By on October 19, 2018

Ford badge emblem logo

News this morning of Ford deciding not to bring the Raptor Ranger to American shores (via Autoblog) whipped your normally placid author into frothy indignation, prompting him to print off a Blue Oval and emphatically throw his entire collection of competition-grade Elkadart Razor steel-tipped darts at it.

Okay, maybe the situation is not that dire here in the office. But given some strange product decisions, Wall Street frustrations, and a mystifying new ad campaign, we’re left with one inescapable question:

What in the name of Henry Ford is going on at The Glass House?

Longtime readers (thanks, all three of you) know of my affinity for the Blue Oval, especially its Lincoln division. I maintain my relationship with the brand is a textbook definition of Stockholm Syndrome. Despite a myriad of reasons not to, and a driveway currently occupied by a Dodge and GMC, I’ve owned a dozen of the damn things. Three Escorts, an Edge, countless Crown Vics, the Lincolns. And – I think – it’s one of the reasons I keep hoping for the place to succeed.

Yet, today’s news of Ford deciding not to take on the ZR2 and TRD Pro pickup trucks is another blow to the nadgers. Most of the stated reasons for not doing so fall squarely in the “um, okaaay” file, ranking up there with my excuses for why I didn’t take out the garbage or remember to bring milk home from the corner store. Too close in price to an F-150 Raptor? Please.

This is not to say we’ll never see a Ranger Raptor, given that there will undoubtedly be more generations of Ranger trucks in the years to come. Maybe we’ll get one then. Maybe not. Ford fans in America, the home of wide-open spaces and off-road parks, would finally have a foil to their Chevy and Toyota buddies on the trail.

It remains bewildering as to why Ford is abandoning wide swaths of the market, from small cars to family sedans and now off-road midsize pickups (the latter being an admittedly narrow niche in which to play). My current theory is that Ford will morph the Mustang into a sub-brand, not unlike what Toyota has done with the Prius name. I can’t believe I just used those two marques in the same sentence.

Image: Ford/YouTube

Some of the clues to such a decision are there, not the least of which is the shadowy figure shown above, captured as a still from Ford’s new ad campaign with Bryan Cranston. That’s most definitely a Mustang logo, illuminated and appended to something that really appears to have a taller tumblehome than today’s Mustang. We know Ford was playing with (and allegedly abandoned) the idea of using “Mach 1” on an electrified vehicle of some sort.

Ford’s got an image problem right now. Blame it on a few long-in-the-tooth products, blame it on a boss whose management has been described as “cerebral,” or blame it on a disinterested Wall Street. Whatever the issue, at least top brass are committed to doing something – a point driven home at this week’s dealer meeting in Vegas, according to quotes gathered by Bloomberg reporters.

“When you have a moment like we’ve had as a company, you’ve got to look in the mirror and say, ‘What can we change to make it better?’ And it was a long list,” explained Jim Farley, president of global markets. “It all added up to the same thing: We’ve got to get serious about loyalty. The biggest ah-ha moment was when we saw our lead shrinking.”

There it is. Nothing gets the lead out of an automaker’s boots like loyal customers beating a path to the competition’s F&I office. Whatever it takes, I truly hope they’re back to form soon. I’ll pour one out for the Ranger Raptor later tonight but, before I do, let’s give the last word to someone who’s toiled at the Blue Oval for over a decade.

“Ford just seems to be at its best when it can make a comeback,” Farley said at the dealer event. “This week is the first step.”

[Images: Ford Motor Company]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

171 Comments on “Blue by You: With a U.S. Ranger Raptor Off the Table, Ford Frustrations Mount...”


  • avatar
    Lie2me

    I’ve been a Ford fan for a long time, but if they continue to take interesting product off the table I’ll be forced to find it elsewhere

    • 0 avatar
      jfb43

      Grew up in a Ford family and have three right now – ’05 Mustang GT, ’06 F-150, and a ’13 Fusion, and I have to agree with this sentiment. I’m glad I’m not in the market for a vehicle at the moment – maybe by the time I am Ford will have its act together.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Ford would tell you, it’s never had its act together better. But would the lack of Fusions and such, sour and derail the sale of your next new Mustang GT or Ford truck, CUV to Super Duty? If so why?

        Some hard decisions are being made at Ford (Proud), while not deliberately trying to ruin anyone’s day (except maybe Deadweight’s or EBFlex/SilvyZ71’s) and I seriously doubt Ford hates (long) money.

        Still as far as I can tell, no automaker can do it all, and do it right, subcompacts to commercial medium duty, everything else in between (expect maybe GM lol, and they’ll gladly take your business!).

        • 0 avatar
          Art Vandelay

          You know I am a Ford guy, and they aren’t ruining my day, but they are all but assuring that as my 2 current Fords age out of my fleet they will be replaced by something from Europe (The Fiesta ST) and something really used or from GM or Toyota.

        • 0 avatar
          jfb43

          I think I might be the problem here; not Ford. Or any of the manufacturers. I think what I want from a car does not exist and will not exist. They have to make cars to appeal to the largest group of people they can for the section of the market they’re aiming at. I’m a percentage of a percentage, not even on an automaker’s radar, and I understand why no one builds something I’d want to buy.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            I think the greater issue is that certain types of enthusiasts not only want a certain kind of niche vehicle on the market, they also want to be able to choose from a bunch of different offerings.

            So what you end up with is a handful of people on the internet who demand a car like the Toyota 86; not too expensive, RWD, good handling, etc. Then Toyota/Subaru puts it out there and the Internet People go “I can’t get it in the color I want/it needs 20 more horsepower/I can’t get a diesel” and so on, and refuse to buy it. Then the rest of the industry looks at the meh response to the car and decides they’re not going to try.

            It really seems to be a case of letting “perfect” be the enemy of “good.”

        • 0 avatar
          CarShark

          It just seems to me that Ford is looking at the future of the auto industry in the U.S. and seeing a lot more crossovers and a lot fewer small cars and sedans than anyone else is. There seems to be this undercurrent among the enthusiast set that crossovers are a fad that will eventually pass, and that cars will eventually be ascendant again. I just don’t see what will replace them the way SUVs and crossovers replaced station wagons and full-size cars.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Crossovers are a compromise; you can have passenger capacity OR cargo capacity; you can’t have both. Worse, very few can carry a 6′ long item inside even with passenger seats lying flat and most flat-pack furniture tends to run towards 8′, which at one time would fit in any full-sized and most mid-sized wagons. Even the Dodge Magnum boasted the ability to carry an 8′ cargo, while still being sporty. Even carrying a 50″ flat screen television is difficult for most crossovers, if not impossible–especially when carrying the family along.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            That’s why most crossovers have roof racks. That 50″ TV will fit nicely on the roof of a crossover with a rack

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            “That’s why most crossovers have roof racks. That 50″ TV will fit nicely on the roof of a crossover with a rack”

            — … where it can get rained on, or risk sliding off if its not tied down properly, or…

            You do realize that people almost never even USE those roof racks, don’t you? Some brands are so confident that those racks will never be used that they put their AM/FM/Sat antennae right on the centerline of the crossover, where it would be in the way of almost any load put on the rack. That antenna would need to be removed before anything could be put up there or risk having it broken off to even greater expense.

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            Maybe on a gen 1 Escape. The sloping roofline of modern crossovers makes the factory roof rack not so good. You could toss one of those Yakima racks on or something, but at that point why not just put it on a sedan and save some bucks.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            Now you guys are splitting hairs, a roof rack works fine when used properly, I use mine all the time, just don’t pick-up your new 50″ TV from Best Buys on a rainy day. A little common sense goes a long way with roof racks

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @Lie2: Splitting hairs? Maybe. My point is that the ONLY times I see roof racks being used is when they’re carrying skis, kayaks, rooftop luggage containers (Thule, for instance) and mattresses. Rarely, VERY rarely, I’ll see plywood being carried. Those last two items would definitely take out the antenna.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            How do people where you live get their Christmas trees home?

