One little fact buried in the linked piece about Ford's $2 billion UAW savings is this: the Ranger is dead come 2009. It has been known for a while that the Twin Cities Plant in St. Paul, MN that makes the Ranger would close, and the closure date has been pushed back one year, to 2009. The Cleveland plant that casts engine blocks will also close that year. Credit goes to Automotive News for teasing out these new nuggets of info.
We wrote earlier about possible rescue scenarios for the Ranger, but it looks like the Ranger mine has been shut down and sealed off. Mulally has said that Ford will be more forthcoming about its plans at the Detroit show, so anything is still possible. However, after 26 years, it looks like the compact pickup truck thrill is gone. For you Ranger fans out there, the tune you're looking for is "Taps."
[Source: Auto News, sub req'd]
CAR reveals spy shots of McLaren P11 supercar
2010 Chevrolet Camaro priced: LS $22,995, SS $30,995
BREAKING: GM and Chrysler talking about merger
Spy Shots: Nissan 370Z again, with interior shots
2010 Mazda3 unveiled ahead of LA Auto Show
In the Autobog Garage: 2009 Chevy Cobalt SS Turbo
Knight Rider: The Liveblog -- Season 1, Episode 3
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Mazda RX-8 R3, return of the "hummer"
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Chevy Corvette Z06
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 7)
dan spalinger @ Nov 20th 2007 3:08PM
A true shame and an opportunity missed by Ford...as the Frontier and Tacoma have gotten bigger and bigger, heavier and heavier and pricier and pricier, the Ranger remained a true compact pickup in terms of size and price...Who will pick up the mantel?? Likely no one...
Bill @ Nov 20th 2007 6:43PM
Perhaps Mahindra, or some other automaker we don't even know much about.
VP @ Nov 20th 2007 5:00PM
Idiots @ Ford. I am not a ford guy at all but if i was looking for a small truck the Ranger would be my first choice. It gets the job done, simple as that. With everybody from GM to Toyota & Dodge moving upmarket with their compacts Ford could have had the playground to all by itself. Not everybody needs a behemoth like the F-150. Hmmm...maybe next year would be a good time for me to get a great deal on the Ranger.
Tony C @ Nov 20th 2007 5:43PM
Heh. Your kudos to Ford keeping a compact truck a compact truck were purely unintentional on their part. They simply haven't created a new small truck platform since the Ranger was first introduced in 1983. All changes since then have been cosmetic updates or slight modifications to the original chassis.
But Ford shouldn't just concede or give up. They've built the best selling full-size F-series for how many years running now and all of a sudden they've decided they can't succeed in creating and selling a smaller version?
Dean @ Nov 26th 2007 4:41PM
I bought my 1st. Ranger in 1990. I've had 3 total and loved everyone of them. For Ford to discontinue them now, when a small pick-up could replace the F-150 as the best selling pick-up in America is just stupid. I guess that explains why Japan is taking over the auto industry.
mark_welby @ Nov 20th 2007 3:10PM
I'm actually sad the hear of this. No, I never owned one, but a friend of mine had an '01. It seemed like a nice truck. In my opinion the downfall of smaller trucks will be that the gas mileage difference is negligible between them and a full size truck, so people might as well spring for something with a real bed on it. R.I.P. Ranger!
1337 @ Nov 20th 2007 3:52PM
In my opinion, the Ranger is an awful truck. It rides rough, handles poorly, feels flimsy, and can't carry much more weight than a passenger car.
However, its forte is fuel economy. According ot EPA estimates (which I admit are not entirely accurate) an I4 manual Ranger gets 26 mpg on the highway, while the most efficient full-size truck, the Silverado V6 only gets 20 mpg. Even if the EPA numbers are off by a few percent, one of the (few) advantages of a Ranger is its fuel economy.
Shipey @ Nov 20th 2007 4:54PM
1337,
You're entitled to your opinion, but I respectfully disagree.
The Ranger is plenty stiff, which is why it rides like it does. Like a truck. Because it is one, which is why it's popular. It's hasn't been car-ized like the F150. You can still abuse it and not ruin a too-pretty interior. It has simple cloth seats and a rubber floor mat.
Mine doesn't carry the same loads as a passenger car... it has actually CARRIED a passenger car. I brought home my T-bucket project car in the bed.
