I can agree with that list.

I really miss my Ranger. Great little truck

mad_machine wrote: I agree with Pheller. We -need- a small decent miliage pickup. Not everyone needs the behemouths the full size trucks have become. If I could have gotten a ranger that would tow my boat, I would be driving that right now instead of the Rover

How much are you willing to pay for one? Outside of the engine and trans, building a compact truck costs as much as a full size truck except for the change in total weight of steel.

They are both body on frame, with 3 distinct parts- cab, frame, bed. That's the real problem with them.

With previous CAFE rules, it made some financial sense to sell small trucks at a loss so that you could sell big trucks at a gain. That does not hold so much anymore.

Now, if more were willing to MAKE a unibody comapct truck, that would change things quite a bit. But so far, only Honda seems willing to do that.

CRZ+K-series= SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY

9

alfadriver wrote:

mad_machine wrote: I agree with Pheller. We -need- a small decent miliage pickup. Not everyone needs the behemouths the full size trucks have become. If I could have gotten a ranger that would tow my boat, I would be driving that right now instead of the Rover

How much are you willing to pay for one? Outside of the engine and trans, building a compact truck costs as much as a full size truck except for the change in total weight of steel. They are both body on frame, with 3 distinct parts- cab, frame, bed. That's the real problem with them. With previous CAFE rules, it made some financial sense to sell small trucks at a loss so that you could sell big trucks at a gain. That does not hold so much anymore. Now, if more were willing to MAKE a unibody comapct truck, that would change things quite a bit. But so far, only Honda seems willing to do that.

IF the capability is there, I don't care if it is Unibody or cab on frame. As said before it was a useful good size little truck

In reply to Flight Service:

The reason I bring it up is cost- it's a lot cheaper to make a unibody truck, and for the price point- the cost really really matters.

but that's enough of that tanget.

Of the cars on the list, we've only had one, and are just fine with a CUV doing the main reason why we had a ranger. Other than that, can't complain about any of those not being around anymore.

Alfa, I thought the global Ranger was unibody?

PHeller wrote: Alfa, I thought the global Ranger was unibody?

i think it is, but don't know any details. Especially why it's not sold here.

mndsm wrote: IS everyone forgetting the G8 is actually back? Sure, it's called the SS and wears a bow tie on the grille, but that's a Holden Commodore if i've ever seen one.

SS is on the longer wheelbase chassis and is auto-only.

alfadriver wrote: Funny thing about a list like that.... if enough people bought the cars in the first place- so that the company making them could still make money (or still be in business), they would still make them.

Never has a more false statement been typed on GRM.

Javelin wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Funny thing about a list like that.... if enough people bought the cars in the first place- so that the company making them could still make money (or still be in business), they would still make them.

Never has a more false statement been typed on GRM.

So fewer people should buy them new? Or companies should sell them out of the goodness of their hearts?

Or how is my statement not true? None of those cars sold in high numbers, especially as they ended their lives. Which of those cars were solid money earners for the sales numbers and investment they represent?

Javelin wrote:

mndsm wrote: IS everyone forgetting the G8 is actually back? Sure, it's called the SS and wears a bow tie on the grille, but that's a Holden Commodore if i've ever seen one.

SS is on the longer wheelbase chassis and is auto-only.

You sure about the long-wheelbase thing? Everything I've read says same chassis length as the G8.

alfadriver wrote:

Javelin wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Funny thing about a list like that.... if enough people bought the cars in the first place- so that the company making them could still make money (or still be in business), they would still make them.

Never has a more false statement been typed on GRM.

So fewer people should buy them new? Or companies should sell them out of the goodness of their hearts? Or how is my statement not true? None of those cars sold in high numbers, especially as they ended their lives. Which of those cars were solid money earners for the sales numbers and investment they represent?

Plenty of people bought those cars, and would/will buy the same type again. Manufacturers continually cram E36 M3 down the pipeline and ignore the customers, and then fail. The companies that stay true to their customers are still selling vehicles in crazy numbers.

Ford Ranger: Calendar Year Total American sales 1999 348,358
2000 330,125
2001 272,460
2002 226,094
2003 209,117
2004 156,322
2005 120,958
2006 92,420
2007 72,711
2008 65,872
2009 55,600
2010 55,364
2011 70,832

Sure it wasn't lighting the world on fire, but considering Ford put ZERO investment in it since 1999, selling 50K+ a year was still great volume.

Continuing on, Pontiac sold 38,449 G8's in just 2 model years, with sales on a serious rise before the whole Government Motors debacle killed Pontiac. Obviously that wasn't a success, seeing as how they are bringing the car back (Chevy SS) and have already been importing it's platform (Camaro) for years.

Saying what you did is complete ignorance. Look at the sales of the Toyabaru coupes! Oh sure, nobody would actually put money down for a new, lightweight, low-power, RWD coupe and yet they can't build enough of them. Funny.

The simple matter is, most of the cars that go out like this are simply never followed-up by their manufacturers "because the numbers fell off". Honda did bupkiss to the NSX or the S2K over their lives, and Ford the same to the Ranger. GM at least took notes and the GTO begat the G8 which begat the Camaro and the SS and the Caprice.

There's strong consumer demand for certain cars, like compact and midsize pickups, and every time a manufacturer figures it out, the sales go through the roof and all the talking heads proclaim what a surprise it was. Just wait until the diesel Ram and diesel Frontier hit the market.

beans wrote:

Javelin wrote:

mndsm wrote: IS everyone forgetting the G8 is actually back? Sure, it's called the SS and wears a bow tie on the grille, but that's a Holden Commodore if i've ever seen one.

SS is on the longer wheelbase chassis and is auto-only.

You sure about the long-wheelbase thing? Everything I've read says same chassis length as the G8.

You are correct. The fleet/cop car special Caprice is on the long wheelbase, the SS is on the same G8 length platform. My apologies. (Still automatic only )

I can pass on the magnum. Besides, I would rather have a CTS-V wagon.

In reply to Javelin:

That much power, in a car that weight/size/class, I'd actually want an automatic. I could never see myself doing any track/autocross work in it, just a fun street DD. Exhaust, intake, tune, wheels, tires, shocks, done.

Adrian_Thompson wrote:

poopshovel wrote: Does it get 40-50 mpg? Is there an available Si model that runs a 13 second 1/4? Reading comprehension FTW!

Err, I'd say it's there on the fuel econ and there never was a stock 13 sec CRX, I'm betting somewhere there is a 13 sec CRZ though

At this point I'm going to assume either:

A: You're retarded. B: You can't read. C: You're berkeleying with me.

In reply to poopshovel:

Adrian is a Trans Lube Tech at Henessey Honda of Woodstock.

Righty tighty, lefty loosey, Corkey.

Just about all of these cars rested on their laurels for way too long.

And please stop saying the new RX7, the 7th rotary experiment was already done!! Now its time for the RX9 (hopefully much like the RX7 though!)

Javelin wrote: GM at least took notes and the GTO begat the G8 which begat the Camaro and the SS and the Caprice.

I I wish GM had followed up on the Kappa platform. The Solstice & Sky were pretty cool, and with another generation could have taken a more serious bite into Mazda's dominance of that segment. Additionally, the Saturn Curve was one slick concept:

As was the Chevy Nomad concept. That car with an Ecotec turbo and a stick is the naughty fantasy of many a GRMer.

There was a lot of potential in the platform, and I could see it being used heavily in a stretched format by Buick and possibly Cadillac.

You can fit a LS7 in a Solstice, even. Keith Tanner would approve!

Cars I wish came back so I could buy new ones:

E30 (got one!)
AW11 (got one!)
AP1
S13 coupe
GC8 Impreza (got one!)
EG hatch, or whatever came after that one
TVR Sagaris
Original Mini Cooper S

Not doing too bad, I suppose

Javelin wrote: Just wait until the diesel Ram and diesel Frontier hit the market.

I thought it was the TITAN?

Flight Service wrote:

Javelin wrote: Just wait until the diesel Ram and diesel Frontier hit the market.

I thought it was the TITAN?

The frontier is rumored to be getting a teenie cummins 4 cylinder of some sort.