Jump to content

2019 Ford Ranger gets 21 mpg city, 26 highway with RWD, report says


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Assimilator said:

I'm glad they are making the Ranger but it's a segment I'm not particularly fond of because it's just way too small for a BOF vehicle and doesn't offer a significant price or fuel economy advantage to overcome reduced utility.  I get a little suspicious of vehicle segments that don't offer clear quantitative advantages, but sales are ultimately what matters, I just hope they can sustain them.  I think Ford is doing the right thing by making the Bronco a key part of production sustainability.  I think a big reason for GM's success is related to heavy Incentive spending and cheap prices which explains why they've fluctuated so much.  I estimate Ford will probably settle in the 8,000 units a month range but might be a blockbuster initially because of pent-up demand (although they tend to make pricing unappealing for awhile at launch to take advantage of interest).  

Previous Rangers were BOF and smaller than the new Ranger.  Courier/ Mazda was smaller yet and BOF.  Size has nothing to do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, jpd80 said:

OK, I see where you're going with the comparison - an F150 SuperCab has similar rear leg room to the Ranger SuperCrew..

So the difference in price is about $4K more for the F150 but you get the nicer 2.7 V6 Ecoboost, and with that,

I suspect that the weights of those two vehicles would also be a lot closer too......Very interesting, thanks for the insight..:)

 

 

How comfortable are the jump seats in the F150 SuperCab on hour long trips?  I looked at a friends the other the other day.  Curious.  The seats do get up out of the way for in cab storage.  The back seat of my Tacoma with full 4 doors gets uncomfortable after a while.  It's the design of the flip seat back there that makes it harder.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Making mid sized trucks roomier would help to increase sales but would that in turn play against the interests of full sized truck sales?

Adding 3" to 4" more rear leg room and increasing width by say 3" would give a truck that 's still significantly smaller than F150 but possibly just as heavy unless the body was switched to aluminum. I see this as a problem of both economics and competing interests, how much and how far to go will be important considerations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, barney9014 said:

How comfortable are the jump seats in the F150 SuperCab on hour long trips?  I looked at a friends the other the other day.  Curious.  The seats do get up out of the way for in cab storage.  The back seat of my Tacoma with full 4 doors gets uncomfortable after a while.  It's the design of the flip seat back there that makes it harder.  

I own a 2018 supercab and I rode in my buddy’s new Tacoma super crew back seat.  The supercab F150 seats are way more comfortable.   Don’t know if they are as comfortable as a super crew F150 though.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Food for thought weight:

XLT 4x2..........SuperCrew............SuperCab

Ranger............4,441 lbs...............4,145 lbs

F150..............4,528 lbs................4,415 lbs

F150 losing between 600  to 700 lbs really paid off big time for US buyers and fuel economy...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2018 at 4:12 PM, MY93SHO said:

Previous Rangers were BOF and smaller than the new Ranger.  Courier/ Mazda was smaller yet and BOF.  Size has nothing to do with it.

I'm making a point about using a BOF on a modern vehicle of Ranger's size and utility.  It adds weight and takes up space and F-150 proves you can have far more space, economy  and utility from nearly the same weight and price.  I still tend to follow Ford's standing on the midsize market prior to re-launching the Ranger and I'm still skeptical about longterm sustainability.  But I certainly think it's an appealing truck and I think Ford has found the right business case at this point.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was able to test out a new Ranger at the Central Florida Auto Show. It was "nice", but it was a Lariat version 4x4 which stickers around $35K and just about every panel I touched had hard cheap plastic.  I was a bit under whelmed by the interior.  The dashboard mounted mirror switches I loathe because I would need to reach out ahead and out of place, to be able to adjust (works better for the vertically challenged)...I did go back and "touch" Tacoma's, Frontiers and Colorado's, actually the Colorado probably has the better interior materials, while the Toyota felt more solid but basic. Otherwise engine compartment looked pretty tiny with the 2.3L in there and doors slammed with a reassuring thunk as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/22/2018 at 10:43 AM, 70 Stang said:

Funny! Haven't sat in a Ranger, but I have been in mid size trucks that are slightly larger based on ROTW Ranger dimensions. An F-150 supercab has considerably more room than a super crew mid size.....so in price comparisons that's what I compare......not to mention I'm sure you will get more off the sticker on the 150. I know it's a lifestyle choice also to want a mid size.....and I thought I wanted one. IMO the F-150 has gotten to big and I would like to have something a little smaller.

Thanks for your reply. I am wanting a mid size. I do not care about weight so much though, Or towing ability. I want the utility in a smaller package because just as you stated. The F-series has grown way to big for being practical on a daily commute. I am just over 6'. I have sat in every spot in both cabs (I work at MAP and went to the EE event in Oct.) even when the front seat is set for me in the S-Crew Ranger. I am fully comfortable behind it. To be quite honest, I was underwhelmed when I first seen what we would be building on screen. That was until I really got in it and nit picked it. Maybe, Just maybe you might come away the same as I did.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, ANTAUS said:

I was able to test out a new Ranger at the Central Florida Auto Show. It was "nice", but it was a Lariat version 4x4 which stickers around $35K and just about every panel I touched had hard cheap plastic.  I was a bit under whelmed by the interior.  The dashboard mounted mirror switches I loathe because I would need to reach out ahead and out of place, to be able to adjust (works better for the vertically challenged)...I did go back and "touch" Tacoma's, Frontiers and Colorado's, actually the Colorado probably has the better interior materials, while the Toyota felt more solid but basic. Otherwise engine compartment looked pretty tiny with the 2.3L in there and doors slammed with a reassuring thunk as well.

