New U.S. market Ford Ranger: thoughts?

85_Ranger4x4 · Dec 6, 2016

Blown said:
I prefer what I have now, no payment, relatively low insurance cost, I can work on it and have, so it's custom to my style.

Just saying:
A large truck payment?
$400/mo. over 8 years earning 7.5% is worth $55,000.
$55,000 left to grow another 20yrs. at 7.5% is close to a quarter million.

There does come a point though...

I love my F-150 but cancer is starting to take root. Cab corners, bottom of doors, the front of the box, can see it in the inner fenders when the front doors are open. It isn't bad yet at all (seen trucks 10 years newer that are worse) but it is the beginning of the end...

Twister · Dec 6, 2016

rusty ol ranger said:
Wont see me lining up for one.

A techy, unibody, over complex, independent rear suspensioned "truck" with a bed smaller then the cab? No thanks.

Bring back manual trannys, I beams, and locking hubs, and a full ladder type frame, we might talk.

wildbill23c said:
You mean a Ranchero or a Explorer Sport Trac LOL...actually the new version is worse. It will be nothing more than a Ford Escape with a truck bed...possibly worse, a Ford Focus with a pickup bed.

The newer Ranger isnt a unibody, and i dont thik it even has IRS.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

85_Ranger4x4 · Dec 6, 2016

Twister said:
The newer Ranger isnt a unibody, and i dont thik it even has IRS.

I don't think they have announced anything for what the North American Ranger will be yet.

rusty ol ranger · Dec 6, 2016

No they havent said what itll be equipped with yet, but seeing as how fords current trends seem to be europeon, ill place my money itll be a watered down turd.

At some point ill be in the market, but i hope to god my next truck does not have to have an "infotament" system.

I also find it ridiculious theres no big gas V8s anymore. Something the size of a 460 with an ecoboost treatment would eat the powerchokes lunch. In my opinion.

85_Ranger4x4 · Dec 6, 2016

rusty ol ranger said:
No they havent said what itll be equipped with yet, but seeing as how fords current trends seem to be europeon, ill place my money itll be a watered down turd.

At some point ill be in the market, but i hope to god my next truck does not have to have an "infotament" system.

I also find it ridiculious theres no big gas V8s anymore. Something the size of a 460 with an ecoboost treatment would eat the powerchokes lunch. In my opinion.

5.0EB would give them a hard time I think.

FWIW the Ford 6.2 has bore spacing that legally puts it in the big block class.

don4331 · Dec 6, 2016

You better buy quick then rusty; NHTSA has mandated backup camera's in 100% of light vehicles by May, '18. And if they're installing a camera, they might as well include the rest of the infotainment system.

Ford's missed the boat with the T6 Ranger; Colorado/Canyon are hurting Silverado/Sierra sales - Ram and Ford both increase sales of their 1/2 tons in '16 while Chevrolet/Sierra are down by almost the number of mid size pickups they sold. Ford isn't going to hurt F-150 sales, especially given 75% of those sold are Lariat or higher trim...

Note: Price of diesel increased when EPA changed requirement from 500 ppm sulfur to 15 ppm and the extra cost of refining was passed on to the consumer.

Yes, I can keep my Ranger running for rest of my life; but my time is worth something and couple $100 in parts/Saturday afternoon wrenching is getting old.

Give me a pickup based on Ford's C1 platform, with 2.0 Ecoboost and it will haul 730kg/tow 1587kg which is close enough to what my '98 Ranger did. And my back will appreciate that high tech IRS over next 20 years over an antediluvian solid rear axle. The base one would be around $20k (The one I'd buy closer to $30k). So long as functionality is there, it doesn't need to look like the old Ranger. (I don't mind front end look of '17 Escape/Transit Connect, and if they put the little black rubber seam ala new Honda Ridgeline to make it look like cab and box, not unibody, that would work for me).

85_Ranger4x4 · Dec 6, 2016

don4331 said:
You better buy quick then rusty; NHTSA has mandated backup camera's in 100% of light vehicles by May, '18. And if they're installing a camera, they might as well include the rest of the infotainment system.

They put the screen in the review mirror or a small screen on the radio, it doesn't have to be the big double din screen. Moot point to me, my truck is covered in gravel dust so a camera will rarely do anything anyway.

don4331 said:
So long as functionality is there, it doesn't need to look like the old Ranger. (I don't mind front end look of '17 Escape/Transit Connect, and if they put the little black rubber seam ala new Honda Ridgeline to make it look like cab and box, not unibody, that would work for me).

