Ranger returning in 17 or 18?

[rusty ol ranger]

Just curious if anyone has anything concrete. All ive seen is speculation about its return. I could see it seeing as how the colorado/canyon reincarnations are selling. I have also heard it may be called "F100?"

Any input?

Later,
Dustin

 

[RonD]

Yes, pops up every now and then.

My money is on the Ranger name being used again, lol, it's a good name.

But not the same small truck as before, Ford may start building the T6 International Rangers in North America, these are made and sold world wide except in North America.
Look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_BT-50
And here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ranger_(T6)

These are almost the same size as F-150 which is why we can't get them here, Ford would just be splitting their own market.

A model needs a minimum number of sales per year to make it worthwhile.
Our Rangers hit a high point in 1999 then sales started to slide so model was dropped in 2011
Sales figures here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ranger_(North_America)#Sales

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

A model needs a minimum number of sales per year to make it worthwhile.
Our Rangers hit a high point in 1999 then sales started to slide so model was dropped in 2011
Sales figures here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ranger_(North_America)#Sales

Nice how they gave it 12 years to turn around with no updates before they killed it.

 

[RonD]

More like 4 years, by 2003 Ranger sales had dropped by 40%, pretty large writing on the wall, the fact they kept making 8 more years is more surprising

Didn't have alot of areas for updates by the early 2000's.
V8 option was always what I thought they would do because of Explorer success with that option, but by then Ford only had the Modular V8s and even the 4.6l won't fit in Rangers engine bay in any reasonable way.

And making the Ranger wider and longer would just cut into F-150 sales, so.....................

 

[stmitch]

More like 4 years, by 2003 Ranger sales had dropped by 40%, pretty large writing on the wall, the fact they kept making 8 more years is more surprising

Didn't have alot of areas for updates by the early 2000's.
V8 option was always what I thought they would do because of Explorer success with that option, but by then Ford only had the Modular V8s and even the 4.6l won't fit in Rangers engine bay in any reasonable way.

And making the Ranger wider and longer would just cut into F-150 sales, so.....................

Not many areas for updates by 2000 because they'd let the platform wither on the vine for 7 years. By 2003 that you mention, some parts of the Ranger had been in production for 10 years. I'm talking about cabs, doors, beds, manual transmissions etc. They were still using a 3.0 V6 designed in the mid 80s for goodness sake! That's an eternity in the car business. Instead of investing in a fully new platform, Ford chose to do mostly minor revisions to a decade old truck, until it wasn't competitive anymore. By then, competitors had newer, more updated offerings with better aerodynamics, powertrains and crash tests. When the average truck buyer can't tell much of a difference between a 93 Ranger and a 2003 Ranger, or 2011 Ranger they're not going to sell well. Nobody wants to buy a new truck that looks 20+ years old.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Nobody wants to buy a new truck that looks 20+ years old.

 

[Mightyfordranger]

Yeah I'd buy one if they kept the same exact chassis just with a real cool power plant like a 4cycl ecoboost or a 4cycl turbo diesel with decent pwr and trq ratings

 

[RonD]

I prefer the European(and some Asian) take on model and mechanical changes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
US car makers changing looks every few years is for the benefit of the car maker not the car buyer.
Making the buyer's new car look old after a few years means more sales, simple as that.
A Marketing tool.
But that does appeal to a large segment of the US market, and you are right Rangers did not follow that very much.
But that didn't kill it.

Too many duplicate Rangers on the market, from other makers, they weren't Rangers but a large segment of the market also shops price, Rangers are better built and worth more, but not to enough.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Personally, id be all over a brand spankin new ranger with square sealed beams, vertical amber markers, twin i beams, and sliding heat controls....but thats just me

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I prefer the European(and some Asian) take on model and mechanical changes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
US car makers changing looks every few years is for the benefit of the car maker not the car buyer.
Making the buyer's new car look old after a few years means more sales, simple as that.
A Marketing tool.
But that does appeal to a large segment of the US market, and you are right Rangers did not follow that very much.
But that didn't kill it.

Too many duplicate Rangers on the market, from other makers, they weren't Rangers but a large segment of the market also shops price, Rangers are better built and worth more, but not to enough.

I don't care for the overseas Ranger styling at all. It looks like a car with a bed.

Personally, id be all over a brand spankin new ranger with square sealed beams, vertical amber markers, twin i beams, and sliding heat controls....but thats just me

Someday (I swear) I am going to be ditching my sealed beams for conversion headlights. I have never been that impressed with them and the only reason they have stayed as long as they have is I don't do much driving with my Ranger in the dark.

