First Look: All-New 2011 Ford Ranger "T6" Global Pickup Truck

First Look: All-New 2011 Ford Ranger
By Sue Mead for

Ford unveiled its all-new global 2011 Ford Ranger "T6" Friday at the Australian International Auto Show in Sydney. A global team based in Australia developed the midsize pickup that replaces two regional Ranger platforms currently used by Ford.

An early reveal of a Ranger Double Cab XLT 4x4 was held Oct.13 at Cockatoo Island, in the Sydney Harbor, for the automotive press.

The Ranger sports "Ford Truck Tough" styling cues that include Ford’s iconic three-bar horizontal grille and wide nostrils, but the new Ranger is more fluid and aerodynamic than the blunt-shaped design of the current U.S. F-150 light-duty and Super Duty heavy-duty trucks.

Global Small Truck Market

Ford says the Ranger is the most capable small pickup it has ever built. The completely redesigned rig will go on sale next year in 188 countries. In Australia, it will be sold alongside the lighter Falcon Ute car-based truck. The new Ranger will not be sold in the U.S. or Canada.

Ford’s compact pickup, known as a “Kangaroo Chaser” during its early Australian heritage, dates back to Henry Ford’s 1917 Model TT one-ton, the first chassis built specifically for a truck; the 1925 Model T Runabout, which added a pickup-body cargo box, adjustable tailgate, four stake pockets and heavy-duty leaf springs; and the 1928 Model A, the first closed-cab pickup, with a safety glass windshield, roll-up side windows and a three-speed transmission. In Australia, the first “ute” was developed, in 1934, by Ford Australia putting a utility back onto a V8 coupe, which was exported to the U.S. In 1979, the first authentic compact pickup, the Ford Courier, was offered in Australia; the Ranger nameplate was introduced in 2007.


The 2011 Ranger sports a freshened contemporary exterior and interior design; a new range of diesel and gas powertrains with increased performance, more torque and improved fuel economy; new technologies that provide greater comfort and better handling; and is longer, wider and taller than the model it replaces. The new Ranger rides on an all-new frame and chassis that gives it an enhanced and upgraded off-road capability. It also gets as a wider and deeper box, plus increased payload and towing capacity.

Marin Burela, CEO and president of Ford Australia, said the design and development of the new pickup was led by Australia’s Ford Product Development Center and tested in the demanding terrains of Australia as well as in other countries where the truck will be sold.

"In Australia, Ford reinforces its tough-truck credentials by revitalizing the Ford Courier and rebranding Ford Ranger around the world,” Burela said. "It’s anchored by work credibility, versatility and bolder styling, which will make it more appealing to a dual-purpose user."

"Compact trucks are a global phenomenon from Australia to Argentina," said Joe Hinrichs, Ford group vice president and president of Asia Pacific and Africa regions. "The new Ranger was built with feedback from customers around the world that wanted more truck toughness but also a vehicle that could be used for work and personal transport, with family safety as well."

The truck will be built at three assembly plants. Thailand will be the first plant to come on line next year, followed by South Africa and South America. Ford reps declined to identify an on-sale date, but said production will begin in Thailand next summer.


Ford said the Ranger raises the bar in this globally competitive segment and offers the most "high-tech product" in its class, the result of the capability of its all-new family of engines that bring increased performance and fuel economy, a new six-speed transmission, gains in quality and new technologies that improve ride and handling and safety.

"We looked at the evolving needs of this buyer and made it more sure-footed and cutting-edge," Hinrichs said. "The new Ranger has more precise steering, ride comfort, new side curtain airbags, electronic stability control, emergency brake assist, trailer-sway control and the segment’s first rearview camera system. We also know that fuel economy is a reason to buy.”

Hinrichs identified Toyota’s Hilux as the top competitor to the Ranger in Australia. The new model also has the segment’s deepest water-fording depth.

Pickup trucks (combined two-wheel and four-wheel drive) are the second-best-selling segment of the market in Australia after small cars, offering Ford a significant growth opportunity, though Ford executives declined to project numbers for Australia and global sales.

Key competitors and their year-to-date (September) sales volume in Australia are Toyota Hilux (30,127); Nissan Navaro (15,932); Mitsubishi Triton (12,384) and the Holden Colorado (10,380). The Ranger has sold 10,925 units in 2010, and since 2007 about 52,000 Rangers have been sold. (Total Courier sales since its introduction were 110,528.)


Ford calls the introduction of the 2011 Ranger a “rolling launch” for revealing information to the press and buyers. The Blue Oval chose Australia for the Ranger's first unveiling, but it has declined to disclose many specifications, including horsepower, fuel economy and pricing. A staggered model launch in the second half of 2011 will limit opportunity to grow, but Ford expects that 2012 will be the big year for growth of the Ranger globally.


As the 2011 Ranger’s outside dimensions have grown, the new platform has created a roomier interior and easy access into the new truck. It has more shoulder and second-row legroom and comes with seating for up to five, depending on the model. The cabin has been restyled with a more contemporary look, with higher levels of craftsmanship, modern materials and more features. It is also set up to be more driver-oriented.

“It’s a hard-working truck designed to make its hard-working owner proud,” said chief designer Craig Metros, a 24-year Ford veteran who has played a significant role in Ford pickup design around the world. “It’s not often in the pickup truck world that designers get the opportunity to re-invent a vehicle from the ground up”.

