10 Ways Ford Could Screw up the New Ranger - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums



2019 Ranger Discussion for the upcoming 2019 Ford Ranger!

10 Ways Ford Could Screw up the New Ranger

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 04-17-2017, 01:27 PM
Curated Content Editor's Avatar
Curated Content Editor Curated Content Editor is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 272
Curated Content Editor is starting off with a positive reputation.
10 Ways Ford Could Screw up the New Ranger

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-17-2017, 09:36 PM
80broncoman 80broncoman is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: southeren Oh
Posts: 853
80broncoman is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.80broncoman is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I disagree on if its a 2 door it would ruin it. At the least make to where you could order one as a 2 door.
Say goodbye to fleet sales if there is no 2 door. Just like they did when they quit building rangers here in the states. THe local auto parts stores near me started buying Nissan frontiers and Nissan small minivans for parts delivery.

AND I completely agree on using good quality parts.

My father bought a 08 Ranger (4.0L) and in 60K miles it has gone though 3 Ford OEM replacement water pumps!!
This buying of cheap crap parts from CHINA has to STOP!! This was his 4th ranger he bought (the other 3 were NEW 1983, 1990, and 2001) and he is NOT a happy customer.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-18-2017, 11:14 AM
Red2003XLT Red2003XLT is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 267
Red2003XLT is starting off with a positive reputation.
Must have a 2 doors, I do love the newer standard cabs. Keep the half doors but leave the 4 door to the Bronco crowd.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-18-2017, 02:16 PM
Pgh Rebel's Avatar
Pgh Rebel Pgh Rebel is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,203
Pgh Rebel has a good reputation on FTE.Pgh Rebel has a good reputation on FTE.
I agree on keeping it low-tech. The biggest thing that bothers me about newer vehicles is all the tech stuff that inflates the price, panders to the stupid people who can't drive, and prevents the vehicle from being very reliable.
Also, keep it affordable. Not everyone wants a Platinum edition with a $75,000 price tag! I think Ford has forgotten about the rest of us who just want an affordable vehicle without all the frilly stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-18-2017, 02:40 PM
Tedster9's Avatar
Tedster9 Tedster9 is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Waterloo, Iowa
Posts: 12,040
Tedster9 has a superb reputationTedster9 has a superb reputationTedster9 has a superb reputationTedster9 has a superb reputationTedster9 has a superb reputationTedster9 has a superb reputationTedster9 has a superb reputationTedster9 has a superb reputationTedster9 has a superb reputationTedster9 has a superb reputationTedster9 has a superb reputation
No way around it, federal regulations require those air bags, anti-lock brakes, all kinds of stuff.

Power windows could go away, those are more or less silly. Air conditioning isn't necessary in some places.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-18-2017, 08:15 PM
Pgh Rebel's Avatar
Pgh Rebel Pgh Rebel is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,203
Pgh Rebel has a good reputation on FTE.Pgh Rebel has a good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedster9 View Post
No way around it, federal regulations require those air bags, anti-lock brakes, all kinds of stuff.

Power windows could go away, those are more or less silly. Air conditioning isn't necessary in some places.

I've thought for a long time that we could do without a lot of the federal regs. That's what keeps prices inflated, and prevents vehicles from being simple. I'm also including the EPA fuel economy requirements known as the CAFE regulations. One or two airbags is fine and might be necessary. Vehicles are safer today than my first truck back in 1986, no doubt. But why do we need airbags inside the seats? Why does in-car Bluetooth need to be required? Because people are too dumb to put their phone down while driving!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-19-2017, 07:23 AM
Tom's Avatar
Tom Tom is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Braham, MN
Posts: 22,834
Tom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pgh Rebel View Post
One or two airbags is fine and might be necessary. Vehicles are safer today than my first truck back in 1986, no doubt. But why do we need airbags inside the seats? Why does in-car Bluetooth need to be required? Because people are too dumb to put their phone down while driving!
Side airbags mounted inside the seats save lives every day. Being hit from the side is the most dangerous type of hit because there's so little between you and the vehicle that hits you. Seat-mounted and curtain airbags are the biggest reason side-impacts have gotten more survivable in recent years.

Is Bluetooth a new requirement? I don't think it is, but I wouldn't buy a new car or truck without it. I can't imagine it costs much to include, you can get an aftermarket setup that plugs into an auxiliary input for around $15.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-19-2017, 10:54 AM
bbf385's Avatar
bbf385 bbf385 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ontario
Posts: 452
bbf385 has a good reputation on FTE.bbf385 has a good reputation on FTE.bbf385 has a good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pgh Rebel View Post
I agree on keeping it low-tech.

