I think Ford may be making a mistake on this one.

Ford says it won't sell new Ranger pickup in US - Yahoo! Finance

 

This really makes me angry. The F-150 can't replace the Ranger. The F-150 is larger and some people don't want large pickups. They can make the Ranger even more fuel efficient than the V6 engines in the F-150. Ford is on drugs. No Bronco? No Crown Victoria? No Excursion? No Ranger? Ford is going to fail without these models.

 

Full story

U.S.-spec Ford Ranger to officially end production in 2011, Ford explains why — Autoblog

 

I hate to be the only one that can kind of see Ford's side of the equation. The sales volume of Ranger is something less than 75,000 per year. Their return on investment is very small, almost a break even just to show market presence and lure first time truck buyers into the Ford Family. To make a line of vehicles meet US Fed and State standards for safety and emissions would be almost a billion dollars. That tends to balance the scales away from importing and certifying a relatively small volume of vehicles. On the other hand, Rangers have been the best small pickups available since 1983 and If I owned Ford, I would continue the brand in the US no matter where it was manufactured.

 

etc.. you get the idea

 

One reason the sales volume of the Ranger is so low is because the vehicle hasn't changed one bit in over a decade. I owned a 2000 Ranger and if I bought one today it would be the exact same vehicle - same interior, same ancient engine, etc. Ford didn't invest in improving the vehicle and buyers went elsewhere. I don't condemn Ford for what they are doing but I wonder if they are missing a potential market for 4-cyl trucks.

 

The reality also is Ranger owners keep their trucks, so lack of change certainly is one incentive not to replace the one you own. But that lack of change to some extent is also a benefit, it is basic, uncomplicated transportation that can carry small loads, it is relatively easy to repair and parts are plentiful. You can take the reverse side of things and say that because Ford hasn't changed it they aren't putting money into r and d or production equipment changes, tooling and the like, so to some extent that offsets low sales volume. Plus it basically is the only domestic small pickup left-they had the market.

This will be somewhat of a hit to various businesses such as exterminators, cable tv installers, and others who use Rangers because they are economical and just big enough to carry what they need.

I also agree the F150 is not the answer, it is a larger and more complicated truck. Not that this may be a big deal for alot of people, but at least the Ranger was the one pickup that would fit in the typical two car garage.

I'm thinking Ford's not thinking too much about trying to lure Ranger owners back to the dealership to buy something else. They probably know we'll just keep what we have.

 

Ive always said I liked the look of the ranger exterior, IMO, Ford just needed to update the interior and cab size. Why couldnt they have made the interior like an Escape? It needs more interior storage space. And offer it in 3 body styles: the current regular cab with 6 or 7ft bed, supercab with the 6 ft bed, and a crew cab with a 5.5 foot bed. Sure the back of the crew wouldnt be huge, but it'd offer a little more interior room.

The Ranger has had no features like Sync, moonroof, lager door pockets, better cup holders, etc to make it attractive. Also the fact the Ford hasnt advertised it in YEARS hasnt helped

 

If you go 4 wheeling in the woods a lot, have you ever tried to go thru places your Ranger squeaks thru just fine with a F-150?.........your talking body work. So what if the Ranger hasnt had the latest gizmos and techno-crap installed in it, or "has not been revised since 1993 significantly"........Some things just work the way they are! No one has "significantly revised the 1911 .45 auto pistol since 1911!......It works quite well!
I guess Ford has turned its back on the segment of the population that wants a inexpensive, no BS, hard working, SMALL truck.

What could have been with a few updates to keep the "newest thing" people happy, and a 3.5 Eco-boost V-6?

I am sure Toyota, Nissan, and GM will be happy to fill the void.

 

I suppose one positive spin to this is that it may increase the value of your used Ranger. Not that you'd ever sell it, unless perhaps something really bad happened, like a messy deeeevorce.

 

Ford has it's cranium in it's rectum. The Ranger is a move up truck. Young people will no money buy the Ranger as it's cheap then as they gain more buying power they moved up to a F-150.

 

Well geez it's not like there aren't any used Rangers for people to buy.

 

Why do they call it Global? It's not even going to be sold in U.S and Canada. You can't call it global. Maybe they will change their mind.

 

Uh you people do know that a new f100 that is sized a little bigger is going to be the Ranger replacement don`t you. It may have the new higher output line of mtrs with a increase of mpg also supposedly. KB

 

The F100 has been the subject of several posts. It is fair to say it is being classified as a midsize, rather than a compact like the Ranger, and I believe it is going to share the same platform as the F150.