I'm not going to predict what kind of sales the new Ranger will get, I will argue that not everyone needs a full size truck. For sure wheeling an F-150 around many urban situations is a PITA. Depending on where we are going we will take my SO's Tacoma to places where we know my F-150 will be difficult or impossible. For example, my F-150 will not even fit in my nephew's driveway. Talk about embarrassing.

The #1 vehicle in this segment (mid size trucks) has been the Tacoma for quite a while now. All of the Rangers, Colorados, and Canyons are trying to get a piece of that pie.

 

Just about everybody with an F-150 has a car with it. Actually, I think I'm the only one who doesn't. And my HOA had to give me a parking permit so I could park on the street since my F-150 doesn't fit in my driveway. I didn't mind, I love my F-150 and that was coming from a Mercedes-Benz which replaced my Audi before that. I really enjoyed my first F-150 and traded it in for a new one. I will not go back.

Tacoma's like Google and eBay. A very tough one to beat. Strangely, though.. more Fusion cars were sold than Tacoma trucks. This is why I don't really get it, why did Ford go ahead and nix it? Does Ford really expect to sell more Ranger trucks? Ford's new Ecosport will barely hit 60,000 this year, quite a bit less than the 200,000 Fusion cars sold in 2017. The Colorado trucks do not even sell well as the F-150, why even bother? The numbers are telling me it's going to be a mistake. I dumped all of my Ford shares in June, it's headed for a disaster. Don't get me wrong, I love Ford but I don't like the direction it's headed.

 

I had the 2011 Ford Fusion Sport. It was a good car and ran well. I replaced it with my 2015 F150 XLT and can't be happier. I do have to watch where I park.
Some Parking garages have low entrances, like mentioned earlier. I will test drive the new Ranger to see how it drives, and am looking for a mid size truck
to down size to and it is easier to drive for my wife. My F150 is too big she tells me, when she drives it she gets nervous. If she has to make turns, she can't
see how much clearance she from the curb. Or parking how much turning space she has from the other parked car.
If the Ranger does not work out I will cross that bridge when I come to it, and see which direction to go then?

 

 

I think the discontinuation of sedans and such is an OK short to mid term adjustment. Ford is already saving a ton of money by not advertising those vehicles, and as previously mentioned, the profit margins are better on trucks, SUVs and CUVs. The time will come (I think) when passenger vehicles are back in vogue, and as many of the CUVs are built on the same platform, I would imagine that they will have designs ready to go when they need to. Time will tell.

 

Allot of the options we have on trucks and American vehicles in general started years ago in "foreign" vehicles. It just took longer for them to catch up in trucks. American car companies for years did not want to put anymore in a vehicle than they had to. To compete with the foreign companies they had to start offering the options, and then they realized they could package them and make more money !!

 

The small turbo engines, direct injection, alternative body materials, etc. are not "copycat" ideas. They are being forced by the tightening CAFE standards, which are going to get much worse by 2025. Elections have consequences that most people are unaware of.

 

I didn't look at it this way, you're probably right with the profit margin being substantially higher with the upcoming Ranger compared to the current sedans. EPA mandates such as CAFE still apply to CUV's and SUV's (not sure about trucks), but it's been rolled back.

I drove my friend's 2013 Ranger when it was all-new, XLT with four doors and manual transmission. I was largely unimpressed probably because it struck me as feeling a little too basic with the manual transmission. It wasn't a 4x4 either.

That's why I fear the initial euphoria will dissipate quickly, just like what happened with the Taurus and the Fusion. Looking at the pictures of the 2019 Ranger, the interior doesn't look the same as the one I drove in D.F. but the exterior appears identical except for the tarting-up. So this is a seven-year-old truck that Ford is trying to pass off as "new."

The SuperCrew will start at $26,620. There is absolutely no way I will consider it especially at this price even with the tarted-up body and updated interior. Fusion is more comfortable, has a better ride, far better gas mileage, and costs much less, and, like some mentioned, with a lower profit margin for Ford.

CAFE may be a thing of the past and our renewed demand for oil is going to push it above $100 again. If the Ranger can get at least 30 mpg like the Fusion, it may do well but my 8 ball says highly unlikely, and I believe it.

I've given this a lot of thought and can't justify Ford's decision. EcoSport isn't selling well either, not sure about profit margin though.

 

Not so sure about "Ford leads" --- reality is the company's stock has been CRUSHED over the past four years because of poor leadership since Alan Mulally left............F-Series sales as of last month, started going in reverse and I expect that trend to continue and increase as interest rates (currently 7.9% on F350s) start cutting into sales and competitors ramp up their competing products.

Rates are going much MUCH higher compliments of the Federal Reserve exiting positions on its $6T balance sheet, up'ing rates on the short end and Big City Fats (Trump) gross mismanagement of the US Federal Budget (this year's deficit is approaching $1Trillion) --- as the govt racks up even more debt and issues more debt instruments (via Treasury Auctions) rates will take off .................Big City Fats gave a tax break, but most of that will be eaten up by increased interest rate expenses and elimination of interest deductions (e.g. mortgage interest deductions cap'd at $500K and no deductions for equity loans). Overall, by next year and for most consumers, the effects of the so-called "tax break" will be completely eliminated as they shell out more for loans................horrible gross mismanagement by Big City Fats

Ford and its competitors are gouging people on pick em ups --- obscene profits (in some cases over 50% profit per vehicle). Half of all F-Series sales are premium (e.g. Lariat, King Ranch) and that's where Ford gouges the hell out of buyers. Company is losing money in 4 out of the 5 geographic areas it competes (Ford's China sales were just down 43%) and the only products making money are North America where they're gouging US consumers on pick em ups and SUVs -- horrible shaft job but it's the only thing keeping the company afloat.........

 

I don't know where you are getting your info, but CAFE standards are not going away, and have not been rolled back. Trump has proposed rolling them back, and as I predicted on this very forum, California led the lawsuit against the EPA (along with environmental groups and some other states). This will be tied up in courts for years, and meanwhile, automakers have already been designing vehicles to meet the upcoming standards. It takes at least 4 years to go from drawing board to production, so they can't just change designs overnight if the rollback is successful. Even if it's successful, it doesn't mean CAFE standards will be a "thing of the past"; it means that they won't be quite as ridiculous as the original 2025 standards (which they never would have hit anyways).

 

I agree that CAFE standards are not going away. Truth is we (the collective, global "we") need to begin weaning ourselves from fossil fuels for a number of reasons. First, they are going to run out at some point. Where that is, no one really knows yet, but it is a limited resource, and we should think long term about it becoming more rare at some point. Second, the amount of evidence that we are changing the weather dynamics for the planet have other consequences that we can only speculate about (to some extent). Going all truck/utility by Ford has to be a temporary decision that kind of flies in the face of that. We shall see, or maybe none of us will live long enough to see.

 

The natural crude oil will never run out, but it will get more expensive as the "easy" deposits are used up. And now that we can make synthetic crude from any organic material, we will always have oil. But if battery technology improves to the point that it can replace oil (for automobiles), then electric should become more cost effective at some point. There isn't enough lithium on the planet to replace all IC engines if we wanted to (not to mention the heavy duty applications where it isn't viable), so we will need new battery technology before it can be done on a massive scale. The future will probably have a mix of gasoline, electric, CNG, and hydrogen powered vehicles, not all of one. And who knows what humans might invent? Future vehicles might be powered by some technology that we don't even have yet.

 

 

 

Well, not just dinosaurs. It is a generic term after all. Probably more old dead plant matter the anything else. The real origin is still organic in any case.