Thats the reasoning behind the demise of the N.A. Ranger platform. The new F150 will get similar if not better MPG than the Ranger and price point will be very close. I see Rangers all the time at $27K-$29K. You can get a decent F150 for that kind of money.

 

Hey all,
I know its not much relevant to my US friends but i saw pics of the new Aus built Ranger. Looks pretty decent and much better than the early mules we got to see. Sorry im not very handt around the PC and dunno how to put up a link. But i did google Australian motot show and went to New Ford Ranger if anyone is interisted.
Best regards,
Valdor

 

Well Europe is getting it's new Ranger in 2011. Actually built in Thailand and of course twinned with the Mazda as before. Whereas the Mazda looks awful, the Ford looks good. Might not be a match for the VW Amarok thou.

Ford Ranger Pick-up (2011) - autobild.de

The sites in German but the picture gallery of official press photos is good.

 

Thanks for the pic, like i said im not clever around the ole PC.. Anyway ive seen the Amarok and its a decent piece of kitt. Only gripe i got is its engine, Yeah pretty powerfull at around 300ft/lb for the 2.0 l i4 Twin turbo, but i can see that beien a problem in some markets like Africa where our diesel quality is poor at best. Those ultra modern engines not gonna do so great as the more simpler ones. getting stuck a few hundred miles away from an acreditted service station wont be fun.
Also from what i see I cannot see why the Ranger cant match and better the Amarok. should be close in size to. Diesel engine line up is good with a 2.2l i4 and 3.2l i5 doin duty. Wish theyd put the F150 3.7 v6 in the lineup to...

 

Not all that different from the 4Trac concept truck from 2005, only I like the 4Trac better. UPDATE: World Premiere: Ford 4-Trac Concept Truck — Autoblog

 

Several people have mentioned that since the fuel mileage is improved on the F-150, there is no need for the Ranger. I don't know where you all live but after owning both I can attest to the fact that the F-150 has gotten so big it is not nearly as easy to drive/park as a Ranger in the city. My wife didn't mind driving the Ranger SC but finds the F-150 to be a pig to park. Mileage was never the only reason for the Ranger.

 

Great point. Full size trucks are great if you can justify it, otherwise we don't need more full size trucks/suvs on the road for no reason.

 

Great points on the Ranger, the new F150 and other full size ½ tons Trucks have gotten away from the light truck market and are bigger and stronger than ¾ tons of the past. I have Rangers, F150 and F250’s and the Ranger is my favorite and will do 95% of my trucks need until I need big towing. I wish Ford would invest in and keep the Ranger and the light truck market.

 

In all fairness, until your infrastructure in terms of dealer network etc, catches up with Europe and North America you can forget the modern vehicles. I run a workshop myself but need help servicing my 05 F150. Any vehicle after around 2000 is heavily dependent on a highly qualified and equiped service network. You can't even drive them through deep water anymore. There's a lot to say for running 60ies through 80ies vehicles for longevity, and servicability. That's why old Land Rovers and Landcruisers are so popular I guess. Jeeps too. I'm regret trading my '97 for an '05. Should have traded it for a '96 instead!
Ed

 

Anyone at Ford reading this? We're out here and we're the ones driving (and buying) your trucks. You can forget all your expensive market research, that gave you the Edsel. Markets change fast, and we're the ones changing it and living it. The F150 got too big. The '97 F150 was just right. If the Ranger could move up to that, Ford would reach more people. The Transit dominates the British light truck market since 1965 to the extent that people refer to light trucks and vans as "Transits" whether or not they are. Britain is a service economy dominated by contractors, self-employed business people, retailing etc, all built with Transits. Ford can't rely on the F150. The range is too limited, it does too little. The bed doesn't tip, the bed is mostly too small, it's difficult to park, consumes to much fuel, is over built and too sensitive to abuse. I love mine but come on it's a dinosaur, and one that doesn't like splashing around in water either;-)
Ed

 

My company has a fleet of 1400 Rangers, which see about 20k miles per year (I put about 34k on mine in a year). They are great little trucks that park and turn much better than a full size and get better fuel economy. We replace 1/3 of our fleet every year, so I wonder what we are going to after the Ranger. I doubt it will be the F150.

 

I know I haven't been around here before, specially since my main interest is based on a '54 panel I'm working on. But my daily driver is a four cylinder Argentinian ranger. It runs a 2.3L 4 cylinder gas engine that might lack a bit of extra boost sometimes, but it will always get me there. I'm not much of a carrier myself so most of the use is for beach and mountain trips where the stock height really beats a car and without a big impact on gas milage. I'm getting an average 30mi/gal off it with 32" tires instead of the stock 275 and no diff mods.

 

i still think that the general public can build a better truck then the dealers. i mean just you tube diesel ford ranger and or check out the diesel power magazine of the 4bt cummins ranger...hell i would rather have that then any of those new emission garbage crap trucks...plus they should go back to the 99 7.3 powerstroke it was fords greatest diesel engine they had going for them.

 

Just playing devils advocate here but if the Ranger is so good then why isn't North America getting it? Why didn't Ford just adapt the world Ranger for American use?

Does Ford really believe that they will lose money by steering away from the compact truck segment? I think they may be making a mistake. There is a huge customer base that refuses to think out of the box.

Likewise I also have friends that own Rangers. Great little trucks but I believe that the short F-150 4x2 V-6 will surprise many Ranger owners with it's fuel economy and it's ease in handling.

Open your minds, be fair and give it a shot.

 

The reason I will not accept the F150 is because it's simply too big. If I wanted a big truck, i'd get a semi. I feel small in an F150, and i'm 6'3". There's simply no need for that much cab room. I fit perfectly in my F100, and it's the same size as a Ranger. Interior comfort shouldn't be judged on how much space there is in a cab, as the car makers are currently doing, it should be judged by how you place and shape the components within the cab. You can pretty much fit a body behind the dash of the new F150. Downsize that dash and bring it closer to the firewall, and what do you know, instant space. Of course, that's just my opinion. I'm sure some of you diehard F150 guys completely disagree.