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            They pull their Christmas Tree out of the attic the day after Thanksgiving or they go to the lot with me and toss it in my F150.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            Hey, Art, are you available Nov. 24th? Never mind, I’ll just use my crossover with the nifty roof rack ;-)

    • 0 avatar
      DeNomolos

      Lifelong Ford fan here. Owned Mustang GTs new since 1989. Family has owned Rangers, Edge, T Birds, Escorts, Taurus, Fusion, Fiesta.

      Went to Anaheim, CA auto show this month, and not a single product excited me.

      Went with a Tacoma in 2014 since there was no new Ranger at the time, was hopeful that a new Ranger would be exciting and potential Taco replacement. Nope… I’ll keep my V6 thank you – no turbo four banger for me! The Raptor might have been a worthy contender if it had a V6.

      Ah, well…

  • avatar
    thegamper

    I haven’t read anything else about the Ranger Raptor not coming aside from this article, but that does seem a rather astounding decision. It would sell. Truck fans want it!

    My only theory on this is that the Ranger is a reluctant product here in the US for FoMoCo. Ford wants to lure new customers but does not want to cannibalize its F150 and most likely extremely profitable F150 Raptor by offering cheaper Rangers. Same reason nobody will offer wagon variants of cars on sale in the US even though they are offered in other markets. Why offer a wagon when they can sell you a much more profitable crossover?

    Why sell you a little truck for a big profit margin when we can sell you a monster truck for obscene profit margins?

    I gotta believe its all about protecting the F150 money train.

  • avatar
    RSF

    Ford really is lost right now. The family better wake up fast.

  • avatar
    George B

    Too bad. The Ranger is too tall and narrow, but being relatively tall and less wide can be useful off-road. The turbocharged 2.7 liter V6 used in the F-150 and several other Ford vehicles would be a suitable engine for a US Ranger Raptor.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    It’s simple. Ford doesn’t want to cannibalize the profits made from the full-sized Raptor, just like they didn’t want to cannibalize the profits made from any other full-sized F-series.

    They’ll be forced to bring in the Raptor just in the hopes of generating more pickup sales over dying CUV sales.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      So the Tacoma doesn’t cannibalize the Tundra.

      The Colorado/Canyon sure hasn’t cannibalized the Silverado/Sierra (and GM has no issues selling what they build of the “midsizers”).

      But Ford Ranger Raptor buyers will buy over the F-150??? I find that really, really, really, hard to believe.

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        I would counter that in Toyota’s case, the Tundra may cannibalize the Tacoma.

        This is Ford being stupid. We want to be a truck company, but we aren’t even going to offer the most interesting trucks in a segment. At least there was some interesting product in the dark Jack Nasser days, even if it was crap. Now I get boring crap.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        You seem to forget that the Ranger was the #1 best-selling “mid-sized” pickup truck up to 2011. The Tacoma picked up roughly half of Ford’s Ranger sales when Ford abandoned that market.

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          You seem to forget by 2011 the category of midsize was a dead category walking, and the Ranger was, ehem, “value” priced because the platform was older than dirt, did awful in crash tests, and was made of old architecture from the Cold War age.

          I get a subset of buyers appreciate that (they buy Nissan Frontiers today) but it’s a different market, with different buyers in the category.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            … and yet the Toyota Tacoma still sells more mid-sized trucks than any other OEM, even when combining the C-twins by GM into one model. I can guarantee that the Ranger will, in time, pass the Tacoma’s sales and push the Taco down closer to the C-twins numbers.

      • 0 avatar
        dwford

        The Tacoma is Toyota’s “real” truck. The Tundra is a non-factor. I drive by my local Toyota dealer daily, and I’m not sure they even have a Tundra on the lot.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          That would tend to suggest that the Tundra is getting sold almost as soon as it arrives, compared to the Tacoma that sits on the lot for a few days/weeks.

          • 0 avatar
            quaquaqua

            Furry, please. Everybody all said the Colorado/Canyon were gonna eat the Tacoma’s lunch and it never happened. The Ranger especially isn’t gonna be a monster hit when Ford seems set on limiting the models/configurations/hype around it. Totally bizarre.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @quaquaqua: It seems you have forgotten history. Toyota rose to the top BECAUSE the Ranger was dropped. I would personally expect to see the Tacoma lose at least ⅓ of its sales to the Ranger and possibly much, much more since Toyota also absorbed much of the Dakota market. Remember, there are numerous drivers who swear by US brands and RAM is no longer a US brand in their eyes.

            Oh, and I was not one of those claiming the C-twins would “eat Toyota’s lunch,” even if I did ultimately buy a Colorado myself. But then, I’ve never been a fan of Ford, either, so Ford needed to do something exceptional to get my business. Ford failed.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @Vulpine – I seriously doubt that there would be cross shopping between a full-sized Raptor and a Ranger Raptor. They target different buyers. I don’t see guys with heavily modified full sized Chevy’s buying ZR2’s. The Ranger Raptor would be priced similarly to a ZR2 which is priced considerably lower than a Raptor. If anything, the Ranger Raptor would cut into Unlimited Rubicon sales.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Lou,
        I don’t know about that.

        I was considering buying a new pickup. So, I was thinking the V6 Mercedes Benz pickup, I then thought a HD Ram.

        So, it also comes down to how much you want to spend.

        As pickup have become mainstream cars for daily driving, they will also take on the other aspects of car buying or SUV/CUV buying.

        I’m not saying that all people will consider all size vehicles.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @Big Al from Oz – my point is most buyers don’t tend to cross-shop size. They pick full-sized or pick mid-sized and cross-shop the competition. A guy shopping for Suburban sized SUV’s isn’t going to cross-shop a CRV or Rav4.
          A Raptor F150 will be looked at by a different set of buyers than a Raptor Ranger.

  • avatar
    Art Vandelay

    I own 2 Fords right now…My F150 and Fiesta ST in addition to the wife’s Santa Fe Sport. I have owned numerous Fords and consider myself a Ford guy and have been for all of my car aware life. My posts on here certainly reveal that I am a blue oval fan.

    So if you are listening Ford…stop the horse$#!t. You have already screwed me on the Fiesta ST. I love it and it is the sort of car I would gladly hand the keys off to every 2 years and lease a new one. The European one would have me dutifully crossing off days on the calendar until I could swap my current one. Yet I can’t because you seem to be laboring under the delusion that I will not notice you have taken away not only my Fiesta, but the Focus as well and affixed the ST badge to a vehicle closer to my wife’s appliance on wheels Santa Fe…which I won’t be trading in for your stupid Edge ST either because I don’t spend that sort of cash on appliances and the if I did I wouldn’t on principle because you have taken another giant dump on a great badge that once meant something to people like me. (I shouldn’t be surprised given what you did to the SHO however)

    And don’t give me the “you can just get a Mustang” bit. Not everybody who wants a sporty car wants such a car and frankly, if I did there are other options. Besides I get the distinct impression you are not done after crapping on the ST badge and this one is next. At least FCA has a freaking clue as to what Challenger buyers want.

    Enter the Ranger. My first truck was a Ranger. I will soon no longer need the 4 doors and heft my F150 provides. The little Raptor was on my list. My only hope is that the Bronco is getting a Raptorized version and that is why you have held off on this. I am inclined to doubt it however and have no illusions that the Bronco will likely end up being less hardcore than a freaking FJ Cruiser because Hybrid, Mobility, . As such it is likely I will just buy a gen 1 Ranger and restore it. I will end up with a 25,000 dollar 5,000 dollar truck but I will have something to put a smile on my face and will be more interesting than what you have proposed thus far…a cynical product at best…Third world refinement at first world prices. Yes, I have that sort of money by the way to throw at something like that…something you should keep in mind when you run off 25 year customers like myself.

