A bud had a dakota, and had to modify his garage as no midsize truck was available. Took out a workbench so the truck ie full size only available would fit.
If Ford gets back into the “small” truck market in the US, they will most likely make the existing Ranger that they sell in the rest of the world comply with our safety and emissions regulations. That would make it a mid sized truck.
At 127 inch wheel bases in Colordos and Tacomas, there are no mid size trucks anymore…just narrower ones. Mine is. PITA to pull out of drive and onto out narrow road. Even the wife’s FA SUV is easier.
“Had to modify his garage…” @Barkydog absolutely
@dagosa
That bad situation I’m talking about is in regards to their new smaller truck, not the F150
If the new F150 proves to be king of the road, it will not stay that way for long. Because GM and others will also want to jump on the band wagon, building much lighter trucks
Well, I think trucks have to rapidly advance, because now they also have to meet strict fuel economy standards by a certain date. At least, that’s what I seem to remember reading somewhere
^Which is why I’d love to see gery-market imports allowed. They might not meet safety and emissions to the letter, but most first-world markets have fairly decent qualifications.
Nice to be able to go buy a diesel Ranger and bring it home!
I wouldn’t want to be driving a Chinese-spec vehicle, though . . .
Remember a few years ago, when there was an earthquake, and all the recent buildings . . . which supposedly met all the latest requirements . . . collapsed?
I believe it has been proven that the builders cut corners
Just imagine the cars in an accident . . . !
@db4690
That’s why it’s good to be ahead of the pack. Truck design changes very infrequently becasue of the cost. The Ford could be years ahead of a GM/Dodge truck using aluminum. If for example, the New Taconma comes out with an all aluminum compact next spring, the Colorado new design is going to have problems spinnig on a dime. The same for GM, Toyota and Dodge vs the F150. It will be several years of lost sales while GM waited to see the results of Fords efforts and retools them selves. Ford has been planning this for a while. They seem prepared with only a modest increase in price. One subtle catch is the increase in insurance costs for aluminum vehicles which are more expensive to fix.
Btw, the aluminum is military grade and in practical use where they were given to contractors as test mules, they were same if not more resistant to dents then steel.
@dagosa
Why do you suppose the other guys didn’t also introduce aluminum pickup trucks . . . ?
After all, everybody knows aluminum is strong and weighs less
It allowed Audi, for example, to design ever bigger and more luxurious cars, that weighed less and got better fuel economy than the previous models
Was Ford far-sighted, and all the other truck builders are arrogant and near sighted?
I’m only talking about pickup trucks, not the big commercial vehicles, which have made extensive use of fiberglass and aluminum for years now
"Why do you suppose the other guys don’t introduce aluminum pick up trucks ? " @db4690
For the same reason GM and Chrysler needed a bailout and Ford did not. They ( GM) are short sighted.
A large commercial vehicle is built around it’s frame where a PU is built around both it’s frame and body which must pass crash tests.
That has made them expensive to build and heavier in trucks which now have to carry heavy weights, tow plus pass crash tests and have mileage restrictions they didnot have in the past. Fords solution is, aluminum, smaller turbo charged motors. GMs solution is…hmmm, pushrod motors and buying diesels. They are putting their best engineering into the compact Colorado while Ford has in their full size.
"I wouldn’t want to be driving a Chinese-spec vehicle, though . . .
Just imagine the cars in an accident . . . ! "
You don’t have to imagine.
Just view these videos that show the absolutely atrocious outcome of crash tests of Chinese-made vehicles in tests performed by ANCAP (the Australian New Car Assessment Program):
Hmmm…Let’s see…If we take a country that has historically had a very low regard for human life as a result of its massive overpopulation, factor in the lack of a Judeo-Christian moral code, and then pile Communism on top of those other factors, what do you get?
I don’t know about you, but for me, that equation equals NO car purchasing from that nation until…perhaps…many years have passed and they have adequately demonstrated the ability to produce safe and well-built vehicles–as well as the commitment to stand behind those vehicles with decent warranty protection.
At this point, I would trust a Chinese car company about as far as I would trust The Taliban.
