford is doing yet another early start model year on these trucks and according to my sources production of the 2027's starts on 01/26/2026.  

I thought so as well, maybe the guy I talked to didn't realize that. But for the bronco reveal, a rtr version makes sense. Not related to this but he attended some dealer meetings and confirmed other product info like the mustang sedan is a stretched s650 instead of being its own design, and that ev truck patent image is really close to the CE1 truck design. Apparently it will have a lot of accessories.    Again, not related to this, but just some other interesting product tidbits while we're discussing future product. 

It is..PDVSA.