Metros, who served as design chief for the Ford F-150 light-duty pickup in North America, led the Australia-based design team. He describes the new Ranger's design as “21st Century Tough. It’s the result of a design process that answers pickup truck owners’ wants and expectations from all around the world. We explored a bandwidth ranging from Ford North America’s very traditional and much-liked F-Series to influences from Europe’s very successful kinetic design language.”


The Ranger is often used as a sport pickup in Europe, Metros says. Therefore, top-of-the-range Limited and Wildtrak models are tailored with leather interiors, larger wheels and many features typically found on luxury cars.

“In others parts of the world, including Africa and central Asia, or among fleet buyers, Ranger trucks are for the most part strictly utilitarian, with a hose-out interior,” Metros said. “We looked outside the automotive industry at contemporary designs in many consumer products. From power tools to wristwatches, we wanted to apply that same sort of ruggedness and purposeful styling to the interior.”

The Ranger’s designers drew inspiration from the look of power tools from Bosch and DeWalt for interior styling elements, as well as the G-Shock watch for design cues used for the instrument cluster, to create an image of delicate instruments set within a rugged housing. A tastefully crafted console is the palette for the truck’s navigation screen, audio functions and controls for the heating, ventilation and air-conditioning system.

Manual-transmission models get a new short-throw gearshift, and a new lever-style parking brake is used for optimal driver ergonomics. Double Cab models have 20 different areas of interior storage, with door-pocket cupholders designed to hold a water bottle and an available center console that can keep up to six beverage cans cool. The glove box will also hold a laptop computer. Under the rear seats is stowage for electronic items or small packages that can easily be accessed. Also available on some models is a rear-seatback center armrest that folds down and incorporates two cupholders.



Imagine a Ford Explorer Sport Trac with a power dome on the hood, and you have a good first image to draw upon for the 2011 Ranger Double Cab unveiled in Australia. The front end has a short, low-slung overhang, whereas the pickup’s belt line and rails of the box were raised significantly. A clamshell-shaped hood with a cut line in the fenders is a thoughtful design element that gives good access to the engine bay. A horizontal cut line links the headlamps and front fascia. Headlamps, mirrors and fenders (or mudguard flares) have grown larger and give an integrated look across all versions and contribute to its sporty and bolder look.

Metros said the entire front end of the vehicle, particularly the hood, was very challenging to design because of pedestrian-protection requirements and the desired aerodynamics to aid with fuel economy and reduce drag. The Ranger’s side mirrors are larger for improved rear vision and were sculpted to reduce wind noise.

The Double Cab is the first body style to be revealed; the all-new family will include three body styles, 4x2 and 4x4 configurations, high- and low-ride models and “a broad series array” that will range from hose-out work trucks to fully featured personal vehicles, Ford says.

The new pickup is larger in nearly every dimension and has a wider, deeper box capacity, as well as increased cargo capacity. The Double Cab model is 7.5 inches longer, 1.7 inches wider and 2.5 inches taller than the current Double Cab. Its wheelbase grows 8.6 inches to 126.7 inches, which Ford claims is the longest in its class.


The front and rear track on the 4x4 model is 61.4 inches and 62.5 inches on the 4x2 model. The longer wheelbase and increased track were engineered to improve driving and passenger comfort.

Ranger’s chassis setup comes from the expertise of Ford’s global dynamics engineers from Australia, South Africa, Europe and North America, in addition to insight from Ford’s manufacturing facilities in Thailand and South America. Ford says its goals of creating SUV-like handling and comfort, reducing mass and increaseg structural integrity were achieved as a result of the new frame, new front and rear suspension, and new steering system.

All critical driveline components (powertrain, transfer case, oil pan, exhaust system and fuel tank) are tucked between the frame rails to reduce the risk of damage during off-roading. Underbody shielding protects other important components. Minimum ground clearance on 4x4 models, as well as 4x2 Hi-Riders designed for off-road use, is 9 inches with the base 16-inch tires. Seventeen-inchers are also available. Dual front hooks — each rated at 13,277 pounds — come standard on the Australian-market Rangers on 4x4 and 4x2 models. Also, the pickup’s electrical components and air intake are mounted high in the engine compartment to reduce the risk of water penetration and potential electrical shorts.

Ride and Handling

Ford’s driving dynamics team set out to develop a "driver’s truck" with agility, precision and comfort when unloaded or working. All powertrain and driveline variants were developed on a test vehicle before the first prototype was built to help engineers design for a wide variety of handling details, including turning circle and optimal suspension geometry, evaluating scrub radius, toe and camber settings, and the "elastokinematic" properties of the front and rear suspension. Its new suspension was developed in conjunction with Mazda.

“Through careful analysis and tuning, we found it was possible to build the first fleet of prototype vehicles close to final properties for suspension geometry, including changes under traction, braking and hard cornering,” said Matt Reilly, vehicle dynamics supervisor. “This was achieved by using a combination of newly developed computer-aided-engineering (CAE) models, the Kinematics and Compliance test rigs available at all Ford development centers and steering robots for precise and repeatable test inputs.”

