Scion xP
Ford Parts Specialist
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 88,826
Likes: 778
From: Simi Valley, CA
The domestics gave away the passenger car market years ago. Unless Honda & Toyota have a major quality meltdown, the domestics will never regain the passenger car market again. Sad. 
Senior User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
From: Illinois
Originally Posted by Jonas1022
Imagine a Fusion.
A Fusion with two doors, no back seat, no trunk.
Think of a Fusion from the B-pillar forward as just a Fusion.
Then imagine the backseat and trunk area as a pickup bed.
Think Ranchero...
If Ford built it, and sold it for under 20K.
Would you buy it?
Would you buy this Ranchero or the Toyota Scion xP for the same 20K?
Just a thought.
A Fusion with two doors, no back seat, no trunk.
Think of a Fusion from the B-pillar forward as just a Fusion.
Then imagine the backseat and trunk area as a pickup bed.
Think Ranchero...
If Ford built it, and sold it for under 20K.
Would you buy it?
Would you buy this Ranchero or the Toyota Scion xP for the same 20K?
Just a thought.
I do not have a special fondness for Toyota, just respect for their emphasis on quality. I think of a lot of Toyotas product as refrigerators. Rather bland, and nobody loves their refrigerator. But they're reliable, and most run for years with normal maintenance.
The only way Detroit will survive in todays market place is to do the same. Slogans and brandnames will not automatically ensure sales any more. Let the car guys and not just the bean counters have a say in product.
Plus Detroit has the added handicap of trying to regain the respect of millions of Americans who lost trust in their products. Thats a hurdle.
The domestics always sold the majority of cars in America, right? The figures that I saw recently show that very soon the imports will cross over the 50% share. The share I remember was something like 53% at present for domestics.
Detroit has to get their act together pretty soon.
Posting Guru
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,140
Likes: 0
From: Louisville,Ky.
Originally Posted by BigDaddy6969
My boggle with the ranger is #1 too small, #2 underpowered, #3 F'n ugly.
Sit. Stay.
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 18,308
Likes: 20
From: Washington State
Just cause they put it together doesn't mean they have anything to do with its antiquated design, low power output and a size that is out of place in the American compact truck market. Good grief.
If they have spent the last 10 or so years assembling the Ranger and have NOT noticed it's shortcomings...well...maybe we should change their name to "CHARLES"...as in Ray Charles; for being blind.
If they have spent the last 10 or so years assembling the Ranger and have NOT noticed it's shortcomings...well...maybe we should change their name to "CHARLES"...as in Ray Charles; for being blind.
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 18,787
Likes: 30
From: Melbourne, Aus
Originally Posted by Monsta
Just cause they put it together doesn't mean they have anything to do with its antiquated design, low power output and a size that is out of place in the American compact truck market. Good grief.
Low Power output - yes, on paper it is. However, real world performance is a bit different. The Ranger isn't far behind the Tacoma/Frontier, and its on par with the 5cyl Colorado. Its weight/frontal area is major factor here...
Antiquated design - yes and no.
Remember, you can pick up a Ranger for a heck of a lot cheaper than a comparably equipped Tacoma/Frontier too.
While the Ranger needs a redesign, I don't think it needs to go in the direction that most people say. It is the last TRUE compact truck - and has an enviable market niche with that.
Remember when Datsun came in the late 50's early 60's with thier compact truck and sold them hand-over-fist?
Notice how the Japanese manufacturers have moved away from that... I think with an economy that is dwindling, there can be huge market share had from a small, basic truck.
The one thing I think the Ranger needs is improved fuel economy...
Elder User
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 629
Likes: 2
From: DFW Metromess, TX.
Originally Posted by FTE Fred
While I acknowledge the downfalls of the Ranger - think of a couple of things.
Low Power output - yes, on paper it is. However, real world performance is a bit different. The Ranger isn't far behind the Tacoma/Frontier, and its on par with the 5cyl Colorado. Its weight/frontal area is major factor here...
