Ranger Confirmed Through 2011

[NY Ranger Guy]

As per the announcement this morning, Ford has confirmed that the Ranger will stay in production through 2011 in Minnesota.

FORD ACCELERATES TRANSFORMATION PLAN WITH SMALL CAR OFFENSIVE, MANUFACTURING REALIGNMENT (http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=28660)

Among the manufacturing realignment actions:

* Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, Mich., which currently builds the Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator full-size SUVs, will be converted beginning this December to production of small cars derived from Ford’s global C-car platform in 2010.
* Production of the Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator will be moved to the Kentucky Truck Plant in Louisville, Ky., early next year.
* Cuautitlan Assembly Plant in Mexico, which currently produces F-Series pickups, will be converted to begin production of the new Fiesta small car for North America in early 2010.
* Louisville (Ky.) Assembly Plant, which builds the Ford Explorer mid-size SUV, will be converted to produce small vehicles from Ford’s global C-car platform beginning in 2011.
* Twin Cities (Minn.) Assembly Plant – which was scheduled to close in 2009 – will continue production of the Ford Ranger through 2011 to meet consumer demand for the compact pickup.
* As previously announced, Kansas City Assembly Plant this year will add a third crew to its small utility line for the Ford Escape, Escape Hybrid and Mercury Mariner and Mariner Hybrid.

[tbirdsps]

Good news. I read about this this morining.

[rangerslim]

thank God for high gas prices.....haha.

[koda6966]

And yet.. no redesign for the next 3 years.
But hey, does this mean that the blue book of third gen rangers will go down? :D

Usually when a company produces more vehicles in a line, the older (middle) ones have a price drop where as if they just end the line, the prices stay where they were for 10 or so years.

[stonecoldranger]

would love a price drop (who wouldn't) but the prices aren't bad as they stand.. I want to buy an 09 or 10 next year to replace the 06 I'm leasing... hopefully the residual on these trucks stays high unlike the 1/2 tons

[tbirdsps]

I haven't worn out the 92 yet. So, I don't care about value. My opinion is that the Ranger is a darn good truck and doesn't need a redesign. Or, maybe I'm just old.:icon_rofl:

[koda6966]

I haven't worn out the 92 yet. So, I don't care about value. My opinion is that the Ranger is a darn good truck and doesn't need a redesign. Or, maybe I'm just old.:icon_rofl:

I don't care about a mechanical redesign, but I wouldn't mind seeing a cosmetic one with a crew cab option.

[Dar70]

Good news. Maybe I'll upgrade in 2011.:icon_cheers:


And yet.. no redesign for the next 3 years.
But hey, does this mean that the blue book of third gen rangers will go down? :D

Usually when a company produces more vehicles in a line, the older (middle) ones have a price drop where as if they just end the line, the prices stay where they were for 10 or so years.


Crap you mean the current ones wont hold there value as well now.:bawling: I would think that with demand going up they would increase the price. Ahh well. :3gears:

[koda6966]

Crap you mean the current ones wont hold there value as well now.:bawling: I would think that with demand going up they would increase the price. Ahh well. :3gears:

Depends on the age of your truck really..

I'm just hoping on a 3rd gen price drop. Hopefully all the current third early 4th gen people will upgrade.

[Dar70]

Depends on the age of your truck really..

I'm just hoping on a 3rd gen price drop. Hopefully all the current third early 4th gen people will upgrade.

Ahhh you want a nice used truck at a good price. :icon_thumby: I may get one myself for a second vehicle in a few years. I like my newly purchased Ranger that much.:icon_cheers:

[koda6966]

Well, I just got mine (used&crappy) in october, but its a POS.

I want to upgrade to a Stepside Supercab 4x4 with a manual tranny.
Anything I get that's 4x4 would HAVE to have a manual tranny to make up for the MPG drop.

[oldbaldy454]

Yep, here in Minnesota the folks are happy to keep their jobs...if they already did not accept the buyout option....word is that they may convert the plant to small cars, and haven't heard what will happen then to the ranger production.

