What changes would you like to see when ranger is redesigned? I wanna see a crewcab ranger, with a new 250 horse, 275-300 ft lbs 4.2 V6, or a truck tuned, 300 horse 4.6. i would also love to see a hardcore off road option with solid axle and coils, 31" Bfg mudders, option of 4:10 or 4.56 gears, lockers in both ends, 6 speed manual with granny AND overdrive, or 6 speed auto, fixed yoke driveshafts manual hubs, and of course manual t case option..

I can see myself drivin a 300 horse, solid axle, mud shoed crewcab ranger.

 

Amen!!! all those opions you mentioned, but leave the looks and size the same. I like the classic looks, it"s been around forever. I still wish they made the 66-77 Bronco, or the cj-5. some vehicles are timeless, the ranger being one of them. BUT change is in the air. the ranger they make over seas still looks good and it"s a clubcab. Maybe that one could be in our future, we can only hope!

 

I want to see the F150 in the Ranger dimmensions with the 2.3 four, 4.0V6 and 4.6V8 as engine options all with MAnual or auto transmission availability.
Dan

 

Now your talkin, a manual v8 option, maybe even a 6 speed ! Maybe even a small diesel for rock crawlers and trail hounds. A 250 hp 4.0 would even be nice and very doable!!!

 

I'd like to see a 4 cyl diesel 4x4, with a six-speed manual trans. (granny low and overdrive), floor shift t-case, and manual hubs.

 

If you want a real crew cab and a real bed and a real V8, then the Ranger platform has to be enlarged. IMO, there is no way around that fact. And if it gets enlarged, then you might was well forget about any kind of 4-cylinder being a valid option. Think about it. People who currently have Ranger 4-bangers love them and rightfully so, but none of them have ever claimed that their Ranger has a lot of zip or grunt. So if you add more size and weight to the equation, you can see how quickly a 4-cylinder engine could become overwhelmed and be out of its league, even in a base configuration.

I'm wondering about a 6-speed manual for a Ranger 4-banger, it would seem to me that it would require more actual shifting by the driver (duh), and hence more overall physical effort and mental attention being asked of the driver regarding the act of shifting. Not sure if that's a good or bad thing.

I suppose the general point is that, the "new" Ranger, if there is to be one, cannot be (and will not be) all things to all people.

 

Keep in mind, Rock, that some of us LIKE shifting. And, although I'm not old enough to remember 4-speeds, I don't think that adding an extra gear really results in that much more shifting, or hardly any extra mental attention once the vehicle's characteristics have been learned.

My tired old Supercab 4-cylinder with 3.73 gears seems to have too much "space" between second and third gears, and when I load it down, first gear seems too high (need to slip the clutch more than I like to get moving). That's why I would like to see a six-speed.

 

I vote to keep the ranger the same size and give us a 250 hp 4.0 and a 4 cyl diesel. If a v-8 means a bigger truck, might as well buy a f-150.

 

I would like to see an "off road" option with tires, more suspension travel, gearing, and a six speed. Also a 225 + hp v6 and all the plumbing for a nitros bottle factory installed. All you have to do would be add the bottle and gas. Add an Supercharger package and an 8 track tape player..
Dave

 

I would like to see them keep up with the Dakota and the Colorado. make it have more room and little more power I mean if I was not such a big ford fan like I am I would probably have a Dakota with a small V8 so u could pull a 16 ft car trailler with a car on it or a camper or something I just dont think my Ranger has the crap to do some of the stuff that the Dakotas and Colorados do Just my oppion Dustin

 

The 5.4 liter out of the new mustang. with a 6 speed manual trans so it will get mid 20's in gas milege and the truck should have an option package that lowers it about 2 inches with the new mustang 5 spoke daisy mag looking wheels. They would probably want 25-30 grand for it though.

 

Sounds like what you guys want is the Bronco concept SUV from a couple years ago, but with a removable hardtop and a midgate........

-Not that I disagree with any of the options you guys are throwing in. I'm all for a V-8, solid-axle, coil-sprung, 6-speed on the floor, a 3-speed manual-shift transfer case and manual hubs on all four corners! Make mine Midnight Blue and tell me when it's ready ....

 

I do not want the crew cab. That is what the sport trac is for. Just a super cab with two faceing jump seats like the current truck. I want the look and styling of the body and interior of the new F150. The 2.3 16 valve motor has plenty of power but a 6 speed would be nice for a super low 1st gear.

 

I think we tend to get a little v-8 crazy. TAKE THE 4.0, ADD 3 VALVE HEADS, BETTER CAMS, VARIABLE TIMMING, vaavoom!!!!! 250hp. Thats more than the Daks v-8. Torque won't be quiet as much, but for the size and wieght of the ranger, it would rock! THE NEW dakota"s are ugly any how. As far as the colorodo thier hp #'s are decent, but there torque comes in alittle high in the power band. All in all the 4.0 sohc was a leap forward in the small truck market, with still room for improvement. If ford would get thier head out of thier butt, the ranger would still be the truck to beat!!

 

i want a 2002/03 fx4/level II with the manual t-case and manual tranny, the 4.6 v8, and an off road coil over front suspension set up. thats its.

dont make it bigger.