“The result is a Built Ford Tough pickup truck with a single design that provides the best possible road manners," Reilly continued. "For traditional buyers, the benefits are huge with no compromises in payload capacity or towing ability. For sport utility enthusiasts who prefer smoother, more refined road handling, the all-new Ranger delivers with less of the harshness typically found in trucks.”

New hard-rubber "hydro mounts" on the frame between the rail and the cabin bring improved comfort. Filled with hydraulic fluid, the mounts help mitigate vertical and horizontal motions more effectively, thereby reducing body shake and smoothing the harshness typically associated with a truck ride.

Ranger’s longer, stiffer frame is 100 percent new, with a coil-over-shock front suspension, rack-and-pinion steering and a new rear leaf spring suspension. It has the largest brakes in its class, with vented disc brakes up front and drum brakes in the rear.

Increased wheelbase and track also help driving dynamics, both on-road and off-road. The Ranger team also made advanced technologies available in the truck: Electronic Stability Program, antilock braking system and traction control, as well as optional trailer-sway control, Adaptive Load Control and rollover mitigation, all of which bring increased safety and control for hauling heavy loads.

The Ranger also introduces the segment’s first rearview camera system and rear parking sensors to provide additional visibility and alert the driver to obstacles while reversing.



The Ranger comes with two new engines and a choice of six-speed automatic or manual transmissions that improve performance, fuel economy and driving range.

Ford’s Duratorq TDCi diesel engines include a 2.2-liter inline-four-cylinder with up to 276 pounds-feet of torque and a 3.2-liter inline-five-cylinder with a robust 346 pounds-feet of torque.

Ford says its new economical 2.5-liter Duratec four-cylinder gas engine has more power than its major competitors and is flex-fuel capable.

Gasoline-powered Rangers get a standard five-speed manual transmission.

The Ranger will achieve a significantly increased payload capacity of up to 3,306 pounds on selected models. While Ford has not announced the truck’s top towing capacity, it says towing will be “exceptional.”

Ford also reports that the Ranger will come with more engine/transmission combinations as well as a variety of final drive ratios, from a stout 3.31 ring and pinion to an amazingly short 5.30 rear axle.

Ford Ranger Leaves the U.S.

The Ford Ranger first went on sale in the U.S. in February 1982. More than 6.5 million Rangers have been sold in the U.S., with its best sales year in 1999, with 348,358 pickups sold.

"In the past few years, we have averaged around 75,000 Rangers sales annually, with year-to-date sales of 43,000 through the end of September," said Derek Kuzak, Ford group vice president of product development, when we asked about why the new Ranger isn’t coming to the U.S.

"The compact pickup market in the U.S. has been declining for more than 15 years, having gone from almost 8 percent of the industry in 1994 to just more than 2 percent through August this year," Kuzak said. "So we have decided to prioritize our investment in full-size pickups and continue to develop the F-150 in all areas, including outstanding fuel economy. We are just now launching an all-new engine lineup for the F-150 that improves the fuel efficiency of the F-150 lineup by 20 percent. And we are offering the F-150 XLT Custom Package with the all-new 3.7-liter V-6 engine aimed at the entry-level personal-use buyer.

"This new F-150 series will be ideal for those Ranger owners interested in a pickup. For those Ranger customers interested more in affordable transportation than specifically a truck, we now either have, or soon will offer, many new affordable vehicles, including the Fiesta, Focus, seven-passenger Grand C-MAX and the Transit Connect.

"One additional important element of our decision was that this Ranger is bigger than our current product, which we'll build through the 2011 model year, and moves much closer in size to the current F-150," Kuzak added. "So its use here would become even more limited, especially when compared to the increasingly fuel-efficient F-150."


"For those Ranger customers interested more in affordable transportation than specifically a truck, we now either have, or soon will offer, many new affordable vehicles, including the Fiesta, Focus, seven-passenger Grand C-MAX and the Transit Connect."


There's a con going on with the USA Ranger, I read somewhere that the existing USA Ranger is about 88% the size of the current F-series, the global Ranger is just on 90% of the current F-series, so size has gone up. But by not much!

I think the problem is this global Ranger potentially would steal a hell of a lot of base model F-series sales and that would not be what Ford USA would want from it's sgniture (and most profitable) vehicle.

the old ranger in AU started well over 20,000$$$$ and that not factoring what the new one will cost the new one is larger and lager engines two but only a 6.5ft bed cant even go to home depot to pick up long lumber.
the ranger towing will be good for a jet ski and if you go with the 3.2 you could tow a small boat.
the F-150 v6 can tow medium to full size boat
most like the cost of the new ranger will be the same or even more then the f-150 when you factor in the the diesel it go high really fast look at the f-350 diesel 10,000$$$$
and it not all emission bec i live in the second highest emission standers in the state when i bring in the diesel they don't even check it bec there are no standers on diesel i have a 7.3l even the 6.0l and the 6.4l do not get checked and all of those engine cost more and more it. my dads diesel cost only 4,000 bec he went with manual saved 1,000
that was ten years ago factor in inflation and cost of metals sky-roketing and also factor in twin turbos larger direct injectors that all dont have to do with emission and i almost forgot all the people that say more tq more hp more tq more hp more more more more more
also cost more money to
and you come out with a price tag close to the 10,000

I drive a 2004 extended cab Ranger now. It is the best truck I have ever owned. I like the dimensions of the truck. I do not want to drive an F-150 regardless of gas mileage. I want another Ranger extended cab with better gas mileage. If I cannot find the Ford truck sized for my use I will be forced to buy something other than a Ford. If Ford would bring a ute here that would probably be the next best thing. But, I won't buy an F-150. What part of this market does Ford not understand. The F-150 is too large for city and daily driving for a large segment of the market. I want this Ranger and I would love to see it with the diesel here in the U.S.