You make some great pints @VDCDriver. It is importantt to distinguish between a govt. Supported effort of China and what the Chinese ( or any laborer) is capable of when an American company comes in and REQUIRES that labor force to build cars and components sent back to their homeland. IMho, it’s the general lack of exposure to free capitalism. They have a huge market at home with little competition. So, they can sell junk. The fastest way to increase their quality is (the mouse that roared) to loose a world war to the U.S. and have us rebuild their industrial ideals. . That ain’t happening. The next best thing is to refuse their “crap” excuse for automobiles…like we did the Yugo.
what motors do ford trucks come with these days. do they still make a 360 and 390?
“They are putting their best engineering into the compact Colorado”
I certainly hope so, because they didn’t so with the previous Colorado
Although I will say this . . . at least the engine design in the old Colorado was very modern. But sadly, unreliable. Valvetrain issues, at least in the early models
“the mouse that roared”
Last year, I actually saw a play with that title. it was a small scale production, that was in our church theater. I may be mistaken, but I believe it may have been an old play from the 1950s
@db4690
I don’t know how successful the Colorado will be if they plan on taking sales from the compact leader, the Tacoma. They may plan instead, just taking sales from the f150. But, consider this. The new Colorado is lorded for having a v6 with 6 speed trans, all aluminum engine with VVT, OHC and direct direct injection. Well, short of direct injection, wasn’t that the Tacoma’s tech. response 11 years ago when the Colorado put in a scaled down straight six, a five cylinder ? So Tacoma has had nearly the same motor tech features for eleven years that the Colorado is just getting around to throw in.
The Tacoma has a five speed and three fewer mpgs. All they have to do is throw in a six speed, make a dual vvt instead of the single they have now, like they have in the 4Runner and maybe toy around with direct injection which they have already been working with for years. So, by doing nothing new, they can equal or exceed the new Colorado.
It’s sad, but if Toyota does just a tad more ( more aluminum, turbo charging and diesel) the Colorado will find itself ten more years behind again. Instead of being really bold like Ford with all aluminum bod except frame, they have done littl. That is why Ford is still in the driver’s seat . ;-)))
The price tag on the upper end Colorados is close to $40k. Scary !
“the mouse that roared…Last year, I actually saw a play with that title. it was a small scale production, that was in our church theater. I may be mistaken, but I believe it may have been an old play from the 1950s”
It was also a very funny movie, starring Peter Sellers and Margaret Rutherford:
@wesw: I think it’s a 5.0 (not the Windsor 302, though), a 3.5L V6 (N/A), and a 2.7 and 3.5L ecoboost.
Oddly enough, I seem to recall the 3.5 ecoboost weighs more (and with all the underhood piping) is physically bigger than the 5.0…or probably even the old 351W would be. Displacement is SO overrated as a metric for engine “bigness” these days…sort of like categorizing the “bigness” of a computer by its physical dimensions!
It used to be in the old days you could go from a 283, to a 343 to a 383 to a 427 and each step up would get you a more powerful motor. Now you can start with a 4.3L and go to a 4.0L to 3.5L to a 2.8L and each step down can give you a motor with more HP. It must be the metric system…
Ford introduced the new generation F-series in the 2015 model year. GM introduced the new generation Silverado in 2013. The latest CAFE agreement between the government and the auto manufacturers was in 2011. GM hardly had one year to react before MY2013 started, and the agreement wasn’t finalized until after 2013 production had started. Ford had almost 3 years. The extra 2 years gave Ford more time to create trucks that were closer to the future requirements. Over time all the auto manufacturers will meet the ever increasing fuel mileage requirements or pay a fine.
Not to change the subject back to gas again, but I paid $2.29 for mid-grade in New Ulm, MN today. Regular was $2.19. My BIL reported that E85 in Sioux Falls, SD was down to $1.58. Woo hoo.
There was an article in one of the mags a month or so ago on what Ford had to do in terms of sourcing product, and recycling product for the truck project. It was really a total quality management operation, if it works. Unfortunately, like said before, they only managed to cut the weight down by 700#, which is still only 400# lighter than the competition. So with the higher expense, smaller than expected weight advantage, and now $2 gas, it may have been a nice idea but terrible timing.
And I don’t dislike Ford at all, but lets be honest. The reason they didn’t need government help is because they had already mortgaged everything to the hilt the year or two before.
“The reason they didn’t need government help is because they had already mortgaged everything to the hilt the year or two before.”
True, but doesn’t that just mean they had something worth mortgaging?