NAVYDAVY Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 :)We use to have 200,000 in sales, and be the segment leader. Now that can happen again, just build it right and put the right power train in it. People want it for their 1 car garage. You will see, this is the new size, the new normal. I'm saving my money for this one. Build it Aluminum or build it steel, Ecoboost it, Diesel it, just build it the way people want, If you read the forums or blogs, people keep asking for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 If they make it out if aluminum and put a deisil in it, I'll buy one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jniffen Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Hell put the 2.7 or 3.5 V6 and it should be fun. Unless the weight will be about the same as the F150. I wish it was coming sooner, need a new'newer set of wheels. Love a Mustang, but might not be sensible in the Upper Midwest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 :)We use to have 200,000 in sales, and be the segment leader. Now that can happen again, just build it right and put the right power train in it. People want it for their 1 car garage. You will see, this is the new size, the new normal. I'm saving my money for this one. Build it Aluminum or build it steel, Ecoboost it, Diesel it, just build it the way people want, If you read the forums or blogs, people keep asking for it. What really sold the old Ranger was a low base price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 What really sold the old Ranger was a low base price. Agree- IMO, AND BOF construction and a decent size. And to those who say .."the only reason Ranger sold so well was it was low cost transportation" ...I'm sure there were plenty of other low cost "basic transportation vehicles" on the market back in the Ranger's high volume years. But the allure was it was a TRUCK. Not an econobox. My big fear is we will end up with a TC derived econobox-or as I prefer to call them-"cheesebox" I have been noticing a lot of the new GM twins- and the thought came to mind- "well GM did a good job of duplicating T-6 dimensions-don't know the actual dimensions, but if the knock on T-6 is it is too close to 150, my eye says the GM's appear to me to be very close in size to the full size GM's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 As the buyer of a $7995 1990 base, 2wd, reg cab swb manual Ranger, I assure you that price was the major factor behind those Ranger sales back then, with utility being a bonus. From what I remember those trucks made up 75% of the inventory back then, if not more. Ford was practically giving them away to maintain their best selling title. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Hell put the 2.7 or 3.5 V6 and it should be fun. Unless the weight will be about the same as the F150. I wish it was coming sooner, need a new'newer set of wheels. Love a Mustang, but might not be sensible in the Upper Midwest. A new "Ranger" with the 2017 Raptor's 400HP+ EcoBeast engine would make an excellent Lightning replacement! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted September 11, 2015 Share Posted September 11, 2015 As the buyer of a $7995 1990 base, 2wd, reg cab swb manual Ranger, I assure you that price was the major factor behind those Ranger sales back then, with utility being a bonus. From what I remember those trucks made up 75% of the inventory back then, if not more. Ford was practically giving them away to maintain their best selling title. Again NOT disagreeing on price as a significant factor. But based on my experience (had a decently optioned 89 Super Cab 4wd) and knowing plenty of other owners of nicely optioned Rangers during those high volume years, I don't believe price was the sole reason for great sales numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 11, 2015 Share Posted September 11, 2015 I guess we won't know unless we have actual sales figures. I agree there were plenty of sales of more expensive models. I just think the cheap ones were a bigger portion of overall sales. But I don't know for sure. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabfordeb Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 I think size was the larger factor. Look what happened to good condition low mileage used Ranger prices in recent years. You could buy a new F150 for less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Was just looking at used trucks. $8K for a 1979 F100 in decent (not restored) condition. Really good ones are $12K - $25K. A 2012 F150 supercab XL 4x4 with 100K miles was $19K!!! I can buy a brand new supercab XLT loaded for $32K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Used truck prices are ridiculous! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.