Yep, may mean older trucks worth less if they keep building new ones rather than becoming a collectors item.
Would be neat if they would come out with a small diesel 4 banger like the ones offered overseas, then maybe someday to run it on a ethanol-diesel blend like some new foreign cars scheduled for 2010 and beyond.

http://www.trollhattansaab.net/archives/2007/11/an-ethanol-diesel-engine.html

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/04/scania-extendin.html

[Dar70]

Yep, here in Minnesota the folks are happy to keep their jobs...if they already did not accept the buyout option....word is that they may convert the plant to small cars, and haven't heard what will happen then to the ranger production.

Yep, may mean older trucks worth less if they keep building new ones rather than becoming a collectors item.
Would be neat if they would come out with a small diesel 4 banger like the ones offered overseas, then maybe someday to run it on a ethanol-diesel blend like some new foreign cars scheduled for 2010 and beyond.

http://www.trollhattansaab.net/archives/2007/11/an-ethanol-diesel-engine.html

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/04/scania-extendin.html


Its good to know the ranger will be around a few more years in its current form. Its one of the last true pickups that look like a pickup.

[oldbaldy454]

:clapping:

Ya, I heard on tonights news that they will keep making trucks,
yesterday there was talk of the plant staying open
but then switching some production to small cars...
guess it will be small trucks for now

Maybe I should drive up there and buy a new one...
but I like my old E85 burner too

JB

[stegomon]

since the 3.0 is dropped....do you think they may drop in the new 3.5 in the ranger to replace that and maby evan replace the 4.0 at the same time??? or just keep the 4.0 for the next few years???

[Boggin-B-Series]

they may do a 7.8 powerstroke!?!? lol hahaha that would be cool

[85_Ranger4x4]

since the 3.0 is dropped....do you think they may drop in the new 3.5 in the ranger to replace that and maby evan replace the 4.0 at the same time??? or just keep the 4.0 for the next few years???

The 3.5 would waste a 4.0, the 4.0 would likely replace the 3.0 as the middle V-6.

[koda6966]

3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8!!!!!

Sorry.. big fan here..

[reginald fairfield]

Well, I just got mine (used&crappy) in october, but its a POS.

I want to upgrade to a Stepside Supercab 4x4 with a manual tranny.
Anything I get that's 4x4 would HAVE to have a manual tranny to make up for the MPG drop.

ha ha, you just described my truck exactly.

[reginald fairfield]

since the 3.0 is dropped....do you think they may drop in the new 3.5 in the ranger to replace that and maby evan replace the 4.0 at the same time??? or just keep the 4.0 for the next few years???

Dang it... I think that is the death of the 3.0 engines. Rangers are now the only fords that have them, right?


I know a lot of people don't like them, but you have to admit they are runnin little turds. Hope parts stay available for a long time. The reason I like it is that it is an oldfashioned motor that has reached near perfection. It still has pushrods and normal cam, but it still runs for a long damn time... :bawling::damnit1:

[stegomon]

Dang it... I think that is the death of the 3.0 engines. Rangers are now the only fords that have them, right?


I know a lot of people don't like them, but you have to admit they are runnin little turds. Hope parts stay available for a long time. The reason I like it is that it is an oldfashioned motor that has reached near perfection. It still has pushrods and normal cam, but it still runs for a long damn time... :bawling::damnit1:

the 3.0 is dropped as of 09...it is not in the 09 order guide:bye:

[4x4RangerGuy]

the 3.0 is dropped as of 09...it is not in the 09 order guide:bye:

A sad day indeed. If I were to get a newer Ranger it would have to be a 3.0. Otherwise I might have to look elsewhere :icon_rofl:...jk of course :haha:

But yeah, that sucks there won't be any more 3.0s.

[koda6966]

ha ha, you just described my truck exactly.

...its not black as well is it?

A sad day indeed. If I were to get a newer Ranger it would have to be a 3.0. Otherwise I might have to look elsewhere :icon_rofl:...jk of course :haha:

But yeah, that sucks there won't be any more 3.0s.

I dislike the 3.0, it lasts a long time and it's kinda trustworthy, but I like some power behind a motor. I'd swap in a 3.8 out of a Windstar if I could..

[reginald fairfield]

...its not black as well is it?



..


