Ford leads; others follow
 

This topic isn't specific to the F-150, but the F-150 is affected by some of these points I'll make, so this is probably as good a place to start the discussion as any .... Don't flame me.
Also, I've owned many brands in my life, and driven others I don't own. There is no perfect vehicle. Each brand makes good and bad products ... Again - Don't flame me.

I saw this today: https://www.tfltruck.com/2018/10/201...fficient-news/
So GM now has a small gas turbo engine in the 1500 ... Go figure ...

My point is that Ford is a sales leader in trucks, and maybe that's because they are an industry leader in truck features and options ...
Examples:
- small gas turbo engines; Ford started the trend and now GM jumps on board (I recall many GM fans debasing Ford for such technology and they love their Vortec V-8 engines, but now look where the General has landed ...)
- alternative body materials; Ford starts with Aluminum and now GM has composite beds (GM TV commercials lambasting Ford's aluminum, but now they aschew the steel they so proudly touted just a few years ago)
- piezo injectors starting with the Ford 6.4L PSD, then GM put them in their Dmax (GM fans called the piezo injectors unnecessary, but GM now sees the light due to the need of ever quicker injector response in multi-injection events)
- pull-out step assist in the tailgate; now GM has a clever tailgate with sectioned system (GM fans said we were too lazy to use the step bumper, but now they see the advantage of a tech-laden tailgate ....)
etc ...

I'm not saying GM is bad; I've owned a Dmax and I liked it overall (great engine/trans; terrible chassis prone to corrosion everywhere).
It's just that GM fans seem to poo-poo what Ford creates, only to laud their own brand after they copy Ford's lead in some manner.
Ford does not always get it right; we'd be less than honest if we didn't admit that. But Ford certainly is a market leader in sales because they are a market leader in features and new applications.

It`s a copycat industry with some brands sitting back, taking notes, and watching how the consumer reacts to a new or exclusive feature and it if proves successful in the market, other brands will make their own version of the original and then tout how much better it is compared to the original. In the end, consumers are the winners because of the variety in the market.

Not to mention the GM 2.7 also boasts lower fuel economy and horrible power numbers. The ford 2.7 is hitting 325hp/400Tq with GM at 310hp/348Tq.

Its amazing that not that long ago 300 hp and over 300 ft lbs of torque in a gas engine wasn't laughable.

I agree, remember when the 5.4 3v debuted with 300hp it felt like a powerhouse! Now if I have to drive one of our fleet trucks with the 5.4 I feel like I should be in the slow lane with my hazards on.

I remember the 351 being a hot engine in an F 150. Before I got my '14 Ecoboost I had a 97 F 250 heavy duty 4wd with a 5.8 (351) in it to to with, it ran good and pulled what I hooked to it but oh my gosh this 3.5 Ecoboost will eat that 351 in every way imaginable.

I see that overly complicated/engineered tailgate from GM being a theft magnet as well as something that`ll have to be replaced after any type of hard impact from behind. Didn`t they also but the sensors for their blind spot system in the rear bumper? Not a very smart location considering the bumper will be damaged first before the same system in the tail light housing.

Funny that you mentioned this because it made me remember back in 1989 when I purchased my first brand new car which was a Mustang GT. That 225 HP in the 5.0 was one of the baddest and most powerful engines on the road but today that`s almost the starting point of many engines that are not V8`s.

I really do believe Ford is the leader. My neighbor bought a Chevrolet Silverado at the same time.. and he didn't have vents for the rear seats even though he had the center console. At least he was quick to point out my truck's made out of inferior aluminum, ha ha ha

While I agree with your points, Ford can be guilty of the same thing.

Remember when we mocked GM in 2006 for ditching manuals in their HD trucks? How did that end up for us?

Let's not forget the loud criticism of the Ecodiesel because the extra cost and complexity of a modern diesel is pointless in a half-ton when you can get tons of power and comparative fuel economy from a turbo v6, at a lower up front cost. Now the F-150 comes with a baby Powerstroke(Honestly I still think the little diesel is a waste in either truck).

A lot of people in the Ford camp(and in FoMoCo itself I imagine) touted the Ranger as unecessary because you get the same or better value out of an F-150 without much additional cost. Now we've got a Ranger coming due to the popularity of the Colorado/Canyon twins.

Chevrolet sold 145,000 Colorado/Canyon pick-up trucks last year while Ford sold 209,000 Fusion sedans. And Ford sold almost a million F-150 pick-up trucks.

If Ford sells the Ranger, it will only get half of Colorado's sales.. not even more than 75,000 a year. Ford is making a mistake.

I've had several Ranger trucks, my most recent was a 2007 I bought new and sold early this year, regular cab 4wd. The thing I loved about it is that it would go anywhere, very nimble and light. It was an XLT but a very basic and easy to maintain and repair. I don't think the new one will be quite the same.

Yes, it's an assumption. Thunderbird was sold again and failed again. Fiesta was sold again and failed again.

The Ranger was smaller, more fuel efficient, and failed. Chevrolet brought back El Camino and called it HHR but that failed.

I don't get it.. Ford sold quite a bit more Fusion cars than Chevrolet sold Canyons, yet Ford wants to bring back the Ranger?