Yes it is a very nice looking truck and I would love to buy one if Ford will not bring it here I will be buying a Nissan Frontier not interested in a F150 just as I would not be interested in a Nissan Titan.

"Whats with Fords naming of there new engines? Duratorq and Duratec, sounds familiar. Can't they spin the names of their own engine brand being the Power Stroke instead of GMs Duramax? Sounds like they're trying to remind people of a GM powertrain." - GREG

Greg, Ford has used the name Duratec since 1993, and Duratorq since 2000. Hardly inspired by GM.

16 mpg city is the most fuel efficient F150 with the new ecoboost 6 and that is a 2 wheel drive model. Too big, too inefficient to replace compact trucks.

No Chicken Tax tariff for trucks built in Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, and Australia. Ford is building Ranger in both Australia and South Africa, tariffs are not the reason Ford is eliminating the Ranger in United States.

Ford will sell both the global Ranger and the F150 in Mexico, a much smaller market than United States. United States alone would generate a predicted 100,000 plus sales of the redesigned Ranger.
There is a market.

Ford is not selling the new Ranger here because some executive or bean counter determined the current Ranger is cutting into sales Ford's F150 cash cow.

I totally agree with elevatorman larry I want a ranger cause of its size
I need a truck half the time so a truck half the size is perfect! haha lol all kidding aside the ranger is the ideal size for me as I do spend some time in the city

just drop the 3.7 in there and you become the new market leader lol

It is not just Ford that is not bringing the T6, it is everyone else! Otherwise, the US market would have been without US desigen Tacoma, Ranger, Dakota, S10/Colorado.
Why such a small amount of diesel cars are imported to the US? Just BMW, some Mercedes and VWs. In Europe, ANY manufacture has a diesel option, including Ford of Europe, Chrysler, Peugeot, Citroen, Opel, Renault - even Hyundai has diesels for cryin' out loud!

You all are missing the picture here. The reason we will never have this vehicle in the U.S is because of the EPA. We have the most stringent regulations of diesel engines in the world. I guarantee you that this truck would not meet current EPA specifications for a U.S. Vehicle. Same goes for the Toyota and other great pickups from the rest of the world.

It is also probably a matter of money. Buying a diesel powered truck nowdays is much more expensive. Expensive to buy, to run, insure and diesel fuel is much more expensive.

No U.S. sales? thanks Ford for giving up the market to Japan, India, and Korea as Hyundai will have a truck here is a couple years. Who’s making these decisions? You can see how the new Ford cars are being received. The size difference between the F150 and the Ranger won't be an issue. Many people, i.e. urban dwellers don't want a full size truck. Parking, gas mileage, and other factors weigh in heavily in their decisions. Come on people!

the only reason that they don't bring this truck? over here is because it will canabalize F-150 sales. They don't want to give up the bragin rites to outselling Chevy GMC half tons.

Stop complaining. Obviously most truck buyers want and purchase full-size trucks. If you want a small truck so badly, then put your money where your mouth is. If all of y'all were out there purchasing Rangers or Sport Tracs then Ford wouldn't be killing those off in the U.S. If you're so intent on exacting revenge on Ford for killing off these trucks in the U.S., then go buy another brand's small truck. And that means by actually purchasing one, not just coming on here and complaining and saying that you're going to, but actually purchasing. And Tacomas aren't real compact trucks anymore so get over that stupid wording. They're about as big these days as a 2003 full-size F150

"For those Ranger customers interested more in affordable transportation than specifically a truck, we now either have, or soon will offer, many new affordable vehicles, including the Fiesta, Focus, seven-passenger Grand C-MAX and the Transit Connect."

Yeah, if you're a girly girl who hauls nothing but Barbie dolls and accessories to the house. Guys need Rangers to haul lumber and cow manoo and off-road and stuff! Try that in a Transit the senseless marketing going on at Ford! Now replace Kuzak with the Incredible Hulk!

Would like this truck in the US... I wish we had something to choose from along the lines of the Tacoma. US doesn't have one and why?

It's about time Ford gets to the level of Toyota pickups!

Coil-sprung front, the Tacoma had that suspension back in 1995!

This will force a Hi-Lux redesign and let the fun begin in this segment...

It's looks like a Hi-Lux but oh well I am impressed by Ford yet at the same time upset at them!

This is the type of competition Toyota needs here in the U.S. It is boring being the only OFF-ROAD capable small pickup in the U.S. market. Tacoma's have impressive off-road manners from the factory and this Ranger would have been sweet to see out on the trails...

Ford is gay for shutting down the Ranger here. Another reason I still choose the Tacoma, it will be here for quite some time.

Ford, you loose once again (in the U.S. market).

I agree with a lot of the comments made here about Ford trying to sell us their idea of what we should by vs. what people want.

