Here's the thing that kinda shocks me. Ford will green light the Raptor but not a new compact/midsize? Don't get me wrong I think the Raptor is an awesome truck and Ford deserve's full credit for bringing it to a market were all other brands were to afraid to pull the trigger on something so bold. But none the less.

I think for the most part the F-150 makes a decent replacement for the Ranger as I myself am planning to trade my 2003 Ranger in for a 2011 FX4 5.0L this summer. HOWEVER...The massive size of the F-150 is not a concern for me, as it will be for many current Ranger owners.

I think that an F-100 would be a great idea. Seeing as the new 2011 F-150's with the 3.7L 5.0 and Ecoboost genrally get equal to or better mileage than most ''midsize'' trucks on the market today. A slightly smaller less heavy duty lighter weight F-100 could get 25 to 27mpg pretty easy...And it would fit right in with the other midsize trucks on the market today, in realtive terms of size and capacity.

I agree that here lately Ford has made some of the best choice's in their entire histroy as an automotive giant. With that said, I don't think killing of the Ranger is a good idea. Ford claims that its because the Ranger is part of a dying segment and they are having trouble getting them off the lots. Well I would say the main reason for this is because, the Ranger has been neglected for the past 15 years. The compatition has long since updated and made leaps in bounds over the Ranger. But people who buy Rangers don't only buy them for the fuel econmy, and I think it was a little ignorant of them to say Ranger owners should just opt for a Fieasta or C-Max as neither of those yeild any light truck capibility nor do they have anything in common with light trucks other than the frugality.

Here's what I think should be done...

Ford Ranger/F-100

Price Range
16,000$ - 30,000$

Engine options
2.0L I4 Ecoboost, 3.7L V6, 3.0L Diesel (Gasp!) 5.0L V8 for hi-po applications

Transmission Options
6-speed Automatic, 6-speed standered (True Stick Not Manumatic)

Curb Weight
3700lbs to 4400lbs (depending on configuration)

Clean Sheet Design

Cab Options
Regular Cab, Extended Cab, Crew Cab

Trim Options
XL-XLT-Sport-FX4-Lariat

Towing Capacity
Between 3,500 and 6,000lbs

Hauling Capacity
Between 1,000 and 2,000lbs

Bigger (But not much) than the current Ranger



I'm not someone who constantly studies the market to try and figure out what will sell and what wont...But I think that what I listed above would be a pretty winning combination with not only the current Ranger crowd but also people who are not ''brand specific'' and are just looking for a smaller truck to suit their needs.

But hey just my 2cents.

Other than killing off the Ranger great Job Ford!

 

You can't say that the Ranger has been totally neglected, only for North American sales. The world Ranger is new and it's pretty big. Keep in mind that this is Ford's pick-up truck offering for the rest of the world. Yes, they can get an F-series but it's immensely expensive thus not worth it.

IMHO, if the North American Ranger were to make a come back, it would be an adaptation of the world Ranger.

So gentlemen, the half ton truck is alive and well, just not for us.

 

Yes perfect, but you're pretty much describing the global Ranger so a clean sheet design isn't even necessary. Fords argument that the F150 is just as economical as the Ranger just confounds the laws of physics. Given equal modern engines a 1000lbs lighter truck will be more economical. AND a 2.0 I4 Ecoboost couldn't power a F150, but it could power a Ranger.

My 2006 F150 is too big. I regret trading my '97 for it. My next truck may have be a Nissan;-(

Ed

 

Another thing Ford seem to have forgotten is the following. In the 60s and 70s a F100 or F150 wasn't a lot bigger than a regular Sedan. That means young drivers and men and women in general were used to piloting a large vehicle anyway. Nowadays we have a whole generation who may never have driven anything larger than a Civic or a Focus. My wife drives a mid-sized economical diesel station wagon, basically a longer wheelbase Malibu Wagon, available here which is large enough, but she refuses to drive my truck at all because it's waaay to big. So whereas she drives 1 mile to work in her 40mpg car I have to take the truck 30 miles to work. Duh! Sometimes I need a truck. Sometimes it's just carrying little me. The size of the truck reduces our flexibility. And I bet there are millions of people out there, non truck drivers, who can't or don't want to drive a vehicle that size. My wife would have no problem driving a global Ranger.

BTW I think this thread is very important. I'm sure people at Ford read these forums even if they don't post here and maybe just maybe our thoughts may reach the right people.

