We need a Ranger?

I just saw a couple of the 2013 ford rangers rolling out of a Loves. I'd not even heard of it and I'm not sure why ford wouldn't at least try to sell it in the US if it is being sold in Mexico and Canada....

Any thoughts?

Well I don't know for Mexico, but in Canada, the 2013 Ranger is just the left over 2012 Rangers that are being disposed of. I really like the Ranger, but when you can get an equivalent F-150 for a few more grands (less than 5k more) it just doesn't seem to make sense. The small pick-ups have fallen victim to the success of the large pick-up which are produced in such large quantity, they are uber-cheap for what you get.

I'd like to point out how foolishly optimistic I am.

I saw "Ranger" and thought "oh please oh please a small truck".

I was wrong. Reminds me of that cute girl I went to high school class with. She was something to look at and appreciate then, but good lord did she get big since the last time I saw her.

The American "Bigger is better" mantra is what killed off the minitruck. Soon the costs, related to the mantra, equaled bloated fullsize trucks without the available profit margin. I know I am one of the few, but I have ZERO need for a fullsize. I want fuel efficiency, not towing a damn house capability. Most of the fullsize trucks sold now are nothing more then the diamond ring you see on a women's finger, a fashion status symbol.

when I think of range, this is what I think of:

fanfoy wrote: The small pick-ups have fallen victim to the success of the large pick-up which are produced in such large quantity, they are uber-cheap for what you get.

And that the full-size trucks are getting damn near the same fuel economy, makes it harder to justify something smaller.

Get a 90s Ranger for $500 and drop a crate engine in.

RealMiniDriver wrote:

fanfoy wrote: The small pick-ups have fallen victim to the success of the large pick-up which are produced in such large quantity, they are uber-cheap for what you get.

And that the full-size trucks are getting damn near the same fuel economy, makes it harder to justify something smaller.

but imagine if say Ford had kept evolving the ranger. They could have kept it small and gotten close to 40mpg out of it.

Is it the new FWD Ranger? Those are lame.

The ranger sold outside of the US is the only American pickup with sensible proportions apart from the '90s Dodge Dakota. The others are ridiculously huge and super easy to bottom out off-road.

mad_machine wrote: but imagine if say Ford had kept evolving the ranger. They could have kept it small and gotten close to 40mpg out of it.

I don't think that could have happened unless you want a rebirth of the Ranchero/El Camino in car form or Aussie UTE remodel, see SUV to CUV. The problem is the towing capacity and warranting the vehicle when it breaks.

Ew. I just looked and threw up a little.

GameboyRMH wrote: Is it the new FWD Ranger? Those are lame. The ranger sold outside of the US is the only American pickup with sensible proportions apart from the '90s Dodge Dakota. The others are ridiculously huge and super easy to bottom out off-road.

FWD Ranger?

And that the full-size trucks are getting damn near the same fuel economy, makes it harder to justify something smaller.

Don't get me wrong, I have absolutely nothing against full size trucks, or the people who buy and use one because its strength match up well with their needs. However it's plenty easy to justify not getting one for people that have absolutely no desire to drive something that long and wide through traffic and around parking lots, as so many actuall full size truck owners seem almost fully incapable of doing anyways, and who can't stand the idea of one of those monstrosities filling their driveway because it's physically too large to proplerly fit into the garage. No thanks. For the same price I would much rather have a well optioned small truck, that is more correctly sized to my wants and needs, over a stripped down half ton. The only things the full size trucks have going for them in regards to people like me who don't care about how many times more capability it has than I need, is the cubic dollars spend on engineering development to convince large numbers of ignorant people who have no use for such a vehicle to want it and that it will now only partially suck for their needs. But apparently Ford decided long ago that it would be easier to just try to push people into full size trucks...And unfortunately, for the most part it seems to be working.

Rumor is that the new model is based on an lateral drivetrain layout and the 2WD option will be FWD.

Driven5 wrote:

And that the full-size trucks are getting damn near the same fuel economy, makes it harder to justify something smaller.

Don't get me wrong, I have absolutely nothing against full size trucks, or the people who buy and use one because its strength match up well with their needs. However it's plenty easy to justify not getting one for people that have absolutely no desire to drive something that long and wide through traffic and around parking lots, as so many actuall full size truck owners seem almost fully incapable of doing anyways, and who can't stand the idea of one of those monstrosities filling their driveway because it's physically too large to proplerly fit into the garage. No thanks. For the same price I would much rather have a well optioned small truck, that is more correctly sized to my wants and needs, over a stripped down half ton. The only things the full size trucks have going for them in regards to people like me who don't care about how many times more capability it has than I need, is the cubic dollars spend on engineering development to convince large numbers of ignorant people who have no use for such a vehicle to want it and that it will now only partially suck for their needs. But apparently Ford decided long ago that it would be easier to just try to push people into full size trucks...And unfortunately, for the most part it seems to be working.

