I think this is more about changes in the marketplace. Mini-pickups used to be the rage - and they’ve grown over the years to the point where they are midsized. Folks who want mid-sized utility vehicles are buying SUV’s.
The poor small pickup is trying to compete against a bigger vehicle that costs only a little more to make and can be sold for substantially more. Personally I think there is a market for a true mini-pickup - and no one is making one nowadays - and I suspect it is because of the cost to build vs selling price thing. No profit in them.
The mini-pickup is built in Asia by several manufacturers. Fuso and Isuzu already provide dealer networks to sell them, but the minis are underpowered by US standards, with top speeds around 75 MPH, if that high. These trucks could be fine for city use, but would be useless on the highway. I’m not sure how we would license them if they are unsafe on highways. The would still need to meet emissions standards, of course. There is an article on line stating that Suzuki may bring the Jimny (was the Samurai) to the US by 2014. Since the USA only recently got way serious about increasing US fleet mileage, the manufacturers have not had time to bring anything to market. We could see small entrants from a number of sources. I suppose that we could consider the Ford Transit Connect as a first foray by Ford.
Yes I am cheap. I wear that badge proudly. However I do agree with the article in one respect, if I were looking at a top of the line compact truck with 4x4 V6 and all the trimmings, I doubt I would have bought a Ranger. I probably would have opted for the Tacoma, but at that price point I would have jumped up to a full size truck.
If you want a 6-cyl, you might as well go for the F-150, even in a regular cab. At $23,000 MSRP, it gets better gas mileage and is more capable than any of the mid-size pickups.
Jt…The official position of Ford is just that from I have read. With their high mileage 6cylinder with what, 300 hp, capable of equalling mileage of an intermediate with a full size 150, why develope, at this time, a new Ranger.
Even the 4 cylinders in 4 wd can do no better.
Goodshepard…for the last 25 years, I have always bought Toyota trucks while my brother always bought Ford Rangers. Over that time regardless of the perceived difference in quality, he spent no more and some years less on ownership costs then I . The difference is this. I used mine for off road and towing pontoon boats while he always had 2wd and used it for light utility towing and commuting…that was it. He also complained bout them a lot but kept buying them cause he wears his “tight wad” tag prowdly too. I live “off road,” he lives on a tarred road. I beat up on cars, he babies them. I pay more…he, and you pay less. But, if I bought a Ranger as my neighbor did, I, like he would be paying a lot more in upkeep with the hard use.
Gasoline mileage isn’t the only reason one might purchase a Ford Ranger sized truck. The compact size with a smaller turning radius might make more sense than a larger F-150. I’ve seen Ford Rangers and Chevrolet Colorados used as delivery vehicles. Auto parts stores in my area use them.
As an analogy, I would still buy a minivan over a full size van even if the full size van got better mileage. Ford and GM quit making minivans, so they lost my business to Toyota. If I needed a compact truck, I would purchase the truck from the company that makes them. I would not buy a larger substitute. Ford wanted to sell me an Edge–Chevrolet wanted to sell me a Traverse when I replaced my Uplander. GM and Ford lost the sale to Toyota.
The thing I don’t get us that even with the slow sales (mostly fleet) due in part to no advertising and poor to no incentives. This little truck was almost pure profit for ford. It’s tooling was paid for long ago, as was the tooling used by it’s suppliers. I think they had EPA issues with the current drive line, and paying to update it in light of the low end F150’s plus the want of global platforms, killed any internal interest in keeping the ranger. I had a friend with a 2011 ranger ext cab v6 with towing package, he then purchased a 23 foot boat that came with a 2001 f150 crewcab, and he swore they got about the same mileage on his daily commute.
BTW, the Ford Ranger is NOT in any way a Mazda derivative. The only Mazda component that was ever in them is the ~post 1990 5 speed manual transmissions. I’ve heard alot of knowledgable automotive people that think the Ranger was lifted from Mazda…Not a bit, none at all. So, CaddyMan, they’re not just Mazdas.