Antiquated design - yes and no.
Remember, you can pick up a Ranger for a heck of a lot cheaper than a comparably equipped Tacoma/Frontier too.
While the Ranger needs a redesign, I don't think it needs to go in the direction that most people say. It is the last TRUE compact truck - and has an enviable market niche with that.
Remember when Datsun came in the late 50's early 60's with thier compact truck and sold them hand-over-fist?
Notice how the Japanese manufacturers have moved away from that... I think with an economy that is dwindling, there can be huge market share had from a small, basic truck.
The one thing I think the Ranger needs is improved fuel economy...
Low Power output - yes, on paper it is. However, real world performance is a bit different. The Ranger isn't far behind the Tacoma/Frontier, and its on par with the 5cyl Colorado. Its weight/frontal area is major factor here...
Antiquated design - yes and no.
Remember, you can pick up a Ranger for a heck of a lot cheaper than a comparably equipped Tacoma/Frontier too.
While the Ranger needs a redesign, I don't think it needs to go in the direction that most people say. It is the last TRUE compact truck - and has an enviable market niche with that.
Remember when Datsun came in the late 50's early 60's with thier compact truck and sold them hand-over-fist?
Notice how the Japanese manufacturers have moved away from that... I think with an economy that is dwindling, there can be huge market share had from a small, basic truck.
The one thing I think the Ranger needs is improved fuel economy...
Senior User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by Red Star
Senior User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by mundt
Got a kick out of the scion comments-for background I was an owner operator for years, semi's. 40,000 lbs. on up, you don't haul with a pick up or a ton and a half. Same throughout the load range, you buy depending on what you want to do with the vehicle. Have a '90 4.9 that I love, but I don't love it for fuel economy at todays prices either.
But just one example of why Toyota is within reach of being the number one seller in America. Just one example.
I'm retired, deliver for a florist. They have always used Ford vans. A Windstar was the newest. The gas prices in the last couple of years have created a problem with the miles you accumulate during deliveries.
The Windstar at that time (and today), cost over $60.00 for a tankful that would last three days or less. In November '05 the Boss bought a Scion XB, a tankful would cost $30.00 or less and do the same work. And it does in 95% of the cases the same work. 28 to 32 MPG during stop and go.
Can you name a competetive Ford or GM, or Chrysler product for this purpose?
The Scion has zero problems other than normal maintenance, want to know the repairs with the Windstar, or the Aerostar for comparison?
Delivering flowers you carry no weight, but the engines idle endlessly, the vehicles have endless drivers. They are not your normal family vehicles, they lead a hard life. You hustle on deliveries.
Toyota designed the Scion's for the youth market, I would assume the XB pickup would be designed for the same market. Not to compete with the heavy duty whatever's.
So these are quirky vehicles, but they are well sorted out. The small engines and trannies complement each other to deliver a very adequate performance for their small horsepower.
But just one example of why Toyota is within reach of being the number one seller in America. Just one example.
I'm retired, deliver for a florist. They have always used Ford vans. A Windstar was the newest. The gas prices in the last couple of years have created a problem with the miles you accumulate during deliveries.
The Windstar at that time (and today), cost over $60.00 for a tankful that would last three days or less. In November '05 the Boss bought a Scion XB, a tankful would cost $30.00 or less and do the same work. And it does in 95% of the cases the same work. 28 to 32 MPG during stop and go.
Can you name a competetive Ford or GM, or Chrysler product for this purpose?
The Scion has zero problems other than normal maintenance, want to know the repairs with the Windstar, or the Aerostar for comparison?
Delivering flowers you carry no weight, but the engines idle endlessly, the vehicles have endless drivers. They are not your normal family vehicles, they lead a hard life. You hustle on deliveries.
Toyota designed the Scion's for the youth market, I would assume the XB pickup would be designed for the same market. Not to compete with the heavy duty whatever's.
So these are quirky vehicles, but they are well sorted out. The small engines and trannies complement each other to deliver a very adequate performance for their small horsepower.
