[GMusa]

www.autoblog.com

Enter the Rumormill: Ford considering F-100 small pickup

Posted May 12th 2008 1:05PM by John Neff
Filed under: Trucks/Pickups, Ford



We've been begging for better small trucks from automakers for some time now, and it looks like Ford may have an answer for us. Pickuptrucks.com reports that Ford may revive the F-100 name on a new mid-size truck built on a modified version of the future F-150's platform. Rumored to be a little less than 9/10th the size of the F-150, the F-100 would also feature extensive use of aluminum to save even more weight. Unlike the Ranger, which shares no parts with the F-150, the proposed F-100 would share many and be built on the same assembly line as its big brother. Ford clearly needs a solution for the upcoming change in CAFE standards that will required a fleet average of 28.6 mpg for light duty trucks by 2015, and an F-100 offering an EcoBoost twin-turbo V6, a naturally aspirated V6 and V8, and possibly even a diesel could do the trick.

As for what will happen to the Ranger if an F-100 is added to the line up, no one knows for sure. Believe it or not, but the Ranger still sells having moved 7,585 units in April and 29,182 year-to-date. Whether or not those numbers are high enough (or whether they're predominately sales to fleets) to keep it alive for much longer remains to be seen, but its presence in the market place satisfies a need for small, relatively fuel-efficient pickups. We don't see an F-100 filling that role, but rather competing with larger mid-size trucks that are predominantly powered by V6 and V8 engines. So we hope that Ford sees the value in a redesigned Ranger, even if the rumored F-100 comes to market.

[Source: Pickuptrucks.com]

 

[GMusa]

Both Ford and GM needs new midsized pickups!!

 

[HoosierRon]

I am not sure that a truck that is 9/10ths the size of the new F150 is "mid-sized". It needs to be 9/10ths the size of an F150... three generations ago.

 

[Sinner]

I am not sure that a truck that is 9/10ths the size of the new F150 is "mid-sized". It needs to be 9/10ths the size of an F150... three generations ago.

I agree, a 3/4 sized F150 makes sense, but one were they take out an inch or two is just stupid.

 

[camaro_freak]

whatever they do they need to do it soon! The Ranger is beyond long in the tooth... why not just abandon the market entirely?

GM isn't doing much better with the Canyon/Colorado....

 

[redimpss5]

With the "El Camino" type truck big in the news, you bet Ford is wondering what to do 'bout it!

 

[nailhead425]

As long as ElCamino style vehicles fall under the truck classification they aren't bad. I guess the folks down-under do well with the IRS and the payloads are on par with midsized trucks here, so why not?
The ElCamino we had when I was in high school was awesome. Car like and car sized, but it could actually haul stuff.

 

[BigThreeForever]

There is a very interesting article on Ford's smaller pickup strategy at FoMoCoNews.

It details the F-100 mid-size truck due in CY 2010 and the replacement for the Ranger, which, if I recall correctly, is due in CY 2012 and will be sold worldwide as a true "global" compact pickup, replacing the by-then-defunct US Ranger and the present Thai built Ranger sold elsewhere.

There is also news of a new Bronco, due in the CY 2010-2011 timeframe.

FoMoCoNews is a very good site. Check it out.

 

[drew770]

Gees, I am glad Ford has decided to look at offerning this type of vehicle. It seems that Ford's new focus is not to abandon any segments to the Japanese.

Good and now maybe this will force GM to figure out what to do with its mess being the Colorado/Canyon.

 

[Rick_VT]

There is a very interesting article on Ford's smaller pickup strategy at FoMoCoNews.

It details the F-100 mid-size truck due in CY 2010 and the replacement for the Ranger, which, if I recall correctly, is due in CY 2012 and will be sold worldwide as a true "global" compact pickup, replacing the by-then-defunct US Ranger and the present Thai built Ranger sold elsewhere.

There is also news of a new Bronco, due in the CY 2010-2011 timeframe.

FoMoCoNews is a very good site. Check it out.

Im pretty sure Ford Australia has the responsibility for making the new ranger "world" pickup

 

[dzuchowski]

i think when ford designs the next f150 after 2012 ford will make it unit body because of the 35mpg cafe standards. I think Hank Hill will be madder then a bull

 

[paul8488]

Not such a bad idea. Sounds like a bit of a stripper F-150, slimmed down a bit. Sounds like a very smart way to cover the whole market... a new Ranger (eventually) to cover the truly compact market, an F-150 to cover the large end, and an F-100 that shares a platform (and development costs) with the F-150 in the middle. I think that's really smart... Ford is thinking! The midsizeish market isn't all that big right now, and shrinking in North America... and it seems at the same time that the compact market is still very large elsewhere in the world. This way Ford doesn't abandon the midsize market, but doesn't spend a fortune on it either.

 

[GMERIE]

To all:

About one year ago the Ford Truck plant was testing to see if they could run the Ranger track (F100) on Louisville. I know this since a friend I know works at Kentucky Truck. Test was successful. Looks like it will go through here.It will not be produced by Ford Austrailia it will be produced in the USA at Louisville

 

[Bigbee60]

GM isn't doing much better with the Canyon/Colorado....