As someone said, if 75000 units a year isn't enough, how could it be for the Ford Transit Connect or some other limited number SUV / car. I am positive they will never sell 75000 units of the Transit in the USA / Canada, no matter how good an idea it is.

As for price and the stupid chicken tax issue. If they can import the Transit Connect, they can do it for the Ranger. All it would take is to import knock-down kits and assemble them in the USA / Canada / Mexico. Why not at the current St. Paul location for that matter. They have experienced & dedicated people that are trained to assemble small trucks.

I can tell you Ford Canada is actually advertising and boasting about the fact that the Ranger is Atlantic Canada's best selling compact truck. You will find Rangers at every corner around here. People like smaller vehicles and not only for the price of fuel. So now Ford is willing to give up/loose this market to Toyota or some degree Nissan? If that is the new way to make money and retain customers, then I don't understand the first thing about business I guess.



Oxi, it's not Hi-Lux, it's just "Hilux." Maybe it was Hi-Lux years ago I am not sure. The Nissan Navara is coming out with a 250HP/405lb-ft 3.0L V6 diesel in Australia, I don't think the Hilux will be top dog too much longer.

I will also pile on and say that while I like the new F150s and the new engines for them, the F150 is about 10-20% bigger than I want. The current Ranger (which I own one of) is too small.

Look at the interior on this T6!! 5 or 6 speed manual and a car-like center stack/console. I'd be all over one of these.

To put it bluntly, this is the Ranger (or Sport Trac) that Ford needs here. Ford is lucky that the Tacoma's are so expensive or I wouldn't even be in the market for a truck....

Here is it, short and sweet, had the market demanded the Ranger it would still be alive. Don't blame Ford for not trying to satisfy a small group of people who claim they would buy it if they made it.

Small market means small selection. If you guys wanted it so bad you should have been buying them when they where around. It's not as if Ford looked at a thriving market and said, "Screw it" No they looked at a shrinking market and suck screw it.

No company in their right mind would throw good money after bad and expect to survive long.

It's too late to cry and complain about the loss of the Ranger, people should have been doing that 5 or 10 years ago.

As to the Hilux comparison , I hope Toyota finaly pulls there heads out and bases the next generation USA Tacoma off the far superior Toyota Hilux then it doesnt really matter what Ford does with the Ranger .

Small pick-up sales declining in last 15 years! Yeah ... maybe because Chevy and especially Ford have not brought out new exciting small pick-ups during that time. Cripes, how old is the current Ranger platform? I would now love to have a fresh new and stylish compact pick-up available with comfortable seats and various cab, bed, engine and suspension variations. Ford and Mazda now have such trucks and despite Ford's improved decision to give the U.S. the better cars they've built in Europe, etc., they deem the U.S. is beyond the point of buying such updated small trucks. Please Ford/Mazda, sell these in the U.S. now.

What a plan:
Let the Ranger die on the vine by not updating it and not adding a few inches, a back seat and back door and techno and better engines for decades.
Building all kinds of SUV/CUVs that have all kinds of overlap and questionable reasons to be - including that transconnect thing.
Building a great half ton truck AND expecting every prospective customer that doesn't want the old Ranger or the overlapping kiddie picker-uppers to run down to get a large $30,000 pickup to serve their needs.
Wanting to claim that they sell the most half ton pickups so much that they would embarrass themselves with all this malarkey.
Now I would like to know:
How much do these product planners, marketing experts and green-light pushers make and where can I apply for the job?

I'm Canadian and an Albertan which almost means you have to own a truck of some sort , I have a Ranger now and can never see myself ever buying an F150 or any other full size truck for the simple reason being that they are way to big for use as a dd in my opinion. Now reading that one of the reasons we won't be seeing this new ranger because its around 90% of the size of an F150 is complete BS. I must say.

The double cab they listed above has the following dimensions listed:
Wheelbase: 126.7 inches
Front Track: 61.4 inches
Rear Track: 62.5 inches
A regular cab shortbox (6.5') 2011 F150 list the following for those same dimensions:
Wheelbase: 126.0 inches
Front track: 67.0 inches
Rear track: 67.0 inches

So what will probably be the longest available T6 ranger has a wheelbase less than 1inch longer than the shortest available F150 and more than likely within the same inch or two of overall length and come in around 5-6 inches narrower as well.

It looks to me like Ford is comparing apples to oranges on this 90% scale comparison. I'm betting this exact comparison is where they got there 90% figure from and not the fact that a crewcab ranger is most likely 70-75% of the overall size of a crewcab f150 (which with a 5.5' bed has a 145inch wheelbase)! I would love to see the overall measurements for the T6 however.

Make my North american T6 an Extended cab sport 4wd with a (cause as much as I would love a diesel I know it won't happen due to emission costs) 2L Ecoboost with around 230hp and a 6speed stick please.

The reason the current Ranger sales died is because Ford sat on their a$$ for a decade, during which all other manufacturer's replaced their mid-sized trucks. If the Ranger offered a Crew Cab like the other manufacturer's, their sales would be much higher.

Ford, get with the picture! Buyers do want mid-sized trucks, I do not want to drive an F-150 around DC everyday, getting 14-16 mpg. I guess my next mid-size purchase will be the re-designed Tacoma in 2012. I would rather buy American, but if the American companies dont offer it, screw 'em.

