Dodge is coming out with a diesel in the 1/2 ton truck...

Nissan working with Cummins for a diesel Frontier...

NOW Chevy is planning a diesel in their Colorado?!?!
2015 Chevrolet Colorado brings modern amenities, diesel power to midsize pickup set [w/videos] - Autoblog

And Ford abandons the segment...

Sad, sad day.

 

The F150 probably out sells every truck that the others produce combined.

Here are some answers.

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...-and-fast.html

Ford saw that people were moving out of the need of small trucks, buying small cars instead. Ford builds great small entry level cars with tons of features and tons of first time buyer incentives.

My son bought his first car on his own - a 2013 Focus - full of young buyers "likes" and technology features.

F150s now offer better mileage than Rangers could.

 

Thanks for the link.

While some of those reasons are valid, I still don't understand why:
A) Ford walked away from a market segment they could dominate and
B) the small Duratorq works in the rest of the world, why it couldn't work here?

As far as the price of diesel, this is an interesting take on it: Why Diesel Costs More Than Gasoline - Business Insider

But people moving from small trucks to cars? I don't but it. I'd never walk into a dealership and trade my Ranger for a Focus.... How many of us here would?

I have a buddy who bought a 2011 F150 w/ 5.0 and loves it. Another buddy just bought a brand new F150 Ecoboost and loves it. I could afford an F150 but for me it's just a lot bigger than I need, and I'd submit to this forum that there's a lot of others out here that might feel the same way.

They can't keep Tacoma's on the lots, so I believe there's a market.

The challenge on Ford's part would be to build something as good as a Ranger, perhaps with the 2.7 EB and a Duratorq engine options and stop trying to supersize the "small-truck" segment.

 

I upgraded from my 91 Ranger to an 08 Ranger - no rust, more power, AC. Why would I replace it with a F-150? I wouldn't. I like the hauling and occasional towing abilities of the Ranger. I like the size of the Ranger - I watch folks driving full size pickups struggle to get in and out of parking spaces in shopping centers.. I'm not sure the 150 would fit into my garage. I don't like the high sides of the 150. The 150 might match highway mileage, but the Ranger would come out on top on city driving, which is the type of driving I do the most with my Ranger.

In other words, the Ranger is the perfect vehicle for me. The F-150 is more truck than I want or need.

It might be nice to have the Cummins 4 cylinder diesel if the price premium isn't too hefty.

 

My thoughts exactly.

As for diesel, I'm not convinced that the overall ownership cost of a small diesel pickup truck would be measurably better than that of my regular gasoline Ranger.

 

i know when i read about the diesel coming in the colorado it peaked my intrest....a 200 cid inline 4 diesel would be about perfect, but i'll just keep driving my paid-for '93 as long as it will still keep going, i wouldnt want a F-150 either, since the style change in '97, ive not cared for the look, and the ranger chassis works for me!

 

Only in the TV commercials, in real life there is no full size truck that can get 25+ mpg driving around town.

 

Ford never actually bailed on the Ranger, you can buy as many as Ford can make/deliver and with a diesel MOL everywhere other than North America. Unfortunately for myself and unless that changes, the only viable, competing product is a Chebbie Colorado, and after having owned them I know what to expect and that history will probably repeat itself.





And of course, the 3.2l Powerstroke Diesel:

 

Agreed, on a recent trip to Oregon , my 2010 2.3L 5 speed Ranger got 30.3 MPG. Do not believe the advertised mileage fairy tales that are on the window sticker, when they say "your mileage may vary", they know you will never get what the factory claims in the real world.
I didn`t consider a new F150, mainly because I don`t need a full sized truck for my daily downtown rush hour commute, plus I like manual transmissions, and Ford stopped offering them in the F series PUs a few years before.
As for the diesel engine in a Ranger or F150, why? I really don`t understand why so many people are infatuated with diesels. Much more expensive to buy and maintain, and diesel costs more than gas by a fair bit. Ford offered diesel Rangers in the 80s, and dropped the option since very few were sold.

 

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...is-coming.html

Ford F-150 to Offer Diesel V6 » AutoGuide.com News

 

Correct, they were only offered from '83 to '87. The 83/84 came with a 2.2L Perkins diesel built under license by Mazda, the 85/87 came with a turbo powered 2.3L Mitsubishi diesel. Ford abandoned the diesel Ranger in the American market after dismal sales. They now have somewhat of a cult following and are considered collectable. I've owned an '83 diesel Ranger for nearly 20 years now, it's always a conversation starter when I pull up to the diesel pumps, which doesn't happen very often with dual tanks and 37mpg.

 

Ford hitched their wagon to the ecoboost, which, with its direct injection technology approaches diesel combustion efficiency at a much lower cost than a diesel (lower injection and cylinder pressures).

I'm sure that the market will tell them if they made the right choice. If Ford sales tank and consumers respond overwhelmingly to the new GM Diesel products, Ford will respond.

Product planners get paid to make hard choices. Ford can't be all things to all people and still be profitable.