Within the remaining lifetime of the current F-150 architecture, and certainly within the usable lifetime of the trucks currently being built we are going to see the $5 gallon. Then the $6 gallon. The best solution would be a Ranger or F100 which could be built on the same line as the F150. Then if fuel prices spike and people shift to smaller trucks, it won't affect Ford. It wouldn't matter to them if a 15mpg F150 or a 25mpg Ranger came off the line.

 

If Ford offered us a Ranger or F-100 the size of the world Ranger, how much less does anyone think it will cost to purchase and operate? We all know the diesel isn't happening.

Who's going to spend $20K - $30K or more for a smaller truck that will see marginally better MPG's? Sure as hell not me.

My neighbor bought brand new a 2010 Ranger 4x4 Scab with the four banger and five speed. He wanted a truck and wasn't willing to spend a few thousand more to get the full size truck. Now, he's kicking himself in butt for buying the Ranger. He's pretty ticked about the power, the MPG's, the cost and the lack of payload and bed space.

It's a great looking truck but I really don't see the point in going that small.

 

Well I'm seriously considering selling my dinosaur and buying a new Ranger. The outgoing global Ranger is available with 30-40% discount now, which means I can get a new 2010/11 XL single cab 4x4 2.5 diesel 5-speed with 143 bhp, air, radio/cd, electric windows and locking for €15.000 brand new. It does 26mpg on diesel which costs about 80 cents / gallon less than gasoline here, will be better off road, has a higher payload rating!!!! and a similar towing rating. An extended cab with sorter bed costs the same.

 

Well honestly I think the F-150 is just perfect right now. It might be a little large for some...But I promise too anyone who has not driven a larger vehicle, if you just stick to it and drive on a regular basis for a little while, eventually it'll get just as easy to drive as that Focus or Jetta your use to.

With that said, I think the ''Global Ranger'' is to large for the American Market. As its close in size to the F-150, most people here would just opt for the F-150 over the Global Ranger even if it was offered to us. IF Ford is gonna try and bring back a smaller truck for the American market in the next few years, it will need to be ''at best'' only slightly larger and heavier than the current USA Ranger, because if you think about it...Most current day midsize trucks are only capable of getting about the same mileage as 1/2 ton trucks, and yet they don't even have half the ability. 20+ Years ago, small trucks the cheap efficent alternitve to larger 1/2tons, but today they use just as much fuel as your avarage 1/2 ton they have close to the same curb weight, They can cost up to 40 grand ''well optioned 1/2 ton territory''... Point being, I personally feel as though ''Midsize'' trucks are kind of pointless.
They are 3/4 the size of a 1/2 ton, and yet yeild no real benefits over a 1/2 ton.

Compact trucks need to stay compact. And 1/2 ton's need to stay realtivly large.

 

I agree with all the people who want to keep the Ranger. If Ford just updates it with the newer engines like the 3.7 and the little EcoBoost it will make good power and mileage. The old 2.3, 3.0, and 4.0 are dinosaurs that should have been retired long ago. I believe there still is a large enough market for these trucks, especially for the offroad segment. I'm not sure about elsewhere in the U.S. but here in Southern California Rangers are extremely popular desert trucks. The places I go I see the same amount, if not more Rangers than Jeeps. The new powerplants would really do wonders for the little truck.

In addition, using a shared motor would cut production costs. The same manual tranny from the V-6 Mustang as well as the Auto from the 3.7 powered cars could be shared as well.

As for the chassis, maybe box it and possibly update the suspension. I like leafs in back but I wouldn't be upset if rear coils were looked into. I'm not suggesting a complete rebuild, just a legitimate update. 15 years of facelifts is too much. Updating the truck would allow the same factory to continue production while sharing motors and transmissions with other models would lower costs and I think would greatly boost the little truck's appeal.

Unfortuneately the updates I would really want are probably never going to happen; those being a diesel and solid front axel. Someone also suggested earlier in this thread a mini-Rapter which would be bitchin' since the Ranger is so famous out here for being a desert pre-runner, but I don't see that happening either (really cool to think about though, 5.0L or 3.5L EcoBoost would be perfect motors for a Ranger Raptor!). I doubt any of this will happen which is a real shame because the Ranger, despite it's age, still has a lot of potential. I'm really sad to see the little truck go.