    So as a lifelong Ford guy, be advised that it is unlikely that a new Ford will replace either of my current ones (and the oldest is the F150…a 2015 model). Perhaps I’ll grab an old 90’s SHO and be reminded of better times when Cobain lived and Ford built a car people wanted. But I’ll probably just get a Golf R.

    Or you could get your head out of your corporate kiester. To quote that dude you fired, “In this business you lead, follow, or get out of the way”.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      At least the GTI haz those snazzy plaid seats. Hope it comes in brown

      • 0 avatar
        jfb43

        The seats and the $10k+ in price difference is why I’d choose the GTI over the R.

        I really wish the FiST would continue on. As I said, I’m not in the market for a vehicle, though it is tempting to buy a new FiST given how cheap they can be had…but I’m not going to irrationally and emotionally buy a car just because they’re being discontinued. Nice try, Ford.

        • 0 avatar
          Art Vandelay

          Yeah, you can’t shop the R against a GTI…you have to think of the R as a budget Audi S3 with a manual. Then it makes sense at the price.

          Still, as a slow car fast sort yes, those seats would probably steer me to a GTI which when equipped towards the bottem end of its range makes sense.

          But I really want to replace my Fiesta ST with a new Fiesta ST. What was all that about retaining customers Ford?

    • 0 avatar
      NG5

      Art, I have pretty much the same sentiments. The only three future Ford vehicles I was interested in are the new Fiesta ST (which I would probably have traded in my current Fiesta ST for if I thought the 3 cyl engine was more interesting and the interior nicer), the Mustang (maybe if I could get over the idea of driving a performance car that weighed a half ton more), or a 2 door truck with a short overall length, like a 2 door Wrangler.

      After what they did with the ST brand, I’m not optimistic for the Mustang. And now that the Ranger Raptor is ruled out I’m not optimistic that they care about appealing to enthusiasts even in the future Bronco’s segment. I bought the Fiesta ST new because I wanted to support them bringing it over, but my wallet isn’t big enough to merit their interest, I suppose. Whenever I go to get another car, I’ll be looking for a company that seems to support their exciting vehicles.

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        Honestly, I purchased the FiST because I was shopping the usual suspects (BMW 3, Alfa Giulia, Audi S3) and screwed up and drove a WRX and remembered how much fun a manual was. I almost got a Golf R as a result but the Fiesta was fun at all speeds. I had to drive the R at go to jail speeds to be fun. The WRX? Well I’m not 25. The Fiesta is the most fun I’ve had on 4 wheels though. I would probably keep on leasing them but, well you can’t. I’m not sure about the long term prospects for something I beat on as hard as I do that car.

        • 0 avatar
          NG5

          Yeah, if I was in a lease I would be in a tough position because I’d have to think about replacing the car with something else shortly. I did a lot of research and shopping around and it fit my needs for the next say five years and unknown number of driving miles professionally perfectly so I just picked it. It’s been perfect for the use case so far.

          Even so I’m having the same thoughts about what I should do next; previously it probably would have been “get the next generation”. I have to street park and I don’t have a great deal of mechanical sympathy when I go for fun drives out of town so the car is taking a lot of punishment. I feel like I will reach a point where I can either spend money to recondition mine and keep it forever, get another one in better condition, or try to move on and get something else fun. From my other experiences it will be hard to match, and if it’s not worth anything by the time I need a new vehicle again I may just fix it up and set it aside, or give it to a family member I know will take care of it until I can come drive it for kicks sometimes. It’s hard to imagine getting rid of it simply because there’s nothing like it at all on sale in the USA I haven’t tried; maybe I’ll look at the i30N, but that is a bigger car and seems like it will be another 500# of weight.

          • 0 avatar
            NG5

            Oops. Meant to include this in edit but ran out of time.

            Only the Alfa Romeo 4C and Mazda Miata are fun cars that are lighter, and neither of those seats four and can carry a dozen tall cinderblocks (don’t ask me how I know).

            Ford had brought over a globally-liked car in a niche that others don’t really cover here, and it really made them stand out in my eyes. For my next car I’m probably going to be forced out of the niche, or have to look at the preceding two cars and give up practicality in favor of lightweight and all-the-time driving engagement. I might do it, but it wouldn’t be a Ford unfortunately. They even still make and sell the car in other countries! Frustrating.

  • avatar

    “What in the name of Henry Ford is going on at The Glass House?”

    How about Hackett and Farley, two charlatans running Ford in the ground for no good reason?

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      My guess is that Ford is doing two things:

      1) Battening down the hatches for the trade wars and regarly scheduled recession. You want to focus on your most profitable products in a volitile business environment like this.

      2) Clearing the decks for their plugin onslaught — assuming what their recruiters tell me at my local university’s “engineering open house” is accurate.

      But, if Ford admitted either thing, F-150 sales would crater. Sharing their thinking would be politically incorrect with their core customers, though, who think trade wars are good and easy to win.

      • 0 avatar

        China is heading into depression with or without trade wars. Their political and economic system are at breaking point. They are heading to negative grow and capital run out of country. Chinese political system is archaic and will sooner than later crumble. China’s history is endless sequence of uprisings, civil wars and revolutions. From what I read China’s ruler class is in state of panic and things are getting worse as population start rapidly aging. I am afraid that they may decide to start war in Asia while demographically they are able to do that, to appeal to patriotism of Chinese people. Remember that WWII started because of depression in Europe.

        • 0 avatar
          Luke42

          @Inside Looking Out:
          China’s economic growth has been coming from the modernization of the country.

          They still have a lot of work to do in terms of development, because there are still hundreds millions of people living in rural poverty. I suppose they could just decide to stop developing, but I don’t know why they’d do that.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        @Luke42 – I heard somewhere that tariffs on steel and aluminum has cost Ford a billion dollars in profits. Add to that a 60% chance of a recession in the next 2 years and yes, Ford may be planning for a downturn. 70k Raptor Rangers won’t sell in a recession.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      While I haven’t read Auto Extremist’s take on Hackett that certainly is his sentiment on Farley.

  • avatar
    deanst

    ““It all added up to the same thing: We’ve got to get serious about loyalty. The biggest ah-ha moment was when we saw our lead shrinking.”

    The first step in any recovery program is admitting you have a problem. Defining the problem as being only a little bit better than the competition is dillusional.

  • avatar
    brn

    Lot of hate here, but I get the decision.

    Ford already has a flagship offroader with the full size Raptor. Do they need a second flagship?

    The new Ranger needs to establish itself. Why spend resources, diluting it with a low volume edition? Special editions will come later.

    Properly optioned, the regular Ranger looks like it has a great deal of off road potential. People who want a Ranger and an off roader, will already have a solution.

    • 0 avatar
      pdog_phatpat

      A very well thought out response. But you know, people want what they want, when they want it and they want it NOW. And if they dont get it, well who cares they probably werent gonna buy it anyway. It seems to be a fun clickbait game around here to dog on anything Ford. “Back in the day” isnt 2 months ago. Maybe give it some time.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      I don’t see the Ranger Raptor as a second “flagship” just like the ZR2 isn’t viewed as a “flagship” over at Chevrolet.

      • 0 avatar
        Luke42

        Th real question is: why isn’t Ford selling all of their products in the US?

        Most of us know the standard reasons the Raptor will not be sold in the Ubited States: it’s low-volume niche product tailored for foreign markets that will never sell in large numbers in the US, plus non-tarrif barriers to trade (homologation costs), plus actual tarrifs…

        But I’d just like to ask everyone to ponder the fact that Ford is making a cool vehicle that isn’t being sold in the United States. Just think on that for a moment.