From what I remember, it was the other way around. I had one of the later model Mazda made pick ups which was also made for Ford earlier as the Courier. It was a good truck but anemic. Mazda then started to rebadge the Ranger made by Ford to get more oomph as they had no 6 cylinder to use in the north America.
That was my recollection. It was the early Ford Courier that was built by Mazda in the early 70 s.
From a little scoping, it seems that the confusion stems from Mazda being responsible for the Ranger/Mazda PU line overseas, and Ford doing the NorthAmerican, aka, Ranger/Mazda B as we know it, here?
Mazda is developing a pick up that may very well turn into a compact Ranger in the future…full circle it seems.
Your recollection is completely wrong. The North American Ranger was not in any way related to the Courrier. Mazda quit making trucks and sold rebadged Rangers st thier BXXXX trucks. The Cologne V6 (2.8, 2.9, 4.0) was from Germany. The A4LD automatic and subsequent models are made in Bordeaux, France. There is no Mazda influence in any of it.
I mentioned that a few ago. Prior to '90 they had Kogyo Togyo…or however it is spelled. There were also 3 different disel engines available from '83 to '87. You could get dual fuel tanks with those and if you look at the standard bed on current models, the relief for the fule filler hose is still stamped for a dual tank Ranger…diesel only. I think the engines were Perkins, Mazda and Mitsubishi…never sold well but there were a few.
The stamping dies and other tools do not last forever. They need to be remanufactured periodically. Ford sold something like 20,000 Rangers last year; down from 60,000 in 2008. It doesn’t seem to make sense form a financial standpoint to continue the Ranger in the US.
Kawasaga…your reading comprehension needs a little work. Where did I say the Courier was related to the Ranger? The Ford Courier was a North American Mazda made product. The Ranger ia a North American Ford made platform shared with Mazda to compete with the larger, at that time, compact trucks from other manufacturers.
You will see, I agreed with your premise… :=) if you re- read this or the previous post again…more slowly.
Rod Knox…if we go back and actually have the ability to decifer who made what as far as transmissions are concerned, or any other component, what you say may actually be true. I haven’ tresearched it but I feel confident thatFord Mazda, having shared automobile components, models and engineering for years could heve purchased transmissions from the same suppliers or used a common built by one or the other.
I beg forgiveness if I misunderstood. I worked on Ford exclusively for many years and so many times have heard people assume that the Ranger was a rebadged import and somehow it would be more reliable because of that. Well, the Ranger we’re all talking about is really based on a miniaturization of the F-series of that era… It is body on hig psi steel frame rather than a Japanese boxed sheet metal frame (again of the Courier era.). Anyow, F-150 and The Ranger used Mazda 5-speed manuals from about '90 on. The Ranger version was scaled down about 20%. Rear axle (8.8) from the Ford Stirling plant. Front on 4x4 is Dana 44 or something a bit less. The Automatics were always Ford of France. Engines from Europe or US but never Japan except for the rare diesel.
I’ve always been a Ford Fan. When I worked for the government out at a Naval Bombing Range, all the fleet vehicles were Fords and we beat the crap out of them because the roads, if you could consider them roads that criss crossed the desert were extremely rough and the fords did pretty well. We had an occasional lemon in the fleet but that can happen with any manufacturer. We drove mostly Ford Rangers except when it rained or snowed then we took the broncos, f-350’s, or the Expeditions out because they were 4x4. I’m wondering one thing though? Why did Ford discontinue the Excursion. See when I worked at the Bombing Range, Ford also sent us some prototypes to drive out on the Range and we had to report to Ford how much fuel the trucks used, had to report how they handled off road, etc etc…The prototypes had already gone through the crash tests and such this was just the final step before they’d start assembling them. One of the Prototypes I got to drive was the Excursion. That thing was a Tank and so large that I could fit the whole church choir in it and still have plenty of room. So I’m just curious about why ford doesn’t make it anymore…Was it sales? Fuel Economy? Price?
Seems to me noone really wanted the Hummer line either…even if GM almost gave it away. That market simply evaporated…I’m thankful it did. Those were just a 'lil too big for the inattentive soccer mommies that often drive them.