5 Reasons the New Ford Ranger Is Too Late

Ford2015_IAA_Ranger_004 II

Ford used the 2017 North American International Auto Show in Detroit to announce it will bring back a U.S. version mid-size Ford Ranger for the 2019 model year. Now that we've had some time to digest that news, here's what we think:

1. Pickup Truck Buyers Have Long Memories

There were many Ford Ranger owners who loved their little pickups because of their nimble handling and convenient compact size and efficiency. Now Ford wants to bring in a new Ranger to compete with other mid-size pickups because ... well ... why not? We have no doubt there are many buyers who have been waiting for this to happen, but our guess is the vast majority of the Ranger's following have already found substitutes and will be slow to take another look.

2. Why Now?

For the longest time, Ford argued that truck buyers didn't want a smaller pickup if they could get a larger one for a similar price with similar fuel-economy numbers. Has that changed? The most significant benefit of a mid-size pickup is that it offers better fuel economy, and Ford spent millions developing its EcoBoost technology to combat the idea that you couldn't get V-6 fuel economy with V-8 power. Will buyers be as curious about an inline four-cylinder engine that provides V-6 power?

3. Will Pricing Separate the Ranger From the F-150?

It's almost a clich‚ among auto writers to say that much of a new vehicle's success hinges on how the manufacturer prices it. F-150 pricing has been creeping up steadily during the last decade, but Ford will have to careful about keeping enough separation between entry-level F-150s and fully loaded Rangers, especially since average transaction prices for the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon are well into the mid-$30,000s.

4. Current Global Ranger Is Too Big

Ford engineers will have to do quite a bit of research to make sure they understand how much change will be necessary to make a new Ranger for the U.S. It's likely the current-generation global Ranger, which is longer and narrower than other U.S. mid-size pickups, will not meet federal safety requirements. GM spent quite a bit of time and money slowly figuring out it couldn't use the global Colorado for the U.S. market. That meant putting huge investment dollars into extra safety standards. No doubt "smaller" seems to be the wave of the future, but U.S. buyers seem to want much more content.

5. Ford Dealers Have Preached 'Don't Compromise'

Chevy and GMC dealers did not spend years telling potential buyers that mid-size pickups didn't make sense. Ford dealers did and then steered buyers to an F-150. GM was the first to say that it opted for a three-truck strategy to give customers more choice, creating a huge advantage for Chevy and GMC. Ford dealers will have the added burden of explaining why they didn't see this coming.

Manufacturer image

 

Ford2015_IAA_Ranger_001 II

 

Comments

Not everyone who buys a midsize truck is going to buy a full size truck. I would probably not even own a truck if all that was available was full size. At one time when I was living on a farm I could have used a full size truck but I probably would have gotten a regular cab work trim truck. I have driven all sizes of cars and trucks and day to day driving especially parking in an urban area I would not even want a large truck or a large vehicle of any kind. The reason I own a truck is the utility of having an open bed and a 5.5 ft bed extended cab midsize truck more than meets my needs. Also most full size trucks sit much higher off the ground and that includes 2 wheel drive. Having to get on a ladder to reach in the bed of a truck defeats some of the utility. If GM or any of the Big 3 did not offer a midsize or smaller truck then I would buy a Toyota, Nissan, and if there were only full size then I would just keep my old truck and pay to have the body repaired even if it had rust. If full size trucks ever got the size and height they were 20 years ago then I might consider owning one. Bigger is not always better especially if it is more truck than you need.

As for the Colorado taking away sales from the Silverado there is probably some of that but Silverado sales would not increase that much and most buyers who would want a midsize truck would just buy Tacomas and Frontiers. I have never owned a Toyota or Nissan but I would definitely buy a Tacoma or Frontier if there was not a comparable sized GM. I would definitely consider a Ranger based on the Global Ranger but I would not need or want an F-150.