 

Just spitballing here, but what about reviving the old 4.9L I6? Those motors would run FOREVER! I had an old 92 F150 with that motor, the E4OD and 180k miles and still got between 17 and 23mpg in mixed driving. Now before yall jump down my throat-I'm not saying just build it on the same blueprint. I would like to see a new tech version of that motor. With all the new tech, 30+mpg wouldn't be out of the question. Or dare I say it, a diesel config? If they would offer that in a new body ranger or F100 I would buy the first one off the line.

 

The recent torture test and tear down of the 3.5L ecoboost revealed that the twin turbo V-6 is every bit as durable as the 300 while generating over twice the power and more than 100 lb/ft of torque. And, it's doing all this with better gas mileage. GTDI is the foreseeable future right now.

My sister's 2003 Trailblazer with the 4200 V-6 gets crappy mpg's. This is about the most advanced and up to date domestic I-6 available and though it seems to be durable it's thirsty.

I would be more stoked about a new Bronco more than a new Ranger.

 

I agree there a new bronco would definitely be a good thing. Maybe a neo-retro pre 78 small body style? That could actually cover some of the ranger diehards too.

 

Today's mid-size trucks are almost as capable as a basic F-150. One advantage they have is maneuverability. Any way you look at it, smaller vehicles are easier to maneuver and park in tight spaces, regardless of how acclimated you may be to a driving a larger vehicle.

However, size is both an asset and a liability. The smaller trucks don't have the same interior or cargo box volume as a full-size, and they aren't quite as stout for heavy towing.

Regarding fuel economy, I agree that the gap between small truck and large truck has closed. However, fuel economy is just one factor to consider in the purchase of a vehicle. I could buy Prius, but I wouldn't be able to stuff my family and gear in there, and I'd probably be dead if I were hit by a F-150.

Unfortunately, the government wants us all to be driving Priuses. For that reason, I fear that full-size trucks are going to end up downsizing in both physical size and capability in order to stay alive. Today's mid-size trucks may end up being tomorrow's "full-size," but only the auto manufacturers know what they have on the drawing boards.


JKG

 

I've only ever owned Ford trucks. The only automotive product I'd buy would be a Ford. That said, the current F-150 is too big in physical size for me. I need an extended cab or crew cab for my family, consisting of my wonderful wife, one big dog and a tiny dog. For work, I've driven the new GM pickups and they are too hugh! Too much front end to try and see over so the visibility is much too limited for safety. The current F-150 is not as big but I wouldn't buy one. The current Ranger cab size is too small for our needs. My son-in-law bought for his Mom a Dodge mid-size pickup which is physically the size I would prefer. I want a diesel for my next truck. The current F-250 Super Duty is too much truck.

Ford needs to bring the World Ranger to North America with a diesel engine as well as the new high-mileage gas engines. The mid-size body of the World Ranger would sell very well in the USA. I'd buy one in a heart beat.

Ford are you listening???

We readers need to get after our Congressmen and women and get them to relax the diesel regulations on the over-the-road vehicles so we can increase fuel savings. It will also allow Ford to build us a small diesel truck. Ford also needs to increase the percentage of bio-diesel to B25 or B30 they will allow in their diesel engines.

I've stepped down from my soapbox...for now.

Phil

 

Okay, i ve been thinking... Ive read some folks suggest that the new Ranger be renamed F100. At first i thouhgt nahh, its not a real F truck. But the more i learn about the new Aussie built Ranger, the more i think that Ford should name it F100, and keep the Ranger as a spec level like back in the day.
Reason is, that the new truck shares nothing with outgoing model which was based and face lifted on the mid 80'ies Thai built Mazda BT50. The new truck seems every bit as big as the VW Amarock, Frontier, Tacoma(Hilux) ie Mid size. Also we Ford fans in the non North American Market crave/desire your F-Trucks as we rarely get them and are to expensive here. The truck will bring back many memories of us growing up with 60-70'ies generation F100's and F250's. Also Ford would do well in my book to sell all their pickups under the "F" badge (as long as they are mid size and up). It would generate more sales under one badge to and give more interist to restore older genration F trucks still working hard on many farms and some construction bussinesses here. Hell it may even tempt 'em to bring some F250'ies back.
A guy can dream hey

 

Yeah, I hope that day never comes were the ''midsize'' trucks of today turn into tommorws fullsize trucks. But like you said, only the manufactures know whats in store for us next.