Ford Ranger Dead in 2009?

[Sleeping Dog]

Looking like the last of the compact trucks is biting the dust. Just in time for the Mahrinda to arrive.

Am I the only person who believes there is a market for a small pickup? Particularly when gas is $3+ a gallon.

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/20/...l-the-ford-ranger-is-dead-come-2009/#comments

Jim

 

[NorCalBronco]

I'm sad about this, I love my Ranger! I think a FX4 model would be a great EV canidate with stock 31x10.5 BFG's, 4.10 gears, LSD, etc. Oh well.

 

[Martinjmpr]

It's a shame but it's obvious that Ford gave up on the Ranger years ago. Too bad, my '99 was a fine vehicle (although 2wd.) When I was shopping for a new 4x4 last year I passed by the Ranger because (a) I hate the pushbutton T-case, and (b) from what I saw on the Ranger forums when I had my Ranger, the MPG of the 4x4s was atrocious, especially with the 4.0l.

I don't understand why American manufacturers can't make a small engine that's powerful. Seems like the only way the domestics know of to increase power is to increase displacement, and correspondingly to decrease MPG. The Japanese have been making economical and adequately powered vehicles for years.

 

[Nullifier]

Whats even more sad is how the japanese car makers are now falling into the trap of bigger is better. and over the past few years with the gas price thing lurking on the horizon THey to now have lost their identity to the bigger is better thinking of the american buyer.

The toyota mini and nissan mini died in 2005. It is a surprise that an american manufacturer actually held in there longer then anyone else.

It seems that everything about the U.S. car market is moving more and moer toward bigger fuel consuming vehicles. It really sayes alot about the U.S. buyer and our mindset on things.

 

[DaveInDenver]

The toyota mini and nissan mini died in 2005. It is a surprise that an american manufacturer actually held in there longer then anyone else.

The only reason the Ranger held in there this long was that Ford stopped developing the platform about 10 years ago (when they went to a torsion bar IFS from the TTB). Had they paid any attention to the platform it probably would have grown like the Taco, Dakota or GM trucks, too. What I don't understand is why a car manufacturer can't just leave something well enough alone. I guess the only way to get people to lease a new car every 3 years is keep changing it. There's not a lot of people who drive a truck until it dies and look to replace it with essentially the same thing anymore.

 

[ntsqd]

Dave,
I think there are, we're just not vocal enough or they're just not hearing us.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Dave,
I think there are, we're just not vocal enough or they're just not hearing us.

No, I do think you're right that there are plenty of people who think like us. The problem is somewhere between about 1994 and 2004 most of the manufacturers get into this competition that's spiraled out of control. Which leaves people like us uninterested in a new truck and so we just keep putting bandaids on our olds ones. Since we're not spending the money on new trucks as much, this leaves a false impression to the marketing people. It's all about money. Not to mention that Toyota probably didn't have nearly the margin on a 22R-E, W56, bench seat white truck with no A/C in 1991 that a fully decked out Tacoma does now...

 

[Sleeping Dog]

Pick-up size

The problem is somewhere between about 1994 and 2004 most of the manufacturers get into this competition that's spiraled out of control.

The buyers are more to blame than the manufacturers. When I bought my first pick-up in 1981(?), a good half of the used full size p-up's I looked at had 6 cylinder motors, even a few 3/4 ton models.

Even then those trucks were leisurely when entering the highway, but you lived with it. Now buyers not only want an empty truck that accelerates like a car, they want 0-60 in under 10 seconds with a 3000# camper in the bed or pulling a 7000# trailer.

We have met the enemy and he is us!

Jim

 

[PrairieDog]

Count me as a fan in the Ranger camp, too. I prefer having the bed, and longer wheelbase over the Jeeps. And they're narrower than f/s trucks. I know they're not latest/greatest, but they're still pretty stout, and reasonable to operate ($).

But don't get me started on Ford. At Ford, Marketing is Job#1. I hope Mulally can pound some sense into them.

 

[tamangel]

used ranger purchase...

...so it you were going to buy a 4X4 used ranger today, what years would you consider and what options... pre-plastic and pre-pushbutton transfer case era..

Mike

 

[boblynch]

Too bad they weren't replacing it with this. This 2004 concept Bronco included removable roof panels, a 2.0-liter intercooled turbo diesel (128 hp and 244 ft-lb), six-speed transmission, and intelligent 4wd system.

Bob

View attachment 14479

 

[ujoint]

...so it you were going to buy a 4X4 used ranger today, what years would you consider and what options... pre-plastic and pre-pushbutton transfer case era..

Mike

Probably the pre IFS trucks, can't remember if the IFS started in 97 or 98. But the late models have the 4.0 SOHC engine that is really nice. My dad has a 99 with about 115K, it's been a great truck. My dad is the exact opposite of me, he doesn't know how to take care of anything!! So if something lasts with him, it's got to be good.


No doubt on the above concept, Ford missed the boat on that one!! Could have been a JK/FJ competitor!!

 

[tamangel]

Ford Ranger History

found these links:

http://www.edmunds.com/ford/ranger/history.html

http://trucks.about.com/cs/vintagetrucks/a/ford_trucks.htm

Mike

 

[pete.wilson]

Hey

Now would be a perfect time for Jeep to come out with a JK derivative little pickup with either the V6 they have now or the Common Rail diesel (CRD). Ford didn't seem to advertise or update it much in the last 10 years. That article talks about it being expensive and one could buy a full size F150 for not much more, seems unlikely to me unless there is a lot of waste.

 

[PrairieDog]

which years?

...so it you were going to buy a 4X4 used ranger today, what years would you consider and what options... pre-plastic and pre-pushbutton transfer case era..

Mike

Depends what you want to do with one. For 4wd, the TTB units are easier to lift (visit www.therangerstation.com). It's pretty easy to run 33x10.5s. Some prefer 35"s but it requires extensive drivetrain mods.

The IFS-torsion bar 4wd is difficult to lift. There is 3" body lift, or Superlift has a decent kit, or RCD has a kit for specific years that replaces the torsion bars with coil-overs. That's the nicest way to go. (visit offroadrangers.com, rangerforum, or generation edge).

Some of the best technical info is over on www.explorerforum.com Especially for those with automatics. The autos have double the towing capactity of the cheesy Mazda 5sp manual.

For serious situations, a straight-axle transplant for the front is best.

2WD with coil springs is a dream to mod. (dezertrangers.com)

Mine is a IFS-torsion bars w/ full time hubs. It has the torsen rear diff, and an Aussie locker in front. I had a TTB 93 but had a lot of trouble with the front hubs. The IFS with pulse vacuum hubs (1997-1999) is bad.

The xfer case is a Borg Warner. The electric motor shift is not an issue. The unit does have a lot of plastic parts though, and they're not the beefiest. But if a person wants to replace everything, they probably should start with a different platform. It is what it is.