Buying more than you need is about like buying a huge bottle of Heinz Ketchup at COSCO or Sam's Club when there is a one or two person household. It just gets buried in the back of the refrigerator and spoils before you can use it all. If you have a large family or or having a large outing or party then buying the warehouse sized ketchup would make sense. Nothing is a better value if you don't use it.

Not just Ford, but all manufacturers face a declining US market. This will affect the Ranger's success more than anything. But there is an ever expanding market for competitive, refined midsizers.

Oldman popsy jim,
I've read many of your comments and most are based on delusion mixed with dementia.

What killed the smaller pickups is when they were forced to be manufactured in the US. The price of the US made compact pickups rose 25% within a few years making them less competitive.

These newer midsizers like the C twins from GM are very competitive in refinement and capability to the majority of half tons sold. Like cars, if a pickup meets the expectation of the buyer then it will sell.

Obviously many people are satisfied with the Taco and C twins. So the Ranger has a chance with a declining market. The odds improve as gas prices increase.

@Lionel
The Thai built Ranger will not be affected by the problems with Ford's sedan division. Ranger / Bronco built in the US will be for NA only.

@Lionel
Latest Update on the Ranger.
https://www.carsales.com.au/editorial/news/2017/commercial/ford/ranger/spy-pics-next-ford-ranger-spotted-in-melbourne-105614

If Ford makes it people are going to buy it.

@Robert Ryan

If Ford wanted to they could compete, but they won't. A competitive approach would be a unit-body vehicle that utilizes the Madza 6 architecture. They've surely thought of this but the MSRP would be thousands of dollars too high.

Why tie up manufacturing resources and components on a pickup that they can't sell for the same price as an equally equipped Edge, or a Lincoln CUV? It just does not work as a business proposition.

They would lose thousands of dollars per vehicle to sell a stripped T6 derived (or Mazda 6?) to the fleet markets. Ford's decision to drop out of the mid size market in North America made sense in 2011 and it still does, even if it means they have to resist the urge to compete with GM, Honda and Toyota for mid size sales.

@Robert Ryan
Nice web find!!! I've been scouring the web for weeks trying to find test mules or other spy photos of this upcoming Ranger.

The overall shape is much like the T6 Ranger and that's not a bad thing at all. Ford did a great job with the way the rear of the cab blends into the bed with a slight shoulder at the C-pillar that carries to the top of the bedrail. I also like how the second row windows remain close to this style line at the bottom of the greenhouse.

I like the looks of the GM twins, but one style feature I hate is how the glass narrows at the back of the cabs. The Tacoma bed doesn't look like it matches the crew cab at all where they meet... WTF!..???

The T6 Ranger and the mules photos show such a nice fit between the cab and bed that it almost looks like a unibody. Nicely done!!!

@Jeff S.
I can't agree more.... Despite owning a 2002 F-150 SuperCrew right now, I'll never own a full-size again since they have grown so big over the last few generations (all brands). The new crop of mid-size trucks are only slightly smaller than my truck right now, which is only slightly bigger than what I ever really wanted.

I owned a 1994 Ranger XLT SuperCab before I bought my '02 F-150. With starting a family in mind, I needed 4 doors and a rear seat that could hold infant car seats. The only reason I went the F-150 route was my choices were the F-150 and Explorer Sport-Trac. FE was about the same between the two and I felt the Sport-Trac bed was useless for my needs. GM, Nissan and Toyota gave us mid-size crew-cab options but Fords stuck with the Sport-Trac as its only mid-size choice (fail).

15 years since my last truck purchase and with just over 80K on my F-150 odometer, I'm okay with holding out a few more years. I hope the next Ranger is worth the wait. I bet there will be more players in the mid-size mix by then, so no matter what I end up with, it will be exactly what I want vs. the compromises I had to deal with back in '02. I haven't had a truck payment in 12 years, but if I start saving now, it might take the sting away when I do finally pull the trigger.

@Papajim
1) Ford has great bones to start the NA Ranger with the global T6 Ranger. That engineering work has been done and proven in the market since 2012. To bring a revised version to North America with that huge upfront cost out of the way makes great business sense.

