Ford undecided on Ranger replacement? - Page 3 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


General Ford Ranger Discussion General discussion of the Ford Ranger that does not fit in any other sub-forum.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #51  
Old 01-18-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
I see your point...

Oh ok. Now I see the points you guys are trying to make. Basicly due to the bad economy and the fact that if they did redesign the Ranger it would cost too much for us buy and way too much for them to manufacture on a large scale. The one thing that we all agree on is that the Ranger is cheap, we all love it, and it's outdated beyond belief. I just hate the fact that a decent selling truck that's been around for 27 years now (1983 to 2010 so far) and has out lasted a couple of models (such as the Ford 500 which had the same powertrain as my Ranger and GM's S10) to go away without as much as a send off.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 01-18-2010
KLC's Avatar
KLC KLC is offline
RF Veteran
iTrader: (29)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 13,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by knightmare1015 View Post
Oh ok. Now I see the points you guys are trying to make. Basicly due to the bad economy and the fact that if they did redesign the Ranger it would cost too much for us buy and way too much for them to manufacture on a large scale. The one thing that we all agree on is that the Ranger is cheap, we all love it, and it's outdated beyond belief. I just hate the fact that a decent selling truck that's been around for 27 years now (1983 to 2010 so far) and has out lasted a couple of models (such as the Ford 500 which had the same powertrain as my Ranger and GM's S10) to go away without as much as a send off.
At one time the Ranger was a good seller, but times have changed. The Ranger just isn't what people want anymore.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 01-18-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99offroadrngr View Post
Ford currently owns Lincoln, Mercury, and Volvo.
I know that, but when Fox News was covering the vehicle crisis of the big 3 in Aug. 2009 they showed all of the big 3's brands and I distincivly remember seeing Mazda listed as one of their brands.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 01-18-2010
99offroadrngr's Avatar
TOYOTA
iTrader: (37)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 11,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by knightmare1015 View Post
I know that, but when Fox News was covering the vehicle crisis of the big 3 in Aug. 2009 they showed all of the big 3's brands and I distincivly remember seeing Mazda listed as one of their brands.
Fords website which is maintained by Ford and not Fox news also shows their brands and there is no Mazda on there. Ford and Mazda have a "contract/partnership" thing going but they currently do not have ownership of the Mazda brand.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 01-18-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by KLC View Post
At one time the Ranger was a good seller, but times have changed. The Ranger just isn't what people want anymore.
You mean except us of course. Most people consider the ranger an ongoing failure that needs to die. I don't consider it a failure at all. It's still around today and there's alot of people out there love the old ranger to this day (myself included). I just wish they'd change it up a bit and offer a few more options for it. As for those people that consider it a failure I just ignore them because they're closed minded and short sided people who just don't know what fun they can with a ranger and what all you can do with it.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 01-18-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99offroadrngr View Post
Fords website which is maintained by Ford and not Fox news also shows their brands and there is no Mazda on there. Ford and Mazda have a "contract/partnership" thing going but they currently do not have ownership of the Mazda brand.
Oh ok. Hell i thought they owned mazda at one time. You'd think that after seeing a Mazda B series truck and a ranger side by side that one of the 2 owned the other though.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 01-18-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Pa
Posts: 18
I would have to say that the rangers problem is the fact Ford wants to put everyone in an F 150. I could have got an F-150 for the price I payed and looking back on it I should have. The 5.4 gets better milage then my 4.0. I think if they revamped the ranger actually tring to out sell every other truck out there it would. The fact is these trucks sell good with over ten year old technology,so with a real up date and new fuel efficient engines they could rule the market. Heck used car lots here cant Keep them on the lot, was told this by about four salesmen when I was tring to find my buddy a new ride.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 01-18-2010
Jp7's Avatar
Jp7 Jp7 is offline
Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: My LED lab or on the dyno
Posts: 2,970
Quote:
Why do you think that?
The turbo's are so incredibly small. Driving it you can't feel any effect from them. The boost level is so low that the wastegate lines don't even come clipped onto the actuators from the factory.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 01-18-2010
99offroadrngr's Avatar
TOYOTA
iTrader: (37)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 11,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by knightmare1015 View Post
Oh ok. Hell i thought they owned mazda at one time. You'd think that after seeing a Mazda B series truck and a ranger side by side that one of the 2 owned the other though.
lol and the STX rangers have a mazda bed
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 01-18-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99offroadrngr View Post
I think we are all getting too far ahead with this. In my view, just wait until it actually happens then look to see what goes on.

