|
Twerk from Home posted:The Ranger was cheaper than the F150. There was overlap with upper-trim Rangers and lower trim F150s. So, basically just like all other size classes of cars?
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:04 |
|
|
Coredump posted:I'm sorry, was that a yes the Ranger was as much as the F-150 or no, the Ranger was not as much as the F-150? I got lost reading all that. The old one was not. Just updating it to modern crash standards, let alone redesigning it with an aluminum body and fitting turbo bits, would easily push it to the same base price as the F-150. Economies of scale come into play in a big way when everyone wants the big truck, compared to the few who recognize they only need a small one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:The old one was not. That's exactly what I was trying to get at. The ranger was retired in 2012 just like the Crown Vic because it was prohibitively expensive to bring it up to crash test standards that went into effect at that time. If Ford had another, lower volume model of truck it would end up costing the same as the F150 to make, why even bother to build it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
There is already a modern Ranger that meets modern crash standards. Sure it would need some reengineering for the North American market but that has to be cheaper than starting over.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:That's exactly what I was trying to get at. The ranger was retired in 2012 just like the Crown Vic because it was prohibitively expensive to bring it up to crash test standards that went into effect at that time. If Ford had another, lower volume model of truck it would end up costing the same as the F150 to make, why even bother to build it. See, I think the Ranger sold more than people realized. It sold as much as the Nissan Titan, Frontier, and Honda Ridgeline combined. Ranger sales numbers also kept up with the Toyota Tacoma, which does not seem to inspire the same palpitations making a business case for as the Ranger does.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
dissss posted:There is already a modern Ranger that meets modern crash standards. Except if it steals sales from the F-150 all you're doing is reducing your profit since it's going to be a much lower-volume model which costs more to produce but can't be sold for as much, while also making the F-150 more expensive. Especially in the US where the vast majority of the truck market does not care very much about size except as it effects cost of ownership.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Except if it steals sales from the F-150 all you're doing is reducing your profit since it's going to be a much lower-volume model which costs more to produce but can't be sold for as much, while also making the F-150 more expensive. Especially in the US where the vast majority of the truck market does not care very much about size except as it effects cost of ownership. So how is Toyota able to pull it off?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
Coredump posted:See, I think the Ranger sold more than people realized. It sold as much as the Nissan Titan, Frontier, and Honda Ridgeline combined. Ranger sales numbers also kept up with the Toyota Tacoma, which does not seem to inspire the same palpitations making a business case for as the Ranger does. what numbers are you looking at code:
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
Coredump posted:So how is Toyota able to pull it off? They can't, that's why they started selling the Tundra and dumped an enormous amount of money into it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:They can't, that's why they started selling the Tundra Yes exactly. Toyota can sell the Tundra and the Tacoma and not explode.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
Coredump posted:Yes exactly. Toyota can sell the Tundra and the Tacoma and not explode. You really don't understand how businesses work do you
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:You really don't understand how businesses work do you Lets talk about trucks and not try to make personal attacks please. Also I was looking here: http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01/ford-ranger-sales-figures.html http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/search/label/Truck%20Sales?max-results=5 So I compared the 2011 Ranger sales to the 2013 year of the Tacoma since those were the two closest years I could find. I didn't use the 2012 model year of the Ranger since that was the last year and I don't know if it sold for the full model year or how it could have affected the numbers. But yeah, can you explain how Toyota can make the Tundra and Tacoma work but Ford can't sell an F-150 and Ranger together? Coredump fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Ford already makes a Ranger, it's called the Transit Connect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
That's not a pickup truck!!! Come on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
Coredump posted:Lets talk about trucks and not try to make personal attacks please. Nobody cares about "making things work" the name of the game is maximizing profits and supporting a small niche model with low sales is usually not as efficient. Toyota sells about equal amounts of their mid-size and full-size trucks whereas Ford has always sold way more F-150s because most Americans don't buy compact trucks, which are most popular with fleets and have been losing popularity in general for the past decade, especially as full-size trucks have become more fuel-efficient and comfortable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Coredump posted:That's not a pickup truck!!! Come on. It has a built-in roof and everything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Nobody cares about "making things work" the name of the game is maximizing profits and supporting a small niche model with low sales is usually not as efficient. Toyota sells about equal amounts of their mid-size and full-size trucks whereas Ford has always sold way more F-150s because most Americans don't buy compact trucks, which are most popular with fleets and have been losing popularity in general for the past decade, especially as full-size trucks have become more fuel-efficient and comfortable. But help me out here, can you explain how Toyota's business works vs Ford's where Toyota can sell the Tacoma and Tundra side by side and Ford can't? I mean earlier when you said I must not know how businesses work I assume that means you do right? So can you help me out and explain it? I really am interested. Phone posted:It has a built-in roof and everything. Fine fine, ecoboost Transit then.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Coredump posted:But help me out here, can you explain how Toyota's business works vs Ford's where Toyota can sell the Tacoma and Tundra side by side and Ford can't? I mean earlier when you said I must not know how businesses work I assume that means you do right? So can you help me out and explain it? I really am interested. Toyota does a fraction of the volume Ford does. The Tundra is their third attempt at getting into the incredibly competitive US full-size truck market (after the failure of the T-100 and the first-gen Tundra which came out right as the financial crisis hit), it's likely still barely out of the loss leader phase and almost certainly not as profitable as the F-series is for Ford. Additionally, sales of the Tundra may indeed be cannibalizing Tacoma sales. Seriously small trucks went from like 8% of the market in the 90s to 2% of the market today. They're becoming less important and, combined with the way CAFE works, there's not a huge business case for them especially since the difference in mileage and other costs is shrinking. OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
Coredump posted:But help me out here, can you explain how Toyota's business works vs Ford's where Toyota can sell the Tacoma and Tundra side by side and Ford can't? I mean earlier when you said I must not know how businesses work I assume that means you do right? So can you help me out and explain it? I really am interested. The Tacoma sells for a ton of money comparatively. They move really close to sticker where I am, and F150s move cheap. My anecdontal sampling of 2 friends who are both pretty good at cross shopping dealers and getting new cars is that a really base V6 Tacoma costs the exact same as a moderately loaded XLT V6 F150.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Toyota does a fraction of the volume Ford does. The Tundra is their third attempt at getting into the incredibly competitive US full-size truck market (after the failure of the T-100 and the first-gen Tundra which came out right as the financial crisis hit), it's likely still barely out of the loss leader phase and almost certainly not as profitable as the F-series is for Ford. Additionally, sales of the Tundra may indeed be cannibalizing Tacoma sales. See, this is much more constructive than saying "You really don't understand how businesses work do you". Thanks for that explanation. Twerk from Home posted:The Tacoma sells for a ton of money comparatively. They move really close to sticker where I am, and F150s move cheap. My anecdontal sampling of 2 friends who are both pretty good at cross shopping dealers and getting new cars is that a really base V6 Tacoma costs the exact same as a moderately loaded XLT V6 F150. I wonder if Tacoma's can get so close to sticker and F150's are so cheap is that the Tacoma is the only worthwhile midsize truck, while F150 is in the majorly competitive full size bracket? Seriously Tacoma's have drivetrains in them haven't been updated since God knows when. I wonder if a new Ranger came out if it wouldn't drive down the prices Tacoma's command, don't Tacoma's get the same money as some of the full size trucks?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Nobody cares about "making things work" the name of the game is maximizing profits and supporting a small niche model with low sales is usually not as efficient. How do you explain cars like the Veyron, LFA, Ford GT, etc... They all lose money, are niche models with low sales, yet they still get produced. Is it just for the marketing they get?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
Coredump posted:See, this is much more constructive than saying "You really don't understand how businesses work do you". Thanks for that explanation. Well Tacoma supplies are much lower and Toyota truck sales are pretty much at production capacity from what I hear which means they're probably selling them as fast as they get them in, versus cars sitting on the lot needing to be moved. Also, truck buyers are insanely brand loyal and Toyota's small trucks have been a thing since the 80s. And there's very little competition in the compact/mid-size truck segment - the Tacoma was still pretty much the newest thing in the segment until the new Colorado. Ford likely doesn't think the cost of R&D and the risk of cannibalizing F-150 sales is worth the occasional sale it will pick up, especially when the Tacoma is so entrenched and when the only thing they have to sell is the international Ranger which is like 90% the size of the F-150 and probably gets almost identical mileage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Coredump posted:I wonder if Tacoma's can get so close to sticker and F150's are so cheap is that the Tacoma is the only worthwhile midsize truck, while F150 is in the majorly competitive full size bracket? Seriously Tacoma's have drivetrains in them haven't been updated since God knows when. I wonder if a new Ranger came out if it wouldn't drive down the prices Tacoma's command, don't Tacoma's get the same money as some of the full size trucks? If Ford thought they would be making money with a Ranger, they'd have one. I would speculate that driving down prices on Tacomas doesn't really do Ford much good, and yes for the price of a Tacoma you could pretty much have an F150. I bet that the Aluminum F150s will force prices up for a while, but a 2015 F150 with the 2.7 turbo looks like a truck that punches way above its weight class.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
Yeah I'm not denying there's not a small hard-core group of small truck buyers who absolutely will not buy an F-150 but they're likely a very small group, especially if you subtract the brand loyalists who will only consider another Tacoma anyway. Most Americans, if you offered them a bigger truck for the same price and gas mileage, would probably take the bigger truck (not a lot of concerns about street parking or tiny roads here), and if you can get them all to buy the same basic model you can drive down costs across the board due to volume and offer stuff like all-aluminum body panels and higher-tech engines at the same price point. If the new Colorado actually sells well and exceeds expectations maybe they will reconsider, though frankly I don't see that happening.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Everybody has had that idea, except Ford. 1.0L or bust. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
Who's ready for some rumouring? Mid-Engine Chevrolet Corvette is a Go
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:Who's ready for some rumouring? Mid-Engine Chevrolet Corvette is a Go I bet it gets a diesel and AWD this time too!
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
You guys seem to be overlooking the fact that the Ranger was also a huge piece of poo poo while the Tacoma was and continues to be regarded as the best small truck. Sticker prices on new Tacomas approach 40K at the dealer near me and they are EVERYWHERE on the road. A friend of mine just bought a new one because he had an older Tacoma all through high school and college that handled >200K miles without issue. He was going to buy a used one but they depreciate so little that there isn't much of a point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
All modern corvettes are technically mid engine.Coredump posted:But help me out here, can you explain how Toyota's business works vs Ford's where Toyota can sell the Tacoma and Tundra side by side and Ford can't? I mean earlier when you said I must not know how businesses work I assume that means you do right? So can you help me out and explain it? I really am interested. both the transit connect and full size transit have ecoboost options. The connect only has the 1.6 though. A transit connect ST would be hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:it'll only be two three rows, the Caravan is dead Dodge is seriously killing the Caravan? I thought they sold the most minivans of any other make, sounds like a dumb move to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
leica posted:Dodge is seriously killing the Caravan? I thought they sold the most minivans of any other make, sounds like a dumb move to me. I think they're laying their hopes on the 500L as the future of people carriers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:I think they're laying their hopes on the 500L as the future of people carriers. The Chrysler Town and Country is their Minivan, and the 500L is their Euro-style people carrier.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:. They're becoming less important and, combined with the way CAFE works, there's not a huge business case for them especially since the difference in mileage and other costs is shrinking. ilkhan fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:Who's ready for some rumouring? Mid-Engine Chevrolet Corvette is a Go Are these the same sources that swore up and down that the LS7 in the C6Z06 was going to have three valves?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
leica posted:Dodge is seriously killing the Caravan? I thought they sold the most minivans of any other make, sounds like a dumb move to me. Killed, it's kaput officially. As was said, the T&C is their minivan now. e- plus, and this is me talking out my rear end, I'm sure a lot of people at a Dodge dealership ended up looking at and then buying a Durango instead, anyway
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
leica posted:Dodge is seriously killing the Caravan? I thought they sold the most minivans of any other make, sounds like a dumb move to me. I'm interested in hearing their rationale as well. They sell a ton of these in Canada, and the 500L doesn't have the cargo capacity or third row to fully replace it. Also the town and country will cost a hell of a lot more than $19k.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Cyrezar posted:You guys seem to be overlooking the fact that the Ranger was also a huge piece of poo poo YOU TAKE THAT BACK.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
Cyrezar posted:You guys seem to be overlooking the fact that the Ranger was also a huge piece of poo poo When has that mattered? U.S. Sales of the Chevrolet Cavalier, lifted from Wikipedia, originally from Edmonds: United States sales figures 58,904 - 1982 268,587 - 1983 462,611 - 1984 383,752 - 1985 432,101 - 1986 346,254 - 1987 322,939 - 1988 376,626 - 1989 310,501 - 1990 326,847 - 1991 225,633 - 1992 251,590 - 1993 254,426 - 1994 151,669 - 1995 261,686 - 1996 315,136 - 1997 238,861 - 1998
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
a primate posted:I'm interested in hearing their rationale as well. They sell a ton of these in Canada, and the 500L doesn't have the cargo capacity or third row to fully replace it. Also the town and country will cost a hell of a lot more than $19k. They could certainly introduce a down-market T&C to compete with the base model Honda and Toyota vans. I'm really interested to see what Kia comes up with in their new minivan offering, and expect it to be really competitive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:04 |
|
|
By the time you made a modern ranger meet the safety requirements of the NHTSA, and the cafe standards of the EPA, it would be an f-150 in every measure but width.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:58
|
|