  • avatar
    Rocket

    There are three obvious issues with the F-150 Raptor: Its size, its price, and its bad-even-by-truck-standards efficiency. The Ranger Raptor was supposed to be the solution to all three. Ford says they can’t afford to make the Ranger Raptor for the US market. I say they can’t afford not to. Pinheads.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Rocket,
      The Ranger Raptor in Australia returns 33mpg (US) combined. The Ranger is over 35mpg combined.

      The Ranger can tow 7800lbs and has a 2500lb payload. Its GVM is 13200lbs.

      These figures are far more efficient than any US pickup.

      The Big 3 don’t want midsize pickups to compete against full size 1/2 ton.

      The US (Big 3) has spent the past 60 years protecting them.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        If you ask me, Big Al, the modern mid-sized trucks should all simply replace the current round of half-tons. It’s easy enough to up their capacities to the same load capacity and there’s simply no reason why a half-ton should be towing something weighing nearly 10,000 pounds. High load and towing capacities are the venue of the ¾-ton and higher models.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Vulpine,
          Here in Australia if we want to tow that much weight we buy a truck, not a pickup. We either buy a truck that will carry the load on the back or buy a truck more suitable for towing those kinds of weights.

          It’s more efficient to have a more purpose built vehicle for business. Pickups are great and versatile, but anything that’s “general purpose” will not be the best at anything.

          I own a pickup and it’s a huge compromise between the requirements of a car, off roader, and vehicle to tow and carry a load.

          They are great compromise vehicles, but not great for specific purpose use. That’s why trucks and tractors, real off road vehicles etc exist.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            …”Here in Australia, if we want to tow that much weight, we buy a truck, not a pickup…”

            @BAFO – You misspelled “…if we want to tow that much weight, we’re forced to buy a big medium-duty flatbed or box truck, instead of a pickup bigger than a midsize, that can tow that much weight, whether we like it or not (usually we don’t), not a pickup…”

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        @Big Al from Oz – heaven forbid that I sound like DM but you’ll never see a Ranger in the USA or Canada with a 2,500 lb payload. The Colorado has the highest at 1,800 lbs.
        Since the Ranger isn’t in the USA or Canada I’ll post Colorado specs. The best mpg for the diesel Colorado 4×4 is 20 mpg city, 28 hwy and 23 combined. The ZR2 Colorado mpg is significantly worse at 19mpg city,22mpg hwy and 20 mpg combined.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Lou,
          I know, and you just more or less supported my comment in relation to how trucks are used in the US differently than elsewhere.

          Australia actually is the closest to the US (not counting the Canadians) in similar use of pickups. Except we use midsize pickups.

          I think the “US” view that it must be a full size for work is a US paradigm. As the rest of the world will use a midsize (or smaller in many instances) to do as much as a full size and do it more efficiently.

          As for the FE, the new 2 litre Ford diesel fitted to the Ranger/Raptor is quite good and for it’s size packs quite a punch of 157kw and 500Nm of torque, this is more than enough to pull a seven and a half thousand pound trailer at highway speeds.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            It’s just different systems for measuring MPG around the world that BAFO must not be “aware” of.

            The Toyota Prius is virtually the same car for all markets, but returns wildly different MPG ratings, translated up to 70 US MPG, depending on the market.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @BAFO – US payload rating fall under strict SAE standards, while Australia/Africa markets have no equivalent governing body.

            In fact, payload “ratings” in your part of the world are left entirely to the automaker’s marketing sense of humor!

            *Society of Automotive Engineers

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Lou,
            Here’s what we call towing a trailer in Australia is ;)

            US pickup use in Australia is generally for lifestyle and midsizers are the working trucks. Oddly its the same in the UAE and there are quite a few US pickups over there, mainly single cabs as well.

            http://www.trailermag.com.au/news/article/wa-to-trial-60m-super-quad-road-trains

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Link to Australian trailer standards.

            https://infrastructure.gov.au/vehicles/vehicle_regulation/bulletin/vsb1/vsb_01_b.aspx

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Organization_for_Standardization

            International Organisation for Standardisation

            The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is an international standard-setting body composed of representatives from various national standards organizations.
            Founded on 23 February 1947, the organization promotes worldwide proprietary, industrial and commercial standards. It is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland,[3] and works in 162 countries.[1

            UNECE

            https://www.unece.org/trans/main/welcwp29.html

  • avatar
    Art Vandelay

    Having thought about it, I wonder if this is because they feel a “Bronco Raptor” would command more money and they are concerned putting this on the market prior to the Bronco’s arrival might blunt those sales. Then we get the “Ranger Raptor” year 3.

    Having said all that, I am still fed up with their nonsense. My wife and I were driving home talking about replacing her Santa Fe with a sedan (YES! WIN!). I would love to get a Lincoln, however it is her car which likely means ES350.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @Art Vandelay – Ford will need a Bronco “Raptor” to go after the Rubicon. If Ford uses the Brazilian Troller as the template for the Bronco, they will have a potent off-roader to sell.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    …”Ford is being stupid…”

    The Ranger Raptor was never going to happen in the US, and Ford never said it was a possibility. But then the media, while assuming the global Ranger Raptor would (have to) happen the US/Canada too, ran with the story, and were more than happy to stir up the hype for their own interests.

    Even though Ford could’ve announced sooner it wasn’t going to happen, I’m sure they didn’t mind the free coverage. Keep in mind the Ranger itself was never intended for the US/Canada, and was not designed to accept a V6, just inline 4 or 5 cylinders, mostly all diesels.

    That’s why there’s only the 2.3 EB available for the US/Canada, and it’s too measly for a Raptor Ranger.

  • avatar
    nrd515

    I’ve never understood Ford, from their styling from about 1968 until the early 2000’s, to their models and pricing. The only Ford product I even considered buying was an F150 in 2003, and that lasted about 5 minutes before I decided on a Ram to replace my wrecked and never right afterwards 2000 GMC Sierra. Unlike FCA,if Ford would disappear, it wouldn’t affect me in any way. In a a way, they have always been “Dead to me”.

  • avatar
    dwford

    I think the real problem with Ford’s recent decisions is that all the hardcore Ford fans see that their favorite models are STILL IN PRODUCTION for the rest of the world. So they all feel like Ford is treating the US market like a stepchild. And Ford’s vague promises of future models have not been fleshed out, even all this time later.

    It’s just been insanely bad PR management from Ford.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      This. Except for trucks of course. I love my Fiesta ST but it does bug me, just a bit that by all accounts the new one in Europe is better. And of course the fact that Ford sees me replacing it with an Edge.

      • 0 avatar
        quaquaqua

        Why so hung up on the ST badge? Besides, you know Ford will slap it on their EcoSport before you know it. That tampon-on-wheels is gonna be their entry level car, after all.

        • 0 avatar
          Art Vandelay

          LOL…It isn’t the badge…it is the car behind the badge. It has taken 20 years for a car to make me get over not buying a B13 SER. The Focus ST was really good too. I guess I just hate how it is going. Until now the ST badge likely meant you were an entusiast or “in the know” since they were manual only affairs. I’d have been OK with the Fusion Sport getting the ST badge and a bit more chassis tuning even with the auto. But a big heavy crossover?! I haven’t driven one, so I will withold my final verdict but Im not optimistic. However the fact that that is the lone ST variant? Not even a token Mustang? Screw that.

          • 0 avatar
            el scotto

            Mr Vandelay; I hope the latex market is going well. From what I understand, when Mulally took over at Ford, he asked why there were European Fiestas/Fusions and North American Fiestas/Fusions. Mulally was told there 78 (178, 278?, you pick the number) of crucial differences between Europe and North America. He then asked OK; outside of regulatory mandated differences, why in the heck are we doing things differently? Same cars should have the same specs WORLDWIDE. I guess Ford has quickly gotten away from WORLDWIDE commonality in small car manufacturing. Or they could just buy Mazda to make small cars and Volvo to make Lincolns.