Good and now maybe this will force GM to figure out what to do with its mess being the Colorado/Canyon.

Not sure what planet you're both on, but the current Colorado and Canyon GMT355 designs are pretty recent and decent trucks. The I-4 and I-5 engines are much more fuel efficient than any Tacoma, Frontier, Dakota, or Ranger offering. They have reasonable hauling and towing capacity too. I looked at what was in the market and bought a Colorado Crew Cab 3.7L I5 RWD Z71 model and regularly average low to mid-20's in real world use. The only flaw with the truck engineering in its now 5th model year of life was the lack of stability control. It does have six airbags, locking rear differential and traction control and in the Crew Cab 5 star front impact ratings. I didn't want a 15 mpg V-6 and 4WD as mandatory options for a Crew Cab like in the Tacoma and Frontier and I wanted something in the $20 to $25K range out the door (I paid $24K for a loaded Colorado with TTL included). The Tacoma and Frontier models on all of the dealer lots were loaded TRD and Nismo 4x4's costing close to $35K. Not one dealer in New England had a 4 cylinder Tacoma when my local dealer checked around. With Tundra and Titan rebates of $5K, the mid-size pickup options from Toyota and Nissan were more expensive than full size models.

To each his own, but don't bash the GM entries in this market. While they might not be your cup of tea, they are solid, efficient, and affordable trucks. With a rumoured DI I-4 turbo, DI V-6, and diesel coming in 2010/2011 as engine options, these trucks might finally find a market and get some advertising from GM (when was the last time you saw a Colorado or Canyon ad?).

 

[ctaylorzl1]

Both Ford and GM needs new midsized pickups!!

+1 IMO! (That being said, I still love Rangers)

 

[Timekeeper]

Rangers have been great little vehicles. I love my 4x4 Off Roader. It handles all I through at it and in it. I enjoy the smaller size and better gas mileage, even with the 4x4 and 4.0 engine.
It does look a little old since the basic style has been around for some time, but I'm liking it better than the Tacoma. They butchered that puppy!!!

 

[ByTheLake]

Makes sense to me. American pickup trucks are so over-sized, and I'd bet that 90% of pickup owners don't need to tow 9,000 or more pounds. Time to scale back.

 

[johnny smallblock]

I've always wondered why you could only get pick-ups in 2 sizes. You can get sedans in 4 sizes, and SUVs/CUVs in 3-5 sizes. Why not offer 3 pick-up sizes? The compact (EL Camino) car-based pick-up, the mid-size (Colorado) and the full-size (Silverado). Then people can actually choose what size they need.

Ditto for minivans (like the Mazda5 and then something like the Caravan). Not all of us need the largest and most powerful everything.

 

[drew770]

i think when ford designs the next f150 after 2012 ford will make it unit body because of the 35mpg cafe standards. I think Hank Hill will be madder then a bull

I think Hank Hill is already mad because he is stuck with an ole turd like the Ranger and a embarassing Colorado for a domestic choice.

 

[drew770]

Not sure what planet you're both on, but the current Colorado and Canyon GMT355 designs are pretty recent and decent trucks. The I-4 and I-5 engines are much more fuel efficient than any Tacoma, Frontier, Dakota, or Ranger offering. They have reasonable hauling and towing capacity too. I looked at what was in the market and bought a Colorado Crew Cab 3.7L I5 RWD Z71 model and regularly average low to mid-20's in real world use. The only flaw with the truck engineering in its now 5th model year of life was the lack of stability control. It does have six airbags, locking rear differential and traction control and in the Crew Cab 5 star front impact ratings. I didn't want a 15 mpg V-6 and 4WD as mandatory options for a Crew Cab like in the Tacoma and Frontier and I wanted something in the $20 to $25K range out the door (I paid $24K for a loaded Colorado with TTL included). The Tacoma and Frontier models on all of the dealer lots were loaded TRD and Nismo 4x4's costing close to $35K. Not one dealer in New England had a 4 cylinder Tacoma when my local dealer checked around. With Tundra and Titan rebates of $5K, the mid-size pickup options from Toyota and Nissan were more expensive than full size models.

To each his own, but don't bash the GM entries in this market. While they might not be your cup of tea, they are solid, efficient, and affordable trucks. With a rumoured DI I-4 turbo, DI V-6, and diesel coming in 2010/2011 as engine options, these trucks might finally find a market and get some advertising from GM (when was the last time you saw a Colorado or Canyon ad?).

I don't know what planet Camaro_Freak is from but I am from the planet called sales.
Apparently so are the consumers because Toyota again is beating GM in this segment. Which is pretty shameful to begin with since GM built a good reputation with trucks and suvs.
But when you put out subpar products compared to your competitors the consumers will go someplace else.
What is wrong with the interior of the Colorado, does the exterior design not look like it has been around since the 90s and lets not talk about first choice engine.
Is the Colorado decent? Sure but is decent good enough to gain sales? Apparently not.