Did Ford try to sell you an F-150 instead of a Ranger?

[Jim Oaks]

It will be interesting to compare 2012 sales figures between the new global Ranger and the Tacoma.

 

[Jim Oaks]

I sit on the other side of the fence. If there were two brand new vehicles, a 4x4 ranger and a 4x4 F150, I'd go to the F150. The new ecoboost trucks rape my 4.0L in fuel economy and towing power. A 6 speed auto with manual shift is an option I dream of. In its current state, I don't think the newest of Rangers is worth the money when you can simply purchase 2001 and have nearly the same truck.

Should Ford offer a Ranger sized pickup with all the new technology as the rest of its car/truck line up, I would be interested. But as stated earlier, it would compete with the F150 sales.

The new Ranger comes with a 3.2L diesel. The fuel consumption of the 3.2 litre engine in a combined cycle ranges from 28.3mpg on a 4x4 with manual transmission to 26.7mpg on a full-option 4x4 model with automatic transmission. The gas motor can get up to 24mpg. The new Ranger also comes with a 6-speed auto or manual.

 

[4.0B2]

but we'll never see diesels in the smaller trucks here in America...
just like diesel Jeeps in other countries...

 

[adsm08]

This was when we bought our Escape, but they do the same thing with SUV's trying to push the Explorers and Expeditions.

When we went car shopping I avoided the salesmen. We looked around the lot until we found something that she liked the color of and had the options I wanted her to have, then I wrote down a stock number, went and got a plate, grabbed keys off the board, and we drive it.

Went back, turned in the plate, threw the keys at the closest salesman and said "Run the numbers".


Then again, I work there and the sales staff knows I'm smarter than them.

 

[shane96ranger]

It ought to be easy enough to see if the theory holds water Jim. We've got enough members on here that work at dealerships. I'm sure they could ask their sales managers if they were instructed to redirect the traffic.

 

[dasfinc]

I still feel strongly that Ford made the financially correct choice for now.

Global ranger is 100% different than the out going model

Ford would have to build or retool a factory completely. $$$$
Or import them $$$$$$

That would kill their margin/bottom line.

Or they could kill the truck and force buyers into a truck that has a tremendous profit margin and is advertised as being more capable and with better mpg.

The are accepting the customer loss in the US by assuming that enough buyers will move to the f150 to make $x Vs the $X they could potentially make by selling the global ranger here with a small margin.

It doesn't make sense for ford to sell huge numbers of a truck with a slim profit margin ( especially for commercial use rangers), while they can make lots of money by just pushing the big margin F150. The ROI Estimates of getting the global ranger here just wasn't good enough.

And this is all ontop of the potential of loosing sales of a vehicle with a Large margin Vs one with a slim margin. That's a very bitter pill to swallow.

The new full size transit van is a great example of Ford eating the bullet and re-tooling a factory to build a new model to replace an outgoing one. But the transit has no internal competition.
On a side note, I would love a global ranger.

 

[Ozwynn]

yeah.... F150 is nice if you got $45k laying around or can handle a payment with a comma in it

 

[Sunk]

The F-150 barely even exists to me. When I need something bigger than my Ranger, I'll get a PSD.

 

[Gotta_gofast]

The new Ranger comes with a 3.2L diesel. The fuel consumption of the 3.2 litre engine in a combined cycle ranges from 28.3mpg on a 4x4 with manual transmission to 26.7mpg on a full-option 4x4 model with automatic transmission. The gas motor can get up to 24mpg. The new Ranger also comes with a 6-speed auto or manual.

That Ranger only comes in right-hand drive. But the Rangers I see sitting next to the F150 are the old tech we have been accustomed to.

As far as diesel options go, its not solely Ford's fault for not offering such options. Go ahead and blame the government! They set ungodly goals and minimums for on-road diesels.

Should Ford bring this brand new Ranger into the USA I would imagine its price tag would be comparable to the F150s price tag. If both cost the same, I'd opt for the F150. I only say this because the truck would see a lot more towing/hauling than water crossings.

