2020 Ford Ranger Raptor: Spied

I-S5v36TZ-XL II

Although there is still no official announcement about a Ranger Raptor for the U.S., we suspect Ford would not be testing it here unless the company thought it made sense. Our spy photographers recently caught one testing on the streets in Dearborn, Mich., during a spring snowstorm, lending credence to that assumption.

No doubt the Ford Ranger Raptor will expand into global markets it's never known as the mid-size off-roader gains popularity in Australia, South America and Africa. If it debuts here in the U.S., we don't think it will take long for it to impact sales of the Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 and Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro, its two top-tier direct competitors. The test Raptor seen in these photos lacked camouflage, showing off its good looks. Additionally, we thought you might also want to see what the WildTrak package (quite popular in Australia) will look like, as our spy shooters caught it running around uncamo'd as well (see bottom photos). Here's what they sent about the Raptor:

"Although this production-spec Ford Ranger Raptor was caught in right-hand-drive guise, seeing it testing stateside gives renewed hope for those patiently waiting for confirmation from Ford. This truck features a never-before-seen graphics package and the engine seemed to omit that all-too-familiar diesel clang heard on earlier prototypes.

"The Ranger Raptor made its official debut in Bangkok, Thailand, in February. Upon debut, Ford confirmed that it would be equipped (for global models) with an all-new twin-turbo 2.0-liter diesel good for 211 horsepower and 369 pounds-feet of torque while mated to a 10-speed automatic transmission.

"The 2019 Ranger FX4 debuted in the U.S. with a version of the 2.3-liter EcoBoost used in the Mustang and Lincoln MKC paired to a 10-speed automatic, although engine options for the Ranger Raptor would more likely consist of a version of the 2.7-liter EcoBoost V-6, found in the F-150, and (fingers crossed) the new twin-turbo 2.0-liter diesel.

"We wouldn't be surprised if the U.S.-spec Ranger Raptor made an official debut later this year."

Spiedbilde images

 

I-vW6Bgcv-XL II

I-Gtq55jC-X2 II

I-mb2qXzb-XL II

I-fD8WZj6-XL II

I-knvtL3n-XL Wildtrak II

I-bfLfMD2-XL Wildtrak II

 

Comments

@OXI Lol did you see this poor tacoma that tried to go off road https://jalopnik.com/that-doesnt-look-right-1825155281

GMS- Yeah, I raced mine against a 2011 SS. After about 68MPH the SS overtook and was gone. But it is funny to be in a little bmw and tick off the big v8 guys.

-CT

papa jim

Nobody,,,,, NOBODY is going to buy a hybrid pickup truck
not even you

Ecoboost

Aren't you the same guy who said Ford would NEVER put a 2.3 ecoboost in the upcoming Ranger?

Aren't you the same guy who said Ford would NEVER put a 2.3 ecoboost in the upcoming Ranger?

No! wasn't me! heck I am too dumb to know that Ford makes a 2.3 EB

I simply have faith in Ford, if Ford says the 2.3 EB is a perfect engine for the Ranger then I believe them

yes, if Ford made Kool-Aid I would drink it

I simply have faith in Ford, if Ford says the 2.3 EB is a perfect engine for the Ranger then I believe them

yes, if Ford made Kool-Aid I would drink it
Posted by: Ecoboost Rules | Apr 13, 2018 3:36:55 PM

Ford also thought the 5.4 Triton was a good idea. They also said the 6.0 Powerstroke was the perfect engine to replace the 7.3 Powerstroke. Both engines were legendary failures.

Ford also thought the 5.4 Triton was a good idea. They also said the 6.0 Powerstroke was the perfect engine to replace the 7.3 Powerstroke. Both engines were legendary failures.


Posted by: Brawndo | Apr 13, 2018 4:19:35 PM

But they all outsold the competition. Strong, tough and reliable.

@ Frank

Strong, tough, reliable???? OMG....I've seen it all folks. The 5.4L was far from.any off those traits. They were JUNK!!!! Face it. You and ecoboost rules DRINK way to much Ford lies cool aide.... Lmfao

What lie! Do some research and spot being lazy. It's all over this site, I ain't doing the research for you. Do it yourself.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ijjkAlxzvOA

Here ya go!