2) Have you seen the mid-size numbers this year? Growth in all brands, with more to be had.

3) Lastly, Ford announced that the 2019 Ranger would be produced in the same plant as the 2020 Bronco and they would share the same (or slightly modified) platform. This sharing will further save Ford money and make both new designs more profitable. The Bronco will be gunning for Jeep market share which has also been on fire the last few years.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but I'm going to respectfully disagree with your logic. Sorry! Ford might be late to the mid-size show, but I (and their bean counters) feel pretty good about their investment and future business plan.

@Brian

I don't disagree except to say they can't sell it at a price that works. It's the same reason that the Sport Trac was a bust.

I'd buy a nice, lightly used Sport Trac today if I could find one equipped with the 4.6 and six speed. The V6 was a dog.

The V8 Sport trac was only about ten percent of the total number Ford built because it was too damned expensive, then or now. Nobody is going to want a mid size pickup that's north of $40k

Despite all of the positives you listed, the $$$ does not work. GM's mid size still has not proven itself in that regard either, by the way. Nissan is selling Frontiers at fire sale prices, so it's hard to fathom how they make money doing it, either. Honda? Time will tell.

@Papajim
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.... I can't see 4 brands in the mid-size market with Ford and Jeep jumping into the market in the near future all loosing money. Average sales price of the GM twins is in the mid $30k's.

With the loaded full-size trunks in the $50k-$60k range, a loaded mid-size topping out in the $40-$45 range, sounds like a good deal (I sure hope not). With Fords Raptor a huge success, don't be too surprised to see a "baby Raptor" Ranger to compete wit the Chevy ZR2 and Toyota TRD Pro. Both of which loaded are approx. in the mid-$40k's.

a loaded mid-size topping out in the $40-$45 range, sounds like a good deal

@Brian in NC

Buddy you are alone in the wilderness.

Nissan is selling the hell out of Frontiers because you can get an Auto-V6 crew cab in the mid $20s. Buying the Nissan these days is like taking the fat girl to the dance, but a lot of guys are doing it.

I don't know where you get the pricing info on GM because they are VERY secretive about it. Ditto Honda. Good luck finding a plain jane Ridgeline on any dealers lots.

Popsy Jim,
Your statement, to the effect of; "Ford could compete if they wanted to" is another delusional comment.

Ford is a business, they would compete to earn. Obviously they can't.

I know this concept is a little abstract for you.

The profit margin on a midsize truck is not that much less than a full size pickup especially in the well optioned crew cabs. Ford is going to convert the Wayne plant that makes Focus and C-Max over to the Ranger and Bronco. Very small profit margin on Focus and C-Max especially with the cost of UAW labor. Ford is hedging their bet by making both the Ranger and Bronco at the same plant. If Ford does what GM has done with the Colorado/Canyon by basing the Ranger on the Global Ranger and adapting it to NA as GM did with the Global Colorado then this will reduce costs. Also limit the Ranger to an extended cab and crew cab with 1 bed length available on the extended cab a 2 bed lengths on the crew cab. GM has set a successful model to use on the Colorado/Canyon. The trend is toward a smaller truck to be used mainly as a lifestyle vehicle by families that need a 2nd or 3rd vehicle with more utility.

@wild willy

actually Al, the abstract is YOU responding to the content of a competing viewpoint instead of your simplistic comments. And why is it that you and Jeff are so closely connected despite the fact that he's in Kaintuck and you are in Oz. Whats wit dat?

@papajim,
Like a lot of older couples Ford and Mazda have gone their separate ways.
Mazda is pairing with Isuzu for any future Pickups and Ford will be doing their own thing.
My last linked post shows the fruit of that separation.
What the " Zoom Zoom" crowd and Isuzu are going to come up with is a good guess.


@Papajim
You took part of my comment but left out a key portion.... My $40k-$45 "good deal" was comparing a loaded mid-size to a $50k-$60k loaded full size. Would I spend that much? Hell no.