          • 0 avatar

            I got to drive a Focus RS … woo hoo ! Best tight road car ever, even if buzzy on the highway.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      dwford,
      The problem isn’t vehicle models, its making money.

    • 0 avatar
      NG5

      This is a good point too. There are fawning global reviews of enthusiast cars Ford simply refuses to sell here. The only other example of that which comes to mind are insane locally-built kit cars that don’t make it for obvious volume or crash reasons, and the German performance hatchbacks and wagons which only come over in sedan or coupe format. In the former case I wouldn’t expect such a car to get here, and in the latter I’m placated by the fact that the manufacturer generally makes some attempt to bring over an exciting product, even if its form is slightly different.

      Ford, meanwhile, is expecting me to replace my Fiesta ST with a fatter, slower, higher riding Ecosport on an old platform. They did manage to bring that over.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    That is part of the problem that Ford fans see favorite models available in rest of the World. To me the real problem for example was when the prior generations was discontinued after 2011, Ford spokespeople said that customers could either buy an F-150 or a Focus assuming that those who own Rangers are so loyal to Ford that they will buy what Ford tells them to buy. I have owned 3 Ford cars and 2 were very good but if Ford disappeared I wouldn’t miss it. I wouldn’t miss FCA and if GM went I might miss it but I would get over it. The Japanese and South Korean manufacturers have enough good vehicles to choose from. I don’t see any of the domestic based manufacturers disappearing anytime soon but it would be surprised if any of them were taken over by the Chinese or Indians. Another bankruptcy or bailout could mean a take over.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      The South Koreans are slipping in my book. My wife’s Santa Fe doesn’t feel nearly as well built as the Tucson it replaced and the visibility is so poor we were shopping sedans today. Love that Acura TLX or whatever it was (Should have a Legend Badge) with the V6.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @Jeff S – Ford is partnering with VW on commercial vehicles and some suspect that they will merge into one company making them the biggest in the world.

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        I think the MQB is versatile enough that they could sell a significant number o those vehicles at Ford and Lincoln dealers without cutting into Audi’s sales. VW???Not sure but the likely numbers gained at Ford would make VWNA sales numbers statistically insignificant and nobody would miss the current Jetta an Passat.

        With respect to the consume market, would VW getting access to Ford’s BOF trucks and SUVs be worth anything to them. Maybe I they can sell them as commercial rigs globally, but that is a big question mark. I don.see people buying F150s with VW grills or Expeditions. Then again, they don’t need a ton of sales as each one would likely be pure profit so who knows.

        My worst case would be Ford doesn’t get the MQB to develop products on but rather cars like the Chinese market Passat and things like that. Unfortunately I see that as the more likely outcome. VW would sell the goo MQB stuff while For gets the current “Americanized” VW stuff.

        Still, if you are Ford it makes some sense since you have nothing in the pipeline an those aren’t terrible cars by most accounts. A 2.7 eb Passat coul be fun albeit unlikely.

        I would love to see Lincoln take the MQB platform, tune it to isolate the driver vs the Audi approach, and give the interior the Black label treatment.

        But that’s all a pipe dream anyway. Lincoln will stay a less good version of Acura an Ford is going to stop selling cars. This merger ain gonna happen.

        • 0 avatar
          Art Vandelay

          And I know those Ford/Lincoln products step on where VW should be in the market, but VW jus can’t move them in the numbers Ford coul in the US. Question is weather the egos at VW could stomach the margin by which US badge VWs would outsell proper VWs. I’m inclined to say no base on the whole Chrysler mess. Hence ain’t gonna happen unless I is dated hand me down platforms.

    • 0 avatar
      Mike G

      “Ford spokespeople said that customers could either buy an F-150 or a Focus assuming that those who own Rangers are so loyal to Ford that they will buy what Ford tells them to buy.”

      This reminds me of the 70s, with the Big 3 arrogantly thinking they can push people toward the products the Big 3 want them to buy.
      Small cars had smaller profit margins, so they sullenly produced crappy miserable small cars like the Pinto thinking this would push buyers to larger Big 3 models. Instead, many shoppers bought superior Japanese small cars.
      They may be making the same myopic mistake again, overestimating Ford owners’ brand loyalty.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Mike G
        The Big 3 didn’t learn from the energy crisis. They continued on as they had in the past, when they were producing the better quality vehicles, but the world by the 70s caught up and overtook the US in vehicles, especially vehicles that were suitable to a global audience.

        The only exception were the British, who learnt the hard way. Maybe the US auto industry will eventually go to overseas buyers better able to run an auto manufacturing business.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    meant I would not be surprised if any of the domestic based manufacturers were taken over.

  • avatar
    brettucks

    “That’s most definitely a Mustang logo, illuminated and appended to something that really appears to have a taller tumblehome than today’s Mustang”

    It looks like a mustang, and that is a mustang logo, but I swear I see a bit of Fusion between the 4 headlight look and in the grill – with no fusion on the horizon perhaps a Tesla fighting BEV mustang? Perhaps mustang will get spun off. The ad seemed to take a shot at Tesla.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      At this point, Ford may as well take a smaller, FWD, sporty coupe built by say Mazda and affix the Mustang emblem to it.

      If there is talk of doing anything to the Mustang that does not involve 2 doors, RWD, and an optional V8 I suggest Ford study the Probe incident.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    So lets not bring a product that would sell like hot cakes and instead bring a version of the Mustang that nobody is asking for.

    Brilliant furniture guy….just brilliant. Astoundingly you are worse than Mulally.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Can’t you just rejoice the fact you can get the Ranger? When at Disneyland, do you cry if you don’t ge mouse ears? The FX4 plus a few thousand in upgrades would be a badass off roader for when you hit the mall or Starbucks drive thru.

      A V6 won’t fit in the Ranger (too wide) killing the Raptor for the US/Canada, since the Ranger was only meant for global markets where 4 cylinders do the job just fine, gas or diesel.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        A V6 will comfortably fit, with room to spare.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Remember I own one.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        @DM: There you go, talking about things as if you know what you’re saying. If a V6 can fit into the Colorado, it can certainly fit in the new Ranger. Anywhere but in the US, the Ranger IS full-sized; as is the Amarok, the Nissan 400 and even the Tacoma/Hilux. The so-called “full sized” American trucks are too big for most EurAsian roadways.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Vulpine,
          We had Nissan Navara D20 (circa 1986) with V6’es in them.

          The Ranger is designed to fit an inline 5, so I think you might be able to drop a V8 into one with no issues.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Oh, Vulpine,
          We have midsize pickups with V8 diesels, V6 diesels as well.

          DiM just spruik sh!t to hear his brain rattle, or he’s just a troll.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @BAFO…

            “…the only V6 we have is the 3.0 and I’m sure it wouldn’t fit even if we tried…”

            That’s direct from Trevor Washington, Ford’s Vice President of Product Development in the Asia Pacific Market.

            fordauthority.com/2018/07/ford-ranger-raptor-doesnt-need-a-v6-ford-vp-says/

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @BAFO, Vulpine – You didn’t think it was fishy, the US Ranger never offered a V6, even normally aspirated, this time around?

            It’s for a very good reason, knowing many just want a normal V6 like in all the other midsize pickup competition, even the damn CUV based Honda!

            Think before you drink or inhale.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            You kind of left something out of that quote.