To all those whining that they want a bigger Ranger and/or they want a crew cab Ranger, go buy a Sport Trac

Dan J:
"Its amusing that Kuzak thinks (Ranger)pickup buyers are going to buy a Transit Connect."

I'm a Ranger owner and I looked at the Transit Connect the other day and loved it.

The difference is that I own a RWD Ranger and never take it offroad, and it actually works pretty well for my needs. I'd much rather move to a diesel-powered AWD vehicle the size of the Ranger with a kid-friendly back seat that can be reconfigured to haul plywood, but it doesn't exist (and would require extreme cleverness) and the Transit Connect is the next best thing.

Now, if I owned a 4WD Ranger and actually took it off-road, then I'd be SOL.

"That dude needs to get his head out of the sand. Derek, Some (not all)of the issues with the lack of demand in the small truck segment are the result of insufficient investment in the product itself."

I agree with this 100%. I started out this process looking for a 4wd Ranger-equivalent with a diesel engine. The only reason for the 4wd is that, after 100k miles in my RWD ranger, I'm tired of having to work to keep it from fishtailing in rain/slow/ice. I can drive, I can do it -- but my regular car is much easier to drive in poor weather. So, my next truck has to be 4wd -- or FWD or AWD. 4WD is the only option that's available, and just having it on the vehicle kills my gas mileage.

These are all issues that could be fixed by investing in the product -- Ford could license Subaru's AWD technology, slap it in the Ranger, and sell me one. Or they could get US emissions-approval for one of those Durtorq engines, slap in in the Ranger, and sell me one. They could do both, and I'd probably by a Ford advocate for life. If they'd flatten out the 4'x6' bed, they'd have a perfect compact truck -- but I buy an aftermarket flatbed conversion, and I'd be VERY happy. If they want to put a useful back seat into the Ranger, they could do all this and shorten the front end of the vehicle (give it a more van-like front-end rather than a traditional long-nose truck configuration, and I'm sure an artist could make it look cool) and use THAT for the space, rather than lengthening the vehicle. If they'd do all of that, they'd have built the *perfect* vehicle for me. But this would require a substantial product-development effort, and I can see why they'd rather just sell F-150s....

But, until then, the TC is the next best thing. It has a flat 4'x6' cargo area (5' if you have the back seat in the vehicle, but it's removable with a little wrenching) -- which is the same plywood-carrying area as a lot of F-150 SuperCabs that I've looked at. The TC gets the kind of gas mileage I'm used to. The wife hasn't vetoed it. The price is reasonable, and the utility is obvious. And it's not RWD.

If I were a 4x4 guy, though, it wouldn't even be on my list. And maybe I'd like off-roading if I tried it.

Some of us need a 4 door daily driver with good fuel economy and car-like ride that'll haul a full sheet of plywood on the weekend and fit in a standard garage. You can barely haul any cargo in the current Sport Trac and the Ranger hasn't been redesigned since the 80's. Not all of us are pulling horse trailers or getting 2 tons of gravel every day to warrant an F-150.

I've been a Ford guy for 20 years but I'll be looking at the Ridgeline and Avalanche first this time...

It's a shame that Ford is getting out of the small pickup market. Their statement that since most of the Ranger's customers are using their pickup as a commuter vehicle, that they would be better served with a small car and if there is a need for hauling there is the F-150 also ! Meaning if you are a commuter that occasionally hauls small loads, Ford wants to force you to buy two vehicles. Unfortunately their marketing people goes to some of the enthusiast sites where there is alot of people just talking out of their A** just to have something to post. Reading a lot of the comments from all those with their "Tim the Toolman" mentality, We need more power and more torque to drive the two miles from the trailer park to the job at Walmart is Dis-serving those who really need to have a vehicle with economy and utility and not a toy. To those that are commuting distances to their job, 20-25 mpg is not an option ! If Manhindra ever gets their act together they may hit the jackpot from this underserved segment of the customer base.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. People just want what they can't have. If it were going to be available here, there would be very little fuss about it. The F-150 is not available in Australia. Here's what some people are saying on Australian Ford Forums:

"Really like the photochop with the F150 Raptor style grill"

"put the money in to bolting in a v8"

"Shoulda used that FORD grill from the US pickups!! Looks tough"

"Looks very Hiluxish, I would have preferred it to look more F150ish"

Just proof that nobody is ever happy.

So Ford finally made a Dakota... but without the V8. Love my Dakota V8 5sp, but Ford should not force anyone into a Transit Connect, and concerning the Transit Connect, Ford could have brought the long wheel base diesel 5sp model but choose not to do so because why? The would have to crash one more for testing, and had to certify a manual trans/diesal combo, which again Ford choose not to do.
Sounds like the bean counters have taken over Ford and kicked the Car Guys out. Shame, they were on such a roll.
If Toyota can do it Ford sure can???????????????

Show me a single cab version please.

When it will be sold in Brazil?

JWM: "You all are missing the picture here. The reason we will never have this vehicle in the U.S is because of the EPA. We have the most stringent regulations of diesel engines in the world. I guarantee you that this truck would not meet current EPA specifications for a U.S. Vehicle. Same goes for the Toyota and other great pickups from the rest of the world."

The Euro V regulations in Europe are just as strict as the EPA regulations are here. They're strict about different things, but they're just as struct.

IIRC, mainland Europe, diesel is half the price of gasoline (due to taxes) and modern turbodiesels are fun to drive, so European drivers demand diesels. If you're a car manufacturer, and you've gotta pick one standard to meet, you'd probably pick the European standard.

There are some car manufacturers (like Volkswagen and Mercedes) that meet both European and California standards. I've owned a Jetta TDI, and it was a very nice-driving car when it ran -- but a Volkswagen does have its drawbacks.

Another quick thought on the demise of the smaller pick up, when was the last time you saw an ad or promotion for a Ranger? I have three F-150's. 96-99-04. I truly want a smaller p/u and this new Ranger would fit perfectly. I know it would disappointed quiet a few, but it will be awhile before we get a smaller diesel. I am truly worried about the future of the county and will not under any circumstances buy foreign, just can't send any more of our dollars overseas. Thank God the government hasn't decided to stop us from rebuilding and upgrading yet.
On this statement of 90% the size of an F-150, I once read that the 97-03 series was 90% the size of the 04 and up series. Does this mean the new Ranger is the same size as my 99?

What will you bet that once the present U.S.-built Ranger goes out of production, and the Twin Cities Assembly plant is closed down, UAW workers terminated, and the buildings sold off, that Ford decides "Due to public demand" (and failure to convert Ranger buyers to F-150's) to bring back the Ranger name with the "New T-6 World Ranger" but built in Mexico or somewhere (by non-UAW labor)?

My money says that's the game Mulally is playing...

Given Ford's vast assembly facilities already in Mexico, it probably won't be long (if it ain't already) before Ford is just another automobile importer.

I have been in the current Hilux. It is nowhere near what it was in the 80s and 90s. the interior has plastics worse than a Fisher Price toy. I promise you that the Tacoma is better and also better packed for the off road than the Hilux. Part from the diesel engine, you don't miss anything.
The FX4 Ranger is a jem off roader - even though it is a little dinosaour.

Mike888 The current non-US Ranger can pull a 25-26ft 5th wheeler, far cry from a small boat. It is interesting the comment that the towing capacity is "exceptional" for the new Ranger . No figure was given, as tow ratings vary from country to country, still the load capacity of 3,300lbs is pretty stout.
This is the first shot in the up upcoming global pickup war. Toyota, Mitsubishi and Nissan are all working on what they think will be even better vehicles as far as payload, towing and off road abilities go.

If the current model can tow a 26ft 5th wheeler. What can the new Ranger with a 3,300lb payload and "exceptional towing " do ?
I agree with other comments that the Global Ranger, the "90% as big as a F150" would cannbalize US F150 sales and it would make no sense to introduce it.

this truck seems pretty close to an explorer sport trac, any thoughts?

Let's not jump to conclusions this truck cannot meet.

The Hilux has a reputation overseas:

Why do we, here in the states, have to own such large, slothy vehicles (like my F150 that weighs in @ 5600 lbs/ 2540 kgs) when the pic "Robert Ryan" has presented shows a Ranger hitched up to a 5th wheel camper.

Better yet, why does the USA have to own such large pick up trucks to begin with? Most owners drive them unloaded and not pulling any thing, yet claim they need the "added capacity" of the "highest tow rating" yada yada yada. I see some cynical folks on here like Alex and CE claim to just go buy a Sport Trac, or claim that the new Ranger is 90% the size of the new F150 (which I doubt, my 2001 Supercrew 4x4 truck is smaller than a current F150 in the same configuration)....yet...why NOT have the option? You guys slam the idea, yet the only thing CE can come up with is rhetoric and the only thing Alex can do is surf the web and get prices in Australia and take Ford's propaganda as gospel.

Well, Alex and CE, why not offer these vehicles in the states when Toyota and Nissan do and give Ford truck buyers an option besides a 40K F150 that is a slothy, large pig of a truck? My bet, is that it WOULD defintely hurt F150 sales and Ford knows it. So, why should a consumer like myself feel any obligation to Ford when they care so little for a WHOLE segment? Some folks like myself don't need 11300 lbs of towing that 90% of you (as in population) never use anyway (rather for bragging rights, you were duped), and would love to stick with Ford and buy a T6 Ranger for my truck needs.


I agree! I see so many fullsize driving around doing nothing. They need all this power for what? To cover their incompentant driving...

Most are handicap rigs anyway, for LAZY drivers that seek leather and heated seats and other bullcrap that the average farmer could care less about.

I am an off-roader and unless you strip down your full-size, your not gonna go far. Most still think big truck, big engine and big tires... oh really?

Big truck: have fun painting those scratches when you cannot fit bewteen the trees on a trail. Most full-size take their front 1/4 panels off and rear bed to lighten the weight and not have to worry about those pesky trees and shrubs that love to dent and scratct and do not forget about the rocks.

Big engine: again to hide the lack of off-road driving ability. I have seen 4-cylinder Toyota's, Jeeps tear it up off-road without even revving their engines much. It's called low-end gearing, something the big engine guys seem to not understand (as well the weight factor and having proper ground clearance for that weight.)