Face it. Modern mid-size trucks aren't cheap anymore now that they're finally getting updated with all of the same technology and creature comforts that the full sizes have been getting over the years.

I'm driving a 15 year old Lariat F-150 SuperCrew which I bought brand new in '02, obviously I hang onto my vehicles for a long time. Why would I buy a new antiquated truck badly in need of an update knowing I'm going to have it for another 12-18 years? Have fun taking the fat girl to the dance, I won't judge you. But don't judge me for taking the brilliant sexy girl home to live with me.

My wife bought a 2016 Honda Pilot EX-L last year and that was middle of the road pricing in the lineup and she paid almost $36k. The Ridgeline which is based on the new Pilot is priced very similarly. Most of the Ridgelines I've looked at at Hendrick Honda here in Charlotte, NC. were priced. $32k-38. Cost a bunch but a very nice truck.

The Tacoma TRD Pro starts at $40k and tops out around $44k. I couldn't find pricing on the Chevy ZR2 but it's safe to say it will be in the same ballpark. Nothing secretive about Honda pricing... Build one on the web to your liking with full pricing available.

As for your comment about you not finding cheaper models on the lot??? Because most people want the nicer spec'd models and they aren't interested in the base models as much. Dealers sell more vehicles when they have what people actually want in stock. Good for dealers profits when those stocked vehicles aren't base models either.

@Brian

You used a lot of words to agree with my point, unintentionally I'm sure. The new generation of mid size trucks are too expensive in the mid forties.

The whole appeal of mid size for many years was economy and utility. Why forgo the advantages of a full size pickup if your midsize costs as much as a well trimmed XLT or Silverado?

I mentioned Honda because when I last shopped their dealership in my area you could not find a new Pilot for less than 38K and the new GMC Acadia we ended up buying was well trimmed at the same price point.

As long as Nissan is selling a second generation Frontier crew cab in the mid 20s, the rest of the field will lose value-focused customers regardless of how nice their newest model is. It will be hard to get excited about a second gen Ranger in the high thirties, especially since Ford is lagging so far behind in getting their next spin on the T6 to showrooms, now estimated to be at least another year away at the earliest.

@Brian in NC--Many on this site compare midsize trucks that are well optioned to full size pickups with less options and say that the full size truck is cheaper which is true but comparing a lower trim full size truck to a better optioned midsize truck is like comparing apples and oranges. Your comparison is much closer because you are comparing a well optioned 4 x 4 crew cab midsize pickup to a comparably equipped well optioned 4 x 4 crew cab full size half ton pickup. That is like comparing a new all wheel drive CRV with heated leather seats at about 33k to a all wheel drive Buick Enclave similarly equipped at 55k which is much closer. GM doesn't seem to have any problem selling the higher trim Colorado/Canyons and 30k to 40k is about the going price for most vehicles equipped like most people buy. Like you I tend to keep my vehicles much longer than the average person so I buy new and get what I want that best meets my needs. I doubt Papa Jim has ever kept any vehicle 15 years or more. I have had two vehicles, one for 17 years and another for 18 years and I currently have a 99 S-10 for almost 18 years. I am not recommending that everyone keep their vehicles that long but if you do get what you want, otherwise you will be less satisfied with it and you will tend to keep it for a shorter period of time. In the long run it pays to keep a vehicle longer and it is easier to maintain a vehicle that you like than one you don't. Everyone is different and everyone has different needs and wants.

Five Reasons the New Ford Ranger Is Too Late

@Jeff S

I didn't write the article (see above).

Mark Williams at PUTC did. Enough well informed people agree with me on this topic that the only comparison you were able to make said something about buying Ketchup at Costco, for god's sake!

FYI, when I sold my first S10 it had almost 200k miles on the clock. My 1994 Ranger had about 250. My old Mercury sedan had nearly 200k. My 1979 Plymouth 1500 van was used as a rented mule 'round the clock on the waterfront for three years and I was still able to sell it. My 2009 Silverado still looks like new and has almost 90k on the clock.

