New Ford Ranger, Bronco Confirmed for Michigan Assembly

2015-Ford-Ranger-Wildtrak II

Thank you, Donald Trump. In response to Trump's attack of Ford Motor Co. for moving small-car production out of Michigan to Mexico, Bill Johnson, United Auto Workers chairman at Ford's Wayne, Mich., plant, confirmed that Ford will produce the new Ford Ranger mid-size pickup truck and Bronco small SUV at the same plant that will be moving Focus and C-Max production to Mexico, where the vehicles will be made less expensively.

According to RoadandTrack.com, there will be many Ford fans anxiously awaiting both a smaller pickup and better Jeep Wrangler competitor.

Ford produces the global Ranger pickup around the world and is quite successful, winning customer loyalty and third-party awards from enthusiast and commercial outlets. Extremely popular in Australia, the new Ranger is likely to shrink in overall size compared to the current global model because it has a footprint similar to that of the current regular-cab long-bed and SuperCab short-bed F-150.

Earlier reports had the Ranger slated to enter the U.S. marketplace by the 2019 model year, meaning that plant upgrades are likely to start sometime next year. We assume the new Bronco SUV would make its debut sometime shortly thereafter.

The new Ranger will go head-to-head with the Toyota Tacoma and Chevrolet Colorado — not to mention a new Nissan Frontier, set to be redesigned for the 2018 model year as well. As the mid-size segment continues to grow, we fully expect more manufacturers to be lured into the downsized pickup arena, offering a variety of options from traditional offerings to more elongated crossovers with storage beds. There's no doubt the new Ranger will be the former.

Manufacturer image

 

2016-Ford-Ranger II

Ford Everest SUV II

 

Comments

If the Bronco still only has a 2-door body, it won't be able to compete well with Wrangler JL at all. Once Jeep figured out that people need more ingress/egress and hung those two extra doors on, sales went through the roof.

That's a Bronco L O L!.

I hope we see Ranger and Bronco concepts at the auto shows coming up in the next few months. I am eager to get the details on the next Ranger.

I would like to see the new Ranger be closer in size to the last U.S. Ranger rather than the current global Ranger. For the extended cab with a six-foot bed, maybe 200'' long x 72.5'' wide x 68'' tall.

I would also like to see Ford use aluminum in the body to keep the weight down and offer a four-cylinder port- (not direct-) injected engine in order to realize great gas mileage like the last U.S. Ranger. Those last gen U.S. Rangers got outstanding mileage with the four-cylinder and the manual transmission (something like 30 mpg on the highway).

That should be called the Ford Explorer not the Taurus wagon the put the name on know but Ford does this with different cars.

Let us hope that the new Ranger is a truly SMALL Ranger and not the current Global Ranger.

Well at least Ford is not shy about posting up their plans for a new mid size pickup while Nissan continues to just sit on their fingers and stay comfy with the same old Frontier.

Why would you think it's anything but the global ranger?

Bronco looks like a 4Runner killer, I like it! Guess we should reserve judgment till we see just how much of the global DNA comes over from the Everest (technically that competes with the Toyota Prado overseas, but we arent allowed to have nice things over here).

Toyota needs to wake up, they may finish out this decade on top, but people are slowly getting more options that aren't just warmed over designs from 10-20 years ago.

Well at least Ford is not shy about posting up their plans for a new mid size pickup while Nissan continues to just sit on their fingers and stay comfy with the same old Frontier.


Posted by: Dinduette | Oct 4, 2016 2:25:35 PM

The Nissan Navarro (global Frontier) isnt exactly setting the world on fire in other countries. When I was in central America it was what people bought when they had to drive further than they could walk, didnt want a motorcycle, but couldnt afford a Hilux.

The Navarro is actually the closest to it domestic twin of any of the global midsize trucks. The Hilux, Ranger and Colorado are all significantly tougher than their US counterparts. Hopefully Ford comes out of the gate with the 3.0l I5 and the same chassis that is under the global Ranger. I said that 3 years ago when the Colorado/Canyon was announced, the GM twins did a good job but we still got a watered down version, guess it's bad for business when a midsize out tows and out hauls the entry level half tons. My Hilux in Central America had E rated LT tires and we regularly hauled 3500lbs in the bed, safely.

Please have a diesel option like overseas. Either the 2.2 I4 or 3.2 I5.

Perfect for exploring the boonies for an extended time before having to refuel.

Glad to see the Ranger make a comeback. Wonder if this will entice Ram to bring back the Dakota?

Get ready Fiat recall & shaky GOVT motors; it will be Ford dominance soon...heh heh heh

That rendering of the Bronco, could not compete with a Wrangler. Other renderings of the Bronco look better. GM will have the Blazer out sometime next year using the Colorado frame and running gear.

