Ranger gets Roll Stability Control in 2010

[Jim Oaks]

I got a media release emailed to me from Ford on the 5th to be released on the 6th. ~ Jim Oaks

2010 FORD RANGER: AMERICA’S MOST FUEL-EFFICIENT PICKUP ADDS NEW, STANDARD SAFETY TECHNOLOGIES​

​

· America’s most fuel-efficient pickup – the Ford Ranger – will add as standard equipment this summer a segment-exclusive safety technology – AdvanceTrac® with RSC® (Roll Stability Control). This unique technology helps prevent skidding and dangerous rollover conditions

· The new 2010 Ranger also adds new combination side air bags – offered standard – designed for head and torso protection

· With 2.3-liter I-4 engine, the Ranger is the most fuel-efficient pickup truck with an EPA-estimated fuel economy at 21 mpg in the city and 26 mpg on the highway

· Ford has more U.S. government 5-star safety-rated vehicles than any other brand and more IIHS “Top Safety Picks” than any other automaker.



DEARBORN, Feb. 6, 2009 – The 2010 Ford Ranger, America’s most fuel-efficient pickup, comes to market this summer by adding unique standard safety technologies, including Ford’s AdvanceTrac® with RSC® – the world’s most sophisticated electronic stability control system that helps prevent skidding and rollovers – and combination side air bags.

Industry-exclusive AdvanceTrac with RSC goes a step beyond stability control systems found on competitive models with a gyroscopic roll sensor that determines both the vehicle’s body roll angle and roll rate.

If it detects the vehicle is about to roll, the system automatically applies additional countermeasures – such as reducing engine power 15 percent and/or applying brakes to one or more wheels – to enhance vehicle rollover resistance.

The new Ranger’s head-and-chest combination side air bags provide enhanced head and torso protection in certain side impacts. The side air bag system is designed to cushion the head, minimizing lateral head injuries in case of collision, in addition to acting as a barrier between the occupant and the side of the vehicle,

“The 2010 Ranger’s Roll Stability Control and combination side air bag technologies will help occupants stay out of harm’s way,” said Steve Kozak, chief engineer of safety systems, Ford Motor Company. “The Ranger has been America’s most fuel-efficient pickup, and now it features a combination of safety features not offered in any other small pickup.”

In addition, Ranger also provides high levels of safety and security with Ford’s Personal Safety System®, Tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS) and SecuriLock® passive anti-theft system, all included as standard equipment on all models.

Also standard are four-wheel anti-lock brakes, driver- and front-passenger air bags, safety belts with front pretensioners for outboard seating positions and side-intrusion door beams. Ford’s front-passenger sensing system helps ensure air bags are not deployed on the passenger side when small children are detected. Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children (LATCH) child-seat mounts are provided in the front-passenger seat on all models.

Further adding value to the Ranger is its class-leading fuel economy and low cost of ownership. With EPA-estimated fuel economy at 21 mpg in the city and 26 mpg on the highway for the 2.3-liter I-4 engine, Ranger is the most fuel-efficient pickup on the market today. Plus its 7,500-mile service intervals for routine maintenance, such as oil changes, help Ranger historically rank among the lowest cost of ownership among all compact pickups studied by Edmunds.com.

# # #​

 

[Original_Ranger84]

Awsome!

I like how they use "sophisticated" instead of "complicated".

 

[jasonl]

Wonder if the 4x4 will still get worse fuel economy than an F-150? I know I beat this to death, but come on ford! 14/18mpg out of a 4x4 compact???? Are you kidding me??

 

[robbieo11]

Ford Listen
We Want A Powerstroke
We Want A Quad Cab!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[fixizin]

Side airbags sound cool, since, from a strictly engineering standpoint, we should all WEAR HELMETS when driving ANY passenger vehicle.... but hey, my hair is the only thing the ladies like about me... can't arrive with helmet-hair, LOL...

How much does the REST of that stuff WEIGH???

Wonder if the 4x4 will still get worse fuel economy than an F-150? I know I beat this to death, but come on ford! 14/18mpg out of a 4x4 compact???? Are you kidding me??

jason... dude... are you talking AUTO trans?? 'cause my 3.0L 4x4 Sport, MANUAL tranny, gets close to 25MPG hwy, and that's with the semi-cool factory fender flares and stiff mud flaps hangin' out in the slipstream.

If so, I agree that FoMoCo needs to put a LOT MORE BRAIN-SWEAT into their Ranger AUTO trannies... they SUCK!

