Truck news

Ford will be reinventing the Ranger pickup.

It will be base on a common platform on which the Transit connect will be built.

So, we will have a FWD "truck"

They should totally name that the Ranchero, not the Ranger.

And I'm not just saying that because of the plate of Huevos Rancheros in front of me...

Hmm. I'm not sure how I feel about this, but I'm sure someone else will let me know.

andrave wrote: Hmm. I'm not sure how I feel about this, but I'm sure someone else will let me know.

QFTFT

FWD doesn't tow or haul as well as RWD.

I wonder if "reinventing" will translate to "making it berkeleying gigantic like all the other 'small' trucks on the market".

Good. We've needed a small fwd truck for some time now. As anyone who's ever had a Dodge Rampage or VW Rabbit truck can attest.

foxtrapper wrote: Good. We've needed a small fwd truck for some time now. As anyone who's ever had a Dodge Rampage or VW Rabbit truck can attest.

I certainly loved my little 'page. 1000lb capacity in the bed and Turbo-Dodge upgrade potential. 30mpg. Easy to park and drive. Though it should have been based on the new Focus.

I actually think this could be a very good move. As has been noted with the advances in half ton trucks, you can now get 20+ mpg's in a fullsize that will tow and haul just about anything, and cost little more than what the midsize/small trucks were going to cost (i.e. the new world Ranger is almost as big as an F150).

The development cost on a fwd based on a transit that already exists has to be fairly minimal. This will allow a standalone "mini" truck replacement for a market that is completely absent, one which I also think will not compete directly against any fullsize. I think there's plenty of market for a light duty hauler that also gets substantially better mpg's than a full size, and Ford could reclaim some of the lost Ranger buyers who never loaded there trucks to capacity anyways.

Plus I have a soft spot for fwd trucks. :)

...or add in existing awd architecture for a unibody "truck":

Obviously those are all '80's relics now, but given the bloat that occured, even "mid size trucks" such as Tacoma/Dakota are all BIG nowadays. Something with the footprint of a Transit with a decent rated rear spring would get quite a bit done, without much fuel usage.

turboswede wrote: Though it should have been based on the new Focus.

Isn't the Transit Connect based on the Focus, and therefore, isn't this also? I thought I saw that the Transit Connect was getting an update, presumably to the current Focus platform... (?)

Rebadged Mazda model with SkyActiv-D????

part of the ranger's appeal for many was its north to south engine and transmission layoutand body on frame construction, both of which made it durable and easy to repair. I'm not sure the transit will attract quite the same buyers. Beyond that, the ranger was popular at least largely because it had been designed 300 years ago by cavemen and the resulting total lack of R&D spent on the truck in recent decades meant that fleet buyers could trade spare change, paperclips, and bubble gum wrappers for stripper models at their local ford dealer.

this news could possibly bring me into a showroom. I would not mind a real small truck.. not these things that are just as big as the full size pickup my parents had back in the 70s.

Give it some style, the ability to carry a moderate amount of junk, and good gas miliage.. sign me up!

andrave wrote: part of the ranger's appeal for many was its north to south engine and transmission layoutand body on frame construction, both of which made it durable and easy to repair. I'm not sure the transit will attract quite the same buyers. Beyond that, the ranger was popular at least largely because it had been designed 300 years ago by cavemen and the resulting total lack of R&D spent on the truck in recent decades meant that fleet buyers could trade spare change, paperclips, and bubble gum wrappers for stripper models at their local ford dealer.

Yes, an east to west, traditional FWD orientation makes it a pain to do just about any work on the engine, except possibly if the plugs face forward.

If the new Ranger becomes itty bitty then my objections to FWD go away. With an itty bitty truck you aren't worried about towing or hauling capacities and the truck becomes more an extension of a DD.

I used to love my little Mazda PU.

But as someone else noted the MPG of the big trucks and their prices are so inexpensive when compare to the little ones that the last time I bought a truck I went for a full sized F150 instead of the Explorer Sport Trac I was shopping for.

The big truck was about 2 MPGs better plus the back seat was absolutely cavernous! We hardly ever put stuff in the bed, it all goes in the back seat. The floor is flat and the seats fold out of the way.

I paid less for the full sized truck than the smaller one was going to cost me.

andrave wrote: part of the ranger's appeal for many was its north to south engine and transmission layoutand body on frame construction, both of which made it durable and easy to repair.

To this note I'm amazed that Jeep has never pulled the trigger on a factory Wrangler based pickup truck. The aftermarket has tried to fill the gap... (Brute)

...but Chrysler could do it themselves a lot cheaper if you didn't have to buy it complete only to throw away a bunch of unnecessary parts. Simple layout, existing drivetrains, and none of the electrical/dash/etc. would need redesigned. Close the cab, bolt on a bed. A longer chassis / long bed would fill the real "work" req's for commercial buyers and is a few extended frame drawings away (add in another foot of fuel line / brake line / wire). Easy peasy by modern standards, and could play in the space that was left wide open by the Ranger's departure. It would seem to me you wouldn't have to sell that many to recoup development costs, and your hardcore "Jeep" following would earn it credentials on the "real truck - has frame" clientele.

wow.. I l like that brute. as loved and hard to find as the old scramblers are.. I am surprised Jeep never tried to recapture that market

iceracer wrote: Ford will be reinventing the Ranger pickup. It will be base on a common platform on which the Transit connect will be built. So, we will have a FWD "truck"

Do you have any source on this? links/insider/etc.?

In reply to xflowgolf: I was just going to ask the same question.

The ranger was never intended to tow anything that the new transit connect cannot........also, transit should be a dohc 4cyl, so plugs will be up top and center.

Ah. Say hello to the Ford Rabbit Pickup.

http://www.stangtv.com/news/ford-mustang-test-mule-new-ford-ranger-spotted-in-the-wild/

That picture looks bigger than I'd expect and 6 bolt rims.

This isn't new. Ford has been tAlking about this for a number of years now.

ransom wrote:

turboswede wrote: Though it should have been based on the new Focus.

Isn't the Transit Connect based on the Focus, and therefore, isn't this also? I thought I saw that the Transit Connect was getting an update, presumably to the current Focus platform... (?)

I think the Transit Connect is based on the European Focus platform. I have no idea about the update though.

In reply to sachilles:

I believe that's the European version, which is not FWD. But it was posted in an article saying that it was spotted in Michigan, and speculated that they may be considering bringing it here. I have no other information and don't know what, if anything, is true, so TIFWIW.