I'm not being lazy....they were not the engine u think they are. Let's take a poll and more people on this forum will agree with me than you. And if they were....why not still build them???? GM is still building the 5.3L

Please stop typing.

Catch up! (I bet you hear those words a lot when GM releases TRUCK SALES compared to FORD)

Posted by: papajim | Apr 13, 2018 8:34:49 AM


Looks minivan or car like !

Ridgeline,Ranger future VW look like minivans or car front clip...Not good !

I guess a good truck for the ladies ! And Soy Boys !!

As this article shows it was the Australian Wildtrack testing with the Ranger Raptor in the US

https://www.motor1.com/news/239016/ford-ranger-wildtrak-caught-testing/

The Ranger Raptor in Australia pricing starts at an incredible $76 000 AUD or $53 000 USD. I do believe if a 2.7 or 3.5 EcoThirst was offered it would be cheaper.

One of these V6 gasoline fuel guzzlers will not go astray in the Aussie market as we need some high horse power utes.

I even think a low rider Ranger based on the XL entry model with a 2.7 V6 and a handling package would sell. Call it a Tremor or a Lightning if it had at least a mid spec trim package.

The Ranger Raptor with even a 2.7 would have a F Series Raptor for breakfast off road. The F Series or for that matter any US half ton 4x4 will find it hard to against most of the Aussie 4x4 midsizers.

@BAFO - No one buys a fullsize 4X4 pickup to get an "ultimate", no holds, off road performer. And there's much better choices for that than a midsize 4X4 pickup, when off roading ability is an absolute priority.

There's always compromises to be made. Anyone will agree it's not all "win/win" with the midsize choice.

But the point of Raptors is "high speed" desert running, pre-running race events, or just plain, full sideways rotation, catching air, and other off-pavement hijinks, which Raptors facilitate better than any other, package "turnkey" trucks.

$53K isn't bad at all considering Americans gladly pay way more than that for far less capable 1/2 ton 4X4s, but with lots more bling/gadgetry.

Except Raptors come in priced at a fraction of what you would pay for a similarly aftermarket modded truck, wide track, wide body and whatnot, plus the added benefit of a full factory warranty and unmatched resale value.

crunchtime and TNTGMC,
Even a 3 litre 6cyl BMW 7 Series will smoke Rustang and Schmamaro. And the 7 Series weighs more! 4.5 sec 0-60.

https://www.autoblog.com/2016/05/02/bmw-quad-turbo-diesel-confirmed/

Oh, it's a DIESEL!

Robert Ryan,
Looking at the Ranger Rupture those running boards should of been more slider orientated.

The Wildtrak looks disgusting, I have yet to see a Wildtrak in Australia with a complete colour coded paint job.

Somehow I don't think the Ranger Raptor in this article is for the US market.

It might be one of ours in the US for some of the Dearborn people to do laps of honour in are the place and to increase interest and tease.

Not a fan as I have stated here and elsewhere of the Raptor. Merdedes X Class is the flavour of the month in Australia

@big al

Hate to break it to u but the new mustang and camaro go 0 to 60 from 4.4/to 3.9/ depending on stick or new 10 SPD....so your 7 series won't beat them....older ones yes! But u a comparing a new 7 series

http://www.google.com/amp/www.motortrend.com/cars/chevrolet/camaro/2018/2018-chevrolet-camaro-ss-1le-vs-2018-ford-mustang-gt-performance-pack-comparison/amp/


nobody mentioned the great gas mileage the new Ranger will get with the 2.3 EB
It's going to get at least 25 MPG and maybe as high as 32 MPG

think how wonderful it will be with a truck with an engine that gets 30 MPG and will blow the V8's off the road

That 2.3 will not blow V8s off the road! It won't get that great of gas mileage either!! If I remember right the mustang isnt getting that good with it in it!!

