http://www.autoblog.com/2007/05/13/t...ve-the-ranger/

 

Repordedly Ford has prototyped a unibody pickup that may eventually replace the Ranger.

 

I hope you're right.

This would be great Ranger.

 

I always appreciate eveyybody's opinion, but I'm not sure I agree here. A Ranger for our market needs to either be smaller, simpler, and less expensive than the Ranger shown above or large and more like the modern crop of mid size trucks. IMO the foreign market Ranger is a compromise between the two which would likely fail to please most people looking for something smaller than an F150. I'm not saying it would be a total flop, and in fact I think this truck should come here as a Mazda, but I don't think it would meet with the kind of success a which Ford pickup could or should.

IMO a better solution would be to build two trucks. First, the long-rumoured, F150 based F100 to help get back some of the full-size pickup defectors leaving the fold because of gas prices. (and my bet is that Ford would get a bunch of them if they did this right) IMO the engine bay of such a truck would be the perfect spot for the upcoming Twinforce V6 with the naturally aspirated version proving the ideal base engine.

Build a much simpler, far more elemental Ranger to slot in below this truck. I think a good approach would be taking the approach of 'it's so basic that it's cool'. For example, imagine rubber floors, very basic 'soft' interior appointments like simple door panels and a simple dash design all while being able to get a blue tooth, CD, and an MP3 without having to sign up for leather, an auto tranny, or even power windows and locks. The simplicity and ease of personalization of such a truck could be made to appeal to both the young up and comers who like trucks (like there aren't a few million of those) and the established people who need a basic small truck.

If done correctly I would each of the above would easily outsell a federalized, foreign market Ranger in the long term despite having two trucks in place of the one. And this would allow Ford to still bring in the foreign market Range/B series under the Mazda brand giving them a truly distinct offering and maximizig sales. And arguably, the back to basics Ranger I propose could be sold in foreign markets alongside the existing Ranger/B Series you prose bring over since it would no doubt be cheaper and smaller allowing maximum total volume in every respect. Of course Ford will never do it because Mulally is bent on simpification no matter what the cost.

 

Source? Hopefully, it's the same size as the current Ranger, as it could finally give Ford something new to combat the Tacoma, Colorado and Frontier. Then, Ford needs to do something about a replacement for the Crown Victoria, hopefully involving a production version of the Interceptor concept. And then there's the Focus...

 

I don't think we need small Ranger again. Nobody is looking for small trucks anymore. Trucks that used to compete with Ranger (Tacoma, Frontier, S-10/Colorado, Dakota) grew so much in the recent years, they're not even competition anymore.

 

Yeah, but wouldn't a new Ranger have the market for little trucks to itself? Besides, the Ranger cult is pretty big, last I checked, so there's still a market for little trucks.

 

Yeah we do! It's the perfect "other vehicle" the option of not having a 'beater' as your daily driver. Perfect if made simple like noted above. With all the extra's that the dealer's add for their stock, it is near imposible to find a correct one. They are killing it themselfs by adding all the useless options. Keep it simple, and market it. Hey there's an idea, actually tell us it's there. The only dependable small trucks out there are the old Rangers and old S-10's. The newer enlarged and optioned out mid-sized, are ridiculous. If you want the fluff, move up to the F-150 and opt it out to your hearts content. There is a need for a plain & simple vehicle at Ford. It should be the Ranger!

 

I know some people who don't like the fact that most pickups are starting in the mid-size range. IMO, the Ford could own the small pickup segment with a well-thought-out and executed next-gen. Ranger. For total domination, they can throw in a Ranger Thunderbolt.

ferrarimanf355 - like your avatar! "Anta baka?" LOL.

 

A new compact Ranger, and an F100 to slot in against the Midsizers, sounds like a sound plan. The vehicle market is Balkanizing across the board, and large automakers will need more models selling lower numbers individually to replace the few huge number models of the past.

 

The Dakota and Tocoma have definately grown, but the Colorado/Canyon still look really small to me.

 

I don't think the problem is that people don't want to buy small trucks anymore. Rather, it seems to me that the auto makers simply no longer build small trucks most people would actually want to buy. The few that haven't moved on to the mid size realm are either so old that they've relegated themselves to an image of utilitarianism and low costs (Ranger) or have simply gone awry altogether like Chevy's small trucks. And to be blunt most of the mid-sizers are lacking to say the least. Of the current crop only the Frontier stands out leaving both this market and the compact truck marekt wide open for standout offerings from Ford.

Arguably the above is similar to the situation we've seen with coupes that has led so many auto makers to claim that the market for the same has dried up and that the Mustang is but an anomaly. The problem is that you have to actually build a car people might want to buy before you can really say this, but the auto makers apparently don't see it that way. The Mustang isn't an outlier, it's an example of what can happen when you actually do it right.

If you recall we were hearing the same thing regarding large sedans until the 300 showed up on the scene and handily dispelled those myths in it's first five minutes on the market. People don't want cars like these, according to the sales figures the Mustang and 300 put up their first few years on the market they are desperate for them. IMO the 'people don't want x' argument has primarily become an excuse for auto makers generally employed when they have no idea how to build a car the public wants.

The first automotive 'big wig' who takes the reigns of a major auto manufacturer and fully understands the above will absolutely decimate the competition. I just hope he ends up at Ford, and soon.

 

I second that motion. My Ranger doubles as a commuter vehicle and for the weekend jaunt to Home Depot to pickup 10 bags of mulch.

I don't want, or need a larger vehicle. Maybe some see the need for the new Dakota/Tacoma/Frontier-size pickup. Quite frankly--I don't. If I had the need for that size and towing capacity, I'd spend the extra cash and get a full-size pickup.

 

A single cab version of the Sport Trac with a longer bed would make a nice Ranger replacement. They'd get one more vehicle off the Explorer platform, plus, it would be mid-sized and V8 capable....

 

Someone who worked on it and would not tell me much of anything other than a prototye existed and at that time no decision on production had been made.

 

If your hands are tied, then I'm cool with it. I'll take your word for it. If true, then hopefully the Ranger won't stray from its roots.

 

I don't know much more about it. It may never make production. You would be shocked to learn of how many vehicles idea go through the proposal stages, some going all the way to prototpe stage only to never make it into production.

IMHO that's one of the things that has put Ford in the bad situation it's in today. Lots of engineering & marketing time is spent on fantastic sounding vehicles which for one reason or another don't get manufactured. If more of those people hours could be focused on products that actually would make production Ford would be a different company today.