Otherwise +1

 

[Rex2nr]

Not many areas for updates by 2000 because they'd let the platform wither on the vine for 7 years. By 2003 that you mention, some parts of the Ranger had been in production for 10 years. I'm talking about cabs, doors, beds, manual transmissions etc. They were still using a 3.0 V6 designed in the mid 80s for goodness sake! That's an eternity in the car business. Instead of investing in a fully new platform, Ford chose to do mostly minor revisions to a decade old truck, until it wasn't competitive anymore. By then, competitors had newer, more updated offerings with better aerodynamics, powertrains and crash tests. When the average truck buyer can't tell much of a difference between a 93 Ranger and a 2003 Ranger, or 2011 Ranger they're not going to sell well. Nobody wants to buy a new truck that looks 20+ years old.

Exactly why I walked away from a Ranger in '07 when my '95 bit the dust. I went and bought a new Tacoma. I may be in the market for a new(er) truck in the next year or so and have started looking around at whats available. The Tacomas are going down the same path of the Ranger- minimal updates. The biggest thing was the 4.0 V6 is now a 3.5 with the same power and gas mileage. I've never like Chevy trucks I've driven, but looked at the newest Colorado, and have to say I'm interested. I hope there is a new Ranger on the market, because the F150 is a bit more truck than I NEED.

They have definitely improved on the looks this year:

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I rode in a new Colorado over the weekend, the front seats are hard and not comfortable and the gauges are funky (or at least look so from the passenger seat)

When I was on the market in '05 I passed on a new Ranger because it cost the same as a F-150 that was nearly new and got the same mileage.

I was impressed the Taco got a new 6spd manual a year or two go.

 

[wildbill23c]

Trucks got bigger because people want to use them as a family car rather than the intended purpose of a truck.

I doubt the ranger will ever come back to the US, Ford keeps pushing that F150 ecoboost crap, and the only thing left in the compact truck world now other than used are the basic model Nissan Frontier and Toyota Tacoma. I'd love a new Ranger, only if they kept them simple and left all the electronic crap out of them, a simple truck is all I would want or need. The trouble is the Ranger prices were getting outrageous for a V6 4x4 extended cab, it pushed people to buy an F150 because of price and fuel economy wasn't any different in the real world....that 4.0L V6 sucked up a lot of fuel, people would buy the F150 with the V8 and get the same fuel economy and have more cargo room for close to the same price Ford wanted for the Ranger. Ford priced themselves right out of the compact truck market.

I bought a 2008 Toyota Tundra 4x4 5.7L V8 brand new in 08. The Tacomas I was looking at had pretty close to the same prices as the tundra, and the same fuel economy but a very cramped interior. I bought the tundra because if I was going to spend that kind of money on a truck I may as well get a full size with the biggest engine available considering the dismal fuel economy in the first place. Again, the 4.0L V6 is a terrible gas hog and in reality gets the same fuel economy as the 5.7L V8 in my Tundra.

 

[wa2be]

I've never like Chevy trucks I've driven, but looked at the newest Colorado, and have to say I'm interested. I hope there is a new Ranger on the market, because the F150 is a bit more truck than I NEED.

I'm hoping the rumors about a new Ranger are true because I would love to compare it to the Colorado before I make a purchase decision. Chevy just announced a new V6 with an 8 speed tranny for the 2017 Colorado. The only thing keeping me away from ordering one once they become available is the possibility of a new Ranger in the next couple years (I owned a '99 Ranger for 10 years before my current Ridgeline). I'd love to get back into a Ranger (especially if it has an EcoBoost), but the Chevy is looking pretty good to me right now. I hope Ford shows us something at the next round of auto shows this winter. Otherwise I think they are going to continue to see sales going to GM that could have been theirs.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I'm hoping the rumors about a new Ranger are true because I would love to compare it to the Colorado before I make a purchase decision. Chevy just announced a new V6 with an 8 speed tranny for the 2017 Colorado. The only thing keeping me away from ordering one once they become available is the possibility of a new Ranger in the next couple years (I owned a '99 Ranger for 10 years before my current Ridgeline). I'd love to get back into a Ranger (especially if it has an EcoBoost), but the Chevy is looking pretty good to me right now. I hope Ford shows us something at the next round of auto shows this winter. Otherwise I think they are going to continue to see sales going to GM that could have been theirs.

#'s still are not really huge for them though but are better than they were.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2016/08/best-selling-pickup-trucks-july-2016.html

What happened to the Ridgeline last year? Go on hiatus for awhile?