Ooh! Almost. Dark Charcoal. :icon_pepsi:

[koda6966]

Ooh! Almost. Dark Charcoal. :icon_pepsi:

Hmm.. close enough.

I can't decide on black or dark green though.

[reginald fairfield]

Hmm.. close enough.

I can't decide on black or dark green though.

Go for the green one. They look sweet.... My buddy has one, it is nice. A 2000 model, 4x4 stepside with green paint, only 65,000 miles.

[koda6966]

Go for the green one. They look sweet.... My buddy has one, it is nice. A 2000 model, 4x4 stepside with green paint, only 65,000 miles.

Yea, sad thing is, my cash flow = my ranger and my ranger = crap.
No clue as to how much I would get for it. I've asked around and checked KBB but never really got a price that made sense. I've heard everything between 500-2000 for it.

[crazy96863]

I thought I would mention... The 3.8 is a great motor, a 302 - 2 cylinders. A great choice to swap but I found out the 4.2 in my 05 Freestar is the same motor, only more displacement and a few tweaks to older motors didn't have.

Even with all the weight of the fully loaded van, the motor and trans., and being front wheel drive, I find it a bit impressive that it will smoke the tires off. It carries around a few cojones to say the least.

Might be something to look at when considering a 3.8 swap.

[koda6966]

I thought I would mention... The 3.8 is a great motor, a 302 - 2 cylinders. A great choice to swap but I found out the 4.2 in my 05 Freestar is the same motor, only more displacement and a few tweaks to older motors didn't have.

Even with all the weight of the fully loaded van, the motor and trans., and being front wheel drive, I find it a bit impressive that it will smoke the tires off. It carries around a few cojones to say the least.

Might be something to look at when considering a 3.8 swap.

My mothers Racestar *AHEM* Windstar has the 3.8, I know this beasty well. :icon_thumby:

As for the Freestar, I don't know if I would ever feel comfortable tearing an engine from a vehicle under 10 years old though.. feels like a waste for my POS ranger. Plus I've heard that its harder than hell to do that swap.

[85_Ranger4x4]

I thought I would mention... The 3.8 is a great motor, a 302 - 2 cylinders. A great choice to swap but I found out the 4.2 in my 05 Freestar is the same motor, only more displacement and a few tweaks to older motors didn't have.

Even with all the weight of the fully loaded van, the motor and trans., and being front wheel drive, I find it a bit impressive that it will smoke the tires off. It carries around a few cojones to say the least.

Might be something to look at when considering a 3.8 swap.

Completly unrelated to the 302, numerically it comes out that it is 3/4 as big but the bore/stroke is different among other things.

Honestly there is a long list of engines I would rather put in my truck than the headgasket-eating 3.8.

If you want a 4.2 (also a headgasket eater) they also came out in the 97+ F-150's. Supposedly they fixed the headgasket issues in later years...

[rboyer]

I love the 3.0 engine. I think it is probably the best thing Ford ever put out as far as reliability. The last vehicle with a 3.0 that I owned was an Aerostar with an M5OD trans and it had almost 300,000 miles on it when I took it to the junkyard and the only reason I took it there was because the body rot was WAY too excessive to even consider repairing. Right now I have a Windstar with a 3.8 in it which I drive from time to time and i'm seriously thinking about getting rid of it before I experience any more motor or trans problems.

[koda6966]

I love the 3.0 engine. I think it is probably the best thing Ford ever put out as far as reliability. The last vehicle with a 3.0 that I owned was an Aerostar with an M5OD trans and it had almost 300,000 miles on it when I took it to the junkyard and the only reason I took it there was because the body rot was WAY too excessive to even consider repairing. Right now I have a Windstar with a 3.8 in it which I drive from time to time and i'm seriously thinking about getting rid of it before I experience any more motor or trans problems.

Don't blame tranny problems on the 3.8, the trannys in fords nowdays are for shit.

[reginald fairfield]

Don't blame tranny problems on the 3.8, the trannys in fords nowdays are for shit.

he's right.