            It is not “…the only V6 we have is the 3.0 and I’m sure it wouldn’t fit even if we tried…”

            It is “…the only V6 Diesel we have is the 3.0 and I’m sure it wouldn’t fit even if we tried…”

            I knew something was fishy as they have the 2.7, 3.0, 3.3, 3.5 and 3.7 gasoline V6s.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @Scoutdude: Note also that the Diesel in a Colorado is an I-4 while the V6 is a gasser.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            @ Vulpine, I know that the diesel in the Colorado is a 4cyl. That is not the point, someone asked the Ford guy if they would offer a V6 diesel and he said he didn’t think it would fit if they tried. The point is that doesn’t mean one of Ford’s many gas V6s won’t fit, nor does it mean that Ford won’t offer a diesel in the future. If they do offer a diesel it will likely be a version of the 4cyl or 5cyl diesels.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          Knowing the global Ranger was only going to predominantly diesel markets (when originally designed), there was no need for a wide engine bay to accommodate a V6, giving engineers less constraints for suspension, differential, etc.

          Had designers/engineers known the global Ranger was coming to the US, and of course a US Raptor too, it would’ve been designed around a V6.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @DM: You’re making an awful lot of assumptions there. Have you really anything to back them all up?

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            The man said it wouldn’t fit. What does that mean to you?

            When they designed the Corolla, should they have left room for a V6, just in case? No, they design (everything) to the minimum specs.

            Maybe F-150 designers should’ve left room for a V12, ’cause you just never know! The global Ranger was never designed for the US, it’s an afterthought, and Ford is making the best of the situation. But that means no V6 and no Raptor for the US.

            If Ford could (without a tremendous expense), trust that they would.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Vulpine,
            DiM is on one of his trolling sessions, let him go. He forgot his meds.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @DM: “The man said it wouldn’t fit. What does that mean to you?”
            — It means, as he said, it MIGHT fit. He did not use the absolute statement that it wouldn’t.

            “When they designed the Corolla, should they have left room for a V6, just in case? No, they design (everything) to the minimum specs.”
            — And the Corolla is also a much smaller car. The new Ranger is as big as the current Colorado; I find it extremely difficult to believe the engine bay is going to be too small.

            “Maybe F-150 designers should’ve left room for a V12, ’cause you just never know! ”
            — Maybe they did and you just didn’t know it. I’ve seen V12s that were much smaller than a big V8.

            “The global Ranger was never designed for the US, it’s an afterthought, and Ford is make the best of the situation.”
            — I seem to recall you saying the exact same thing about the Colorado.

            “But that means no V6 and no Raptor for the US.”
            — But the Colorado has a V6 and both a Z71 and a ZR2.

            What you say is impossible will be seen on American roads. This is just another Ford tease to try to keep interest up.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @Big Al: He needs to be reminded of how many times he’s been wrong on these boards.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            I’m as devastated as anyone but thanks I’ll take the word of a Ford executive over any internet keyboard “engineer” knowitall. That plus no way would it or any midsize pickup offering for sale in the US/Canada in any kind of competitive capacity come with a 4 cylinder only, turbo or no.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @DM: “That plus no way would it or any midsize pickup offering for sale in the US/Canada in any kind of competitive capacity come with a 4 cylinder only, turbo or no.”

            Interesting how you completely contradict what you earlier said and try to make it sound like that’s what you’ve been saying all along.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            The original global Ranger was not designed solely for global markets. It was intended for the US from the get go and would have been the midsize called the F100 that would slot between the US Ranger and the F150. So yeah I doubt they did anything to the engine compartment that would prevent a production line V6, in the expected displacement range.

        • 0 avatar
          JimZ

          “There you go, talking about things as if you know what you’re saying. If a V6 can fit into the Colorado, it can certainly fit in the new Ranger.”

          The Colorado has nowt to do with anything. it isn’t just the physical exterior dimensions of the vehicle, it’s the actual space available underhood. This Ranger *as it exists* has only ever had inline engines (4 and 5 cylinder.) You can’t just say “A V6 will fit because Colorado” when you don’t know the routing of things like the steering column, suspension hardpoints, the design of the engine cradle, the height of and width between the frame rails, and so on.

          it’s quite possible that putting a V6 in this Ranger would be an extreme tear up of the design.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @JimZ: “The Colorado has nowt to do with anything. it isn’t just the physical exterior dimensions of the vehicle, it’s the actual space available underhood. ”

            — It has everything to do with the Ranger. DM make the same kinds of assumptions when the new Colorado was announced. He flat ignored the fact that the Americanized version is slightly larger than the global version, to accommodate American mores. I would remind you that the American versions ARE tear-ups of the design; they have to be to meet American safety rules.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            If they couldn’t use the existing global ‘platform’, “as is”, it wouldn’t be profitable, or anywhere nearly as. The Holden Colorado was designed with North America in mind, while the global Ranger was not.

            Since you claim dimensional changes “coming to America”, where? Show them, place a link, etc. Anything! Or stop talking out of your “back pocket”.

            You’re not even capable of running a simple “search”, google or otherwise, so how would you begin to know (about anything that spec specific, or marginally technical) in the first place?

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            @DM you’ve got that backwards, the Ranger was designed for the US originally it was the Colorado that wasn’t ever intended for the US.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            We can go ’round and ’round on that, but Ford execs stated emphatically the global Ranger was not headed for North America, it was only for global markets, period, when the platform was first released.

            Wouldn’t it be crazy to design it for North America just to release it for sale everywhere ‘but’? By the same, the F-series was definitely not for global consumption, per the Ford exec, in an interview by caradvice.com, effectively selling only the appropriate pickups for their respective markets.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @DM: “If they couldn’t use the existing global ‘platform’, “as is”, it wouldn’t be profitable, or anywhere nearly as. The Holden Colorado was designed with North America in mind, while the global Ranger was not.”

            — Since you asked for it…
            • “While it did start out as the global Colorado, the engineers have made so many changes to it that it may actually be more accurate to look at this as a little Silverado in global Colorado skin than simply writing it off as a rebadged global truck.”
            • “The Colorado’s new frame, which is fully boxed and uses a lot of high-strength steel, is about 40 percent lighter than the global frame, and shares relatively few components with it.”
            • “The American Colorado is significantly longer than the global truck.”
            • (a) “The extended cab rides on the shortest wheelbase, 127.9 inches, which is exactly 6 inches longer than that of the global Colorado.”
            • (b) “The overall length of the longest American Colorado, the crew cab longbed, is 224.1 inches (on a 140.5-inch wheelbase), and the global model has an overall length of 210.5 inches.”
            —- http://www.trucktrend.com/features/1606-2015-chevy-colorado-red-devil/

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Stretching the frame doesn’t alter the platform one bit. Search what a “platform”consists of. Good job on your searching so far!

            They could make it a Colorado “limo” and it wouldn’t alter its platform. At all.
            Same with alloys in the frame makeup.

            If you haven’t noticed, globals only come with 5′ beds (crew cabs), no 6′ option. That’s spread out 6″ ahead of the rear axl (wheelbase) and 6″ behind, or there about’s.

            I actually thought you knew this, being a engineer and all, except you made it sound like they’re making the
            North American Colorado *wider*, as many feel (probably mistakenly) Americans tend to be fatter, but no, not even that would alter the platform necessary.

            Now if the NA Ranger had make changes to the steering, suspension, axles, fuel/brake lines, wiring loom, etc, not to mention widening the frame (then reengineering its crash collapse) to accommodate a V6, that would get too expensive, and might as well wait for the next generation/platform. Clearly it’s something like that happening.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Stop trying to buffalo us, DM. The article clearly stated they were not the same.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            …”The article clearly stated they…”

            Just pure melodrama. Then the article goes on to provide zero examples except wheelbase and over-all length differences.

            The over-all maximum length is just the foot difference of the global/Holden not offering a 6 foot bed with the crew cab.

            The wheelbase difference is interesting since in all configurations (except no regular-cab for the US/Canada twins), the US/Ca Colorado (and GMC Canyon) have the rear axle pushed about 6 inches further back, giving it a more stable look, but likely meant for CAFE compliance, since increased “footprint”.

