St. Paul Ford Ranger plant to shut down for December
For the entire month of December, Ford's plant in St. Paul, Minnesota, where about 1,000 workers assemble the Ford Ranger, will shut down. According to reports, it is normal for the plant to be closed for the week of Christmas, but an additional three weeks of downtime is necessary to "align production with demand."The plant had initially been scheduled to be shuttered sometime in 2008, but the recent upwards trend in small pickup sales prompted the Blue Oval to keep it open a bit longer and it currently has no specific date set for closure, though it's demise is currently rumored for sometime in 2011. Perhaps if Ford would actually do something to update its long-in-the-tooth Ranger truck, it wouldn't need to consider its death at all, but that's another story entirely.
[Source: Reuters]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
auto parts 8:39AM (10/17/2008)
it is good to shutdown the operation especially during the festival, to give more time to the workers to have a good rest.
Reply
Mattias 9:13AM (10/17/2008)
No plans to bring the Thai Ranger to the US? We have this Ranger here in Europe and with the VM-Ford-Bastard-Diesel it is a really nice small work truck.
http://www.ford.co.uk/ns7/ranger/-/-/-/-/-/-
Here in Europe however Joe Plumber usually drives a long wheelbase Transit Connect and Bob Carpenter has a Ford Transit flatbed. These Thai Rangers are usually just found on large road building sites.
Reply
BigMcLargeHuge 9:31AM (10/17/2008)
I'd take that 3.0 TDCi over just about any truck currently offered in the US.
Avinash machado 9:21AM (10/17/2008)
The VW Robust would make a nice alternative to the Ranger.
Reply
BigMcLargeHuge 9:31AM (10/17/2008)
Funny how when gas prices go up people go from a Land Cruiser to a Rav4, but they won't go from an F-150 to a Ranger. You'd think they'd hop in a small pickup. Guilt by association? Do they just swear off trucks entirely?
How are the Tacoma/Frontier doing on sales I wonder? Are they losing out on guilt-by-association as well?
Reply
Joe 1:00PM (10/17/2008)
The issue is that the people that actually need real trucks can't downsize to a Ranger, because it doesn't have a wide enough bed to haul full sheets of plywood or drywall, and doesn't have the load capacity to move dirt, cinder blocks, machinery, or tools. The people that buy F-150s so they can roll around in a truck won't downsize because it's style for them.
The Ranger is a great little truck. My dad had two of them back in the 90s, but he hauls too much firewood, home supplies, and equipment to be able to fit them in a small pickup. Besides, his GMC 1500 gets 22 MPG with the 5.3L V8. His old Chevy 1500 had the 4.7L and got 23 MPG. Before that, it was a 1997 F-150 with the 4.0L V6, and he only got 16 MPG out of that. The Ranger, with the Vulcan 3.0L V6 and a manual got him 23.
I'd rather have the big truck, too.
fixitfixitstop 10:44AM (10/17/2008)
Compare prices on full-size and mid-size and small-size pickups within in the same brands. You'll discover that the prices and fuel ratings are close enough that buying the smaller truck doesn't make a whole lot of sense unless you live in a city.
Cellien 11:11AM (10/17/2008)
@fixit:
Actually, the 2.3L Ranger has an user avg. rating of 28.2 mpg on fueleconomy.gov. I've seen numerous reports of over 30+ mpg even with normal driving (and higher with hyper milling ~36-38 mpg). That with the cheap cost of a Ranger (got my XLT for $11,500) it's extremely cost effective. I get 26 mpg on my 5" LIFTED 2.3L Ranger consistently with 50/50 city/highway. I get even better during the fall and spring when I don't have to blast the A/C here in Texas. :)
BigMcLargeHuge 11:22AM (10/17/2008)
Nissan Titan 4WD:
12/17
Nissan Frontier 4WD:
17/21
Toyota Tundra 4WD:
13/16
Toyota Tacoma 4WD:
17/22
(I selected matching trim options: all extended cabs)
Gee, I dunno. I think 4-6mpg on average matters pretty much wherever you go. 33% better mileage never hurt anyone.
Gstill 9:47AM (10/17/2008)
The Tundra outsold the Tacoma this time last year, but now the Tacoma is selling a little better.
The only reason I think the Titan outsold the Frontier in September is because Nissan dealers are selling them both for about the same price.
Reply
Gstill 9:53AM (10/17/2008)
Here's the link that I forgot with that post.
http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/otf0999.html
Reply
BigMcLargeHuge 10:32AM (10/17/2008)
Good info, thanks.
I'm going to assume 'yes' as the answer to my question.
SUVs: large SUV sales getting colder means small SUV sales getting hotter.
Pickup trucks: large PUT sales getting colder means small PUT sales get colder
I'm still astounded how large the full-size market is compared to the mid/small-size pickup. I guess if people want the big truck, they WANT IT! (no, I don't think everyone 'needs' them. And I say that having owned 4 full-size and 3 small/mid-size PUTs and living on a ranch. Mid-size pickups are ideal for most applications, IMO)
Matt 10:33AM (10/17/2008)
Being from the Twin Cities, I can tell you that more than one employee at the plant said on the news that it is going to be a "no gift" Christmas.
Here is what would save the Ranger. The tooling has been paid for a long time...so the Ranger is a money maker. And the one thing that Ford needs right now is money (mainly because they insist on dumping money into the "failed 8 times over" D3 platform.
So, keeping the body and interior the same...Ford needs to swap the engines. Get rig of the heavy drinkers that are in the Ranger now, and offer the 2.5 4-cyl and 6-speed auto. If you need a bigger engine then you could get the 3.5 V-6 with the 6-speed auto. INSTANT power bump and MPG bump.
And if Ford really wanted to sell these and make money (which, based on last months figures...they do not), then offer a 3.0 diesel like Jeep did in the Grand Cherokee.
~235HP and 375 pound-feet of torque.
The Ranger would be an overnight success.
Reply
Mattias 11:00AM (10/17/2008)
Ford would probably use a version of the bastard engine mentioned before. This is a 3.0l four cylinder that would probably produce ~170hp to 190hp. A version of the Lion V6 (~207hp to ~230hp) or even the Lion V8 would sound great, but this engine is just too complex and thus too expensive to offer it in a work horse pickup. The Lion is a great choice for the Disco though.
The robust sounds nice: A turbocharged Audi V6 (single soft turbo, low boost) would make for a great V8 torque feeling, a 200hp version of the I5 TDI could appeal to those more commited to towing and offer a better fuel economy.
Cellien 11:18AM (10/17/2008)
The Ranger offers a lightweight aluminum 2.3L Duratec (143 hp compared to the next step up 3.0/148hp). They are dropping the Vulcan 3.0L in 09 though.
BigTeebo 12:47PM (10/17/2008)
I live less than a mile from the plant, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies. Several times I've seen disguised mules drive by on the river road. Sadly I've never been ready with a camera.
Reply
Cellien 1:48PM (10/17/2008)
Tell us more.