Spied: 2019 Ford Ranger Crew Cab

[blksn8k]

They spotted more Ranger prototypes being tested in Colorado (click)

At least the sign makers in CO have a sense of humor.

Back on topic: This appears to be a different mule than the truck(s) seen in MI back in Feb. This one has plates and a rear bumper and the camo wrap is applied differently.

 

[Will]

Phuck.

My 1995 4x4 Ranger curbed at 3,600# new. A new Tacoma, similarly equipped, curbs at 4,500#. I often am at the scrap yard and watch trucks go over the scales while waiting for my money. I see LOADED 70s and 80s F150s not even hitting 5,000#.

I learned to drive a stick in a 1974 620 Datsun pickup. That truck was a 3/4-ton, rode like total crap, and had a curb weight of less than 2,400#. But it was a perfect truck. I worked for a lawn care service and we loaded it with tons of bags of fertilizer and other nasty chemicals, and towed machines behind it. It did everything we ever asked to do. At 2,400# curb weight.

I hate the way it is all going. When I was at that job in the mid-80s, my boss bought a new S10. It had a 2.8 V6, squishy suspension that couldn't carry anything, the interior was plastic and nasty and was falling apart within the first year. Everyone hated that truck--and I use the term loosely.

Why do we have to get stuck with a plastic fancy-pants piece of shit ith no real bed, can't carry anything, Cadillac-grade interior, truck? I power-washed the inside of my 2000 E350 last week. You can powerwash the inside of a 1974 Datsun pickup. If you powerwash the inside of a 1985 S10, the yard will be full of plastic puzzle you can't solve and carpet.

The last good truck I had was a 1977 F100. The inside was the same as the outside. Sky blue steel and rubber.

 

[2002edgeplussupercab]

It is going to be almost as ugly as those photos and have a less tow rating than mine.

 

[Flash Gordan]

It is going to be almost as ugly as those photos and have a less tow rating than mine.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. As for tow ratings, supposedly the new Rangers will be able to tow 7,000 lbs.

 

[blksn8k]

Not saying the Ranger we get will be as capable as the one sold elsewhere but those trucks are pretty damn good off-road. Better than most F-150s except the Raptor. They have to be considering that most countries where they are sold don't have superhighways like we do. They are designed with engine air intakes and axle vents high enough to be able to ford water right up to the tops of the fenders.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1G2qNCYyds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pvp09saPcng

 

[ChrisK]

Will we see one of these with three pedals? Or are they carrying on with their crusade against manual transmissions?

 

[SnC RangeR]

why can't we have trucks that look like truck and not SUV abortions.

 

[2002edgeplussupercab]

Why do you want a manual tranny when the new autos are more efficient ?

 

[2002edgeplussupercab]

The first video course doesn't look any worse than a normal night's backroading route in my 2wd 1 wheel peel.

 

[don4331]

Don't confuse a transmission for which engineers have tuned to get better numbers on a government mandated test with one which is more efficient.

Gas engine economy is determined by displacement, boost and rpm. By installing 3 over drive ratios and using 3:31 gears as standard, the F-150 can knock back some excellent numbers in the EPA testing. But the automatic needs the alternator to provide electrical power for the solenoids; and a pump to provide hydraulic power for the bands.

As a result, the standard transmission is more efficient that the automatic. And that doesn't even factor in that the manual is a lot lighter.

As for wanting a manual; the number one reason: So, only my kids can drive my Ranger - none of their friends can drive a manual (Worked 85% with my daughter - one of her friend wanted me to teach her too/about 50% with my son - one friend has manual WRX, the other a manual GTI).

 

[Flash Gordan]

Has there been any new sightings of these lately?

 

[blksn8k]

IMO most of the "spy" photos that have been taken so far have either been of test mules for a mid-year update for markets outside of North America where the current T6 Ranger is already sold or they could also be testing drivetrains, electronics, etc. for the upcoming North American version. Either way, I wouldn't put much stock in the appearance of any Ranger that someone happens to see driving around Michigan or Colorado or wherever. Whatever we are going to get may not look anything like those or it might look exactly the same. The bottom line is the average consumer isn't going to have a clue what the next Ranger is going to look like until Ford decides it's time for us to see it. It's been that way forever in the auto industry and anyone outside of the manufacturer who claims otherwise is just looking to somehow profit from our ignorance.

 

[don4331]

2 days to circle on the calendar:

1/Dec/'17 - LA Auto Show; 13/Jan/'18 - North American (Detroit) Auto Show. Odds are the Ranger will be introduced at one or the other.

Given how close we are to those dates, the odds of any new "spy" photos are extremely low.

 

[fr7]

Looks ugly in my opinion. Size wise it looks like in between an older ranger and an F-150, if you want to buy that thing you may as well buy a full size truck I would say. I remember when I was in Mexico seeing what looked to me like the 98 and older crew cab rangers, they have a very short box and some had a roll bar thing behind the cab, I though they looked neat. To my knowledge that style of ranger was never sold in the USA. If you Google crew cab ranger you'll see what I'm talking about..

 

[blksn8k]

Everyone's needs and wants are different. Otherwise we would still be buying the same stuff we were able to buy in 1950 - one size car and one size truck.

I have owned the same Sport Trac since I bought it new in 2007. Why? Because it is the best size and has the best features for my needs and Ford has chosen to stop selling anything comparable here, that is until the 2019 Ranger...