I know there's already been discussion this week on the 6.2L, but there's some other interesting rumors in this article:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...6250358/&imw=Y

 

given todays $4 a gallon fuel prices, it never made sense to get rid of the ranger, a very fuel efficient truck, in the first place. if they would just get of of there butts and redisign the darn thing already it could be the #1 selling small pickup.

 

I wouldnt call it a very fuel efficient truck. OFC the manual 2wd with the 4 cyl or the 3.0 V6 (?) will get good mileage, but the 4x4 with the 4.0 does not.

I dont know why more frontiers arent selling when in all reality they get over 16 mpg easy, in 4x4 CC form with a 4.0 pushing more power than the ranger.

 

Because you can easily pull 18 MPG in an F150 (I can reach 19+ on the hightway, closer to 15 with my normal non-highway driving now). Why would you want a smaller truck that doesn't get any better gas mileage? That's one reason small truck sales have fallen the last few years. You get the negatives without many positives.

 

not everyone drives their trucks 100% highway. Frontiers easily get 20+ on the highway. Many Frontiers are getting 17 mpg city. Just look at some frontier forums. Let's see f150s get that in the city.

PLUS, not everyone needs a truck as big as the f150.

 

Forget Ranger and Frontier, neither will be huge hits with the Fuel economy they get in this market, This is what we really need

http://www.ford.com.mx/vehicles/home...sp?idModel=COU

Unfortunately, I'm sure Ford will wait until Kia or someone like that proves that this is a huge hit and Ford will strugle to catch up like usual.

 

I get a solid 19.3 or better on the highway in my 4DR fullsize F150 best ive seen is 20.1 and that was the average for the whole tank

 

My point was that the difference in fuel economy between small and large trucks is not as great as one would think. That's why there are not as many sold.

Now, with fuel prices at $4.00 that small difference in fuel economy is starting to make a difference.

 

definitly. i just hope i can get even close to what some guys at clubfrontier are gettin . One guy with a 3 inch lift and 35s is gettin 18mpg average. I think ill be kissin the ground at the gas station with that kinda mileage .

 

Thanks NMJeff.

With news like that continuing to unfold, it seems unlikely that Ford will want to keep the '09 refresh around too long. I'm sure they want to get it fully remodeled as soon as possible once the new F-100/future-F-150 frame is completed. More aerodynamic, more fuel-efficient engines, lighter, etc. It's a major reason I'm afraid to purchase this refresh. Perhaps if the stock market rallied and I had tons of extra cash lying around, otherwise it just seems prudent to wait until the full remodel, much as I love the NAV screen and SYNC in the '09. With the F-100 scheduled for a 2011(MY) rollout, here's hoping an all-new F-150 follows right behind in 2012(MY).

 

sad to see the boss go but keeping the ranger is probibly a good idea.

 

I just don't see them shelving the 6.2, they have sunk far to much money into the motor over the last 5 or 6 years to cancel it and get none of it back. If they put it in the trucks it will cost them almost nothing compared to what they have already spent, so why not go ahead and sell the few that will sell and make back as much as you can? Your looking at a small risk in the little amount of money to finish the project and sell the engine, with the chance of making back some of the Millions spent on designing this motor. Besides they know they have to do something to stay competitive, and I don't think they can squeeze the #'s needed out of the 5.4 and still meet emissions.

 

The 6.2 is not being shelved. It's going in the Super Duty. The F-150 will get the 5.0 which is making the same power as the 6.2 but with better gas mileage and more durability. Read all about it on the blueoval forums.

 

The 4 cyl Ranger is the most fuel efficient truck in America, and although there have been SEVERAL switches between which 4 cyl it is exactly, the current is a 2.3 capable of 23 city, 29 freeway with CURRENT EPA ratings.

No F150 will come close. For the vast majority of F150 owners a Ranger will do the "truck stuff" they need.

The 3.0 V6 will average about 16-19(20+ possible) mixed depending on the driver.

The 4.0 SOHC will be about 15-17(18+ possible).

These are REALISTIC numbers, not the magical 17-20 that some owners report on their F150s (My Dad gets 20+ on freeway only 60 mph trips, so I know it is possible, but if you actually DRIVE the truck it isn't). Those are ACTUAL across the board "you can count on these" numbers.

I was a moderator on a HUGELY successful Ranger forum for over 2 years...I know a thing or two about Rangers

 

I honestly get the mileage i report.

I just did 105.8 miles (minus one percent) on 4.725 gallons

So 104.6 miles / 4.7 = 22.1375 mpg
<90* out driving at 67-68 mph with AC on>


My mixed driving (mostly city) in Austin this week was
50.0m (minus one percent) on 3.489 gallons

So 49.45 / 3.489 = 14.1731 mpg

<100* 15-60 mph with max AC on>