By on November 24, 2021

 

Next-Gen Ford Ranger

Despite what we’d all like to think, America isn’t always the first to receive a particular new vehicle – even when it is made by one of our largest automakers. That was the case with the current Ford Ranger, a pickup truck which was on sale in other markets before it showed up on our shores. Even now, other iterations (Ranger Raptor, anyone?) are not found in North American showrooms.

Such is the case for the next-gen Ranger as well, it seems. Ford launched the revamped mid-sizer in an online event last night, showing off a trio of trims and detailing several powertrains that are unlikely to be options in this country. One thing’s virtually assured, however – it probably won’t take Ford as long to drag this Ranger across the pond as it did with the current model.

Why? Profits, for one. We don’t need to explain to the B&B that pickup trucks are laden with profits in the same way your author’s plate of french fries is laden with gravy. Consider the burgeoning mid-size market as well, with players from Toyota and GM, not to mention the newly introduced Frontier. Leaving its Ranger to wither on the vine would be tantamount to leaving money on the table, something for which the Blue Oval is not known.

Anyways, the truck. This new Ranger cuts a familiar shape but has sufficiently different styling cues to distinguish it from the present model. It also rides on a wheelbase that is 2 inches longer and also has a couple extra inches of width. The latter will likely help with elbow room in the cab; at present, driver and passenger share cozy quarters. Those headlamps are very reminiscent of the Maverick, a choice that was surely intentional in order to create brand harmony across its lineup. That pickup family now runs the gamut from small to extra large, by the way, from unibody Maverick to giant Super Duty.

Next-Gen Ford Ranger

Behind that new face will reside a choice of powertrains, depending on the market in which the truck is being sold. Suffice it to say there is little chance either of the three diesel engines will make it to America, given recent challenges associated with that type of fuel. It is an excellent bet the existing 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-banger, making 270 horsepower and 310 lb-ft of torque, will return along with its 10-speed automatic transmission dance partner. Whispers remain that Ford is set to plug the 2.7L EcoBoost V6 into the next Ranger, set for Raptor duty and cranking out similar specs as found in F-150 – namely 325 horses and 400 lb-ft of twist. That is nothing but speculation for now, however.

We would say the interior shots provided by the Ford Thailand media site to show a cabin that is an evolution of the current accommodations. Dominating the dashboard is a large infotainment screen of similar ilk to the one found in Expedition and Mach-E, though it lacks the integrated dial of those units. Controls appear on the display for features such as heated seats but there doesn’t seem to be any fixed buttons for items like a power tailgate.

Next-Gen Ford Ranger

Next-Gen Ford Ranger

Speaking of the cargo area, Ford showed this next-gen Ranger with a very handy step integrated into the side of its bed just behind the rear wheel. Like GM’s bumper step, it’s a great way to offer owners a leg up while deploying exactly zero moving parts. Also shown in the promotional photos are twin power outlets in the bed, plus a rail system of sorts which seems to accept both moveable tie-down points and an oddball bed divider.

For some overseas markets, the next Ranger will be produced in Thailand and South Africa starting in 2022. We’ll keep our ears to the ground for the inevitable American version.

[Images: Ford]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

35 Comments on “Ford Trots Out New Ranger for Other Markets, Will Likely Appear in America Soon...”


  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    If you want a small truck you have to buy a Maverick or a Santa Cruz. The Ranger has been made wider and longer.

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      The reason I’m getting a Santa Cruz is the new (now slightly older) Ranger was already at F150 height for reasons I can’t comprehend. These days a midsize is what we previous knew as full size. Full size is now so massive I have zero interest in such a beast.