and i think they will put the Pinto back into production.
Maybe we should wait and see what happens. They may redesign the Ranger or are in the process of redesigning it who knows. But I doubt very seriously they'll bring the old Pintos out of retirement. The Mustang would kill it. Here's a model that might be under consideration, The Torino GT's. It would probably give the mustang a run for it's money. Those were pretty stout cars.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 01-18-2010
cchsbuzz19's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: North Canton, Ohio
Posts: 2,417
What I think is gonna happen is there going to take the Ranger off the market and a couple years down the road when they realize that people can't afford a $35,000 truck and people start complaining that they want a more compact truck, they'll bring back the ranger fully redesigned. Thats just my opinion, and sorry if someone mentioned something similar to this I didn't read the last 3 pages.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 01-18-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheaplabor View Post
I would have to say that the rangers problem is the fact Ford wants to put everyone in an F 150. I could have got an F-150 for the price I payed and looking back on it I should have. The 5.4 gets better milage then my 4.0. I think if they revamped the ranger actually tring to out sell every other truck out there it would. The fact is these trucks sell good with over ten year old technology,so with a real up date and new fuel efficient engines they could rule the market. Heck used car lots here cant Keep them on the lot, was told this by about four salesmen when I was tring to find my buddy a new ride.
I think your right on the money there. One model for every person out there truck wise isn't good for business. I wouldn't mind owning an F150 either but I really don't need that size truck. When I first got this ranger that I'm in I wanted one with 4WD and i'll give you 2 guesses what they tried to steer me towards. An F150. Ford seems to forget about the ranger year after year. The interior is the same as it was 10+ years ago, they recently got rid of the 3.0 and only left 2 choices and neither are up to standards as far as other engines they have availible and I think they screwed up by getting rid of the splash model. It had that "old school" look you know from a design stand point. They really need to change it badly but don't want to spend the money to do it and just a few minor changes would improve on it greatly. Like other engine choices and set it up to where the customer can order any engine that she or he wants installed from the factory. Kind of like on a "semi-custom" basis. Say you don't need an F150 but still need a truck with more power on a smaller scale. Wouldn't it be nice to say can you order me a Ranger with a V8 or the new 3.5 ecoboost V6 engine? hell just offer a rebody kit for it to where you can keep the truck the same underneath but have a totally different look on the outside. They can do more with the Ranger than they say they can without changing alot of their tooling. I have no question or doubts about that.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 01-18-2010
karrbass4life's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 3,072
Id be happy with a reg cab, super cab, and crew cab Ranger layout.

The truck needs to be redesigned from the ground up, only thing it should keep from previous models are package names, the Ranger nameplate, and the Ford emblem.

As for engines and transmissions the new engines from Mazda look promising in the Inline-4 class. They just to be tuned for down low torque. In the V6 class the 3.7L that will be in the 2011 Mustang should find it's way into the Ranger. Once again it will need to be tuned for the torque. As for gearboxes. 6-speed. 5 gears are a thing of the past. Ford wants fuel efficiency heres how: 6-speed stick and auto.

(Note: You'll notice that a V8 and Diesel option were left out. Honestly a V8 in a Ranger will never happen. From a sales point if you need a V8 get a bigger truck. This will keep the Rangers cost down and not take sales away from the F-150. Ford will put a Diesel in a F-150 before they ever even think about the Ranger. Diesel prices are higher than gasoline at this time which is what killed the 4.4L Diesel F-150 project.)

I want to see the options like the 2001-2003 Rangers had like a manual transfer case, the FX4 package, a "sportier" package maybe with the SXT name or maybe FX2, the Tremor package would be amazing with the new Sync technology.

I want the Ranger to survive more importantly.