Don't get me wrong, either. I agree with you.

I've had three S-Series Blazers and an S-Series pickup, and am currently hording three more of them, in the process of getting (an old) one back on the road. Come springtime, I'm selling the MCS and getting a later model S-Series pickup for daily use. I had considered getting a Silverado/Sierra, but I really don't want to deal with bulk of one, even though I could get one of the same age as an S, for about the same price.

Want a small truck? Here is my answer. I am working on a plywood box to put in the back so I can go get some mulch in the spring. The box will be within a few inches of the same size as the bed in the 84 Ranger I had.

Ford says that the us market can't justify the sale, I understand this since I went to buy a new Dakota in 2002 and ended up with a 1500 and didn't give up anything; I only gained size. The pictures of this ranger don't do it justice; it is pretty small (smaller than a Dakota) but just as ugly as the pictures.

In reply to Driven5:

When buying a truck, its better to get more than you'll ever need than not enough......realistically, the sub half ton trucks cannot pull cars on trailers well. If you're only ever going to use one to commute or throw an occasional thing in the bed, yet never tow anything that weighs more than a garden tractor, a small truck is for you.

Note, I've come from S-10's.......to something way more than I'll ever need(f350sd). I daily a hatchback, so no need for another minitruck.

when I got my F150 I would have much rather found a Ranger sized truck ... 4x4 with a big enough engine to be my tow vehicle .. maybe I didn't wait and search long enough ... but I couldn't find my unicorn

yamaha wrote: When buying a truck, its better to get more than you'll ever need than not enough......realistically, the sub half ton trucks cannot pull cars on trailers well. If you're only ever going to use one to commute or throw an occasional thing in the bed, yet never tow anything that weighs more than a garden tractor, a small truck is for you.

To a point you're correct. But that depends significantly on how heavy the cars you're looking to tow are and how frequently you're looking to do it. The types of cars I would most frequently want to tow any V6 compact trucks correctly setup for towing should be able to handle without issue, and the cars they might struggle a bit with would be few and far between. Also if you're only going to ever throw an occasional thing in the bed and never tow anything more than a garden tractor, you realistically shouldn't be buy a truck at all. This fallacy that only trucks can tow anything being pushed onto us in this country by the major auto manufacturers as they drastically reduce or completely remove tow ratings from most vehicles as one means of coercing peopole into unnecessarily larger and more expensive (profitable) vehicles is one of my biggest automotive frustrations.

Absolutely, having separate properly sized vehicles for every purpose (towing, commuting, family hauling, street toy, track toy) is certainly the ideal option...But is not one that's generally available to most people.

Ranger50 wrote: The American "Bigger is better" mantra is what killed off the minitruck. Soon the costs, related to the mantra, equaled bloated fullsize trucks without the available profit margin. I know I am one of the few, but I have ZERO need for a fullsize. I want fuel efficiency, not towing a damn house capability. Most of the fullsize trucks sold now are nothing more then the diamond ring you see on a women's finger, a fashion status symbol.

Nope, you're not alone, I have a 2007 5speed Ranger and love it for it's utility, it does exactly what I want. To me size matters, since I live near the city and am in there alot I like that my truck is the size of a car. Try parking an F150 with an extended or crew cab (forget about a longbed) in a parking deck in the city. I may yet sell mine for a 2012 4.0 4x4, can tow anything I need, gets same gas mileage as an F150, and fits in my garage.

I thought I read somewhere that the fuel economy standards based off of the height x width footprint really screws light trucks and that is why they are not being made in the US anymore. That plus the frozen chicken tax negating imports of small trucks. http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/fuel.html

I'll add that the small pick-up have sort of fallen into a no-man-land because unless you need to carry a dirty lawn tractor, or something like that, a minivan is a lot more versatile, economical, nicer to drive, etc... Heck, just get a cheapo HF trailer you can carry that lawn tractor with your minivan.

RealMiniDriver wrote: And that the full-size trucks are getting damn near the same fuel economy, makes it harder to justify something smaller.

Yep. An F150 getting almost 30 mpg? Why bother with a little truck then?

chandlerGTi wrote: Ford says that the us market can't justify the sale,

Because they, and I mean Ford itself with its model line only, have pushed it that way. They have made the financing terms more attractive, better options, geared salespeople, slanted advertising, and fixed part prices and availablity into the favor of the F150. Then they roll out the claim the Ranger can't hold its own and needs to go. Mostly because Ford wants to retain the "Best selling truck" advertising BS... GM started doing the same, especially after they dumped the popular S-series, and gave Ford a scare.

HorseE36 M3 is all I can say to Ford's claim.

Chrysler is selling PT cruisers without any advertising to the tune of 50k units/yr which justifies production still to this day. Where is the market or profit in those?