      Despite what the interwebs screams I don’t need 32″ tires or an 8 foot bed. A Santa Cruz with the tailgate dropped is pretty much a perfect match dimension wise to my old Dodge Dakota Quad Cab which has severed me well for two decades. I’ve never wanted nor needed anything bigger. Ikea and Lowes runs are accomplished with nothing more then a tie down strap here or there.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        I saw a Santa Cruz the other day. Sharp looking little rig.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        33″ on 20’s is the minimum on a fullsize. Anything less looks goofy. Some call parking a midsize pickup prohibitive, but it’s all relative and I’ve never been in a parking lot that I couldn’t find my spot. Sure yeah I might have to walk a couple extra feet or go up or down another level, but I welcome the challenge. Bring it!
        Sh!t it’s totally worth it and life’s to short for a midsize.

        I realize many (most Americans) are way too inept for a fullsize anything. Parallel parking isn’t even on driver’s license tests, the last 40 years since most would fail.

    • 0 avatar
      SD 328I

      You can blame VW for the larger Ranger, the next Amarok is going to be based on the Ranger, and they needed to fit a V6, something the T6 Ranger previously wasn’t designed for.

  • avatar
    kcflyer

    I’m going to pour one out for the diesel four cylinder manual transmission that will be offered in this truck in sane markets.

  • avatar
    ajla

    I like the aesthetics of the old one more. It had some unique personality, this just looks like a Ford truck set to “Medium size”, which I guess was their point.

    This one is apparently being offered with a diesel V6 in Kangaroo Land so I assume that means the 2.7T will be available here.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    A 2.7T Ranger would be a genuinely appealing product. Unfortunately I still expect that Ford will nerf it here in order to push people toward boring base F-150s that are too big to park.

  • avatar
    Syke

    Why do you need a powered tailgate?

  • avatar
    downunder

    https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/motoring-news/new-ford-ranger-revealed/news-story/07e056ca8d11a900a6b9f11239014219 for more views and maybe a video.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    Some of us don’t need or want a full size pickup and the Ranger is no longer a compact pickup like it was in the prior generation ending in 2011. Ranger is not a bad truck but it is not small and it is growing in size in the current generation and this next generation. For many the Maverick is the right size for those of us wanting a true compact pickup. At least Ford has listened and now has a compact pickup.

    • 0 avatar
      Carlson Fan

      The Maverick is a fine PU if you have zero or light towing needs. In fact I’m going to tell my dad 80+ year old father to take look at one, versus an SUV of similar size, because I think it would be the perfect little truck for him.

      • 0 avatar
        redapple

        Maverick – yes!
        I hope i can tow 2 snowmobiles with it.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          “I hope i can tow 2 snowmobiles with it.”

          Behind my two place single axle open snowmobile trailer – Yes!

          Behind my two place tandem axle enclosed v-nose snowmobile trailer – probably not!

          In both cases the weight is the easy part, the tough part is pushing the air out of your way.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    That’s a nice F-150, tis no Ranger though.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    Certainly underwhelming but far better than the turd we have now. If Ford offered the Maverick with actual capability, proper RWD and the 2.3 they could get rid of the Ranger all together. The Ranger really serves no purpose. Too big and too close in size to the F150.

    • 0 avatar
      redapple

      EB – Nailed it.

    • 0 avatar
      SD 328I

      Isn’t the current Ranger outselling everyone but the Tacoma? The current Ranger is nowhere near the size of the current F150.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        That’s silly. The Ranger is completely in its own class and it would be irresponsible of Ford to skip a class, or just plain stupid.

        I can’t speak for FCA but it makes no sense, all the established truck/SUV segments they avoid. Billions free for the taking, and they’re panicked over a stupid leaked email about what’s for lunch??

        Ford has now 6 (SIX!) classes of pickups, FCA has 3? That’s not counting the F-series based industrial trucks and now a new F-600.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I don’t tow and my needs are not as much as they were. The 42 mpg on the hybrid Maverick make it a perfect fit for my needs especially since I don’t need AWD.

