You said the Ranger wouldnt be profitable with the reg cab and supercab, not true. Lots of companies buy base Rangers to use for parts runners. If Ford had continued to upgrade and improve the Ranger every 5 years it would most likely still be the class leader.

A 180 hp 4-banger and a 220 hp 5-banger is underpowered?
As for quality, well, thats debatable. I know a few people who owned Tacomas are said the quality sucked, so IMO that aspect is in the eye of the beholder.

 

Ignorant.


My current Ranger is my third, and the fact that it can meet my needs as a truck and GET THE JOB DONE is why it is my third. Granted, Im not hauling bricks and concrete, but I do my share and I want to do so without sinking all my money into gas-guzzling V8. If I had extra money to burn I'd get a F150 in a heartbeat, however I couldnt justify it. If I needed to haul a lot, I'd get a F-Series, or a U-Haul.

I have the 4.0, and the fact that it is a truck, I accept the gas millage which I dont think is bad. It has fine power for passing, accelerating and towing. The Ranger with the 2.3L may not have the "kick" the 4.0 does, but for what it gets in gas more then compensates, IMO. And as said before, the regular cabs with 2.3L are used mostly as part runners, fleet, or an affordable way to haul your mountain bike and camping gear out for the weekend.

We have a Ford Fusion in the household. When we need to pack up the family and go shopping, or long distance travel we take the car. If I was single, the Ranger Supercab is perfect because I can fit cargo in the bed and behind the cab. If I was to need to consisntantly carry more passengers then I could fit, well then I'd invest in an F150 or maybe I shouldnt have a truck at all.

The point is, not everyone needs a full or mid-size crewcab. The Ranger fits my needs perfectly and I cant see many situations where I'd be needing more power or passenger space, but I DO need a truck. The mid-sizes that are offered are much more money to buy and gas up with. BTW, Ive sat in the back of a Dakota, Colorado and a '07 Silverado and they are terribly uncomfortable, so I cant imagine any truck outside of the Dodge Ram Mega Cab having a comfy rear seat.

Maybe Im just in "Ford Country" here in Metro Detroit, but the roads here are loaded with Rangers, new and old. I'd say 1/2 of them are regular cabs. Go visit the Ranger forum and check some of the posters profiles, I think you'll find the are a lot more regular cabs then you think.

 

There's far less profit in a RC as opposed to a SC or CC. There's minimal profit for Ford in the base Ranger, which is basically a fleet vehicle. There's more of a demand for SC's, and yet more of a demand for CC's. The RC Ranger in its present form is highly profitable for Ford since it's little changed from 1983. But to build a new Ranger RC without offering a CC wouldn't make much sense. For example, Toyota built 1000's of RC 2007 Tundra's, many with the 5.7L, and the dealer lots are full of them. Most ppl want the CC, and Toyota has recognized this and has changed production schedules. Mebbe auto parts stores buy Rangers as parts runners, but not around here...I've yet to see one in the past 10 yrs. Most of the stores here are using stake bed Tacoma's.

 

unless your a beefcake, nissans, and yotas back seats are pretty comfortable, dont know about gm's.

you may not need a 4dr but others do, its just sad that this is the only light pickup in the market not offering a 4dr ranger here in the u.s. you dont think something is wrong with that?

 

umm.. they aren't even in the same class Ranger's a compact pickup and the Tacoma, Dakota etc. are are midsize pickups.. can we atleast do an apples to apples comparsion.. I do agree however Ford does need to do an update but i looked ata nwe one the other day and they looked good. i don't want another one but they looked good.

 

I posted about the uncomfortable back seats in the mid sizes because Im sure it'll be an argument as to why Ford "must" have a 4 door mid size truck. If they change the Ranger to a 4 door crew cab, it'll cut into the bed lenghth, weight the truck down more causing more fuel usage and/or lessen power. Hey, thats fine and all, but Ford should still offer a small pickup, Supercab, Supercab 4 door, regular cab AND a mid-size crew cab, if that what they want to do. Give us options!

There is no resaon for me to buy a mid size if I could go full. Which again, if I had the extra dough to spend and could justify it, I would skip the mid and go full size. Therefore, the current Ranger 4 door Supercab works best for me. I need a truck but cant justify or afford the cost of an F150.

 

yeah the 2dr supercab,lol

 

Ok that went over my head. Ive got the 4door. Or, if you like, two full doors and two half doors. Does that equal 3 doors?

 

hey my tremor supercab has 2 drs, to me its an extra cab.

 

The Ranger could have 8 doors and it still would be a glorified car. Maybe I lack sensitivity since I have a hard time sitting in one and not kissing my knees, I dont know. All I know on the subject is that if given a choice between a Ranger and a Dakota (yes both are 1/4 tons) I would take the Dakota hands down. Its a sad scenario really, considering I probly will never buy either.

 

My work vehicle is a 06 Dakota with the 4 full doors and the back seats are more comfy than any Ranger I've had to stuff myself into.

Isn't the Sport Trac a glorified 4 door Ranger? And with a V8 option to boot?

 

once again for the final TIME! they are not even in the same class ranger is a COMPACT repeat COMPACT truck. Dakota is a Midsize lets repeat again slowly a MIDSIZE.. Is that clear to you now??

 

They compete for the same market. You can call them whatever you want, bottom line is that when people are shopping for a ranger they will also be looking at dakotas S-10's sonomas tacomas etc. regardless, they are still a glorified car.

 

They did compete with S-10s, Sonoma's way back when they made them but the replacements are larger and the Tacomas and even the Dakota's have been enlarged so they are not comparable. The Ranger is the only small truck left. The problem with the Ranger is the lack of a redesign and the price. People who want a small truck want a redesign and a price that is not so close to a full sized truck. Most of the new Rangers I see are white parts runners for auto parts stores.

 

naw,
gm has one as well, any numbers form them, if there selling more colorado's than the ranger??