Wxman..Do a little research. Ford did not need nor receive a government bailout with tax dollars. Still should be built in U.S.

In Mexico they have the Ford ranger and it look better in the picture then real ,,

If Ram is going to bring the Dakota back they need to do it sooner rather than later.

GUTS
GLORY
Ram may get a new midsize truck
BEST IN CLASS
RAM Dakota!

Build a truck in Mexico it's only good for the company profits,,

I heard Ford planned new gen Explorer will be rear wheel drive in 2018!

Wxman..Do a little research. Ford did not need nor receive a government bailout with tax dollars. Still should be built in U.S.

But they did take a super low interest tax payer (5.9 billion) loan on the terms it would build vehicles the government wanted. (who's government motors now)

Poorly worded article. Ranger and Bronco to be built in Michigan. Focus and Cmax moving to Mexico to make room for the trucks to be built in the US.

fORD (AKA) Government motors, Would have been bankrupt back in the 70"s if the govt never helped them out. AND FOR WHAT, TO CONTINUE TO BUILD JUNK.


Wxman..Do a little research. Ford did not need nor receive a government bailout with tax dollars. Still should be built in U.S.

But they did take a super low interest tax payer (5.9 billion) loan on the terms it would build vehicles the government wanted. (who's government motors now)


Posted by: SKEETER | Oct 4, 2016 6:57:33 PM

Actually the vehicles are a small part of the doe atvm loans... plant efficiency and low carbon output is another. Everything from lighting in plants to renewable energy production and lower energy useage. Most of fords low interest loan has went to green factories. You can read about it here....
http://energy.gov/lpo/services/atvm-loan-program

Here is another article on ford's lowest carbon foot print life cycle pickup.
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1103646_ford-f-150-plants-recycle-enough-aluminum-for-30000-trucks-a-month

I'd love to see a small ranger, but my guess is it will be big and expensive just like all the other midsizers. It's interesting that there are so many midsize trucks. More than full size. Wish it was the other way around. I'd really like Honda to build a full size truck and for toyota to give us an all-new full size truck. If I were in the market for a midsize, it would be tough to choose. When it comes to full-size I really only have two options I would even consider- ford or chevy. I'm ready for the ATV manufacturers to make a true compact pickup. Fairly confident that is where it is going to come from.

The pictured red vehicle is not a Bronco rendering, but an Everest sold in other markets.
The US Ranger will certainly be smaller than the Global as it is 9 tenths size of the F150. More compact than the Shakerolet colorado to not cannibalize from from full size as the GM error as evidenced by the numbers of internal conquest sales.To those who thought that it was an error on Fords part to discontinue the compact Ranger in 2011, not really. Ford product planning is more strategic than GM who is far more reactionary.
When the Ranger is launched it is pretty clear who will be sunk.

@devilsadvocate
Do not know what year of Navara you saw, but the current workmate version has a 2,700lb payload and 7,700lb towing.
I would agree the Ranger, you will receive will be a diluted model.
Current Ranger has a 4,900lb kerb weight,same as the 2.7 Ecoboost F150
An Everest Platinum SUV version of the Ranger has a 5,500lb kerb weight, that is not far off the 5 litre V8 version of the F150 with 5,600lb
Global Ranger is not " midsize". US Ranger could be a small Pickup though

@Miath,
They have slightly older and smaller 2.2 Litre Diesel model

@devilsadvocate
The Bronze coloured vehicle is the Everest not the Bronco. It is a 5,500lb SUV version of the Ranger.

Ford will be 4 dollars short and 5 years to late like normal.

FORD QUALITY - AGAIN ;;;;;;;;LOL
http://www.autonews.com/article/20161004/OEM11/161009968/newer-ford-f-150s-being-probed-by-u-s-for-brake-issues

Sweet

I like the idea GO FORD.

Ford always gonna be number one second to none.

Maybe Ford should fix their F-150 brake failures that are being investigated right now first!

@T-BIRD "Ford always gonna be number one second to none" in recalls!

Hate to say it since I'm a retired union worker. But the UAW has shafted themselves by leveraging their bargaining rights against the auto MFG's. No one should get paid as much to do what they do. I'm all for benefit packages but you have to draw the line somewhere. If the UAW would've taken better concessions when things were slow they'd still have more workers in the U.S.
As a retired union carpenter we took pay cuts and benefit cuts when things got slow. Yes it took a while to recoup, but at least everyone was still working. The UAW has shafted it's members by conforming enough.

As to the new Global Ranger. As long as it's the same size as the new GM twins it should do well. Throw the 2.7, 3.5 Eco Boost in and it should be a screamer.

Nicely done Ford, Enter this market at the right time and crush the competition.....

Posted by: Nitro | Oct 4, 2016 1:06:51 PM

Nitro, by the time Ford brings a mid size competitor to market there will only be a few of you Ford "deplorables" left to buy one, everyone else would have moved on to a mid size that they can buy today. However, I give Ford credit for a " too late to the show " attempt at following GM.

As for the suv pictured above, it looks like the old chevy traverse from the edge of the front fender rearward. Why can't Ford create it's own designs and stop using old GM and Aston Martin designs. Oh, Camaro called and wants its rear quarter panels back from the new Mustang.

That Ford Everest (the SUV) should've been the Ford Explorer. The Explorer out now should be the new Taurus X. The Flex should be axed as it's on the same platform. Everyone wants to make a helluva lot of SUVs/crossovers under one brand. I doubt the Everest (the REAL "Explorer") would make it to the US as it's nearly the size of the regular-length Expedition and would likely share the same engine, although it doesn't have to go through the chicken tax hoop like the Ranger.

That Ford Everest (the SUV) should've been the Ford Explorer. The Explorer out now should be the new Taurus X. The Flex should be axed as it's on the same platform. Everyone wants to make a helluva lot of SUVs/crossovers under one brand. I doubt the Everest (the REAL "Explorer") would make it to the US as it's nearly the size of the regular-length Expedition and would likely share the same engine, although it doesn't have to go through the chicken tax hoop like the Ranger.

That Ford Everest (the SUV) should've been the Ford Explorer. The Explorer out now should be the new Taurus X. The Flex should be axed as it's on the same platform. Everyone wants to make a helluva lot of SUVs/crossovers under one brand. I doubt the Everest (the REAL "Explorer") would make it to the US as it's nearly the size of the regular-length Expedition and would likely share the same engine, although it doesn't have to go through the chicken tax hoop like the Ranger.

@devilsadvocate
The Bronze coloured vehicle is the Everest not the Bronco. It is a 5,500lb SUV version of the Ranger.


Posted by: Robert Ryan | Oct 5, 2016 6:07:41 AM

Right, I know that, but it is being floated on multiple sites as a potential Bronco (nobody knows what the Bronco will actually be) since it shares the same platform as the Ranger and the Ford union rep explicitly said the two new vehicles slated to move into the plant in Michigan share the same platform.

As cool as the Bronco concept looked, bringing the Everest makes more sense. As someone else pointed out above with rumors that the Explorer may move to rear drive or at least be beefed up a little. They could kill the Expedition (that dinosaur still used the old 5.4l mod motor until only a few years ago), slot the re-freshed explorer up to the true fullsize category (it is basically already the size of a Tahoe), and then sell the Everest re-badged as a Bronco for the Midsize segment.

The whole thing is all kind of funny, and brings to mind the adage "there is nothing new under the sun" because 25 years ago the Explorer was basically just a re-freshed Bronco II with an optional 4 door config. It had the same front 1/4 and TTB dana 35 front axle. Those things were great, light, rugged and could go nearly anywhere (my family had a '93 with a manual transmission, it had the same track width as the Jeep YJ I drove in highschool but way more practical).

4 all-new SUV at 2020:
Ecosport
Everest
Ranger
Bronco
I think so

@devilsadvocate
Current Everest is slightly shorter than the small version of the Expedition. Unlike Expedition it can go Off Road very well. It has too some does the rest of the considerable competition

Will it come in Stick shift? if so im in

The Everest is not nearly the same size as the Expedition. It is one class-size smaller, mid-size vs. full-size.

Everest Dimensions: 192.6'' length x 73.2 width x 72.3'' height

Expedition Dimensions: 206.5'' length x 78.8'' width x 77.2'' height

There is enough size difference between the Expedition and the Everest to justify both. There is room in the market for a BOF mid-size Everest/Bronco, a BOF full-size Expedition, and a unibody Explorer that seems to fall in between mid-size and full-size. The BOF Everest would cater to a different market than the unibody Explorer just as the Toyota 4Runner appeals to a different crowd than the Highlander.

@5-speed
Major difference is current Expedition, that has a weight of 5,500-5700lb in the short wheelbase version , cannot go Off Road. 5,500lb Everest can and does it pretty well.

If anything, that bronco looks like the current Dodge Dirango.
Just saying though. Sipping my tea....

*Durango

Robert Ryan,

I guess both vehicles are technically the same mass then, but I, and I think most other people, would measure vehicle size by exterior dimensions, rather weight.

That Everest is very heavy for such a small SUV.

The next Expedition will use Aluminum, so its weight should come down. I imagine that the next Ranger and Everest would also use aluminum. It will be interesting to see if the next generation of the Everest weighs less than the next generation of the Expedition.

I cannot speak for the off-road ability of either SUV, but I am sure that the 4x4 Expedition could do some modest off-roading given its ground clearance and two-speed transfer case with low range. I have seen Expeditions in use with the National Park Service here in the U.S.



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2017 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us