08/07/2008, 3:56 PM
Ford News
Ford’s new efficient engines mean F-100 project shelved, no more Ranger imports
Ford is apparently investing so much money and resources into its new generation of EcoBoost engines and efficient transmissions that it no longer needs to bring smaller and more fuel efficient trucks to market, as the engines themselves will attain the kinds of fuel consumption numbers it wants. This likely means the long-rumored F-100 and a Ranger replacement will not see the light of day.
The EcoBoost-badged engines will not only use turbo-charging and direct injection technologies to attain low consumption, but Ford’s head of advanced powertrain research, Dan Knapp, also hinted the automaker is considering an ethanol boosting technology in a Detroit News report.
After the 3.5-liter, twin-turbo EcoBoost V6 debuts in the 2010 Lincoln MKS sedan next year, it will move in under the hoods of other models, including the F-150 pickup in about 1.5 years, Ford execs said on Wednesday.
The F-100 would have been built at Ford’s Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, but it is being retooled for small car production.
“We have no intention of giving up our leadership in trucks,” said Ford’s global product development chief, Derrick Kuzak. “Fuel economy (will be) a reason to buy — no longer a reason to reject — Ford vehicles.”
Not only will Ford make its engine assembly plants more flexible to suit demand between four-cylinder and V6 or V8 engines, but the automaker also confirmed it is in discussions with General Motors on potential collaborations on powertrain development.
08/07, 4:06 PM
posted by:
beatusmongous
Ouch. That really sucks.
08/07, 4:18 PM
posted by:
golf4me
They need to bring on a new Ranger, the version sold elswhere would be fine. With a 4cyl diesel, getting over 30 hwy. I don’t care what they do to the F150, it will never be as efficient as a (true) small truck. Plus the new one is ugly as sin.
08/07, 4:19 PM
posted by:
inline6
And the current Ranger, on its 1983 platform, with its 1993 body panels and its 1995 interior will soldier on with no replacement in the wings.
Just like the Crown Vic and E-Series vans…
08/07, 4:23 PM
posted by:
hbcbob3
Haha…where’s irobot when you need him…
08/07, 4:25 PM
posted by:
jumpoffit
these engines better be worth it
08/07, 4:56 PM
posted by:
xyunya
And what about 4.4L and 6.8L diesels? Are talking heads aligned or just attached to the same buttocks?
08/07, 6:54 PM
posted by:
mazdaman
Cancelling the midsize F100 was a good move. Midsize trucks just seem like such a silly idea.
What I don’t understand is why they can’t build a version of their foreign market Ranger over here. While more fuel efficient engine options for the F150 are certainly welcome, I still think there is a market for smaller, compact size trucks in the U.S. I definitely wouldn’t mind owning one, but the current U.S. Ranger is just too ancient.
08/07, 7:31 PM
posted by:
jayjc08
Ford never said they are shelving Ranger and F-100. These are all conclusions made by LLN. Just because they are retooling one factory for smaller vehicles, doesn’t mean they can use the other three or four they have idling, or factories with newfound capacity.
The mid-size market is ridiculous. They come with the fuel economy of a full size SUV, and the versatility of one too. Problem is, nobody wants to develope in the segment. Toyota has soldiered on with a few minor updates year after year to keep the Tacoma competitive, and Nissan used to have a nice small truck, but none of them are truly small aside from the Ranger. Even then, the Ranger is pretty large as well. There are no truly small, runabout pickups anymore, and it would be a bang with $5 a gallon and fleets.
08/07, 7:39 PM
posted by:
tx_coyote243
I planed on trading my IS300 for a four door diesel ranger. Now what are my options? Non of the pickup on the market get good mileage, even the four pot ranger suck if you look at what it is.
I would buy a four door Ranger with a diesel in it because it will fit in my garage. The F150 will too but I can’t open the door to get out. I already have a F250 crew cab but don’t need a big truck all the time. What I am saying is Ford has lost touch with it’s customers. I just want a compact pickup that sets four instead of a midsize car.
08/07, 7:58 PM
posted by:
DrFill
Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul?
Ranger seems destined to be the next Mercury
Hanging around, but for no real reason.
The F-100 was a good idea.
The Ranger isn’t exactly crash-worthy, so I guess Ford doesn’t care about improving it’s safety.
Sounds to me like Ford is so worried about F-150 competition, they take any R&D from Ranger and invest it there.
Slippery slope, when the US is downsizing.
DrFill
08/07, 8:05 PM
posted by:
ktulu
baybe if i red the article I;d have something 2 say
08/08, 1:11 AM
posted by:
bigp
no the needed to replace the ranger , but we can get the european ranger sweet
08/08, 9:26 AM
posted by:
HolyDogWater
Well, I mean if two whole people commenting on this site want to buy them, then Ford certainly should invest billions in the project. It’s a no brainer. God, why don’t these companies realize how smart and all knowing people are who comment on the web. Next thing you know you’re going to tell me you found something that wasn’t true out here on the web too. Crazy!
08/08, 9:53 AM
posted by:
shaver
A mid-size seems pointless, but a ranger size replacement with a 32 Mpg + 4 banger, modern safety and interior quality makes tons of sense in the new era. Keep it priced simlar to focus.
08/08, 3:15 PM
posted by:
PetrolHeadPete
^^^ This.
08/10, 9:42 PM
posted by:
jayjc08
Troller Pantanal!
09/08, 9:27 PM
posted by:
tyler_is_aero_tt
Great! I think it was completely pointless to make an F-150 9/10s of its normal size. That’s what, 4 inch difference? Why don’t you just make a better Ranger or outdated Sports Trac?