Last edited by karrbass4life; 01-18-2010 at 10:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 01-18-2010
04blackedge's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (13)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 23,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by knightmare1015 View Post
I think your right on the money there. One model for every person out there truck wise isn't good for business. I wouldn't mind owning an F150 either but I really don't need that size truck. When I first got this ranger that I'm in I wanted one with 4WD and i'll give you 2 guesses what they tried to steer me towards. An F150. Ford seems to forget about the ranger year after year. The interior is the same as it was 10+ years ago, they recently got rid of the 3.0 and only left 2 choices and neither are up to standards as far as other engines they have availible and I think they screwed up by getting rid of the splash model. It had that "old school" look you know from a design stand point. They really need to change it badly but don't want to spend the money to do it and just a few minor changes would improve on it greatly. Like other engine choices and set it up to where the customer can order any engine that she or he wants installed from the factory. Kind of like on a "semi-custom" basis. Say you don't need an F150 but still need a truck with more power on a smaller scale. Wouldn't it be nice to say can you order me a Ranger with a V8 or the new 3.5 ecoboost V6 engine? hell just offer a rebody kit for it to where you can keep the truck the same underneath but have a totally different look on the outside. They can do more with the Ranger than they say they can without changing alot of their tooling. I have no question or doubts about that.
Seems like you keep forgetting about the Sport Trac, its smaller than a fullsize and comes with a v8. Fits your criteria perfectly
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 01-18-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by cchsbuzz19 View Post
What I think is gonna happen is there going to take the Ranger off the market and a couple years down the road when they realize that people can't afford a $35,000 truck and people start complaining that they want a more compact truck, they'll bring back the ranger fully redesigned. Thats just my opinion, and sorry if someone mentioned something similar to this I didn't read the last 3 pages.
I think that you have stated what will happen. Ford has already done this twice. The first example the "old school" thunderbird which was a failure because people didn't want to spend $40,000+ on the damn thing when you can get a used one for alot cheaper. The second time was the Taurus. they got rid of it and replaced it with the 500 and it failed and they brought it back with different interiors, and newer engines to boot. You'd figure Ford Motor Company would learn from it's mistakes and ask the public what it wants to see and they'd go from there. But nope. we don't know jack **** according to them. From a design point they'll find som excuse then try to fix what they screwed up.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 01-18-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04blackedge View Post
Seems like you keep forgetting about the Sport Trac, its smaller than a fullsize and comes with a v8. Fits your criteria perfectly
Nope I haven't forgotton the sport trac, I just don't care for midsized SUV it's just not my style. But it is closer to what I want though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by karrbass4life View Post
Id be happy with a reg cab, super cab, and crew cab Ranger layout.

The truck needs to be redesigned from the ground up, only thing it should keep from previous models are package names, the Ranger nameplate, and the Ford emblem.

As for engines and transmissions the new engines from Mazda look promising in the Inline-4 class. They just to be tuned for down low torque. In the V6 class the 3.7L that will be in the 2011 Mustang should find it's way into the Ranger. Once again it will need to be tuned for the torque. As for gearboxes. 6-speed. 5 gears are a thing of the past. Ford wants fuel efficiency heres how: 6-speed stick and auto.

(Note: You'll notice that a V8 and Diesel option were left out. Honestly a V8 in a Ranger will never happen. From a sales point if you need a V8 get a bigger truck. This will keep the Rangers cost down and not take sales away from the F-150. Ford will put a Diesel in a F-150 before they ever even think about the Ranger. Diesel prices are higher than gasoline at this time which is what killed the 4.4L Diesel F-150 project.)

I want to see the options like the 2001-2003 Rangers had like a manual transfer case, the FX4 package, a "sportier" package maybe with the SXT name or maybe FX2, the Tremor package would be amazing with the new Sync technology.

I want the Ranger to survive more importantly.
well I have to agree but still they should offer more than they do now. Some of those Mazda engines are pretty sweet looking and they do need to be retuned for more torque cause that's what moves the truck to begin with. You can have all the horsepower in the world but if you aint got the torque it won't move like it should from a performance stand point. I'd also like to see a limited slip rear differential come into the mix for the ranger. We all want the Ranger to survive. I think another good example is from another brand: GM getting rid of the S10. I think they're regretting that choice they made years ago now. When GM got rid of it Ford should have jumped on the oppertunity to have their sport compact truck line dominate that paticular plattform.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 01-18-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Here's another Idea...