[rboyer]

i'm not blaming tranny problems on the 3.8, i'm blaming the AX series trans for that. As for the 3.8 i'm blaming their poorly designed intakes for my dislike of them. It is not uncommon to see a 99-up 3.8 throw a "system too lean" code.

[Sevensecondsuv]

Yeah, 3.8's are not at all related to a 302 or 5.0L and I know very few people that put them anywhere near the top of ford's engine list. Have you ever driven a 4.0L ranger? The low end torque would make you swear it's got a V8 if you're used to a 3.0. It took 12 psi of intercooled boost on a 3.8 to make roughly the same horsepower and a little more torque than a 4.0 SOHC. Factor in that the 4.0's don't have headgasket eating issues and most would agree the 4.0 is far superior to a 3.8. Plus the 4.0s actually came in the ranger.

I like the 3.0's too for their reliability, longevity, and the fun of winding one out. I do think the 2.3 is probably a bit better in terms of longetivity. I've seen and heard about several more 300,000+ mile 2.3s than 3.0s.

I too am interested to see what Ford does with the engine line-up for the Ranger. The 2.3 is current, the 3.0 is not availible past 08, and the 4.0 is scheduled to end production next year when the Mustang and Explorer get the 3.5. Hopefully they put the 3.5 in the ranger. A 3.5 will eat a 4.0 Cologne and probably get better mileage than a 3.0 Vulcan. I know the 3.5 Duratech Taurus gets better mileage than the 3.0 Duratech Fusion.

[dude772]

I talked to one of the older sales guys at work. He said they are going to have the 4.0L in everything but the regular cab rangers.

[Simple_serf]

I wouldn't wish a 3.8 on anyone. I had a windstar...It ate coolant and headgaskets for breakfast. With a whole 60K miles too. Ford refused to do anything about it, the problem occured too late, even though it was recalled. I saw that van last night...It's now on it's 3rd engine.

I have a 3.0 in our taurus (one of the last old school tauruses made, 07 Fleet vehicle). I want to get a ranger with one, but I have other places I need to put my $$ now (like passing inspection)

[RANGER 07]

Now ,if only Ford would test/change the tranny, before it did come out of 'PRODUCTION',
..now that will be a perfect pick up for me...sigh

[reginald fairfield]

Don't get me wrong either, I have nothing against the 4.0 engines. The only thing I really don't like about them in the OHC. I have never worked on a motor with those, only pushrods. That is why I like the 3.0. Yeah, it is pretty nutless for a v6, but that is the tradeoff. The less power you have, the more the motor will tend to last a long time. Most of the time, anyways. That is why 460's only last about 100,000 miles in a lot of cases.

Didn't the 4.0 that used to come in rangers back in the day have pushrods? How did that one run?

My mom used to have an early explorer that had a 4.0, I think it had pushrods... It always ran pretty good.

[exbass94]

The OHV 4.0 has pushrods. They came in Explorers and Rangers from 1991 till around 2001. My OHV has 140k trouble-free miles.

[85_Ranger4x4]

The 4.0 OHC is a pretty good engine, it had some teething problems out of the hole at first but they have been long worked out.

Considering the 4.0 lineage started out as a V-4 and slowly evolved to its current state, making too much power for its package hasn't been too much of a problem yet, they have done a good job of building it for each evolution (aside from the cylinder heads on the 2.9)

[Rulebreaker]

i'm not blaming tranny problems on the 3.8, i'm blaming the AX series trans for that. As for the 3.8 i'm blaming their poorly designed intakes for my dislike of them. It is not uncommon to see a 99-up 3.8 throw a "system too lean" code.

The system too lean is stupid simple to fix. The EGR ports under the upper plastic intake will slowly plug until all the exhaust gas goes to one cylinder causing the code. Just pop the cover off and clean. If they were driven harder it probably wouldn't happen. RB

[crazy96863]

I stand corrected on the 3.8 being the same as the 5.0. It does share many common characteristics that the 5.0 has... see the 3.8 swap in the tech library.

I have personally owned a 1990 Ranger 4x4 with the 4.0 and a 1997 Explorer with a 4.0 SOHC. The Ranger made lots of power and gobbs of usable torque however, the Explorer would smoke it on the track. That S.O.B. would run like a scolded dog! The power was comparable to v-8s of the time but weighed allot less.