 

[jasonl]

Yeah the current 4x4 4.0 auto is only rated at 14/18. My dad has an 04' auto and he says he can squeeze around 20mpg out of it hwy. A guy I work with has an 06' 5 speed and he regrets not getting the f-150 because he can do no better than 20mpg hwy also. His truck was used so he was un-aware they got the same fuel economy as a full size. To me it is just pure product neglect. The more updated SOHC version of the 4.0 gets worse mileage than the old OHV even though they added a gear to the auto. According to epa numbers the fuel mileage got worse in 97 when they added the 5spd auto. I know the epa numbers are not perfect, but they are relative. I just hope they add a more fuel efficent engine before they pull the plug on this truck because other than fuel mileage the truck has aged well IMO.

 

[robbieo11]

93 4.0 auto 4x4 3.73 gears auto hubs 28-30 mpg

 

[dogboy]

I wonder how that whole anti-roll system will effect wheeling? Are you going to have a gutless pig who's brakes keep being applied, when you go offroad?

I'm still a firm beilever that if you want to drive like you have a sports car, you have bought a sports car, not a truck...
I think all these new systems are just asking for problems becuase people will start to rely on these things. I just don't think that is a good direction to be headed...

But, that is just my opinion. I prefer simple, more controlable things, manual tranny, manual hubs, things that you can rely on working properly.

93 4.0 auto 4x4 3.73 gears auto hubs 28-30 mpg

I'm gonna have to call bullshit on atht one.... sorry.
There is no way you could get 28-30mpg out of a 4.0L!

 

[LearjetMinako]

Thats another point for Ford. At least they are still thinking about the Ranger and not just let it collect dust till it dies. RSC (ESC) and the Curtian SRS is a good thing. Makes my 96 Ranger feel more outdated. Doesn't mean I'll trade-up. But I'll be taking a closer look at the 2010 Ranger.

 

[Dar70]

I wonder how that whole anti-roll system will effect wheeling? Are you going to have a gutless pig who's brakes keep being applied, when you go offroad?

I'm still a firm beilever that if you want to drive like you have a sports car, you have bought a sports car, not a truck...
I think all these new systems are just asking for problems becuase people will start to rely on these things. I just don't think that is a good direction to be headed...

But, that is just my opinion. I prefer simple, more controlable things, manual tranny, manual hubs, things that you can rely on working properly.



I'm gonna have to call bullshit on atht one.... sorry.
There is no way you could get 28-30mpg out of a 4.0L!

I feel the same way about the traction/roll system. The airbags are great and I wish my 08' had them but the traction system I could do without. I had one on my grandam, Im sure its not anyting like ford is putting in the Ranger, but it would occasionally malfuntion and IMO its just another thing you need to get fixed if it breaks down. Careful driving is better than any traction system.

BUT if it helps sell more Ranger,(which is why they are doing these safety upgrades)more power to them.

 

[Matthew18]

the roll over protection is a nice feature, but one of the reason why i like the rangers is because it does not have all that computer controlled shit to relay on, me i dont trust it. but the airbags and the door beams are def needed to impove the safely of the truck.


would be nice if they kept the 3.0 Vulcan and made it with sohc or dohc.

i wonder if they will save the ranger from the axe again in 2011

 

[turtle3.0]

I'll give Ford an A for effort. Trying to make your product appeal to more people is always a good thing. The problem is that a lot of the loyal Ranger owners don't want all the computer controlled safety items. A lot of guys didn't like it when Ford introduced the tire pressure monitoring system on the Ranger. Unfortunatually in this technological world we live in, the "simple" or "mechanical" truck (and car) is no more.

 

[jasonl]

Isn't there a rollover rating mandate for 2010? Maybe Ford added the roll stability control to simply meet the 2010 safety standards?

 

[Jason]

Sweet. It's good to know Ford is ready to launch the Ranger like a rocket straight into 2002. I know they can do better, but at least this is a start.

 

[racsan]

thats just silly, no need for a truck to have that garbage. quit trying to go arond curves like youre in a 'vette. and that milage comment abot a '94 4.0 with auto, 4x and 3.73's getting 28-30? aint no way. my manual trans 4.0 4x '93 with 3.73's aint broke the 20 mpg barrier ever, best was 19.5 with a average of 17-18. more unnessesary crap to go wrong and drive prices up. who buys a vehicle anyways based upon what happens when you get plowed into the side? wish they would do away with all of this mandated crap and give us old-school stuff we can afford and work on. my '71 bronco was about as basic as you could get, and very serviceable. todays stuff-not so much. so does that mean that induced powerslides are no longer possible? that bites.