 

[K.Strong]

When I got my truck in January 2010 I was not shown an F-150. Actually the sales guy just bought a Ranger himself. The area I'm from has a population of about 80000 people, out of those people the ones that drove a truck drove a Ranger. The people I know that do go with an F-150 only go for the base model and it's very rare to see a F-250/350. The demand for a small pickup there is very high, if you looked on the Ford lot you'd see ever option of Ranger there with about ~75+ on the lot. Its dealerships like that one that well see a huge sales decrease.

 

[shane96ranger]

Dumb question probably, but is Canada getting a global Ranger? I thought the US was the only market getting the cold shoulder.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I sit on the other side of the fence. If there were two brand new vehicles, a 4x4 ranger and a 4x4 F150, I'd go to the F150. The new ecoboost trucks rape my 4.0L in fuel economy and towing power. A 6 speed auto with manual shift is an option I dream of. In its current state, I don't think the newest of Rangers is worth the money when you can simply purchase 2001 and have nearly the same truck.

Should Ford offer a Ranger sized pickup with all the new technology as the rest of its car/truck line up, I would be interested. But as stated earlier, it would compete with the F150 sales.

That is where I was when I got my F-150. For the similar money I could get a bigger truck that is a couple years old as opposed to new, more legroom, a realistic back seat that seats 6, more payload/towing and gets the same or better milage with a 5.4 one none the less. Mine was 3 years old with 25k miles and was a tad cheaper than a comparable equipt new 4.0 4x4 Scab Ranger... that really wouldn't do any more for me than my '85 could. It would have still been a deer hunting, brush hauling at best truck.

I do wish they would have canned the 4.0 poked the 3.7 or even 3.5 in the Ranger towards the end just to see how that would have changed the sales.

but we'll never see diesels in the smaller trucks here in America...
just like diesel Jeeps in other countries...

I agree, moot point in the US.

They are figuring at some point diesels will even price themselves out of pickups altogether with what it will take to meet emissions here.

Ford would have to build or retool a factory completely. $$$$
Or import them $$$$$$

I kinda wonder if they don't want the current Ranger factory for the Mustang now. Mazda just pulled out of their agreement on the current one and they say Mustang production alone won't keep the lights on. I haven't heard anything but I just hear of one really big plant that won't sustain itself and a smaller one that is paid for and needs remodeled anyway opening up... just kinda makes me kinda suspicious...

yeah.... F150 is nice if you got $45k laying around or can handle a payment with a comma in it

Depends on the F-150 you want to get... they make 'em in all flavors.

 

[shane96ranger]

I kinda wonder if they don't want the current Ranger factory for the Mustang now. Mazda just pulled out of their agreement on the current one and they say Mustang production alone won't keep the lights on. I haven't heard anything but I just hear of one really big plant that won't sustain itself and a smaller one that is paid for and needs remodeled anyway opening up... just kinda makes me kinda suspicious...

I remember hearing or reading that most, if not all, of the Twin Cities Plant was being torn down and the real estate being sold off.

EDIT:

At a public meeting Wednesday night, company officials said equipment will be hauled off beginning early next year, with demolition of the buildings to follow.......
An environmental assessment and cleanup will likely take several years, and only then can the site be redeveloped.

I guess "redeveloped" can be interpreted as sold off, or Ford building something new there.

Source: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/11/10/ford-plans-for-plant-closure/

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I remember hearing or reading that most, if not all, of the Twin Cities Plant was being torn down and the real estate being sold off.

Well there goes that theory...

 

[Legend]

Not at all. Already had a Ranger. Needed to haul 4 or 5 passengers. Tired of making 3 trips to the dump with grass clippings when I mow the yard. I went to trade it for a very specific F-150. Only problem I had was local dealer insisted what I wanted was what he had on his lot. "It's blue, not red and it's 3/4 ton not 1/2, and it's 2WD not 4WD, and it's diesel not 3.5 EB but otherwise it's exactly what you asked for." Eventually had to go to dealer 150 miles away. Who found one for me 3 states over and got it.