I was able to test the new Ranger at Ranger Base Camp in Texas two weeks ago. I thought Ranger interior was much better than Colorado and Tacoma. No more hard plastic than F-150. Dash layout similar in appearance to Edge and Explorer. Seats very comfortable to my 5-8 165lb frame. Sat in back seat of SCrew behind a gentleman who was 6-1 and I still had plenty of leg room. I thought the Colorado cheap and Tacoma basic, both with their share of hard plastic.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 11/24/2018 at 9:33 PM, ANTAUS said:

I was able to test out a new Ranger at the Central Florida Auto Show. It was "nice", but it was a Lariat version 4x4 which stickers around $35K and just about every panel I touched had hard cheap plastic.  I was a bit under whelmed by the interior.  The dashboard mounted mirror switches I loathe because I would need to reach out ahead and out of place, to be able to adjust (works better for the vertically challenged)...I did go back and "touch" Tacoma's, Frontiers and Colorado's, actually the Colorado probably has the better interior materials, while the Toyota felt more solid but basic. Otherwise engine compartment looked pretty tiny with the 2.3L in there and doors slammed with a reassuring thunk as well.

That's cool you were able to sit inside.  They only had one XLT supercab at the Miami show, and they locked it behind a fence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎11‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 5:59 PM, Assimilator said:

I'm making a point about using a BOF on a modern vehicle of Ranger's size and utility.  It adds weight and takes up space and F-150 proves you can have far more space, economy  and utility from nearly the same weight and price.  I still tend to follow Ford's standing on the midsize market prior to re-launching the Ranger and I'm still skeptical about longterm sustainability.  But I certainly think it's an appealing truck and I think Ford has found the right business case at this point.  

if the Ranger wasn't BOF there would have been huge uproar....let alone compromise with payload and towing...both which ( correct me if Im wrong ) Ranger holds trump cards….

 

Edited by Deanh
fat fingers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎11‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 5:59 PM, Assimilator said:

I'm making a point about using a BOF on a modern vehicle of Ranger's size and utility.  It adds weight and takes up space and F-150 proves you can have far more space, economy  and utility from nearly the same weight and price.  I still tend to follow Ford's standing on the midsize market prior to re-launching the Ranger and I'm still skeptical about longterm sustainability.  But I certainly think it's an appealing truck and I think Ford has found the right business case at this point.  

sustainability will come in 2 years when chassis gets upgraded and ( Im guessing ) the 2.3 becomes one of several engine options...right now its GET THE PRODUCT OUT THERE.....

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ranger is riding on the upgraded chassis that Bronco is getting, it's actually a substantial redesign hidden by basically the same top-hat.  The top-hat will be redesigned in 2022 for the 2023 MY. 

The US and ROTW Ranger have largely diverged at this point.  

This is not the temp-job people seem to think it is.  

Edited by Assimilator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Assimilator said:

Ranger is riding on the upgrade chassis that Bronco is getting.  

You sure?  Everything here and on other sites is the NEW frame debuts on the Bronco and then on the next gen Ranger.

This frame was modified for North American consumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MY93SHO said:

You sure?  Everything here and on other sites is the NEW frame debuts on the Bronco and then on the next gen Ranger.

This frame was modified for North American consumption.

Yep, it's an all-new frame for North America, part of that is extending the frame to the bumpers but that's the only visual cue.

Besides, why would Ford waste money developing a new frame if they intended to only produce it for a few years?  It's actually one of the reasons Ranger didn't get a full redesign, they had to spend a chunk of money getting the platform ready for the new plant.

Edited by Assimilator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Assimilator said:

Yep, it's an all-new frame for North America, part of that is extending the frame to the bumpers but that's the only visual cue.

Besides, why would Ford waste money developing a new frame if they intended to only produce it for a few years?  That would be a colossal waste of money.  

It's all "new" because it wasn't used in the ROW trucks.  This is marketing 101. It's like GM saying "Check out the all new Silverado" and it uses the same front axle seals as the 1997 model.

 

"Besides, why would Ford waste money developing a new frame if they intended to only produce it for a few years? "  To get it in the market!

Who says the V6 friendly frame won't be just an evolution of this one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MY93SHO said:

It's all "new" because it wasn't used in the ROW trucks.  This is marketing 101. It's like GM saying "Check out the all new Silverado" and it uses the same front axle seals as the 1997 model.

"Besides, why would Ford waste money developing a new frame if they intended to only produce it for a few years? "  To get it in the market!

Who says the V6 friendly frame won't be just an evolution of this one?

I think your both saying the same thing.

Like Fuzzy said, the current cab/engine compartment can't fit a V6 into it, since it wasn't designed to do that, since ROW only needed an I4/5 gas/deisel engine in it. 

Since the Bronco will be more or less all new from the frame up, it shouldn't have the same problem. nor will the Next Gen Ranger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎11‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 10:14 AM, wildosvt said:

Thanks for your reply. I am wanting a mid size. I do not care about weight so much though, Or towing ability. I want the utility in a smaller package because just as you stated. The F-series has grown way to big for being practical on a daily commute. I am just over 6'. I have sat in every spot in both cabs (I work at MAP and went to the EE event in Oct.) even when the front seat is set for me in the S-Crew Ranger. I am fully comfortable behind it. To be quite honest, I was underwhelmed when I first seen what we would be building on screen. That was until I really got in it and nit picked it. Maybe, Just maybe you might come away the same as I did.

That is really good to hear.....and I will be looking at them as soon as they hit the showrooms, even though I have a few years before I buy a new truck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...