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/ford/mustang/2016/2016-ford-mustang-ecoboost-first-test-review/

http://www.google.com/amp/s/jalopnik.com/2015-ford-mustang-ecoboost-the-jalopnik-review-1695429065/amp

Its only getting around 24 mpgs...so in a truck that is a stretch!

Mar 6, 2017 - The BMW 435d is just pipped to the post for quickest diesel, but it's a rapid car nonetheless. It completes the 0-62mph dash in 4.7 seconds thanks to its 313hp 3.0-litre diesel that can also return fuel economy of 50.4mpg on average. It comes with xDrive all-wheel drive as standard, as well as an eight-speed ...

https://www.carwow.co.uk/best/fastest-diesel-cars

My thinking is the new Ranger will cost much less than a F-150
My paid-for used F-150 is worth more money when I trade it in than what a new Ranger costs, so the dealer might write me a $5000 check for the difference.
I can ride off the dealer with a paid-for new Ranger and an extra $5K in my pocket

The Ranger will cost slightly less than a similar F150. Ford will not sell these unless they can be as profitable as the F150, especially since they will be taking some sales away from the F150. 9/10's the size of an F150, and 9/10's the price is my bet. But for someone wanting a slightly smaller truck they will sell well, just like the other brands.

I say put the 3.0L V6 EcoBoost in it with at least 400 hp / 400 lb-ft.

It's a fan truck, just like the F150 Raptor...

Another lame Ford with no locker and plastic hub gears, oh and it's like 6 years to late. Ford sucks and never learns just cheap china trash!

Yes. The Ranger is going after GM and Toyota. My question is...
Will it cut into those all important Ridgeline sales?

El Jefe

The Ridgeline is no contender, it's NOT a truck, it's a SUV with a small bed for girly men.
The only ones buying them are the ones that drink the Honda Kool-Aid where they belong to a Honda Cult. If the Ridgeline was made from cardboard and had a lawnmower engine they would still buy and love it just because Honda makes it.

I hope this Raptor has the 2.3 turbo engine and really rips! I remember guys on this site's comments pages who said the 2.3 was too wimpy for a Ranger (much less, a Raptor).

We can only hope!
Posted by: papajim | Apr 12, 2018 8:57:51 AM

The 2.3 is a better choice than the 3.3 V6 and a better truck motor with it's torque than the competitors V6 offerings. The 2.7 is still the perfect engine for this truck. I personally would pay a $1,000-$1,500 option for it. In a 4,800 lb 4x4 F-150 it achieves 19/24mpg. In a 4,500lb 4x4 Ranger it could get 20/25 and achieve it a lot easier than the 2.3 will achieve it's mpg ratings. Which, based off the Explorer, I would expect will end up around 20/26mpg in a 4x4 Ranger. A 2.7EB Ranger with a 3.73 gear option would be awesome.

The 2.7 is still the perfect engine for this truck.

@2.7 ecoboost

Wrong. It costs too much to build. The 2.7 has a lot of cool technology but Ford needs an engine they can sell in the base Ranger and still make a profit on the vehicle.

The mid size market includes Chevys, Toyotas, and Nissans that have cheap base engines. Ford must compete across the Ranger line pricewise.

The 2.7 is still the perfect engine for this truck.

@ 2.7 Ecoboost

I agree with you it would work well for the Ranger Raptor. This would really force GM to put a higher output 4.3L motor into the ZR2. That's the motor its needs they could easily get 325 HP and over 325 TQ out of that motor. Plus, its a bulletproof motor and N/A so cost would be cheap!!

a higher output 4.3L motor into the ZR2. That's the motor its needs they could easily get 325 HP and over 325 TQ out of that motor. Plus, its a bulletproof motor and N/A so cost would be cheap!!
Posted by: TNTGMC

@tntgmc

Actually the Gen five 4.3 is already a high output truck engine. To really boost the performance of the 4.3 would require a supercharger or turbo.

Cam, heads and intake would not offer that big a boost on an engine that was designed from Day One to be a torque-biased truck engine.

@ papajim

Where does it say its a H.O. motor. I am interested in that bc I have never read anywhere where it has said that?? I still think there is alot more potential left for the motor N/A!