I'd doubt this would happen but A V8 can be affordable if they partnered up with GM. Think about it. Whom would gain the most if they did team up a little bit? both would benefit from exchanging technology with each other in a limited partnership. No secret that GM's engine line up is much much larger than Ford's and that is indeed a fact. I consider Chrysler too far gone to do that. But GM and Ford could exchange a few things like a trade of some sorts. I'm not High on GM mind you in fact I really can't stand them other than their engines and parts availibilty which is far greater than fords will ever be.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 01-18-2010
Corkey's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: sioux narrows,ontario
Posts: 83
"That's not all that much better than the much more capable F-150 with the three-valve 4.6-liter V8 and six-speed automatic, which gets 15/21".

holy, crap,, that is sucky mileage , i have a 96 Explorer 4 door, 4.0 auto trans, and i get better mileage than that, with 33's on it, and mine has 360,000 kilometers on it, almost 230,000 miles,
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 01-18-2010
Sixt9coug's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Norwalk, CA
Posts: 1,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheaplabor View Post
I would have to say that the rangers problem is the fact Ford wants to put everyone in an F150




Heck used car lots here cant Keep them on the lot, was told this by about four salesmen when I was tring to find my buddy a new ride.
Exactly on both counts. F150 as a higher profit margin on it. They make more of them. Costs are amortized over a larger amount of units as well. Once again, look at the sales figures. 55K Rangers sold in 2009 versus over 400K F Series trucks! Yes, F Series encompasses the F250, 350 and others but the 150 is by far the largest volume model. So why rebate the hell out of a Ranger to sell it at $16K when you can get 25K out of an F150 even with rebates? Yes it will cost more, but lets say Ford pulls in a 20% profit per unit on average (hypothetical... they sure as hell don't release what they make per unit). Why would they push a Ranger for a $3200 profit when they can get $5000 out of an F150 and most likely, a happier customer.

With the Ecoboost F150 already on the horizon and rumors flying that it might tickly 25mpg... wheres the case for a 4.0L Ranger that can't get that? Or even the 4 banger that really is doing marginally better with half the capability and room? Add higher profits on the full size and it drives home the point for Ford supporting it's bread and butter models.

Your second point about not finding Rangers used very easily supports the first point. I would be willing to be that 75% of the members on this site bought their Rangers used. If people aren't buying the vehicles new. (unless its heavily incentive laden like how i got mine) then why should Ford support it?

I would be sad to see it go, but it doesn't make financial sense to keep it around.

Last edited by Sixt9coug; 01-19-2010 at 12:55 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 01-19-2010
russian's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Windsor, ON
Posts: 574
Meh. Nothing matters till its in stone.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 01-19-2010
Tys 4x4 FTW's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 6,575
v6 ecoboost ranger would be ftw.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 01-19-2010
ringer4x4's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: upstate ny
Posts: 544
the ranger in europe got a full redesign.... Ford Ranger Gets a Real Redesignů But Only for Europe : Auto News looks alot like a sport trac to me... my biggest gripe about my ranger is hp.. would be nice to have an engine that made decent motor or responded well to low buck mods
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 01-19-2010
cheese_man's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: arthur
Posts: 2,100
the reason why the 4.0l rangers are bad for fuel economy is!

the proper gear ratio for 31 inch tires is,,, 3.31 gear ratio for street - ( 3.55 ratio better for off-road )

3.73 gears if you take it off-road a-lot

4.10 gears were originally manufactured for 33 inch tires

the problem is with today`s automatics is they are not as strong internally as yesterday`s auto`s

so the manufacturers had to compensate with higher gear ratio`s( suck`s for mileage though )
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 01-19-2010
WillInThe04Ranger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rocky Mount, NC
Posts: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by knightmare1015 View Post
Nope I haven't forgotton the sport trac, I just don't care for midsized SUV it's just not my style. But it is closer to what I want though.
.
It's not an SUV if it has a truck bed.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 01-19-2010
whippersnapper02's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 7,415
So is anyone going to be buying a new Ranger soon? You know. That 30K+ 4 door V8 thing some of you want?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pre key mod but undecided about the back FX42008 Suspension Tech 17 01-26-2012 08:25 PM
undecided... fourliter dan Wheels & Tires Semi-Tech 23 07-22-2010 06:53 PM
Front buffer replacement. (Shock replacement.) Hawklore Suspension Tech 4 01-19-2010 12:03 PM
old bushing replacement (1996 ford ranger) fletch12518 General Ford Ranger Discussion 19 01-04-2007 02:42 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:39 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.