Ford-UAW Deal: Ford Ranger and Bronco In, Taurus Out

Mark Stevenson
by Mark Stevenson
ford uaw deal ford ranger and bronco in taurus out

Ford fanboys (this one included) will finally get the Wrangler-fighting sport utility they’ve been yearning for since the demise of the Blue Oval’s two-door SUV in the mid ’90s.

According to the Detroit Free Press, Ford is looking to get back into the newly re-energized midsize truck game with its global Ranger, and that truck brings with it a sport utility based on the same architecture. It’s widely believed that SUV will be none other than Bronco.

(It bugs me that it’s called Bronco. The long-gone model was based on the F-150 and the Ranger-based SUV was called Bronco II and later Explorer. This makes no sense! But I’ll take it.)

The two new models are to make home the Michigan Assembly Plant that will see its current models — the Focus and C-Max — heading south for a Mexican vacation in 2018. Production of the new models is expected to start sometime before 2020.

Details on the rumored Bronco are scarce, but industry observers believe it will follow a similar recipe used by the Jeep Wrangler.

Other Ford assembly plants will see changes as well, including Chicago, which is slated to lose the full-size Taurus sedan. TTAC’s former managing editor Derek Kreindler had speculated previously on the demise of the Taurus in North America, effectively turning the car into a China-only model. Lincoln MKC production is expected to fill the gap left by the discontinued sedan in Chicago.

The deal between Ford and the United Auto Workers union spells out $10,000 signing bonuses — $8,500 for ratification and $1,500 in advance profit-sharing payments — to approve the contract; a $1,750 annual bonus payout, similar to one in the proposed General Motors contract; a $70,000 early retirement buyout for senior workers; a $9 billion investment plan for Ford factories; and, pay increases for veteran Tier 1 and newer Tier 2 workers.

Join the conversation
11 of 151 comments
  • Pch101 Pch101 on Nov 11, 2015

    I get that Alan Mulally has left the building, but did they forget his phone number? This is almost pre-bankruptcy-GM-like in its intentional overlapping of product. Somebody must have forgotten about the Explorer that will be parked on the same lot.

    • See 6 previous
    • Bd2 Bd2 on Nov 13, 2015

      Mulally is over-rated.

  • Lichtronamo Lichtronamo on Nov 13, 2015

    So Taurus is leaving Chicago and the fusion based Conti goes there. Assume a next gen T6 Ranger goes to Michigan Assembly along with derivative Bronco (in the mold of the first generation and Bronco II) Where is Explorer (and the Aviator) going in terms of platform and assembly? I read at GMI that one of the future products listed for an existing axle plant is a new Explorer axle. Could it be that Michigan Assembly gets the Ranger/Bronco but Ford will also use this platform for the Explorer/Aviator (which could also provide a global Everest). TTAC speculated before that the Explorer would return to a RWD platform. There is also the rumored D6 platform that could be under the Conti, Explorer and Aviator. Will be interesting to see this all shake out...

    • See 1 previous
    • Lichtronamo Lichtronamo on Nov 13, 2015

      @Scoutdude Then these would be on D6 along along with future Lincoln sedans (or the new Ranger could be unibody like a Honda Ridgeline and not BOF like Taco and Colorado/Canyon - ha). Automotive News had it that the first D6 sedan would be the MKZ replacement. But wouldn't this also mean that the Fusion ends up being a D6 platform?

  • ToolGuy CXXVIII comments?!?
  • ToolGuy I did truck things with my truck this past week, twenty-odd miles from home (farther than usual). Recall that the interior bed space of my (modified) truck is 98" x 74". On the ride home yesterday the bed carried a 20 foot extension ladder (10 feet long, flagged 14 inches past the rear bumper), two other ladders, a smallish air compressor, a largish shop vac, three large bins, some materials, some scrap, and a slew of tool cases/bags. It was pretty full, is what I'm saying.The range of the Cybertruck would have been just fine. Nothing I carried had any substantial weight to it, in truck terms. The frunk would have been extremely useful (lock the tool cases there, out of the way of the Bed Stuff, away from prying eyes and grasping fingers -- you say I can charge my cordless tools there? bonus). Stainless steel plus no paint is a plus.Apparently the Cybertruck bed will be 78" long (but over 96" with the tailgate folded down) and 60-65" wide. And then Tesla promises "100 cubic feet of exterior, lockable storage — including the under-bed, frunk and sail pillars." Underbed storage requires the bed to be clear of other stuff, but bottom line everything would have fit, especially when we consider the second row of seats (tools and some materials out of the weather).Some days I was hauling mostly air on one leg of the trip. There were several store runs involved, some for 8-foot stock. One day I bummed a ride in a Roush Mustang. Three separate times other drivers tried to run into my truck (stainless steel panels, yes please). The fuel savings would be large enough for me to notice and to care.TL;DR: This truck would work for me, as a truck. Sample size = 1.
  • Art Vandelay Dodge should bring this back. They could sell it as the classic classic classic model
  • Surferjoe Still have a 2013 RDX, naturally aspirated V6, just can't get behind a 4 banger turbo.Also gloriously absent, ESS, lane departure warnings, etc.
  • ToolGuy Is it a genuine Top Hand? Oh, I forgot, I don't care. 🙂