            Of course none of this means the “platforms” are not still exactly the same, and there’s no better way to describe differences between the Chevy/GMC twins and their Holden sister-truck is “badge job”, plain and simple.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            Yes when the Ranger was released they said it wasn’t for the US, but the fact was that was a last minute decision and it had been intended to be the F100 in the US.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Vulpine,
            The Ranger was designed for the US market as it is in the global market.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            More Vulpine,
            The US was going to sign a FTA with Thailand back around 2006/7. A coup d’état occurred in Thailand with the Military overthrow of a democratically elected government. So, the US tore up the FTA.

            The global Ranger was to be exported to the US to replace the “US” Ranger. This left a void for Ford to fill.

            It couldn’t so Ford continued with the very outdated US Ranger until 2012 and told all potential Ranger buyers to buy a Fiesta or something like that.

            Ford is again a poor decision.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Try again, DM. It clearly stated length, frame AND body differences. It is not the same as the Isuzu-based global model.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Thank you. Those aren’t things that change the “platform” or fundamental truck in any way, any more than the base/basic RCSB F-150 *differs* from the crew cab, short bed F-150.

            The frame, cab from the B-pillar back, and the bed of the base F-150 doesn’t in anyway interchange with the fully loaded crew-cab F-150’s body or frame. Except they’re still the same trucks, 100% the same platform.

            With in a platform, just going from 2wd to 4wd changes the trucks more “physically’, that the stuff you mentioned.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @DM: “The frame, cab from the C-pillar back, and the bed of the base F-150 doesn’t in anyway interchange with the fully loaded crew-cab F-150’s body or frame. Except they’re still the same trucks, 100% the same platform.”

            A) We’re not talking about F-150s;
            B) I strongly recommend you read that article again. The frame of the US Ranger is completely different from the global version in materials, using stronger metals. The body panels are different. The cab and nose are different. The US version shares almost NOTHING with the global version; very clearly stated in the article I linked. It IS A Different Platform.

            … Though it is possible that the next Global Rangers will be sharing the US platform…

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            You still haven’t a clue what a “platform” means. I’ll send you a link. The nose/clip is a cosmetic “bolt-on”, no different than how the Silverado and Sierra nose/clips differ.

            Fullsize or midsize, all the same applies. The frame’s metallurgy (psi strength) makes absolutely no difference or change/alteration (to the platform).

            It would shock you to know (learn) the Frontier and Titan (along with the Armada/Xterra) all have shared the exact same “platform” for decades, with frames clearly of different metallurgy, mount points, lengths, wheelbases, suspension, etc.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            The Chevy Trailblazer, Isuzu Ascender, Saab 9-7X, Olds Bravada, Buick Rainier, GMC Envoy and others have all shared the exact same platform with just cosmetic/sheetmetal changes between them, plus badging/emblems obviously, and of course dealers/brands that sell them across town, borders and oceans.

            They’re still the same trucks, no different than the Holden and GM midsize twins.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Learn something today…

            en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_platfrom

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Stop moving the goalposts, Mike. You started out saying the US Colorado and the Global Colorado were the exact same truck. Now you’re using a highly-variable platform to make your point? All you’ve done is proven my point: That you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about and have to weasel around to try and prove yours.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            All platforms are variable, even if some don’t. So what’s the difference between a base Silverado RCSB that vary massively up to GMC Denali or Cadillac Escalades within the 100% same platform, verse the midsize GM twins varying slightly between themselves and the Holden/Isuzu sisters?

            Just simply the $26,000 Silverado varies a great deal more vs the $70,000 Silverado, than the Colorado by Holden or Chevy that share the same platform, just like the Silverado platform and all it’s wildly different iterations within the same exact platform.

            Sorry if you’re to slow to figure it out but, I’m done.

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        “A V6 won’t fit in the Ranger (too wide) ”

        Are you high? The Ranger is 9/10ths the size of the F-150. You’re telling me that a V6 won’t fit? Pure BS.

        But thats fine, there are plenty of gas guzzling Ecoboost engines that would fit. 2.3L out of the Mustang would fit just fine. 310HP and 350 ft-lb of torque. That would be perfect in a Ranger Raptor. They could also do a sport version with that engine.

        This is Ford, as usual, making bonehead decisions. The raptor sells like crazy for some reason at far too high prices. So why not capture the people who really want a raptor but cannot afford it or do not want a truck that big?

        Rather Ford thinks what everyone wants is a 2-door hybrid. Hackett is a complete moron.

        • 0 avatar
          EBFlex

          Doh…..the Ranger is slated to get the 2.3L That’s more than enough engine for that truck. A V6 is unnecessary. Just give it a higher output tune for the Raptor version.

        • 0 avatar
          JimZ

          There’s “too wide” as in “won’t physically fit,” and “too wide” as in “can’t be built on the production line.

          It’s also possible that a V6 might be able to physically fit underhood, but be too wide to allow the body to be decked onto the frame with the engine in place.

          this is why the Panther cars never got a 5.4; the engine would physically fit in the engine bay but the body couldn’t be dropped onto the frame.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      You know EBFlex, I am a Ford guy and never once have I agreed with a darned thing you have said on here…But at this point I’d just like to say…

      Ford…What a Disgrace!

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        Don’t deny the truth buddy. I’m right on just about everything.

        I think the decision to not bring the Ranger Raptor here is a massive mistake. Throw the 2.3L in it from the Mustang and watch it print money. Nope Ford would rather bring a hybrid 2-door muscle car to the market. Hackett is a cancer.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      Who said the Ranger never had a v6? I had several (2.8/2.9/4.0) and the Vulcan 3.0 was offered in a much smaller platform.

      Keep in mind though, any v6 Ford has that would be an upgrade over the turbo 2.3 has 2 turbos bolted on the side making it a bit wider.

      The smart play is going to be to hold on to my 2015 and just use the crew cab portion like a giant extended cab I guess. Though sometimes I do want to get a blacked out regular cab with as much engine as I can get, a console and floor shift, and slap some gen 1 lightning emblems on it.

  • avatar

    Maybe the rumored Volkswagen and Ford alliance will become a reality? Ford seems to be floundering.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      LuvGerman,
      I have spent a number of years stating the US auto sector needs to align itself with its global competition. They haven’t. This isn’t about vehicle models, but how the US vehicle culture is reliant on protectionism.

      Half the people in the US can’t afford full size vehicles, they can only afford smaller EU and Asian vehicles. But the US Big 3 are only competitive at producing mediocre quality large vehicles because no other country (most) have no requirement for them.

      Most large vehicle produced by non US manufacturers are luxury/prestige, and they are successful.

      So, the US can only build expensive average quality vehicles no one wants.

      Add to this the organisational structure of the Big 3 currently stands creates a less than competitive business.

      Trump Trade barriers (and chicken tax, differing trade barrier regulations) will not fix some of corporate Americas inefficiencies.

      • 0 avatar
        George B

        Big Al, you wrote a statement that shows you have no clue regarding the consumer preferences of Americans.

        “Half the people in the US can’t afford full size vehicles, they can only afford smaller EU and Asian vehicles. But the US Big 3 are only competitive at producing mediocre quality large vehicles because no other country (most) have no requirement for them.”

        Americans who can’t afford a new full size vehicle almost always purchase a used full size vehicle if that’s what they want or need. The larger vehicles are noticeably more reliable with lower insurance costs. Insurance costs more than fuel for many drivers. Americans buy a smaller vehicle because they want a smaller vehicle. Americans buy smaller Asian cars, but not EU cars because European cars tend to be less reliable and require expensive maintenance. The exception is the Volkswagen GTI which is a reasonably popular non-luxury EU car. Americans lease European luxury cars and turn them back in before the become a money pit.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          George,
          I don’t think all vehicles in the US are fullsize.

