Dodge has hung on to some "small pickup" sales by being the only one to offer a V8 engine and more bed space. Now, GM is about to release the Colorado. All new from the ground up it will have more interior space than Ranger, more cargo space, more horsepower (although NOT more torque), better fuel economy, and more configurations and options. A bigger, seemingly better truck for the same money. Ford remains the only company now out of the big 3 that is sticking with it's traditional compact truck setup.

Could the Ranger finally be knocked out of the #1 position in it's segment for 2004? Ford says it has no plans of a new Ranger...so I'm afraid that's exactly what's going to happen. It's unlike Ford to be behind in the truck market....what's going on? The Colorado is tempting me....

 

Looks like a Tundra with chevy badges and the rediculous front end to me.

 

Yes, but on the other side of the coin, this will make the Ranger the only game in town when you're interested in a domestic label small pickup, as this will put the Chev in the same category as the Dak, which most people consider mid-size.
That's all symantics, but, the Ranger will be the only "small" pickup left.

 

You have to realize to that the Ranger is so far ahead in sales for compact that even a moderate increase in the chevy sales would not be equivelant. Kind of like SUV's. Seems like I see an explorer more than all other SUV's combined.

 

Yeah, I agree the Chebbie front end is wack. But what I'm saying is that honestly, if you could get more truck for the same buck, wouldn't you? I think the Ranger won't sell quite as good anymore. I still love mine though!

 

As a new owner of a Ranger (I have had it for about 3 weeks) I know I chose the Ford because of the reliability ratings it receives. I actually like the look of the Dakota and test drove a few. Dodge has been having problems with transmissions and I wasn't willing to take that chance even though it is a bigger truck. A completely new vehicle always has bugs that need to be worked out in the first few years. I am sure the Colorado will be the same. Ford is positioning itself as the only company to keep the compact size. Think of the Exporer, Chevy went bigger with the Trailblazer, but two years later Explorers are still selling very well. Just my $.02

 

Daimler-Chrysler was looking at building a compact pickup at a plant in Windsor, Ontario, but cancelled the project because the bean counters said they couldn't make a viable business plan. And the union accused the governments of not offering enough $$$ to make it work.

 

Yet Chevrolet still doesn't offer a V-8 option even though the truck is larger. I hope they are not still using that SBC based 4.3 Liter engine are they? I'm not worried about the Colorado. I like my RangePlorer

 

No, they are using two brand new engines. An inline 4 and an inline 5. Both are taken from the inline 6 currently in the Trailblazer. I looked at dyno charts for both engines, and the torque curves are as broad as the Mississippi River. I'll bet they will be serious towing machines, and they have promised 3 miles per gallon more than the 4.3 V6 it replaces (that would be 24 miles per gallon on the highway!).

I think if they get the build quality up to par, they could really hurt Ranger sales. I'm not knocking the Ranger...I love mine. I'm just saying...it looks bad for Ford at this point.

 

I'm kinda mixed on the Colorado. I would never get one, but I think it may take a good share of the rangers sales from people that aren't brand particular. I think the 3.5 might be a little weak fo the heavier colorado, especially in the torque department as it's peak drops from 250 to 225. It might be braod, but it is still less than before on a heavier vehicle. Will probably have to rev it to get it going. The build quality is what it has going for it. I still like the size of the Ranger better. Good for around town and the light hauling I need it for.
Wish ford would offer a Diesel and or a V-8. Maybe someday.
Hey WXboy, how do you like those pirellis. Love mine, just curious. Dont' see too many of them though.

 

You are right...the torque is not impressive except for how broad the curve is on a dyno sheet. Not impressive amounts though.

For the record, I HATE the Pirellis. Mine are basically new, and if I keep this truck another month or two the FIRST thing I'm going to do is throw these tires in the trash. I'm all about conserving money, but when it comes to tires, you get what you pay for. These things literally make my truck ride like a tobacco wagon, and they've been balanced by two different professional shops. They are hopeless. That's my opinion of them. I'm glad you are having better luck with your set.

 

I have hear rumrors about a v-6 diesel for the F-150 and ranger in the works- that would be awesome. Has anyone els heard this?? i will try to dig it up.

 

Possibly. Jeep is going to try it first and if it goes over well then you can bet Ford will be working on a smaller powerstroke for the half-ton trucks (Ranger / F-150).

 

Are the small displacement diesels really worth developing? The tend to cost more, and I think that the small diesels wouldn't outdo ther available gasoloine counterparts.

 

I have heard about the small v-6 diesel for the F-150... from what I read Ford put the engine on hold due to financial problems.