The old 4.0 were rated for 165-170 HP, the SOHC push 205-210. Not sure here but I think they still sell both in various applications.

My experience was the SOHC was not as reliable as the regular version though. The first time it got hot, it fried just about every sensor and perhaps more. I saw the block on my 1990 Ranger get cherry red a few times and it still ran strong. I beat it until the tranny started slipping then I got a 96 Bronco. Good truck to.

[85_Ranger4x4]

I have never heard of a engine getting hot and frying sensers...

Somewhere around 2001 they pulled the plug on the 4.0 OHV. SOHC is pretty much the same engine with different cylinder heads and a more interesting timing chain setup.

My parents have both, a '94 4.0 Explorer XLT and a '02 Explorer XLT. The '94 got a new computer after leaving us stranded once with about 100k on it, as it sits it has 170k on it. The '02 has 77k on it and has required absolutly nothing... and would happily turn the '94 inside out.

[crazy96863]

I have never heard of a engine getting hot and frying sensers...

Somewhere around 2001 they pulled the plug on the 4.0 OHV. SOHC is pretty much the same engine with different cylinder heads and a more interesting timing chain setup.

My parents have both, a '94 4.0 Explorer XLT and a '02 Explorer XLT. The '94 got a new computer after leaving us stranded once with about 100k on it, as it sits it has 170k on it. The '02 has 77k on it and has required absolutly nothing... and would happily turn the '94 inside out.

I don't know how she did it but my wife was driving the exploder when it overheated because of the thermostat went bad. The computer actually shut it down on her. She obviously wasn't paying attention to the gauges.

I changed the O2 sensors, plugs, wires, reset the computer and had a mechanic look at it. It ran but it had considerably less power. It would sputter around randomly as well with a check engine light. I finally had enough & got rid of it. It was to small for my family anyway. (4 seater).

There may have been some mechanical issues with it but I couldn't find anything. No noise, no leaks, good compression. My assumption here is it was an electronic issue.

[crazy96863]

My mothers Racestar *AHEM* Windstar has the 3.8, I know this beasty well. :icon_thumby:

As for the Freestar, I don't know if I would ever feel comfortable tearing an engine from a vehicle under 10 years old though.. feels like a waste for my POS ranger. Plus I've heard that its harder than hell to do that swap.

The trick is finding a wrecked one. Although, I wound't swap the 4.2 if I had a donor in my yard; at least not from a Freestar. It is a nightmare under the hood and making all the wires stretch and finding a place for all the electronic crap.

As others have mentioned, if anyone feels like doing a very complicated swap with little to gain, 4.2s are in the trucks as well. Maybe a few other cars to.

302 is cheaper, easier, faster, more aftermarket support, and can be built much stronger with parts from a junkyard. Even new parts are cheap. If I recall correctly, there are still more 302's running today than any other engine on the planet. They are used in every application from vehicles (obviously), to marine engines, generators, aircraft ground support equipment, and various other applications. If I am wrong, they are still up there in numbers so no point arguing my point. This translates into cheap readily available parts.

[matt32]

I love my Ranger, i think that they are the best compact pickup truck out there, and its good to hear that they still have a future for it :icon_hornsup:

[Blackhawk]

The Ranger beat out the Tacoma & dakota in the JD Powers dependability ratings yesterday

[laclabb]

I really like Ford Rangers. I'm really satisfied with it. Some rumors tells that it's going to be something like a mini-pickup based on the current F-150.
__________________________________________________
Powered by Autopartswarehouse.com (http://autopartsware.tabulas.com)

[KARMAN]

I talked to one of the older sales guys at work. He said they are going to have the 4.0L in everything but the regular cab rangers.
I found this the other day on the Ford fleet site:
https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/2009fleetshowroom/2009-ranger.asp
2.3L I-4 engine: Regular Cab 4x2, standard; 2-door SuperCab 4x2, optional
All others have the 4.0

[Rat City Ranger]

I love my Ranger, i think that they are the best compact pickup truck out there, and its good to hear that they still have a future for it :icon_hornsup:

I couldn't agree more.