You aren't the only geezer on this PUTC site, but by God you are the most hard headed.

@Jeff S.
You nailed it precisely with you last comment. A least one person here understands my point in buying a very well equipped MID-SIZE for thousands less and an equally equipped full-side. Knowing I'm going to drive a truck for a very long time, I might as well buy exactly what I want with no regrets down the line. I'm 46 years old and have only ever owned two Ford trucks ('02 F-150 Which I drive today and '94 XLT Ranger) and two Volvo cars ('81 Volvo 242DL and '73 P1800ES which I still own) Many motorcycles though!

Next truck? Ask me in 2 or 3 years. But it will definitely be a mid-size. I'm done with full-size truck for good!

@Papajim
Seriously?!? I don't agree with much of anything you post here. My main point just doesn't register with you.... I DON"T WANT A BLOATED FULL-SIZE... Not matter the price!!! YES, I would rather pay as much, hell.... even more, for a nearly loaded mid-size than a middle of the road full-size. BIGGER IS NOT BETTER!!! An updated mid-side crew cab with long bed would perfectly meet my needs. I'm done!
(talk about hard headed)...F-!

@Brian and Jeff

Just try to remember the name of this article.

It's not an article about what YOU like. It's a statement about whether or not Ford made good decisions about their product mix.

As it stands today, Ford is late to the dance.

@Papajim,
Read my first couple of post again... I gave valid reasons why Ford is most likely going to do well with the new Ranger, both in a solid product for consumers and as a money maker for Ford. Ford late to the mid-size dance.... Absolutely! I completely agree (but that's where our agreement ends).

It wasn't until your illogical banter started that I used my own situation as an example of why the mid-size market has a lot of room to grow. It's not about me. Just trying to have an civil discussion about trucks. You should try it some time. I'm done!

@papa jim--Again you did not read my prior postings. You are saying that you should only comment if you agree with the article? The buyers who buy midsize trucks for the most part are using them as a lifestyle/family vehicle. A crew cab midsize pickup is a replacement for the midsize family sedan. Most of the buyers of Tacomas and Colorado/Canyons are using them as family/lifestyle vehicles. Yes there will be some fleet sales of the base midsize trucks but most of the sales will be higher end crew cabs. Crossovers and trucks are replacing full size and midsize sedans. You need to read other sources besides this site. Why do you think the sales of cars has fallen? This is one reason why midsize trucks are coming back. Most suburban homes do not have a garage big enough to park a full size crew cab pickup especially when you add lawn equipment, bicycles, and a host of other items stored in a typical garage. Also most women do not want to drive a full size crew cab pickup and they want to drive something more luxurious than a work truck. If a family has a limited amount of space and cannot afford more than 2 vehicles a crew cab midsize truck is a perfect vehicle alongside a crossover, SUV, or minivan. Not everyone is retired and living in Florida. There are many families with children and pets who need the functionality of a truck for those trips to Home Depot and the Nursery. It is pointless to discuss this with you since you are living in the past and do not live in a suburban setting with growing families. Even the smallest bed on most midsize crew cabs is 5.5 which is enough for most families.

@papa jim--The following link might enlighten you as to what is happening from the perspective of a new car dealer.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2017/01/dealerships-want-get-trucked-often-2017/#more-1499601

@Jeff S

Simply address the question implied by the author of the article and please quit going on tangents (ketchup).

Is Ford too late? Yes or No.

If Ford is not too late give reasons supported by the facts, not just your wishes or your opinions. Your silly responses to my reasonable comments got Brian from NC all in a dither and now he wants to quit.

I bet you're might proud of yourself!

Boy this papajim dude lacks IQ and emotional intelligence. I don't comment often on this site because of people like him.

Papajim, you are entitled to your views, but read the comments of others' and comprehend what had been written. If someone states they like X because it has particular attributes they find attractive, you can't tell them they are wrong. Example; Blue is my favourite color. Don't tell me it's red.

There are many sites on the net with short stories with a questionaire at the end to assess and teach you that badly needed comprehension. Try it.

Is Ford too late? Yes or No.

Posted by: papajim | Jan 27, 2017 8:01:09 PM

NO!!! Ok you can go back to your park trailer now...

@Lionel

Hurry!!!! You're going to be late for the school bus again.

@papa jim--Are you the prosecuting attorney? Ford should not have discontinued the Ranger without having an up-to-date replacement but they did. Maybe Ford was late but it can be argued that they are not too late. The trend toward a smaller pickup that is easier to drive and easier to park as a 2nd or 3rd vehicle for families is growing. A crew cab midsize truck competes with a crossover, suv, and a midsize sedan. So, Mr. Prosecutor a new Ranger is late but it is not too late.

@Jeff S

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:


Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.

The topic of this article is whether or not Ford was late with the Ranger that still is not available in the US despite being sold in global markets for YEARS.

I agree with Jeff S. Pap Jim, GM is a mess. Ford isn't too late. Yes, GM got their midsize pickups update done. But GM hurt their full-size sales and hurt their van sales by not developing them as much as Ford. We can debate which approach was best but at the end of the day Ford sells more trucks (pickups + vans.) Now go ahead and throw some insults because that's all papa jim has got. GM is a mess.


@papajim
"The topic of this article is whether or not Ford was late with the Ranger that still is not available in the US despite being sold in global markets for YEARS."

Will not be the same Ranger sold overseas, it is not going to have a 2,500lb payload.
Will Ford be too late? US public have short memories, this new vehicle will be very different to the tiny somewhat primitive Ranger of the past. They will buy it in the same qualities as the Colorado/ GMC

Should be " Is not the same Ranger"
Quantities instead of qualities

@Robert Ryan

are you not quibbling a bit? in fact isn't the T6 aka global Ranger being considered as the North American Ranger?

@papajim
It will not be the same as you are getting. You are getting a very much lighter version, look at the Colorado for inspiration.

@papajim
Workhorse version built in Thailand, South Africa and I think Argentina.
Lifestyle version to be built in the US. F150 is your workhorse.

@papa jim--You are a fine one to tell others to stay on topic. You are too biased against Ford to see why a new Ranger will sell. You have not even bothered to read the links I provided and have a micro view of the truck market. Trucks are no longer just for work they have become a lifestyle vehicle that families buy and use. If you are living in a retirement community and reading AARP publications then you are isolated from how most suburban families live. The Ranger will sell especially the crew cabs because it is a family vehicle. Now go back to your Lawrence Welk 8 track tapes.

@Robert Ryan--I would call an F-150 and the equivalent half tons more lifestyle than workhorse. Workhorse is 3/4 to 1 ton. As Big Al has said most pickups are a sedan with a balcony. I do agree that the NA Ranger will be less capable than the Global Ranger more like the NA Colorado is to the Global Colorado, but regardless it will sell well because most families don't need a more capable truck but do need the utility of an open bed. Many have been waiting for a new Ranger especially those who are loyal to Ford. A new Ranger will sell.

@Robert Ryan

are you not quibbling a bit? in fact isn't the T6 aka global Ranger being considered as the North American Ranger?
Posted by: papajim | Jan 29, 2017 1:16:33 AM

Yes, it will be the same but with a facelift and reinforced frames to meet North American crash safety standards. They don't care about crash standards in third world countries.

Many have been waiting for a new Ranger especially those who are loyal to Ford. A new Ranger will sell.

@Jeff S

Wrong again.

It's Ford dealers that have been doing the hollering. Consumers haven't been sitting around waiting for Ford's corporate bigwigs to make the truck they want--they go out and buy one from Nissan, GM, Honda or Toyota

Ford's delay in getting an already dated model to market is classic, but usually it's GM and RAM that are late with product. Last time around GM was almost 10 years from the drawing board to the showroom with the first gen Colorado/Canyon/Isuzu trucks. By the time the old Colorado hit the market Toyota and Nissan already had much better trucks.

Now it's Ford's turn. Their T6 is going to be very "mature" putting it nicely. They have waited too long.

Many have been waiting for a new Ranger especially those who are loyal to Ford. A new Ranger will sell.

@Jeff S

Wrong again.

It's Ford dealers that have been doing the hollering. Consumers haven't been sitting around waiting for Ford's corporate bigwigs to make the truck they want--they go out and buy one from Nissan, GM, Honda or Toyota

Ford's delay in getting an already dated model to market is classic, but usually it's GM and RAM that are late with product. Last time around GM was almost 10 years from the drawing board to the showroom with the first gen Colorado/Canyon/Isuzu trucks. By the time the old Colorado hit the market Toyota and Nissan already had much better trucks.

Now it's Ford's turn. Their T6 is going to be very "mature" putting it nicely. They have waited too long.

Also, ours will all have beds with sides. Apples to apples the global midsizers are about half as capable as a full-size Ford/Chevy which isn't bad but lets get real here.

@Dave,
"same but with a facelift and reinforced frames to meet North American crash safety standards. They don't care about crash standards in third world countries."

I hope you are not referring too the US as a third world country?
US Mustang got a crash rating the same as a Chinese Cherry sedan, in a recent ENCAP crash test.
I have already posted roughly how it will look.

@Dave,
"have beds with sides. Apples to apples the global midsizers are about half as capable as a full-size Ford/Chevy which isn't bad but lets get real here."

No, US Fullsizers that used to be built and sold here, we're not that capable.
Last F150 assembled here in 1992

@papajim
"Now it's Ford's turn. Their T6 is going to be very "mature" putting it nicely. They have waited too long."

It will not be " mature" as it is brand new globally and it will be new to the US market.
Only name plate is old, new Ranger will compete with Colorado, Tacoma

@Robert Ryan

I'm curious. Do you have information about the distinctions between the current T6, in production beginning in 2011 globally, and the T6 inspired North American model you made reference to?

Please share.

According to the information I found online, the T6 uses a 2.5 duratech 4 cylinder gas engine in addition to some mild diesel options. Neither of these choices sound like anything that will set American hearts to thumping.

@papajim,
We do not have the 2.5 Duratech, that is a European spec vehicle.
You will have a mix of Ecoboost and the 3.2litre Diesel

@papajim,
Whoops 2.5 Duaratech is only sold in Latin America.Main engine in Europe is the 2.2 Diesel, 3.2 does not appear
Europe is a very minor Pickup market.

@papa jim, The big trucks are nice.

But the reality is since the 'olden days of yore' families have become smaller.

The average family with it's 1.7 kids might not require 3 across the back seating.

I do know my BT50, which is essentially a global Ranger would be less comfortable with 3 adults across the back seat.

But, how often does most (not some) require the 3 across the back seating.

I do think the large vehicle is more a cultural issue than a necessity issue. I do hope the Colorado does well. It will give Ford some competition which is lacking in the US pickup market.

The newer midsizers have had an emphasis placed on rear seat comfort.

The Ranger would be a great addition to the US market. But, like Ford stated it will take sales away from the F-150.

If anyone has traveled to the US you will see that most pickups haul air with one passenger, not tow trailers, with 3 abreast in the rear.

From the comments on PUTC you would think if you were an overseas reader you would assume that the US is full of pickups towing trailers.

This just ain't the case.

@papa jim,
I wasn't discussing what and how you do something. I was talking broadly. You aren't indicative of the US population.

Actually no one who blogs on this site could really be deemed a 'normal' pickup person. As most are pickup fans.

So I do expect some far out comments.

Even in Australia we do have many utes and pickups towing. But most don't.

Most are grocery getters, just like the US.

I mean, why would you buy a pickup if you don't use it's utility first and foremost? Also, some do buy for the extra space in the back. But many are used as family SUVs, just like here.

Oh, by the way, I'm not stating in no way that full size trucks aren't wanted in the US.



The comments to this entry are closed.