LOL, they have to do much better than be in-line with Tacoma pricing for me to consider a new Ranger.

IMO, it looks closer to a Nissan Frontier, so it better be in-line with THAT pricing, hehe.

 

Sounds overpriced and ripe for continual incentives.

One could once buy a base compact pick-up truck for the same price as some of the lowest priced cars (during the 80's and 90's). Things have elevated well beyond low vehicle pricing. I'm almost positive if a manufacturer brought back a no-frills compact pick-up truck for $14k (price of a Versa), it would sell like crazy for the day workers/laborers out there.

 

You won't find anything for 14K, but base Nissan Frontiers start at 19K...that's not a bad deal at today's prices.

https://www.nissanusa.com/vehicles/trucks/frontier.html

 

I don't think it's possible to build a pickup for $14k, let alone sell one for that price. Especially not with the price of aluminum and steel recently.

 

One can easily argue that the Tacoma is overpriced as well. You get a mediocre and underpowered drivetrain combo and basically a warmed over previous gen frame and structure. The Ranger will have a stronger frame and structure with much better and powerful powertrains. Plus if there's one thing that Ford does well, are trucks.

 

 

I would still choose a Tacoma over this. It may be unreasonable, but I have no desire to have a 4 cylinder turbo in a truck. Playing around with the configurator, it appears that you cannot get the 4 door "SuperCrew" cab with the long bed, so you are relegated to a 5' bed. I had a 5' bed on my Tacoma and it ended up being a mistake, so next time around I'd want the 6' bed, which is only available with the smaller cab Ranger, which would not work well for my family.

I've spent quite a bit of time driving my dad's 2016 Tacoma lately and have become quite fond of it. Makes me miss my 2011.

 

 

Yup, no one truck is right for everyone. Never once did it bother me that my old Tacoma didn't have a seat height adjustment so that's a non issue for me. And as a mechanical engineer with lots of history with channels, beams, and frames I have no hesitations about the C Channel. Very misunderstood on here.

 

 

Do you know the material specs, heat treatment, or even the thickness of the material being used? When you only focus on the shape and leave out these very important details, you cannot actually have a discussion about the strength of C Channel versus boxed. As I've said before, I can spec out a C Channel that's stronger than a boxed frame any day of the week. It all depends on the details.

The Tacoma frame is fully boxed up front, double C Channel in the middle, and single C Channel in the rear. Do I believe the Tacoma frame is less rigid than that of, say, the Colorado? Yes, I suspect it is (in the rearmost section, anyway), but would avoid calling out the Tacoma frame as insufficient because both designs have positives and negatives, and I do not have all of the material specs and design considerations that would definitively point to one being superior to the other.

The Tacoma's max payload (1620 lbs), by the way, is higher than the Colorado/Canyon (1576 lbs) or the Frontier (1502 lbs). So in what way is the C Channel insufficient or holding the Tacoma back?

Bringing this back to the Ranger (and because this C Channel discussion is tiring ), I haven't looked extensively but I haven't seen any Ranger specs for payload. I have read, however, that the Ranger's towing capacity is expected to be 7700 lbs, which will be far superior to anything else in the class, save the Canyon Diesel.

I think the Ranger will be a success, I just don't see it as a slam dunk and I don't think it will "dethrone" the Tacoma, but time will tell. I recall talk of how the GM twins would really damage the Tacoma but Tacoma sales are as strong as ever.

 

 

obviously going to be fans / support / bias toward the tacoma on here but i've no doubt this new ranger will be formidable competition to toyota simply because ford.

 

Well the chief engineer said the C channel helps keep the tires in contact with the surface during offroading. I would imagine the flex from the weaker torsional rigidity would accomplish it. Either way it is a cost saving measure and laziness.

 

Absolutely. At one point the Ranger was the best selling compact pickup so now with an allegedly much better vehicle, I dont see why it wouldnt again. The Ranger gives the HiLux serious competition overseas.