Those days are gone and never to return.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-21-2017, 01:00 PM
Frdtrkrul Frdtrkrul is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Prior Lake, MN
Posts: 1,080
Frdtrkrul has a good reputation on FTE.Frdtrkrul has a good reputation on FTE.Frdtrkrul has a good reputation on FTE.
2 door is fine especially for those who don't have a garage to park in or they do but it's really short. Agree that it should get at least 20mpg and higher on gas and mid 30s with ano oil burner. Manual transmission would be nice across all engines and with 4wd and not make it an only 2wd option. It should be a compact truck, like the way it left back in 2011 but more capable. Should have 2 door, extended cab split door and 4 full door options.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-28-2017, 05:12 PM
GOOSEBOY78's Avatar
GOOSEBOY78 GOOSEBOY78 is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 11
GOOSEBOY78 is starting off with a positive reputation.
heres the facts: it will be availible in 2,4 and extra cab. will have all the safety stuff. where i live we already have the rangers

yes you can have the bare bones poverty pack if you want, 2wd and 4wd are availible manual or auto. engine is the 3.7 diesel shared with the transit. no word on the petrol options yet. if you are gagging to see one take a trip to mexico. they already have them.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-29-2017, 04:47 PM
wheelerfreak wheelerfreak is online now
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 133
wheelerfreak is starting off with a positive reputation.
What I really want in the new ranger is for it to be a true mini truck and not a midsize. Seems like all the midsize trucks have all the cost and MPG's of a 1/2 ton, and 7/8's the size. I've had two rangers and still have my Toyota mini truck, for many of my daily uses including commuting that is all I need. If I need more I can use my F150 or 250.

True frame, extended cab, 4x4 and a 6' bed would be perfect for me. I can deal with all the mandated safety items, just don't price it at the same level as a 1/2 ton.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-29-2017, 04:59 PM
GOOSEBOY78's Avatar
GOOSEBOY78 GOOSEBOY78 is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 11
GOOSEBOY78 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelerfreak View Post
What I really want in the new ranger is for it to be a true mini truck and not a midsize. Seems like all the midsize trucks have all the cost and MPG's of a 1/2 ton, and 7/8's the size. I've had two rangers and still have my Toyota mini truck, for many of my daily uses including commuting that is all I need. If I need more I can use my F150 or 250.

True frame, extended cab, 4x4 and a 6' bed would be perfect for me. I can deal with all the mandated safety items, just don't price it at the same level as a 1/2 ton.
its a midsize. sorry to burst your bubble. its diesel only in all variations there is talk of using the 2.3 ecoboost for petrol option.
all of your options are avalible: not sure about the 6 inch bed.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-29-2017, 06:29 PM
wheelerfreak wheelerfreak is online now
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 133
wheelerfreak is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GOOSEBOY78 View Post
: not sure about the 6 inch bed.
I never mentioned a six inch bed?

I guess Ford can count me out as a potential buyer if they go midsize.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-14-2017, 05:44 PM
smlford's Avatar
smlford smlford is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SML / Hatteras
Posts: 1,093
smlford has a good reputation on FTE.smlford has a good reputation on FTE.
Front wheel drive??

Are you fn kidding me?? This author is a moron....
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-14-2017, 11:30 PM
parkwood60 parkwood60 is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3
parkwood60 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by smlford View Post
Front wheel drive??

Are you fn kidding me?? This author is a moron....
So are you saying making it front wheel drive won't ruin it? Or are you saying the idea of any front wheel drive Ford truck is moronic? Because the FWD Ford Courier is hugely popular in a lot of world markets, like central and south America until 2013, and the Bantam in South Africa. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_C...a-based_models
They certainly could cut down a Transit Connect and get a capable if very small truck.
Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
This Ranger is Gonna Party Like It's 1999 Curated Content Editor Ranger & B-Series 1 08-14-2017 05:34 PM
10 Ways Ford Could Screw Up the New Bronco Curated Content Editor 1978 - 1996 Big Bronco 6 05-01-2017 09:12 PM
Help with ignition lock cylinder on my 96' ranger Browning1441 Ranger & B-Series 3 04-06-2017 08:42 PM
Watch the Australians Torture Test the Ford Ranger! DerekShiekhi Ranger & B-Series 0 10-05-2016 12:11 PM
Replace the engine or cut my losses? fettsvenska 1967 - 1972 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks 46 01-15-2016 06:18 PM


Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums >

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:13 PM.


 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: