New U.S. market Ford Ranger: thoughts?

85_Ranger4x4 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but I'm not holding my breath. I think it's more likely that the self-driving stuff will be here by then, and people won't care about visibility and beltlines at all in new cars if they don't have to drive. Some of the autonomous concepts out now don't even have windshields.

If you guys are upset about the tech in current vehicles, just wait 15 years until the majority of new vehicles will be electric and even more will be self-driving. We're just getting the tip of the iceberg now. That will be the big game changer, and could have some pretty far reaching side effects for us gear heads.

You mean like googles self driving car that has logged something like 1/2 dozen "mishaps" in one year?

You will never take the human element completly out of driving. A computer cannot reason, therefore, if the road is icy, foggy, etc, all that car knows is what the posted speed limit is.

Besides, states wont allow it in large numbers, they make to much off traffic fines.

Not to mention, a computer cant back up a trailer, desend a steep grade, or compensate for ANYTHING unless it is givin the parameters.

Lets say your blasting down the interstate on a nice day, hit a construction zone that is not logged in gps data, person slows to 55, gps car continues on said path untill it realizes its taking out barrels and hits a portashitter before it stops.

Give me a good ol RWD V8 powered piece of machinery and lets see if the robo car can follow me down a rutted country road without self destructing its pansy suspension.

stmitch said:

Maybe, but I'm not holding my breath. I think it's more likely that the self-driving stuff will be here by then, and people won't care about visibility and beltlines at all in new cars if they don't have to drive. Some of the autonomous concepts out now don't even have windshields.

If you guys are upset about the tech in current vehicles, just wait 15 years until the majority of new vehicles will be electric and even more will be self-driving. We're just getting the tip of the iceberg now. That will be the big game changer, and could have some pretty far reaching side effects for us gear heads.

Click to expand...

Cars maybe, people will be needing to peer out of trucks for a long time.

And I think people will always be wanting to see what is going on around them.

rusty ol ranger said:

You mean like googles self driving car that has logged something like 1/2 dozen "mishaps" in one year?

You will never take the human element completly out of driving. A computer cannot reason, therefore, if the road is icy, foggy, etc, all that car knows is what the posted speed limit is.

Click to expand...

The biggest problem with the self driving cars is the computer trying to deal with all the goofy people doing whatever.

Well I can see the direction this thread has taken... Obviously not too many fans of the 21st century on here. Face it people, the 80's are gone and they're not coming back! For those of us who live in the Rustbelt, hell there ain't too many vehicles left from the 90's that haven't completely disintegrated by now due to the salt! Newer vehicles with their garbage electronics are a fact of life, get used to it. Not sayin' you gotta buy one, but don't berate others who choose to do so.
But look on the bright side: Those electronics don't last as long as the mechanical components do, so anything newer than about 2010 will be a rolling paperweight in 15 years

No one was being berated.

The plain and simple fact is vehicles nowadays are way to nannied down and over engineered. The only reason they are nannied is to keep the average, oblivious, idiot from killing themself while mindlessly weaving traffic at 90mph trying to get to tim hortons before work ("I just gotta have that latte")

Over engineered because engineers have to justify their salarys, explain what other reason some of these changes have for existing?

Yeah, I am not berating anyone.

They make trucks I would happily buy. Just they are not worth as much to me as they are to automakers.

rusty ol ranger said:

You mean like googles self driving car that has logged something like 1/2 dozen "mishaps" in one year?

Click to expand...

Google's cars have driven over a million miles and have been responsible for exactly 1 crash, that occured at 2mph:
https://www.wired.com/2016/02/googles-self-driving-car-may-caused-first-crash/

How many accidents do human drivers average in that same amount of miles driven?

rusty ol ranger said:

You will never take the human element completly out of driving. A computer cannot reason, therefore, if the road is icy, foggy, etc, all that car knows is what the posted speed limit is.

Click to expand...

Cars already know how to handle icy roads with advanced traction and stability control. Is it that far fetched to think that the computer processing power might increase, improving their abilities? I'd think that especially for foggy roads, the car's sensors would be able to detect things in their path better than human eyes would.

rusty ol ranger said:

Besides, states wont allow it in large numbers, they make to much off traffic fines.

Click to expand...

What constitutional right would they have to do that? Denying people an option that is statistically far safer in order to preserve some minor income from traffic citations would be a foolish limitation on the free market. They'll just find a way to offset the lost revenue with new taxes.

rusty ol ranger said:

Not to mention, a computer cant back up a trailer, desend a steep grade, or compensate for ANYTHING unless it is givin the parameters.

Click to expand...

This one does everything but back the trailer up, and how long will it be before it can handle that too?: http://inhabitat.com/self-driving-semi-truck-makes-the-first-ever-autonomous-beer-run/

rusty ol ranger said:

Lets say your blasting down the interstate on a nice day, hit a construction zone that is not logged in gps data, person slows to 55, gps car continues on said path untill it realizes its taking out barrels and hits a portashitter before it stops.

Click to expand...

You can buy vehicles right now that will avoid this situation. Adaptive cruise control will change the speed of your vehicle by sensing nearby vehicles. Automatic braking can apply the brakes for you if you're accelerating toward a slower vehicle, bringing you to a complete stop. Lane change detection options exist right now too that will warn you if you're about to move into a lane occupied by another vehicle, or if you cross the center line. As the tech develops, and the software programming improves, these systems will work together to give vehicles the ability to safely navigate normal roads.

rusty ol ranger said:

Give me a good ol RWD V8 powered piece of machinery and lets see if the robo car can follow me down a rutted country road without self destructing its pansy suspension.

Click to expand...

I realize the current crop of "pansy" vehicles are intended mostly for on-road use, but there's absolutely nothing that says the vehicle couldn't be a lifted, 4wd truck, or a tracked vehicle like an army tank. You think the military isn't interested in self driving equipment that could drive through any terrain to get wounded out of battle on it's own?

I'm not here to champion these self driving vehicles, because I think it will make being a "car guy" much more difficult and expensive, but I do think it's important to understand where we're going, and we should talk about some of the potential consequences of ending up there. You can complain about all of the new tech making people worse drivers, and you might be right but that argument has been around since the dawn of driving. Do you think there were people complaining that cars in the 40s didn't have to be hand cranked, and that was making people soft? When they added radios, people complained about it being a distraction. When seatbelts were added, some were concerned that it might make people feel too secure behind the wheel and therefore drive more recklessly. It took an act of Congress to allow headlights that weren't sealed beams. Things progress, and safety is typically the reason behind the change, and it will be in the case of autonomous vehicles too. You can accept that, and maybe use the changes to your advantage, or you can complain about how all of this progress is ruining everything. Neither option is going to slow the onset of these changes down.

stmitch said:

I realize the current crop of "pansy" vehicles are intended mostly for on-road use, but there's absolutely nothing that says the vehicle couldn't be a lifted, 4wd truck, or a tracked vehicle like an army tank. You think the military isn't interested in self driving equipment that could drive through any terrain to get wounded out of battle on it's own?

Click to expand...

Who are you calling pansy?



That yellow thing above the windshield is for GPS "Autosteer". Not perfect but it works a lot better than you think it would.

Also note the IFS

rusty ol ranger said:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/10/google_self_driving_car_it_may_never_actually_happen.html

Click to expand...

They are not there yet for cars but they will be eventually.





It is pretty cool what they can do now.

Almost every time you fly on an airliner, you're putting your life in the hands of a guidance computer. And sometimes that guidance computer also lands the plane... A human brain is exactly what you DON'T need in a high-stress driving situation. A computer will never be distracted by feelings and it reacts faster than a person as well.

As for brand new cars, I've driven a handful of econoboxes, sedans, and budget sports cars. There are definitely bad examples of how a car should feel but there are also some very good ones. Color me impressed, I drove a 2016 Camry SE as a rental and I loved it. A 2016 FR-S test drive reminded me of the 1986 BMW I used to own. My daily is my 1990 Ranger. The dynamics of the two aforementioned cars translated very well to the vehicle I'm accustomed to driving. I would consider buying a brand new vehicle, but I'm keeping my Ranger always.

Go out and experience these new vehicles before you put them down.

rusty ol ranger said:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/10/google_self_driving_car_it_may_never_actually_happen.html

Click to expand...

That article is over 2 years old, and focuses on google's project only. Google has tons of money, and tech know-how, but no manufacturing experience. You don't just build a car overnight. You have to crawl before you can walk, and I don't think google is there yet. But, they could license their tech to companies that already make cars and still make plenty of money.

But, every major auto manufacturer is working on this tech now, and most of the problems will be solvable. There are certainly obstacles, and there will be growing pains along the way but I'm pretty confident that a self driving vehicle of some sort will be available for public purchase within 5 years. Even if it's just a regular vehicle with a self driving mode that can be chosen by the operator in limited areas.

Obviously, densely populated cities will be best able to handle this new tech since the terrain is less variable and detailed maps already exist. If self driving vehicles are able to communicate with each other it solves lots of the problems listed in that article. Things like turn signals may be less popular than they already are if a car can notify all of the vehicles around it when and where it's turning. If traffic signals send out an alert when the lights change, the car has little need for sensors that have to "see" the lights. As the number of self drivers increases, the lights can be timed better, and the cars can communicate to reduce traffic problems too. Teslas will already park themselves if they get near a familiar spot such as a garage, and can connect themselves to a charger. Expanding that tech to parking lots and public garages isn't a difficult concept.
There will be needs for infrastructure changes, such as installing new traffic signals or parking spaces that can communicate, but that can be done, and the people that do it first stand to make piles of money.

Obviously, this tech won't be immediately adopted or available everywhere, but it will eventually be here, and perhaps faster than you think. The auto manufacturers are investing billions into it, because they know those investments will be rewarded. They know that vehicles are becoming more and more expensive, and they're lasting longer and longer. The average person doesn't buy a new 40k vehicle every couple of years because they can't afford it, and the vehicles are good enough that they don't need to be replaced for several years. Combine that with decreasing desire to drive among young people, and the only way car companies continue to make money from here is to offer transportation services like Uber, and make cars like phones now, where the tech will be obsolete in 2 years and the consumer has to trade it in for a new one.

I'm the former owner of a '99 Ranger XLT 4x4, which I had for 10 years. It was a great truck, but as soon as I started having kids it was time to move on to something that was more family friendly (interior room for car seats, bought a 2006 Honda Ridgeline). I'm pretty excited about the prospect of a new Ranger, and I'm hoping it's similar in size and capabilities to the new Colorado/Canyon twins. I'm ready to buy at any time, but the only thing keeping me back from pulling the trigger on a Colorado is the possibility of a new Ranger in a couple years. I wonder how many others there are like myself who would love to get into a modern Ranger, but may tire of waiting on Ford to make it happen? If they would at least start showing some prototypes at some of the auto shows I could start to gauge whether it's worth the wait. I grew up on Ford trucks so it's a stretch for me to be interested in a Chevy, but that's the direction I will go if Ford can't give us something more concrete in the next 12-18 months.

wa2be said:

I'm the former owner of a '99 Ranger XLT 4x4, which I had for 10 years. It was a great truck, but as soon as I started having kids it was time to move on to something that was more family friendly (interior room for car seats, bought a 2006 Honda Ridgeline). I'm pretty excited about the prospect of a new Ranger, and I'm hoping it's similar in size and capabilities to the new Colorado/Canyon twins. I'm ready to buy at any time, but the only thing keeping me back from pulling the trigger on a Colorado is the possibility of a new Ranger in a couple years. I wonder how many others there are like myself who would love to get into a modern Ranger, but may tire of waiting on Ford to make it happen? If they would at least start showing some prototypes at some of the auto shows I could start to gauge whether it's worth the wait. I grew up on Ford trucks so it's a stretch for me to be interested in a Chevy, but that's the direction I will go if Ford can't give us something more concrete in the next 12-18 months.

Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat as you. Actually came back to the ranger station to read up on this truck. I sold my 04 b2300 to my little brother who basically drove it into the ground when I bought my audi a4. Since then, I realized I still wanted a truck for both personal and capability reasons. I bought a 03 f150 for decent price, I love the truck but would like something a little newer and with better fuel economy. I'm hoping that info about the next ranger will start to come out soon so that I can start planning for it. I really want one, but also want another car to replace the audi. So I'm trying to hold off to see what I can or can't do. There's no way in hell I'll be making 2 car payments any time soon.

Lets hope that Ford will start releasing some info soon.

Dear Ford: Not waiting for a NEW Ranger that has not improved in both ride and fuel efficiency. A clean diesel would be awesome with a a modern transmission. Comfortable seats are a must! Don't care for Bling but cruise control and decent sound would be good.

Love my Ranger but don't need another slow-flying brick. Please make some honest-to-God improvements before that 30K price tag!