But your right, the MPG is probably the best benefit of these scions.
Elder User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by 02Taco
I hope they dont try to advertise this as a truck! And i also hope they dont use the 1.5 liter motor they use in the Xa or Xb, cause they wont be able to haul crap in that. I am not a big fan of scion, but if i had to get one it would be the TC.....its the only non retarded looking one
Senior User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by FTE Fred
While I acknowledge the downfalls of the Ranger - think of a couple of things.
Low Power output - yes, on paper it is. However, real world performance is a bit different. The Ranger isn't far behind the Tacoma/Frontier, and its on par with the 5cyl Colorado. Its weight/frontal area is major factor here...
Antiquated design - yes and no.
Remember, you can pick up a Ranger for a heck of a lot cheaper than a comparably equipped Tacoma/Frontier too.
While the Ranger needs a redesign, I don't think it needs to go in the direction that most people say. It is the last TRUE compact truck - and has an enviable market niche with that.
Remember when Datsun came in the late 50's early 60's with thier compact truck and sold them hand-over-fist?
Notice how the Japanese manufacturers have moved away from that... I think with an economy that is dwindling, there can be huge market share had from a small, basic truck.
The one thing I think the Ranger needs is improved fuel economy...
Low Power output - yes, on paper it is. However, real world performance is a bit different. The Ranger isn't far behind the Tacoma/Frontier, and its on par with the 5cyl Colorado. Its weight/frontal area is major factor here...
Antiquated design - yes and no.
Remember, you can pick up a Ranger for a heck of a lot cheaper than a comparably equipped Tacoma/Frontier too.
While the Ranger needs a redesign, I don't think it needs to go in the direction that most people say. It is the last TRUE compact truck - and has an enviable market niche with that.
Remember when Datsun came in the late 50's early 60's with thier compact truck and sold them hand-over-fist?
Notice how the Japanese manufacturers have moved away from that... I think with an economy that is dwindling, there can be huge market share had from a small, basic truck.
The one thing I think the Ranger needs is improved fuel economy...
Senior User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by FTE Fred
While I acknowledge the downfalls of the Ranger - think of a couple of things.
Low Power output - yes, on paper it is. However, real world performance is a bit different. The Ranger isn't far behind the Tacoma/Frontier, and its on par with the 5cyl Colorado. Its weight/frontal area is major factor here...
Antiquated design - yes and no.
Remember, you can pick up a Ranger for a heck of a lot cheaper than a comparably equipped Tacoma/Frontier too.
While the Ranger needs a redesign, I don't think it needs to go in the direction that most people say. It is the last TRUE compact truck - and has an enviable market niche with that.
Remember when Datsun came in the late 50's early 60's with thier compact truck and sold them hand-over-fist?
Notice how the Japanese manufacturers have moved away from that... I think with an economy that is dwindling, there can be huge market share had from a small, basic truck.
The one thing I think the Ranger needs is improved fuel economy...
Low Power output - yes, on paper it is. However, real world performance is a bit different. The Ranger isn't far behind the Tacoma/Frontier, and its on par with the 5cyl Colorado. Its weight/frontal area is major factor here...
Antiquated design - yes and no.
Remember, you can pick up a Ranger for a heck of a lot cheaper than a comparably equipped Tacoma/Frontier too.
While the Ranger needs a redesign, I don't think it needs to go in the direction that most people say. It is the last TRUE compact truck - and has an enviable market niche with that.
Remember when Datsun came in the late 50's early 60's with thier compact truck and sold them hand-over-fist?
Notice how the Japanese manufacturers have moved away from that... I think with an economy that is dwindling, there can be huge market share had from a small, basic truck.
The one thing I think the Ranger needs is improved fuel economy...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Red Star
Ford vs The Competition
11
Aug 10, 2008 11:48 PM
linkinluver07
Ford vs The Competition
33
Apr 8, 2007 10:45 AM