          I do believe cost of operating and maintaining the vehicle comes into play as well.

          1/2 of Americans can’t afford to own and operate full size vehicles.

          We have a similar situation here in Australia, actually you’ll find in most countries there are plenty who can’t afford to operate vehicles.

          Most anyone in the world will want the “bestest” they can buy, so it’s not a “US preference”. Its a global thing, a human trait.

          The US market is formed by as much as protection and tariffs as it is by the consumser.

          East Germany was a classic example, how many Trabants were there? Were they there all because it’s was what the consumer wanted?

  • avatar
    Eric the Red

    I actually own Ford Stock and have rode the value down for 30 years. I am an optimist and believe eventually industrial stocks/companies that make things, will come back into vogue. I have seen Ford make some obviously bad choices over the years. *eliminating the Ranger the first time. They had the small truck market leader share of the small trucks! Maybe the small truck market was shrinking but still a leadership position. Why abandon a market you lead! *dropping all cars but Mustangs. Sure go ahead and eliminate the Taurus and Fiesta (small volume), but improve/upgrade the Fusion and Focus. These are the two cars that were selling in decent volume and had good reviews of. SHORT SIGHTED! In a couple of years they will start building cars again. But it will be from a start over position (ala: Ranger). This most recent announcement of not selling the Raptor Ranger in the US is not unexpected. It simply means in future years they will bring it here. Vehicles are often built with future improvements in mind. You don’t give away the whole package the first year. People have to have something to be excited about in year 2 and 3 of a model. To make the Ranger a huge hit would be to price correctly. It is true that when the F150 can be had for Ranger money why buy small. Make the Ranger a more economical (aka: cheaper) vehicle. Many people are willing to buy (accept) a vehicle with less options/power/size etc, if a better value is given.

  • avatar
    Art Vandelay

    On the plus side, I found a Gen 1 Taurus SHO with low mileagefor south of 5 grand. Some car show dude with a funny moustashe owned it. I am far more likely to buy that than any current models. I may let my kid roll in the Fiesta and grab that, a CD Changer, my Pearl Jam, Nirvana, and Alice in Chains CD’s and drive it around pretending I live in a time when music and Ford didn’t suck.

    • 0 avatar
      jfb43

      Dennis Gage?!

      And man, you gotta go back farther than the 90s for non-suck music.

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        Yeah that guy…His SHO was on sale on Facebook. 60 something thousand miles. I could care less about his ownership…it was a low mileage, likely well maintained gen 1 SHO that got my attention. And 90’s was my era for music. Every generation thinks theirs was the best though.

        • 0 avatar
          jfb43

          It’s like buying John Voight’s (the dentist) LeBarron.

          And I’m only 31, so I “grew up” in that era. I never got into the grunge stuff; I’m more of a prog rock guy, and that was a couple decades earlier. I guess I started on Frank Sinatra and Billy Joel, but that’s neither here nor there.

          Cool thing about the SHO.

        • 0 avatar
          EBFlex

          If you are in a Gen. 1 or gen. 2 SHO you don’t need music. The Yamaha 3.0/3.2 provides a sound that is better than any music played over the JBL stereo.

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            True on the Yamaha soundtrack. If my memory of Ford radios from back then is correct you will need it as the display light will have burned out 20 years ago and the caps on those JBL amps would have given up while most people were still on dial up. This one had an aftermarket deck. I would probably not spend the money to restore the factory system but I would put in a period correct high end aftermarket set up if for no other reason than to make the dash look right. I may actually go look at this thing. I see the later (post refresh but pre oval design) frequently, but I haven’t seen a true first gen in years.

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            Price is too high but it is one of those things it isn’t all that likely to pop up again (one in that condition) and is pretty cheap to break into the local cruise/show scene with my kids.

  • avatar
    Conslaw

    Innthe late 1980s, when I was in Australia, I was semi-shocked to see what looked like 4-door Mustangs in large supply down under. I forget what they called them. They could do that here. Still, it wouldn’t nake sense for Ford to water-down the Mustang brand, which I guess is why they are destined to do it. I think they should take another stab at the Lincoln LS. Their early oughts version was a near miss.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      In the 80s 4 door Mustangs were all over North America. They wore Fairmont and LTD badges. You could even get a stretcher Mustang with Cougar or Thunderbird badges. The fox platform to Ford was what the K car was to Chrysler.

      Somewhere in Huntsville is an LTD (the fox version, not the bigger Pantjer one) with a built 5.0 an a Mustang LX front clip. I’ve seen the dashes swapped between them too.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    @Vulpine and Big Al–I don’t think it is as much that a V-6 won’t fit into the new Ranger than Ford is playing it safe and is unsure that the new Ranger will be a hit. I believe it will sell but Ford has handicapped the new Ranger with a starting price of 25k and by not offering the V-6. Also Ford fears that the Ranger will take sales away from their golden calf, the F-150. I believe eventually Ford will offer a V-6 in the Ranger and eventually there will be a Ranger Raptor in the USA. If Ford does decide to offer a V-6 it should be the 2.7 Ecoboost because that is what will sell.

  • avatar
    Spartan

    I’m surprised no one has said this yet, but I think firing Mark Fields was a mistake. He needed a lot more time than he was allotted. They seem to be going backwards under the new guy’s leadership. That said, I’m glad I dumped my Ford stock at the peak of the Mulally era.

  • avatar
    ItsBob

    Kinda late to post in this one but I feel I have to vent a bit. I am biased toward Ford as I started working at a Ford dealership way back in 1967. Called back after retirement for my 5th go (part time)at same dealership after 3 name changes and about 5 owners/managers so ya, I’ve been around the Ford stuff through lots of the bad and good.
    I really believe they monitor these threads to get idea of peoples thought/opinions/etc and sure hope they are this one.
    I agree with the question about what the h3ll is going on at the glass house.
    If you ask them about some new exciting thing that rumors say is coming, the standard answer is “we don’t comment on future model plans” or something like that.
    But here they are commenting on future models by saying its not coming. Why not just shut the f-up about it? Same as the announcement about dropping most car lines. They really got an earful from dealers as most heard about it on here, WTF Ford??? I guess its the hope it jacks the stock up angle?
    So they try keep us hanging on about Bronco info/timelines/whatever but dash the hopes of those looking forward to a Ranger Raptor. May as well say the old standard –We don’t comment line— as it doesn’t seem to bother them to give “NO definitive” answer on lots of other product.
    Ever seen one of those videos where a cop is chasing a bad guy in a car, then several more cops fall in then the bad guy circles and gets behind a cop car and they go around in a circle nose to tail?
    That’s what I visualize going on in the glass house.
    Not gonna get nowhere like that Ford. :(
    Still love ya but very disappointed right now.

  • avatar
    scottydbray

    I own a 2019 EcoBoost which I em enthralled with, but even the biggest Ford lover has to be driven a bit nuts but Ford’s knee-jerk reactions to trying to be a Wall Street darling ala Telsa. My biggest beefs are:
    – Partnering with VW (disaster in the making)
    – New Ranger is basically a 4-door SUV with a bed.. YAWN
    – New Bronco – not what we were hoping for
    – New Continental – Lincoln probably blew it’s last chance for reinvention
    – Fiesta – Get it right finally then don’t bring them here! Thanks Ford!
    – Focus – ditto, Fiesta

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • How_Embarrassing_4You: Well it aint broke, so lets fix it!
  • Peter Gazis: Oberkanone Ford, FCA, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Mazda, KIA, VW, Audi, BMW & Mercedes all have factories...
  • mcs: “Is Musk capable of doing anything without being a complete and utter tool?” Sure, but you...
  • DenverMike: Wrong article, but there it shall remain. I blame the new system “update”.
  • DenverMike: A long bed is obvious overkill for many users and applications, regardless of specified cab. Power...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States