I think it's rated at around 1 hp per cubic inch. For an NA truck engine that was built from scratch to bias for torque, that's pretty sweet.

Cam/heads/exhaust/intake mods will not really gain you very much in a truck engine.

If you lean too far towards higher RPM performance (more HP) you'll lose something on the bottom and mid range performance. Typical trade-offs.

I still think there is alot more potential left for the motor N/A!
Posted by: TNTGMC | Apr 16, 2018

I agree with one caveat! If you're talking about building a 2500 pound pre war Ford roadster, or an old lightweight pickup from the 1950s then giving up some torque in favor of HP is fine.

Interesting. Well we all know what a turbo 4.3L can do!! GM knows turbos!! Get it done then!

The Grand Nationals,Turbo Trans Am, Syclones, and Typhoons where outrageous/wicked cars of their times and some even outran Ferrari's!!

correct. Which goes back to my first reply. The 4.3 with even a mild supercharger boost would be a rocket.

I owned a new 1988 S10 with the first-gen 4.3 and a four-speed.

it would fly because it was so light, and because the engine produced a load of torque at low rpm. In those days the Buick Grand Nationals ruled the streets and 1/8 mile drags.

Except Raptors come in priced at a fraction of what you would pay for a similarly aftermarket modded truck, wide track, wide body and whatnot, plus the added benefit of a full factory warranty and unmatched resale value.

Posted by: DenverIIIMike | Apr 13, 2018 9:43:27 PM

Today's F-150 Raptor is still FAR FAR inferior to a genuine widebody desert truck. The control arms look like nice pieces but the ball joints and bushings Ford puts in them get chewed up quite fast. I know guys that only get 30k miles out of a set of ball joints. Also, a legit desert truck uses uniball or Heim joints, not ball joints. The IWE front hubs are cheap plastic and will break constantly. Most guys get tired of their 4WD going out, so they replace them with aftermarket manual hubs. A real desert truck would also have hydraulic bump stops, more shocks, an axle-over arrangement in the back, etc. The Raptor is the truck you take out to the desert, park, and hop in your real desert truck.

A genuine desert truck "specialty" wouldn't be possible from a major automaker. They obviously can't have the shocks sticking through the bed, and any harsh vibrations through aftermarket type built-proof joints/mounts would cost them "customer satisfaction".

Raptors still have to function as normal F-150s (and Rangers) for the most part, especially for their 1st owners.

Be glad Ford offers the Raptor with as many features as it does. It's doubtful there's profit for Ford on the Raptor package, or they wouldn't force a Lariat (trim) level of luxury.

Wrong. It costs too much to build. The 2.7 has a lot of cool technology but Ford needs an engine they can sell in the base Ranger and still make a profit on the vehicle.

The mid size market includes Chevys, Toyotas, and Nissans that have cheap base engines. Ford must compete across the Ranger line pricewise.


Posted by: papajim | Apr 16, 2018 2:04:04 PM

I said I'd pay an extra $1,000-$1,500 for it as an OPTION.....C'Mon man!!!

papajim,
A 4.3 doesn't fit in a Colorado.

Remember you stated a 2.7 EcoThirst V6 doesn't fit in a Ranger.

So, how the hell are you going to fit a 4.3 into the Colorado. with a supercharger!!!

What a goose.........or better still a gander.

Big Al. Seriously---get help. Reading for comprehension dude! You either do it on purpose, or you're just dumb. There was no discussion of putting engines in Colorados. Bye bye

GUTS

GLORY

WATCH OUT FOR THE NEXT GEN DAKOTA

WHICH WILL DESTROY THE RANGER

I would rather see a 3.7L N/A engine in it, but that 2.3L EB in the Mustang does pretty good at over 300HP and 350ft.lb. of torque.

At least TOYOTA still offers a MANUAL. LOSE!!!

At least TOYOTA still offers a MANUAL. LOSE!!!

Posted by: Bob | Apr 20, 2018 7:09:20 PM

I agree. Had a 6spd in my Frontier PRO4X and loved it. Probably wouldn't want a manual shift in my F-150, but in a mid size, I think it has a place.



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