As rising gas prices squeeze its fullsize truck sales, Ford Motor Co. is thinking of keeping the popular Ranger around for a little longer, according to sources close to the company’s future product plans.
Bryce G. Hoffman writes in The Detroit News that Ford may tack on another two years to the Ranger’s life, continuing its production until 2011, when a new global version of the truck manufactured outside of the United States is expected. Ford is currently scheduled to end Ranger production next year and close the Twin Cities Assembly Plant in St. Paul, Minnesota, where the compact pickup is built.
Debuting in 1982 as a 1983 model, the Ranger is the most fuel-efficient compact pickup on the market today, getting 21 mpg city and 26 mpg highway. Ford sold 36,421 Rangers by June of this year, a 2.3% increase over the same period last year, in stark contrast to the 18.7% beating that its fullsize F-series trucks have taken.
One downside to the Ranger rethink, for enthusiasts anyway, is an indefinite delay for the rumored high-performance F-150 SVT Raptor. The Hemi-fighter 6.2L V8 “Boss” engine is likely to be another casualty.
A Ford spokesman could not confirm the plans for The Detroit News.
Last year, truck enthusiasts who own Rangers spent more than $2,100 on specialty-equipment parts for their trucks. The top components purchased included high-flow air filter replacements, performance tires, custom wheels, bed liners (spray-in and/or drop-in) and exhaust kits.
Original story from sema.org
See more on the Ford Ranger
I must be in that 10%, then.. as I had no idea what a ‘56 F100 looked like until I read this. Now that I’ve looked it up, I can’t say I agree that it’s “one of the best looking Fords ever”. I wouldn’t even agree that it’s good looking, period. (but hey, whatever floats your boat) Don’t like much of anything from before ‘64, (or after ‘90) if I’m honest. Also can’t say I’d buy a Ranger that looked like a ‘56 F100.
Anyway, whatever Ford does with the Ranger, it would be silly to get rid of it now. I shook my head in disbelief when I heard Ford was planning on getting rid of it. Sounds like they might be coming to their senses.
By Ben. July 14th, 2008 at 2:49 amIve been whining for a few years now that Ford should rebody the ranger with a 56 F100 cab- it would sell like hotcakes…a 4 passenger panel truck would do even better in todays ‘crossover’ or ‘call it anything but a truck or SUV’ market…the best thing is, it would not be seen as a PT cruiser wanna-be: the 56 F100 is probably as recognizable as the GT40 or Fastback mustangs are to 90% of the folks out there as one of the best looking fords ever…
surely the tooling for that little truck chassis has been paid for a decade ago, a rebody would be a relatively inexpensive thing to do.
By Tim. July 12th, 2008 at 5:39 pmI like my 2004 Ranger. Over 30 mpg on the turnpike with the 2.3 Duratec makes it easy too like.
By ranchero67. July 7th, 2008 at 5:00 amThe 6.2 is on track for early 2009 but I believe right now F250 and up. The crankshaft line is moving along and will start grinding cranks for production in early December 2008.
The guys at Ford Racing say the “crate” engine version of the new V8 is still a go for early spring 2009. So while you may not want an F150 with the new v8 you will be able to load one in the old Fairlane or Torino.
Ive owned my ranger for near 10 years and would love to buy another new. However they just cant seem to stop making them more and more expensive. They are small in the interior, very tight and hard to deal with. Yet just because they put more and more accessories on them or more power with a gas guzzeling v6 they think that they are worth near 25,000!!!! thats just ridiculous. Sorry but the same newer version of a basic xlt ive seen more than once is near 18,000. Mine new was only 13,000 or so.
By 71hotrodpinto. July 6th, 2008 at 1:19 pmLets get it together Ford. The ranger was supposed to be a low cost higher mpg with light duty capacity. A few frills are nice but lets stop trying to make them a cash cow, redesign the platform “Like you gave a dam”, price it below the competition and youll sell lots more of them.
Lets see some direct injected turbo 4 bangers with 26-28mpg and 170hp for the base @ around 15000 with alloy wheels and carpet, a nice premium stereo, and a few features that will blow everyone away for the price. Then start adding options that drive the cost up to the sky if the market will bear it. The problem i see is that they took away the nice price on the xlt type models and made truckloads of cash when they were selling like hotcakes. Then they started to stop selling cause they did such a great job on the F150. So they ignored the ranger line other than cheezy accessories. The basic truck was the same. Cmon Ford lets get serious about all the vehicles you make…..
Seems like Nasser was telling people that basing the company on SUV sales alone was a terrible idea, like 10 years ago. They crucified him for it. Oops.
A 4 cyl turbo diesel compact pickup would be awesome. Probably $$$ though.
By Steve. July 5th, 2008 at 11:31 amI still think a v-8 option is a good idea. They do need a revamp though, figure it has basically the same design as a 1993 (whenever the last change was). Otherwise, why not keep what has been a great truck.
By 64GALAXIE514. July 5th, 2008 at 4:38 amIf Ford had stuck to the plan of putting out the
By Jake. July 4th, 2008 at 11:40 amsixty mpg hydraulic F-150 they were working on two years ago, with the extra power off the line they wouldn’t even need a turbo and they would be haveing trouble building them fast enough.
I second that. I have been waiting for a fuel efficient, turbocharged 4 cylinder diesel in a Ranger for a decade now. Guess I will still be waiting a long time.
By Dennis. July 4th, 2008 at 10:14 amSuccessful LARGE companies anticipate trends, drive new technologies, and social changes. Small companies can change fast, large companies cannot change fast, hence the need to be proactive, and not reactive. High energy costs and social awareness of the environmental impact of a consumerist economy have been on the horizon for a decade. American automakers have done nothing to prepare, and have had a long time to do so, hard to feel bad for them. Even their employees should have seen the writing on the wall for companies that do not drive their industries. It is not surprising that the Japanese automakers are eating their lunch now and rightly so. Plans to kill the ranger and now bring it back may be a good decision, but it is a verification that Ford and other automakers are reacting, only now it may be too late. Had they been proactive and promoted the type of vehicles that the county would NEED to shift to, they would be ahead of the power curve. Rather than being leaders, they have been followers.
By Guts. July 4th, 2008 at 9:00 am