Big tires: yes full-size need them or else they would sink with their weight and get stuck. Big tires means big investement in suspension and drivetrain and the larger the tires, the more useless the truck becomes on the road!

@Red_4x4 As far as towing numbers go , a Ford US spokesman was coy in describing that aspect as regards the overseas Ranger. but specific in the payload of the vehicle. Different countries have different measures. A F150 like you one you have would have a capacity of 7000lbs if calculated here based on GVWR. A current 2500HD Silverado 6.6 Duramax , 9.900lbs Manufacturer recommendations do not count. The Triton and the Nissan Navarra are like the Ranger rated at 6,600lbs. Navarras can be seen towing 26ft 5th Wheelers here and are used in Europe to do the same thing.

@Red_4x4 I don't believe you should feel any obligation to Ford whatsoever. If they're not offering what you want and what is ideal for your needs and another company is, then by all means go to the other company. My point earlier was to do exactly that--go purchase a small truck from another company. If enough people actually go out and purchase a small truck (versus just whining, complaining, or just saying that they're going to do it without actually doing it) then Ford, GM, and every other truck manufacturer would obviously want to get back into that market. The facts remain that there isn't a big enough market in the small truck segment to warrant Ford, GM, and whoever else to keep making that product in the U.S.

One of the main points that keeps getting brought up is that they haven't updated the U.S. Ranger. Well, that problem is kind of like the question of which came first the chicken or the egg. Would there be a bigger market if they updated the Ranger more over the years, who knows, but maybe Ford, GM, etc wanted to see a big market segment before they throw a bunch of money into it.

A big problem with this segment is that it seems to be very inconsistent also. You have some that want the smallest pickup there is and want it bare bones, exactly what the Ranger has been, so to satisfy those people, not updating it very much or often is what they want. Then you have the other half of the segment that basically want a mid-size truck that is only a little bit smaller than a full-size truck and are basically the size of a 2003 F150 (i.e. Tacoma buyers). And above all, no matter what, the truck has to be really cheap. Well, the more you update something and the more you redesign it and all that, that costs money for research, design, development, new production costs, etc that will have to be passed on to the consumer if the organization wants to continue to survive and be profitable. Let's face it if a small truck is priced barely under that of a full-size truck, most people will buy the full-size truck.

For the people that have been clamoring for a truck slightly bigger than a Ranger and that comes in crew cab version, Ford makes it. It's called a Sport Trac. Yet I don't see anyone on here that mentions it, or says they even test drove it to see if it would fit their needs. Ford invested in making that truck, and not enough people bought it to justify keeping it in the line-up. So why should they invest in it again, just to see it fail again? Well, maybe they should have marketed it more or whatever else. But if people rely on marketing campaigns to determine what type of truck to buy, they're pretty stupid in my opinion. I did a ton of research before I made my vehicle purchase decision, and the decision didn't come down to marketing or brand or whatever else. It came down to what would meet my needs and wants the best. A vehicle is to big of a purchase for anyone to base solely on marketing or brand in my opinion.

But like I said before, if a small truck is the thing that you have to have to fill your needs and nothing else will work, then stop complaining and bashing Ford (or GM or whoever else). Go out there and purchase a small truck. Put your money where your mouth is.

CE: The problem with the Sport Trac is the 4' bed, which is useless for my purposes (I'm a weekend DIYer with a family, and I rarely go offroad).

For my purposes Sport Trac an Explorer with unprotected trunk space -- I'd be better off just buying an Explorer and towing a 4'x8' utility trailer. Except that I don't have room to store a 4'x8' utility trailer in my suburban driveway, and I never go offroad...

I really have to say that I would like to get a pickup for the utiity, but at 25k miles per year, the mpgs would kill me. At least, if I want something that can get out of its own way - which I do.

Maybe something on a weight/size diet? I dunno something with a small diesel? And here it is! But, not for us as usual.

Soo, it was another Accord for me last year. Ah well, maybe next time ford.

I agree with Red and Oxi. buying an F-150 would be overkill for my puproses as well. In fact many folks who buy them never even come close to using them to there fullest extent. The truck is to large. Most of the trails i end up on in NH would trap an F-150 just for its size..The paint wouldn't last long either and who really wants to take their 35K full size truck down trails anyway? My Ranger is the right size. A 6Ft bed is perfect for most of my applications and I've never needed anything larger. and it can be taken back and forth to work without guzzling gas and needing to hog 1.5 parking spaces to park. The F-150 is perfect for those who need a larger truck. I just think it sucks that we're being forced to an F-150 or nothing because they say the small truck market is toast. I think its mostly about saving a few bucks myself. Anyway, the only truck that i've found that would suit me is the Nissan Frontier. Its a bit larger then the Ranger and thats ok. Has a 4.0 motor, and a rear locking diff if you need it. perfect for the trails! And Lo and behold, a freakin metal front bumper! How long has it been since those dissapeared on the Ranger?? Ford just cheapened that truck year after year anyway. Its probably good they were getting rid of it. You can only cheapen a product so much before it becomes embarrasing. Whats funny is that Nissan and Toyota can still make a few bucks offering small trucks to the general public, why did Ford find it so difficult?

@Red 4x4, I don't just surf the web to get info in Australia. I spent 25 years of my life there. Don't be so presumptuous.

The comments to this entry are closed.