I think the Flex could be morphed into a pretty neat looking truck. Not the powertrain or anything just the styling.

tcbaklash · Dec 6, 2016

rusty ol ranger said:
No they havent said what itll be equipped with yet, but seeing as how fords current trends seem to be europeon, ill place my money itll be a watered down turd.

At some point ill be in the market, but i hope to god my next truck does not have to have an "infotament" system.

I also find it ridiculious theres no big gas V8s anymore. Something the size of a 460 with an ecoboost treatment would eat the powerchokes lunch. In my opinion.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you.

Ford's European division is well-known for vehicles that the North American division wouldn't sell because they were faster than the Mustang... I don't see what's so watered-down about Ford getting back into the performance game. The Mustang is now a track monster and the base model sits at 300hp. The Fiesta RS WRC is an incredible rally/rallycross car. The GT defeated Ferrari at LeMans again. Ford is currently offering 7 cars and 1 truck that are performance models, and that's more than most brands.

Only one of these performance models has a naturally-aspirated option. The rest are turbocharged. Even Ferrari is moving toward turbos and hybrids.

rusty ol ranger · Dec 7, 2016

tcbaklash said:
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you.

Ford's European division is well-known for vehicles that the North American division wouldn't sell because they were faster than the Mustang... I don't see what's so watered-down about Ford getting back into the performance game. The Mustang is now a track monster and the base model sits at 300hp. The Fiesta RS WRC is an incredible rally/rallycross car. The GT defeated Ferrari at LeMans again. Ford is currently offering 7 cars and 1 truck that are performance models, and that's more than most brands.

Only one of these performance models has a naturally-aspirated option. The rest are turbocharged. Even Ferrari is moving toward turbos and hybrids.[/QUOTE.]

I wasnt speaking so much in terms of performance as i was in terms of ergonmics and styling. The cramped cockpits with huge protruding dashes that "surround" the occupants, the overalll design of the dash as well as general body shape.

Look at how ass ugly the transits and escapes are.

stmitch · Dec 7, 2016

rusty ol ranger said:
I wasnt speaking so much in terms of performance as i was in terms of ergonmics and styling. The cramped cockpits with huge protruding dashes that "surround" the occupants, the overalll design of the dash as well as general body shape.

Look at how ass ugly the transits and escapes are.

They have giant dash boards because the windshields are laid back for better aerodynamics/fuel economy. The beltlines are higher, creating a cockpit that feels more cramped because of increased safety regulations. They're not going to go back to designs that are less fuel efficient or less safe because sales would tank. You can be upset with the regulations in place, but even without the regs, the people spending their money to buy new vehicles expect those things now.

The vehicle you want will never exist again from the factory. There's no point in complaining. But the good news, is that instead of spending a bunch of money on a truck you don't want, you can spend that same money (or less) to make an older truck just to your liking. Isn't it great having the freedom to choose?

stmitch · Dec 7, 2016

Blown said:
I prefer what I have now, no payment, relatively low insurance cost, I can work on it and have, so it's custom to my style.

Just saying:
A large truck payment?
$400/mo. over 8 years earning 7.5% is worth $55,000.
$55,000 left to grow another 20yrs. at 7.5% is close to a quarter million.

This. Drive the truck that makes you happy and costs the least. Don't invest 10s of thousands of your hard earned dollars into a vehicle that's full of stuff you don't like or need, only to watch the value plummet. Take the money you'd spend on a new ride, and invest it into something that may actually grow.

I can buy/maintain/mod a lot of older trucks for the price of a new one, and come out WAY ahead financially.

rusty ol ranger · Dec 7, 2016

stmitch said:
They have giant dash boards because the windshields are laid back for better aerodynamics/fuel economy. The beltlines are higher, creating a cockpit that feels more cramped because of increased safety regulations. They're not going to go back to designs that are less fuel efficient or less safe because sales would tank. You can be upset with the regulations in place, but even without the regs, the people spending their money to buy new vehicles expect those things now.

The vehicle you want will never exist again from the factory. There's no point in complaining. But the good news, is that instead of spending a bunch of money on a truck you don't want, you can spend that same money (or less) to make an older truck just to your liking. Isn't it great having the freedom to choose?

They have huge dashboards due to the "cab forward" design chrysler pioneered in the mid 90s. Placing the engine more under the cowl and recessing the firewall, making it harder to service. Plenty of vehicles had low set windshelds with normal dashes.

Its because the average modern consumer wants to ride around in a 4G connected cacoon they dont really have to drive.

Cars like the challenger are proof that styling doesnt have to take a backseat to safety regs.

Youre also right, it is my choice to drive an old vehicle, however, with emissions and safety checks getting stricter, and encroaching more and more, that may not be an option forever.

Driving used to be about the experience, now it simply seen as a boring mundane chore, and the vehicles being produced reflect that, 90% of all vehicles today are about as exciting as a refrigerator.

stmitch · Dec 7, 2016

Why do you think Chrysler went to the trouble of the 'cab forward' design? It wasn't just becasue somebody thought it would be cool, and most cars for the next 25 years would follow suit. There were 2 primary reasons:
1) It laid the windshield back, improving aerodynamics which in turn improved fuel efficiency.
2) It created the feeling of more openness in the interior, which is one of the things you claim to miss so much about older vehicles. What you see as clausterphobic new interiors with deep dashboards, others see as much more open and comfortable. Different strokes for different folks, which is kind of my whole point. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean there aren't people lining up to buy it because they do.

Modern vehicles aren't my cup of tea either. That's why I drive what I do. But I try not to fall into the trap of begrudging those who buy newer vehicles, or complaining because I can't go order the exact vehicle I want with everything I want and nothing I don't. It's a very good thing to have a choice. Try and celebrate that instead of complaining that the perfect new vehicle for you doesn't exist. If you can't find what you want, then make what you want, or do everything in your power to keep what you like working as it should.

I like the looks of the Challenger very much, but they made some sacrifices to keep that classic design, primarily weight. To fit the proper crash structure into it and keep the proportions "right", they had to make it a giant car, which leads to higher weight and worse performance than the other cars in it's class.

Assuming you live in an area with emissions testing, your vehicle only has to pass emissions checks for the year it was produced, so as long as your older truck is running like it should've when it was newish you're good to go. Older vehicles require more maintenance, but that's nothing new to anybody. You're often still better off paying to perform the maintenance on an older vehicle than paying $400+ / month on a new car payment. $400/month to keep an older Ranger on the road can go a long way, especially if you're doing some of the work yourself. Heck, you could buy a different 10-15 year old Ranger every 3-5 months for that money. That way, if one needed repair, you could just jump into another one and go.

rusty ol ranger · Dec 7, 2016

I guess "openness" is a relitive term, however, i have no idea how someone can climb in an 2016 taurus and think it feels roomier then an 88 taurus.

Im not begrudging anybody, simply stateing my opinions. Cab forward designs do allow for more "space" in a smaller overall package, however, when the windsheild is 3 feet in front of you, and the dash and center stack sweep down and out into a ridiculously sized center console, and room given by a cab forward design is lost.

I drive older trucks as well, hell, my daily driver is a 77 F250 and my "nice" truck/towrig is a 97 HD 250, but the fact of the matter is the older i get the more ive grown to dislike wrenching and the less time i have to screw with it, that, combined with the fact many of the older trucks in my general area are rustpiles (michigan), so i pretty much have to (at some point) put up and shut up with a modern truck, unless i drive to texas or something.

Either way, the bottom line is, that modern vehicles are not all their cracked up to be.

85_Ranger4x4 · Dec 7, 2016

stmitch said:
The vehicle you want will never exist again from the factory. There's no point in complaining. But the good news, is that instead of spending a bunch of money on a truck you don't want, you can spend that same money (or less) to make an older truck just to your liking. Isn't it great having the freedom to choose?

Yeah it will. People will get tired of high beltlined vehicles like they did in the 60's (after high beltlines in the 30's/40's and 50's) and new materials and designs will allow their return over time.

stmitch said:
I like the looks of the Challenger very much, but they made some sacrifices to keep that classic design, primarily weight. To fit the proper crash structure into it and keep the proportions "right", they had to make it a giant car, which leads to higher weight and worse performance than the other cars in it's class.

But on the other hand the Challenger is in a class of its own. It is a bigger car... but it has a dang nice sized passenger compartment. A lot of people buy them for that. For a cruiser or someone with limited mobility the competition can't touch it.

But the Mercedes platform the Challenger rides on was old when the Challenger came out. And then they stick a sub 400hp Hemi in it and wonder why the smaller lighter cars with 430+ V8's beat on it.

New U.S. market Ford Ranger: thoughts?

Forum Staff Member

Active Member

Forum Staff Member

Im a Jeep guy now.

Forum Staff Member

Well-Known Member

Forum Staff Member

New Member

Im a Jeep guy now.

March 2011 STOTM Winner

March 2011 STOTM Winner

Im a Jeep guy now.

March 2011 STOTM Winner

Im a Jeep guy now.

Forum Staff Member

Sponsored Ad

Sponsored Ad

Today's birthdays

Member & Vendor Upgrades

Truck of The Month

Recently Featured

Follow TRS On Instagram

TRS Events

25th Anniversary Sponsors

Check Out The TRS Store

Sponsored Ad

Sponsored Ad

Sponsored Ad

Amazon Deals