Attention guys Ford will build a new Ranger!
#76
05-15-2007
Originally Posted by bwester04
DOHC in a truck isnt always better, it's easier to get the low end grunt out of an OHV motor as opposed to a DOHC design; thus the reason Ford has been keeping them OUT of trucks.. the 3.0L Duratec was a Ford/Mazda joint operation which evolved from the 2.5L DOHC V6 which was found in early-mid 90's Probes and mid-late 90's Contours, that motor in your moms minivan was used in the Taurus in the mid 90's on.. so it's not that Ford is THAT late with engine technology--speaking of engine technology, anybody think of the early Taurus SHO with a 200hp+ 3.0L/3.2L DOHC V6? how-about that 3.4L DOHC V8 used in the Gen 3 SHO? I could go on and on.. but you get the point lol
So in regards to the SOHC, I think it would be better to replace it with a DOHC: the nature of the design of a DOHC makes it more efficient. It's going to make more power and get better gas mileage than any an equivalently designed SOHC because it's more precise in its operation. And while Ford's SOHC 4.0 makes more usable mid-range torque than the 3.0 DOHC duratec, I think a properly designed DOHC can be tweaked to make usable torque in a truck, all the while making more hp and better gas mileage than a SOHC.
I'm not saying that the 3.0 duratec should drop into the ranger from the MPV unchanged, I'm saying the cams, heads, timing, valves should be changed tuning it for more work versus economy/speed application. Doing so would make it better (in power and gas mileage) than the current SOHC.
anyways, that's what makes sense to me...
#77
05-15-2007
Originally Posted by Bhavesh
So to conclude the last two responses I made: I don't think Ford would bring back a ranger because it's just not profitable for them anymore.
#79
05-15-2007
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Firey depths
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#80
05-15-2007
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fuquay-Varina, NC
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bhavesh
even if the explorer has its own chassis, won't a crew-cab ranger take sales away from the sport-trac explorer?
The Ranger has a muuuch larger market and following than the Sport Tracs. If you set aside the money Ford has spent recently to put the 4.6L into the Sport Trac (from a business standpoint, if Ford were to hypothetically go with a crew cab Ranger and perhaps move away from the Sport Trac, it's not at all uncommon and actually smart to write off past R&D expenses if they choose to go in a different direction), I'd be willing to bet that the crew cab Ranger would be far more profitable for Ford than the Sport Trac. What are some recent sales figures for the Sport Trac? I could be completely wrong, and the Sport Tracs could be a gold mine for Ford, but I see a whole lot of Rangers on a daily basis and not too many Sport Tracs.
#81
05-16-2007
Originally Posted by its cheddar baby
Food for thought...
The Ranger has a muuuch larger market and following than the Sport Tracs. If you set aside the money Ford has spent recently to put the 4.6L into the Sport Trac (from a business standpoint, if Ford were to hypothetically go with a crew cab Ranger and perhaps move away from the Sport Trac, it's not at all uncommon and actually smart to write off past R&D expenses if they choose to go in a different direction), I'd be willing to bet that the crew cab Ranger would be far more profitable for Ford than the Sport Trac. What are some recent sales figures for the Sport Trac? I could be completely wrong, and the Sport Tracs could be a gold mine for Ford, but I see a whole lot of Rangers on a daily basis and not too many Sport Tracs.
The Ranger has a muuuch larger market and following than the Sport Tracs. If you set aside the money Ford has spent recently to put the 4.6L into the Sport Trac (from a business standpoint, if Ford were to hypothetically go with a crew cab Ranger and perhaps move away from the Sport Trac, it's not at all uncommon and actually smart to write off past R&D expenses if they choose to go in a different direction), I'd be willing to bet that the crew cab Ranger would be far more profitable for Ford than the Sport Trac. What are some recent sales figures for the Sport Trac? I could be completely wrong, and the Sport Tracs could be a gold mine for Ford, but I see a whole lot of Rangers on a daily basis and not too many Sport Tracs.
#82
05-16-2007
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: garden grove , ca
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#83
05-16-2007
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fuquay-Varina, NC
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#84
05-17-2007
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Corona, CA
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#85
05-18-2007
Originally Posted by stockranger
hopefully it doesn't go the same way as the colorado that replaced the s-10 . i would hate to see the ranger become a girls truck with a ride like a cadilac!
#86
05-18-2007
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#87
07-16-2007
i would like to see more engine options, like a v8, my 2006 4L auto truck isn't bad, but on the highway, it's lacking power.
i dont' think they need to be bigger, or much bigger anyway. if you need to fit a 4x8 sheet of plywood in your truck everyday, you're a candidate for a fullsize. if you need to haul 5 people comfortably, you're a candidate for a fullsize. if you pull a 3500lb trailer once a week, you guessed it, fullsize. if you do all of the above, buy a fullsize.
a midsize truck is meant to do a little of everything, but nothing particularly well.
i dont' think they need to be bigger, or much bigger anyway. if you need to fit a 4x8 sheet of plywood in your truck everyday, you're a candidate for a fullsize. if you need to haul 5 people comfortably, you're a candidate for a fullsize. if you pull a 3500lb trailer once a week, you guessed it, fullsize. if you do all of the above, buy a fullsize.
a midsize truck is meant to do a little of everything, but nothing particularly well.
#88
07-16-2007
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Livonia, Mi
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#89
07-16-2007
#92
07-16-2007
#93
07-16-2007
#94
07-16-2007
#95
07-17-2007
Originally Posted by zabeard
Can we expect better mpg numbers? I would hope so.
