What Infinitu SUV are we walking about here? QX56? Well it does have 5.6L V8 engine and gas mileage is 13/18. My 3.8L Mustang get same gas mileage during the summer with A/C on.

 

Toyota will be coming out with a new Tundra soon and has announced that it will soon offer a truck to compete with the F250 SD. They are clearly putting their vast resources to work to gain market share here. I am hoping that increasing competition and rising fuel costs will prompt Ford to look again at a neglected category, the small truck (Ranger). I bought a new Ranger in '99 and '04 and they have been reliable trucks, but nothing that excites, just more of the same, year after year.
Dono

 

Isn't Mazda making "Rangers" still? You could always paste on some Ford logos

 

stick a fork in G-M guys , Im telling you they are done!!!! it,s just a matter of time

 

Do you have any keen insight as to why? And why Ford is in a different situation?

 

Actually, it's Ford who makes the Mazda B-Series pickups, not the other way around. Mazda never built the Ford Ranger.

Prior to the Ranger (pre '82), there was something called the "Courier" which was Mazda built. You might be thinking of that.

 

just wait and see , up to one maybe 2 years and the crap will hit the fan, if Gm goes it may help Ford, but G-m will be first to go, too many cars and not enough buyers so the most efficient auto company,s will last, and G-M is not one of them

 

I am a Ford guy through and through, but I have owned a Toyota and constantly see Toyotas running in some of the most appaling conditions in the world, I really don't believe that thier engineering is minimalist, quite the opposite in fact.
I don't think Toyota makes bad cars (mind you I don't believe they are as good as thier old vehicles), its just they are boring. - Who gets excited over driving a Camry?
That doesn't suit me at all.
Correct.
Ford and Mazda kind of do a trade. Ford design and build the US Ranger. Mazda design and build the Ranger for the rest of the world.

 

BigF, I didn't know the part about Mazda designing and building the Ranger outside North America. Are you saying that the Rangers down there are built at a Mazda plant?

As for the North American "Mazda" B-Series trucks, they're actually made and assembled under the same roof as the Rangers, and aside from a few sheet metal and interior tweaks, they are mechanically identical.

 

You learn something new everyday...

 

IMO Ford could redesign the F150 again similar to what the did with the Mustang. Style it similar to the 73-79, 67-72 or 61-66 era trucks. I just don't get that excited about any of the new trucks. Thats why I drive the 70's era trucks. Another peeve people have is the high depreciation on domestic vehicles. My wife's 2002 ZX2 is worth about 3,800.00 now and we paid 16,000.00 for it new.

 

Pretty much.
They are built at the AAT (Auto Alliance Thailand) plant in Thailand.
The plant is (as the name suggests) a joint collaboration between Mazda and Ford, however Mazda do pretty much all the engineering work.

As for the differences between the vehicles, it is the same here. Almost no change between the Mazda and the Ford except for the grille, and interior colours, and a few options.

They also make the Everest - an impressive (but basic) SUV based on the Ranger.
http://www.ford.co.th/everest/eng/home.php

 

I've been around several decades, owned many cars and trucks. Always made it a point to buy domestic - but now I'm driving a Maxima. I still have my '90 pickup with a 4.9 that will last for a long time by all indications.
I just know that in 2000 I had grown tired of check engine lights and recalls for cars with minimal miles on them, low resale, went to the Maxima. I've also subscribed to Consumers for a long while, and every year you get a survey asking for your experience with among other things - cars. And what and where you had problems with them, these are the statistics that they issue in the magazine. And where by a large margin the Asian brands are more reliable, and thus hold their resale better. That I was not getting in my Ford cars.
So, Ford's and GM's problem comes down to market share, they are getting less and less of it. I am not happy about it, America needs all the industry it can retain. But it can't be retained by an unresponsive management that still can't seem to match the relaibility that imports made in America, with domestic content, and American workers can.

 

Actually GM, while hemorrhaging, has a huge cushion of cash which could sustain them for up to five years. Normally a corp could pare down expenses by layoffs and shutting down nonproductive lines, but GM is locked into contracts which require them to pay the union up to 80% for a shut down plant. This is in addition to legacy costs for retiree pensions and health plans that adds around $1600 to every GM car. GM has a huge payroll and still has a significant impact on our economy. Hopefully, the boat won't sink with the union in the bow and management in the stern pointing at each other. Hopefully, they will both start bailing together.
Ford also has problems. At fiscal year-end December 31, 2004, Ford Motor’s automotive operations had a deficit working capital position of $10.3 billion.
Ford had 35 cents of cash and marketable securities for every dollar of current liabilities and total liabilities amounted to a whopping $175.8 billion.
With a tangible equity position of about $8.8 billion, Ford Motor Company’s total liabilities to equity ratio stands at 20 to 1, when 3 to 1 is considered risky. Both companies need to get "lean and mean", but that boat I mentioned is dragging a big legacy and contract anchor in a perfect storm whipped up by a perception of poor quality.
Dono