I usually get 19MPG with the 4.0L V6. That's on a 4x4 with the optional 4.11 gearing and with an admittedly heavy right foot. Not great, but definitely not terrible considering the gearing. More importantly, the power is there when I need it.
naggs @ Nov 20th 2007 5:17PM
the best part of a ranger is the fact that you can buy one new for 8k
Reality Check @ Nov 25th 2007 7:47PM
We use them as delivery trucks and they seem to last a very long time (250k) without any major repairs. But they don't drive very nice and they get about 18 city and 27 highway for the 4cyl in either auto or stick. I wouldn't want to sit in one for eight hours a day but then again what would you want to sit in for that long every day?
_Jon @ Nov 20th 2007 3:20PM
That information 'teased out' may be accurate, but the conclusion may not be accurate.
We are going to build a new, next generation Ranger.
But it will be done in an Asian counry. Yeah, we are going 'global' that way too.
But you didn't read that from me.
And I should come back and delete this comment in an hour.
Rboyett @ Nov 20th 2007 4:30PM
There will be no Asian produced Ranger sold in the US until the 25% tariff on them is removed. The "chicken tax" has been around since the 1960's and there has been no movement on getting it repealed. This is the exact reason why Japanese (and soon Korean) auto makers build all their small trucks in the US.
We are currently in trade negotiations with Thailand for a free trade agreement. Administration negotiators have expressed interest in removing the chicken tax but there are other issues preventing the removal of the tariff.
IMO, Ford MIGHT be hoping to force the issue by closing down Ranger production. Doing so removes some of the jobs that are protected by the tariff. However Nissan and Toyota have hinted that they would move production of their small trucks if that tariff is repealed.
GA @ Dec 3rd 2007 2:52AM
In Asia, Thailand IS DETROIT.
The Fords are built fantastically there.
Perhaps its too small for America, but here in Asia, we'll take 'em, damn good work horses, as well as show pieces!
FOREVER FORD!
Menice @ Nov 20th 2007 3:22PM
leaving another market segment... dummies.
hyundai will fill the void in a few years...there's already talk of a compact p/u.
Think they ought to change the dictionary definition.. BOLD: (adj) Dumb, to do dumb stupid things.
ie: 'Mark did bold things and everyone laughed at him'
tanooki2003 @ Nov 20th 2007 3:22PM
GRRR. Stupid Ford!
They are killing the WRONG vehicles! I guess this is what happens when you mix numbskulls, lazy designers, spending money in the wrong areas, and ignoring the consumers adds up to be.
All the ranger needed was a less bland refresh. Well I guess to the general public who hates the size of a big F150 the only choice in this segment would be the Toyota Tacoma.
1337 @ Nov 20th 2007 3:54PM
A less bland refresh? Does that mean the front end wouldn't be redone? There aren't many things that one can claim ford should not have changed, as not much was revised other than the grille.
mk @ Nov 20th 2007 3:23PM
Unfortunate.
Built Ford Tough just lost one of it's pieces. The Ranger was a good little truck.
It deserved FAR more support than it received. Not everyone wants or needs a big full-size truck.
Are Ford and GM just giving away the market segment to the imports? The Colorado, et al. seem like underpowered toys, no different than some of the imports. At least the ranger felt substantial, despite being small.
Honda Ridgeline, Tacoma (So freaking UGLY), and Nissan Frontier, or whatever they are calling it now... I guess have no real robust american trucks to compete with.
That is kind of sad, considering how american brands have pretty much defined pickup truck markets until now. They lost the ability to define car markets long ago, now they faltering on compact trucks...
Jonathan @ Nov 20th 2007 3:24PM
I cannot believe this. Without the Ranger (and similar Mazda B-Series), Ford won't be able to compete in the compact/midsize truck market. They need to introduce an all new Ranger with more powerful engines and a crew cab variant.
Andrew L @ Nov 20th 2007 3:33PM
they have one the Euro Ranger its actually really nice compared to the US one
Daniel Cowan @ Nov 21st 2007 2:56AM
My sentiments exactly, Jonathan. Ford and GM got out of the minivan segment, and Ford would be boneheads to skirt by without a pickup in their arsenal. Some do not need, or want, an F-150, and maybe Ford will see this. Maybe Compacts will have to come back when these offerings become behemoth , and something like the Super Duty gets as big as the International CXT. Besides, Ford cannot be that stupid. Mullaly needs to see the need for a small pickup. If they have something that has a Mercury variant, please make it different. And if Ford wants to get its act together, make a "Fusion" of the truck segment, something not boring, not to say that the Ranger is boring. That is actually one of the trucks I picture having, that or a small last generation Silverado single cab stepside. I would have the Ranger with a Camper shell. Ford, do not pass this up, or you will so regret it.