Ford may resurrect Ranger & Bronco
- Thread starter Warstud
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Hootbro
Originally Posted By: Lapham3
I recall when they announced the closing of the St. Paul Ranger plant they then had a continuous flood of orders that went on and on. I think Canadian orders also added to it and the plant kept going long after it was initially expected to shut down.
Vast majority of those orders towards the end were fleet sale orders. Basically the stripped down XL 2WD trucks. Not a lot or margins in those.
IIRC, the last Ranger made went to the Orkin pest control company simply as a bug-killer truck. Not a lot of recognition for being the last of a great lineage.
Originally Posted By: Lapham3
I recall when they announced the closing of the St. Paul Ranger plant they then had a continuous flood of orders that went on and on. I think Canadian orders also added to it and the plant kept going long after it was initially expected to shut down.
Vast majority of those orders towards the end were fleet sale orders. Basically the stripped down XL 2WD trucks. Not a lot or margins in those.
IIRC, the last Ranger made went to the Orkin pest control company simply as a bug-killer truck. Not a lot of recognition for being the last of a great lineage.
I hear Ford makes some good compact trucks in Thailand. Too bad imported trucks carry a 25% import tariff.
Ford would have to add a certain amount of content from the USA, Canada, or Mexico to avoid a huge tax penalty.
Ford would have to add a certain amount of content from the USA, Canada, or Mexico to avoid a huge tax penalty.
It looks like if this happens, the US models will be built in MI. That's SOP for trucks like this to avoid the tariff, and Ford has already been through this with the Transit Connect (all ship from Turkey with a full set of seats to make it a passenger car, that are then removed at the port to make it a cargo version). The Colorado is also US built for domestic consumption. Other Colorado plants are in Brazil and Thailand.
Originally Posted By: artificialist
I hear Ford makes some good compact trucks in Thailand.
Yep, that's where the Australian Ford Ranger comes from. Some of our Hondas are built there too. You can't pick the difference between Australian/Japanese/Thai built.
I hear Ford makes some good compact trucks in Thailand.
Yep, that's where the Australian Ford Ranger comes from. Some of our Hondas are built there too. You can't pick the difference between Australian/Japanese/Thai built.
The Ranger has existed overseas for awhile its a nice truck.
Rangers have it rough for CAFE:
http://jalopnik.com/5948172/how-the-government-killed-fuel-efficient-cars-and-trucks
Quote:
On the surface, the footprint requirements can be viewed as logical; a compact, fuel-efficient car like the Honda Fit, should be able to hit tougher targets, by virtue of its small size, aerodynamic profile and powertrain choices. Without any advanced technology like direct-injection, lightweight steel or aluminum construction or even low-rolling resistance tires, it manages a respectable 28/35 mpg IRL, while offering a practical, fun-to-drive package. The Ford F-150 has a very different mission; it must be large, durable, powerful and able to meet the needs of a full-size pickup, and will naturally be less conducive to achieving the kind of fuel economy that a Fit can.
Unfortunately, the footprint method has the opposite effect; rather than encouraging auto makers to strive for unprecedented fuel economy in their passenger car offerings, it has incentivized auto makers to build larger cars, in particular, more car-based crossovers that can be classified as "trucks" as used to skew fleet average figures, much the same way the PT Cruiser did. Full-size trucks have become a "protected class", safe from the most aggressive targets, while compact trucks have become nearly extinct as a result.
http://jalopnik.com/5948172/how-the-government-killed-fuel-efficient-cars-and-trucks
Quote:
On the surface, the footprint requirements can be viewed as logical; a compact, fuel-efficient car like the Honda Fit, should be able to hit tougher targets, by virtue of its small size, aerodynamic profile and powertrain choices. Without any advanced technology like direct-injection, lightweight steel or aluminum construction or even low-rolling resistance tires, it manages a respectable 28/35 mpg IRL, while offering a practical, fun-to-drive package. The Ford F-150 has a very different mission; it must be large, durable, powerful and able to meet the needs of a full-size pickup, and will naturally be less conducive to achieving the kind of fuel economy that a Fit can.
Unfortunately, the footprint method has the opposite effect; rather than encouraging auto makers to strive for unprecedented fuel economy in their passenger car offerings, it has incentivized auto makers to build larger cars, in particular, more car-based crossovers that can be classified as "trucks" as used to skew fleet average figures, much the same way the PT Cruiser did. Full-size trucks have become a "protected class", safe from the most aggressive targets, while compact trucks have become nearly extinct as a result.
- Status