  • avatar
    Mike-NB2

    My wife and I bought her a ’19 Ranger a couple of years ago. We faced some criticism from some folks along the same lines as is mentioned in these comments, and I get that. But the current Ranger fit our needs much better than the F150 would have. We bought it primarily so we could upgrade our trailer a bit. The class-leading 7500 pound tow rating made the Ranger a perfect choice for a 24′, 4000 trailer. And for those not familiar with towing travel trailers, you really wouldn’t want to tow much larger than this with a Ranger regardless of capacity. (Most people are way over safe capacity for travel trailers on full size trucks too.)

    The Ranger was a Goldilocks truck for us. It’s small enough that it still fits in the garage and my wife is fine daily driving it. The fuel economy isn’t much less than the Escape it replaced.

    The one area where the current Ranger falls down and shows its true age is in the bed though. The Ranger’s bed is straight out of the 1970s. The only cargo convenience in the bed are old-fashioned rectangular loops welded into each corner where you can hook a ratchet strap or a bungee cord. There is none of the modern cargo tie-down tech that is available on the F150 or Maverick. There is no bed lighting either, except for the cargo light on the back of the cab. But that gets blocked by the fixed section of the tonneau cover. The bed height is really high and even me, at six feet, struggles to climb in because there is absolutely nothing anywhere to assist.

    Even the interior walls of the bed aren’t really conducive to using a 2×4/6/8 as a bed divider so I had to buy a ratcheting one.

    And there is no bottle opener built in either…

    I hope the new Ranger addresses these shortcomings. For someone who uses a truck as a truck a lot of the time, this is annoying. But, we still like it. If it was my daily driver I’d have added the performance upgrade that Ford offers because why say no to more power?

    Who knows? Maybe in a few years a current-year Ranger will replace this one. With the 2.7 if it’s available.

    • 0 avatar
      Carlson Fan

      “The one area where the current Ranger falls down and shows its true age is in the bed though. ”

      Kind of funny you mention that as my ex has a newer Colorado & needed help getting something tied down in the bed. Being used to the 2004 GMC HD PU I had owned for 13 years I couldn’t believe how lousy the design of that bed was. It was a mess trying to find something to hook a simple ratchet strap on. What would have been easy in the GMC was a complete PITA in that truck.

      I’m looking at another CC PU to replace my Tahoe and would like to go midsize but after looking at them there are just too many negatives for me over a full-size. But everyone’s needs & what’s important to them are different so I get why some choose to go smaller.

  • avatar
    Arthur Dailey

    The times that we have rented a domestic pick-up, we have found lots to like. But getting into/out of them is a pain for my wife. And getting into and out of the bed is a pain for me. So much that we carry around a small step ladder when we are renting/using these pickups.

    And in reality their capacity/capability is far more than what we will need, more than a few times.

    So the Ranger/Canyon/Colorado seemed enticing. Although their back seats are rather small for the size of the vehicle.

    Once the Maverick was announced it appears to answer all of our particular needs. We don’t tow, so that is not an issue. We don’t ‘off road’. High enough ride height/road clearance without needing a step ladder. ‘Usable’ bed. ‘Usable’ back seat. And being FWD and hybrid for us is even better. Most times it will just ‘haul air’ so maximizing MPGs is important. And being FWD means that it will drive/ride more like the vehicles my wife and children are used to and be more ‘predictable’ in light snow/rain/ice than a RWD based vehicle.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    @Arthur Dailey–Agree and that is why I ordered the hybrid Maverick

  • avatar

    I like the car’s look, so cool

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • slavuta: What I imagine is involuntary sterilization with EMF. The Greta’s heaven – Earth is saved....
  • CKNSLS Sierra SLT: The proverbial “horse has left the barn” and the government (both certain individual...
  • ToolGuy: Here’s a good example of progress: https://www.hindustantimes.com /world-news/researchers-dev...
  • Flipper35: All the Rare Rides articles are great, but I may have to suspend again until the stupid PiP ads go away....
  • Syke: Definitely a neat idea, although we’re looking at a real looooong term solution. I can see this happening...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber