2019 Ford Ranger
08-14-18, 03:24 PM
#46
Lexus Champion
IMO, it looks closer to a Nissan Frontier, so it better be in-line with THAT pricing, hehe.
08-14-18, 10:07 PM
#47
Lexus Test Driver
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.
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.
08-15-18, 06:05 AM
#48
Lexus Fanatic
https://www.nissanusa.com/vehicles/trucks/frontier.html
08-15-18, 06:39 AM
#49
Super Moderator
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.
08-15-18, 06:49 AM
#50
Pole Position
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.
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.
08-15-18, 06:52 AM
#51
Lexus Fanatic
I think this Ranger will do not bad. Not sure if it will be a mega hit. I have seen one at the auto show and you can tell it was not designed for the US market first. It is a world market truck. Hopefully this keeps Toyota on their toes. I probably would not buy the Tacoma as the first and foremost truck IMO
08-15-18, 07:01 AM
#52
Lexus Champion
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.
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.
Last edited by JDR76; 08-15-18 at 07:14 AM.
08-15-18, 07:24 AM
#53
Lexus Fanatic
And I have no desire to have a vehicle that has no height adjustment for the drivers seat.
As for a small turbo, meh. The old Toyota trucks and 4Runners from the 80s had them. Would love to see Toyota to offer it again. But yeah. Not a deal breaker.
08-15-18, 07:27 AM
#54
Lexus Champion
And I have no desire to have a vehicle that has no height adjustment for the drivers seat. That is very unreasonable. I will spare the Tacoma on my c-channel frame comments
As for a small turbo, meh. The old Toyota trucks and 4Runners from the 80s had them. Would love to see Toyota to offer it again.
08-15-18, 08:15 AM
#55
Lexus Fanatic
Hard to believe any rebuttal of a C-channel frame. Every truck in the US is now fully boxed aside from Toyota. All Toyota’s pick ups worldwide are fully boxed. Most past Toyota trucks were fully boxed. Sometime ya have to call Toyota out on what it is.
Last edited by Toys4RJill; 08-15-18 at 08:50 AM.
08-15-18, 08:50 AM
#56
Lexus Champion
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.
08-15-18, 09:32 AM
#57
Lexus Fanatic
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.
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.
08-15-18, 09:51 AM
#58
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
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.
08-15-18, 11:32 AM
#59
Pole Position
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.
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.
08-15-18, 11:33 AM
#60
Pole Position
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.