# Is Ford Reviving Electric Ranger Pickup?



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Too bad they're so short on details. Not really sure what eco boost will really get. Ford is trying to build a lot of hype over this idea, but so far details are scarce and I have doubts that it will deliver on the promise. Reminds me a bit about their "hydraulic hybrid concept" that they announced last year. All we ever saw of it was some strange disproportionate pastel drawing of their F150 pickup with green lettering next to it. Never heard a thing about it since then. But they claimed that the F150 would get 60 MPG.

In fairness, the Eco-boost engine series does seem more likely to happen, but I'll still have to see the results first.

I would be delighted if they were to try and reintroduce the EV ranger. Even guys that normally drop V8 engines in older rangers sometimes get interested in learning about the EV version that ford offered a vew years ago. Time would be right to try and sell them again. Kind of funny because 2008 was supposed to be the last year for the ranger. I've personally seen a spike in sales of this great little truck over the last 2 years(the last of the true compact pickups for this market). Just make sure to BUY it and not lease it this time.


----------



## xrotaryguy (Jul 26, 2007)

Heh, the article doesn't really say anything about the electric Ranger other than there was one at the event. Is that a car of the future or a car of the past? haha

My guess is that the ecoboost system would simply attach an electronically actuated turbo to a small engine to improve it's ability to accelerate a compact or mid sized car and to improve its volumetric efficiency and compression ratio at higher rpm. 

This is somewhat similar to the design principal behind the old Sprint Turbo. My buddy had one of those cars, and let me tell you, it was QUICK! Its performance was more than acceptable on the freeway, but on surface streets, it was just flat out commical. The thing would lift up the front end and make the steering wheel jerk around a bit as the front tires scrambled for traction and all that fun stuff. The thing still got 40 mpg too. God that thing was fun.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

xrotaryguy said:


> This is somewhat similar to the design principal behind the old Sprint Turbo. My buddy had one of those cars, and let me tell you, it was QUICK! Its performance was more than acceptable on the freeway, but on surface streets, it was just flat out commical. The thing would lift up the front end and make the steering wheel jerk around a bit as the front tires scrambled for traction and all that fun stuff. The thing still got 40 mpg too. God that thing was fun.


I heard some one on a different forum mention that sprint. He was going to install a 1.0 L turbo engine in his sprint/pickup conversion. Was the turbo engine really only 1.0L? Or is he talking about a different engine....

The Eco boost is supposed to be fitted to the F150 pickup in the next couple of years. There is even talk of putting a 4 cyl engine in that 5000lb+ truck. Something is desperately needed with the F150 though, its gotten so huge over the last 10 years that its only seperated by a few hundred pounds from the superduty. Fuel economy is naturally well behind the industry standard if you believe the EPA tests.

Ford is in big trouble because the F150 was its mainstay in the marketplace for the last 35 years. Now many folks can't afford to buy these huge luxury vehicles let alone fuel them anymore and unlike GM or toyota, ford doesn't have a real plan for the near future with some sort of more advanced hybrid, plug in hybrid let alone a strait EV. I like ford, and drove them all my life, but they've been going in the wrong direction for years now and its finally come back to bite them

There are also plans to build a 4.4L turbo diesel V8 for the F150 to get in the 25 MPG range. Seems to be too little too late when you consider where the price of diesel has gone.


----------



## TX_Dj (Jul 25, 2008)

But they only build what the buying public wants, right? They want a big wasteful V8, even if a smaller 4-cylinder is all they need. Keeping up with the joneses and all that.

My Tacoma has a curb weight of around 3500 lbs, is capable of towing 6000 lbs, and has a payload capacity of 3/4 ton, and is powered by a 2.7 L 4-cylinder which is capable of doing all that... But it's one of the less popular configurations on a Tacoma, because the general public is only willing to "settle" for a V6.

How many of the Tacoma-buying public (or F150 for that matter) are ever going to tow 6000 lbs or haul 1500 lbs of stuff in the bed? 

A lot of people have been conditioned to think that a 4-cylinder is "insufficient" for daily use, however a lot of the diesel-heads have been converting their older full-size trucks to be powered by a "paultry" 120 horsepower Detroit Diesel 4-53 or a "pitiful" 100 horsepower Cummins 4BT so they can get a little better fuel economy... yet both of those engines are torque monsters compared to the V6's that Ford and Toyota are putting in the trucks I've mentioned.


----------



## Cornelius (Sep 15, 2007)

Hauling Air. That's the term used in the auto industry for customers who think they need a full size pick-up with a V8, and then just drive it around empty.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Hauling air, thats a good name for it. Many owners of these large pickups defend their choice by pointing to the size of RV or boat that they need to tow with it during the summer. Then there are guys like me that use the truck for work. Pickups weren't cool back when my truck was built, but now they are replacing the muscle car as the must want vehicle. Or at least they WERE replacing muscle cars. That may change in the next couple of years.

Ford actually offers a version of its F250 superduty in argenrina that comes from factory with a cummins 3.9L rated at some 215 Hp and close to 500 Ft lbs of torque. They claim 25 MPG on the website. Alas, emission restrictions prevent vehicles like that from being offered up here, so the only real choice companies have is to put the focus on the less efficient gasoline engines. Ultra low sulfur diesel will help, but fuel economy has always taken a back seat to emissions regulations so I'm not holding my breath on a 25 MPG truck that weighs 6000lbs in the near future.

The cummins BT was a great series of engine. Draws respect even in ford and GM crowds.

The tacoma is actually a large pickup by my standards. Compared a 4x4 crew cab to my old F250 and it was comparable in size. The 2wds are lower, but its more a 1/2 ton truck than it is a compact by now with all the changes.

I think from now on we will start to see trucks like the F150 begin to shrink or get phased out all together like the land boats did back in the 70s. HD pickups will always have a role to play, but the 1/2 tons are on borrowed time I think. Who would have thought that hauling air would have cost so much.

Maybe now ford can put some more energy into getting the MPGs of the lighter ranger up instead of pouring money down the toilet with the F150s. Its sad to think how much ford has neglected the ranger in north america and yet its still a popular little truck that keeps on selling.


----------



## jrsavoie (Aug 1, 2008)

I've never fully understood sacrificing milage for cleaner air. It always seemed to me that we would have been better off going to a minimum 4% biofuels and having some sort of fuel mile ratio incorporated into the emissions standards. Some of the early 80's diesel Rabbits, Chevettes & S10's got 50 plus MPG. You can't tell me they wouldn't have remained popular if they had been produced.
Emissions should be rated by production of emissions per mile rather than per gallon.


----------



## TX_Dj (Jul 25, 2008)

David,

I know we're a nation apart from each other, but for the record, pick up trucks have never been 'unpopular' here in Texas. Of the myths such as "Everyone wears a big cowboy hat" or "Everyone rides horses" or "Everyone owns a truck", the last one is closest to the truth. Texas is also known as "Ford Country". 

As for the Tacoma, mine is not a 4x4, nor is it a crew cab, it is a Pre-Runner 2WD, which uses all the same suspension parts as a 4x4, thus sits just as tall. It's not a "low boy" which is what we call the "minitruck". This body style tacoma is the largest pickup that Toyota has made besides the Tundra, they're almost the same size. My Tacoma sits up as tall as a stock 2WD full-size truck, but is narrower and shorter.

It may "look" like a 1/2 ton, but it *is* a 3/4 ton.  It's EPA rated 21 city, 28 hwy. Not too shabby for a jacked up "mid size" truck. Could still be a lot better, though.

And for the record, I "need" mine to haul motorcycles, jetskis, etc... but most of the time it just "hauls air"... *sigh*


----------