1.) many vehicles I've seen haven't become more efficient over decades: My friend had a 1991 chevy cavalier and it got high 20's/low 30's for gas mileage. He also has a 2006 chevy cobalt and it still gets high 20's/low 30's for gas mileage. You can buy a 1978 F150 or a 2008 F150, and they're both going to get ~12-15mpg. The only major differences between the two vehicles are the newer ones are made stronger (drive a 30 year old car 100mph, then drive a current vehicle 100mph...which feels better?), are lighter, are modern styled, and make more power.
2.) the technology is available, but is not utilized for the best gas mileage:
-the corolla/focus/civic/yaris/metro can break into the 40's for gas mileage...do we really need hybrid's to help us on highways and around town driving?
-foreign countries have mandates for cars to get 30+ mpg (need source?)
-you don't need to be a technology whiz to see advancements made in alternative fuels that can be used
3.) the first two points are our reality because gas companies are making so much money on gas, that changes aren't going to be made for awhile
while minor gas mileage gains are possible, they'll be negligible at best
not trying to be a d!ck...I just enjoy talking car politics...
#97
07-17-2007
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, PA
Posts: 505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lord Of War
If a diesel was put into the rangers what type of numbers could we expect as far as HP/ TQ.
Then what are the numbers once you put after market exhaust and programmer/chip?
Then what are the numbers once you put after market exhaust and programmer/chip?
But then you start modding them and
#98
07-17-2007
Unregistered User
Posts: n/a
Beginning of this thread, first page, someone mentioned an IRS type of suspension and said nobody made a truck with IRS.. I present to you the Honda Ridgeline. Its a Unibody and a Piece of garbadge as well. Soccermom vehical with no real ' truck ' capabilities contrare to its ratings with the magazines calling it the best new Vehical of the year..
Would ANYONE take a IRS/CV shaft and go offroading with it? On a UNIBODY at that? Some truck. Then again, these magazines are always right, no?
*IF* they continue the Ranger, theres either going to be a total rebuild off an imported design, or ' not much at all '.
Theres a market segment Ford completely owns right now. Real ' compact ' trucks. For what I do, its the perfect size. F150 is too big. Theres no longer a ' small ' truck.
Remember when Ford ' upsized ' the Mustang? The fast little secretary car lost its luster, it became a Behemoth and nobody had any love for it anymore. Its sales plummetted to dismal numbers to where they almost killed the car completely untill they moved to the Fox platform. Anyone ever see pic's of a Late 70's mustang? Their not as common as the late 60's and late 80's models at all, they are ' undesireable ' at best for the common person.
The Ranger has an Identity Crisis.
One group wants 4 doors and a Diesel. Others like whats out there now. Some will hate regardless.
If Ford goes with 4 doors, there wont be a usable bed. If they make this 200inch ( whatever it would need to be ) wheelbase to make up for the cab room, it will be ugly and look like a Pinochio Vehical, long and narrow. Fugly IMO.
The Colorado isn't much bigger then the present Ranger. If Ford dropps the Ranger, GM - Here I come. If ford makes a 4door with no Bedroom.. GM - Here I come.
If they revamp the existing platform and waste profits ( which they cant do ) , I'll get another Ranger. I doubt they will do such as its not what the ' majority ' of folks ' want ' , not NEED.
Would ANYONE take a IRS/CV shaft and go offroading with it? On a UNIBODY at that? Some truck. Then again, these magazines are always right, no?
*IF* they continue the Ranger, theres either going to be a total rebuild off an imported design, or ' not much at all '.
Theres a market segment Ford completely owns right now. Real ' compact ' trucks. For what I do, its the perfect size. F150 is too big. Theres no longer a ' small ' truck.
Remember when Ford ' upsized ' the Mustang? The fast little secretary car lost its luster, it became a Behemoth and nobody had any love for it anymore. Its sales plummetted to dismal numbers to where they almost killed the car completely untill they moved to the Fox platform. Anyone ever see pic's of a Late 70's mustang? Their not as common as the late 60's and late 80's models at all, they are ' undesireable ' at best for the common person.
The Ranger has an Identity Crisis.
One group wants 4 doors and a Diesel. Others like whats out there now. Some will hate regardless.
If Ford goes with 4 doors, there wont be a usable bed. If they make this 200inch ( whatever it would need to be ) wheelbase to make up for the cab room, it will be ugly and look like a Pinochio Vehical, long and narrow. Fugly IMO.
The Colorado isn't much bigger then the present Ranger. If Ford dropps the Ranger, GM - Here I come. If ford makes a 4door with no Bedroom.. GM - Here I come.
If they revamp the existing platform and waste profits ( which they cant do ) , I'll get another Ranger. I doubt they will do such as its not what the ' majority ' of folks ' want ' , not NEED.
#99
07-17-2007
Originally Posted by D.
*IF* they continue the Ranger, theres either going to be a total rebuild off an imported design, or ' not much at all '.
Theres a market segment Ford completely owns right now. Real ' compact ' trucks. For what I do, its the perfect size. F150 is too big. Theres no longer a ' small ' truck.
The Ranger has an Identity Crisis.
One group wants 4 doors and a Diesel. Others like whats out there now. Some will hate regardless.
Theres a market segment Ford completely owns right now. Real ' compact ' trucks. For what I do, its the perfect size. F150 is too big. Theres no longer a ' small ' truck.
The Ranger has an Identity Crisis.
One group wants 4 doors and a Diesel. Others like whats out there now. Some will hate regardless.
otherwise, does anyone know anything about the "compact" market? clearly the ranger is the last "compact" pickup available (vs. all other midsize trucks), but is that profitable? is it in demand? is there really a good market for Ford to keep it?
#100
07-17-2007
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 886
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
