I'd get one in a heartbeat.... and I love the diesel/manual options. IMHO, Ford has missed a bet here, handing GM the mid-size truck market like a gift. Ford has basically ignored the Ranger since the 1998 redesign, and they really missed a bet by not building a crew-cab variant for the US when every other midsize truck started to offer it. It's not like it would have taken much considering they already offered a crew cab in the rest of the world. From an enthusiasts perspective, it makes no sense to me that they wouldn't offer this in the NA market.

From an auto-business perspective, however, it makes perfect sense. They have two products that are mutually exclusive. They could never sell the F-150 successfully outside the NA market... just too big. Then there's the "world-truck" for everyone else looking for a smaller, more fuel-efficient package. It's not that there isn't a market for this in NA, but for Ford NA, they don't want the F-150 competing with another Ford product. It's not that Ford doesn't get the money in the end... it's just that the margins are better for F-150. From a business perspective, the lower margin, and competitive cost and features would net less profit... so they just push those potential Ranger buyers up to the F-150. More profit. And since they can't sell the F-150 anywhere else in volume, they need every NA sale they can get.

It's more of a win for Ford, but a loss for all of us who don't want to make the jump to a full-size truck. With Ford (and most big automakers), it's all about volume. Ford just doesn't feel that there's enough of us potential Ranger buyers to make the venture worth their while. What they're not factoring in, however, is customer loyalty. Give me what I want, and I'm yours for life. Don't give it to me... and I'm off to the manufacturer that does. As it stands right now, Ford is just pushing me out the door...

 

it has nothing to do with there not being a big enough market. It has everything to do with money.

The ranger would have just as many, if not more features than the f150. Ford has decided that they can charge a premium for the F-series and people will line up for it, because there isn't another option. They make money hand over foot on the big trucks. Pricing the ranger competitively wouldn't make them enough money.

"why make a better product that people will use when we can make more money by selling a less usable product?"

 

Gee, a 37 mpg pickup with a manual transmission and diesel engine....I could get rid of my 2011 Fusion and 1988 F150 4x4. But, Ford wouldn't want to make something available in the US I really want...

Yeah, I bought the Fusion, but I'd rather have one vehicle...I guess I'll just have to keep the old F150 for another 10 years, or until someone makes a decent mileage pickup.

I don't need 400hp, 8 million ftlbs of torque and airconditioned seats! My 185hp F150 does everything I need from a truck, except get good mileage. If this truck was available tomorrow with a diesel and 6spd manual in the US, I probably be selling the F150 and trading the Fusion!!!!!

 

I have a 2006 Ranger 4X4, I won't be buying another Ford, unless the new Ranger is sold here in the U.S. Chevy is coming out with a sweet new Colorado. so that will be the next pickup, unless Ford changes their stance on the new Ranger being sold in the U.S.

 

I have zero interest in the new Ranger. The old Ranger had a lot of merits. The mistake Ford made with them was not the size, the small size of the old Ranger is ideal for many markets, markets Ford has convinced themselves don't exist or don't want small trucks. The mistake was the gas guzzling V6 engines. If the idea is to have a small light duty truck, then it should have small engines that are easy of fuel. I think there should have been only two engine options, a basic 4 cylinder, and turbocharged 4 cylinder. And possibly a 4 cylinder turbo diesel.

The new Ranger is nothing more than a slightly smaller F150. If I wanted a truck in the same size as the world Ranger, I would just buy a Dakota, Tacoma, Frontier, or one of the many other light pickups that have grown too large for their shoes. It is pointless to have a light duty truck thats almost as big as a half ton.

 

especially when that light duty truck can do as much as the half ton, get better milage and be cheaper.

yep, makes total sense!

keep drinkin the kool aid that fomoco feeds ya!

 

I'd have to say it seems you're seeing it pretty clearly. Certainly can't argue with your logic. It is, after all, all about the benjamins.

 

I can understand them canceling the US Ranger with sales as low as they are. You make money by volume on an assembly line. I just don't like it myself. I went looking for a new Ranger standard cab longbed 2.3l manual in 2010 only to find out that Ford had already dropped that version. So I was stuck buying used! The new F150 can match almost any V6 Ranger in mpg. Alot of people will shy away from a four cylinder in the US, just not enough horses on paper. Some of us four cylinder owners are the odd ones out. Not that many really need a 200+ hp compact pickup but they just have to have one. The T6 Ranger is closer in size to our Ranger than a shortbed F150. Only 3.4" wider than a US Ranger and 3.3" longer than our supercabs. I would love to have the 2.5l 5 speed manual standard cab version myself. So they can reserve one for me if they ever decided to allow us that option.

 

I traded my 2002 S10 for a 1996 F-150 a several months back so I could pull my boat . The S10 was a great fit in the cab and got great MPG but had no pulling power, at all. The 96 F150 is great but needed a lot of work so I went looking at the 2011 Rangers; good pulling power but I WAS JUST UN-COMFORTABLE IN THE CAB, too small and cramped feeling. Despite the great end of model in US sales, I just did not fit in the cab? I saw the non US Ranger on the web and it looks perfect! But the good ole USA for which I served and love has become an Nanny state with insane environmental regulations that make great vehicles like the new Ranger out of reach...

I suggest we unite and repeal the Prohibition imposed by the crazy regulations that stifle the Ranger being built in the US and give us Americans the freedom to drive what we choose!

 

A Ranger was supposed to be a small, inexpensive, efficient truck. Make that again and develop the niche all over again. Many times automobile manufacturers have been in error. Building what they "think" the public wants. I say go back simple and cheap.

 

Even as it was being killed off, the Ranger is out-selling the Mustang in 2011.

How many more Rangers could have been sold if Ford had advertised the truck, and put even a small amount of effort into it?

Bottom line: Mullaly doesn't want the Ranger in Ford's line-up of vehicles. End of story.

 

i think it boils down to ford wanting the F150 to remain such a "best seller" , so it axes the ranger, giving ford loyalests no choice but to move up to a F150 if they want a ford brand personal pickup. i think they should get back to basics, remeber the ranger "S" of long ago? yes it was very basic, but if thats all you needed, it was a decent deal. now that the crown vic has been discontued along with the ranger, the mustang is the only thing from ford that intrests me, and its way too expensive. i dont like the look of the new full-size trucks from ford, and i dont need a full-size anyhow, i'll just keep a ranger on the road somehow.

 

I have a lot of vehicles, a lot But one I use consistently is my '89 ranger. I did a few visual mods to it, to make it look even older But it keeps going. With good maintenance, why not?? 190K miles and still going strong I drive it out of state every month, its my trip vehicle to work on property. Damn good truck.