Paul’s CC on the Ranchero highlights an interesting hole in the modern American truck market: there are currently no small pickup models available from any manufacturer. Fortunately, customers yearning for something like an old Ranchero or Courier may finally get the product they’ve been looking for: Ford is reportedly developing a Focus-based pickup, slated to arrive in America by 2022. But what would that look like? And would that appeal to customers?
A quick glance at the upcoming 2019 Ranger illustrates why Ford thinks there is room for a smaller truck in its lineup. With a base price of $25, 400, the Ranger SuperCab will be about $2,300 cheaper than a regular cab F-150. Regular cab variants of the Ranger are limited to fleet buyers. That means Ford could plausibly offer a regular cab Focus-based pickup with an extensive options sheet and a starting MSRP of about $23,000.
The majority of Ranger buyers will most likely flock to the SuperCrew configuration. A new Courier would also need two configurations as well. Ford would be kinda crazy to offer a compact pickup with four full doors, which means the hypothetical vehicle would probably be available as a regular cab or a SuperCab.
There is precedent for such a setup. The previous generation Ranger allowed buyers to choose from either configuration. Either way, buyers only had one bed option: a standard 6′ unit. With the new Ranger having a 5′ bed for the SuperCrew variant and a 6′ bed for everything else, the Focus pickup wouldn’t exactly need to match it. I suspect we’ll see a 5′ bed for the SuperCab and a 5.5′ bed for the regular cab.
| Model | Length | Width (incl. mirrors) | Wheelbase | Maximum Payload/Towing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 Ford Ranger (SuperCab) 4X4 | 203.6" | 81.3" | 125.9" (4x4) | 1,500/5,800 Ibs. |
| 2018 Transit Connect Van (extended wheelbase) | 189.7" | 84.1" | 120.6" | 1,610/2,000 Ibs. |
| 2019 Ford Ranger (SuperCab)* | 211" | 73" (excluding mirrors) | 127" | N/A |
| 2019 Ford F-150 (SuperCab) 4X4, 5.5 ft. bed | 231.9" | 96.8" (non-towing mirrors) 105.9" (towing mirrors) | 145" | 2.200/11,800 Ibs. |
* = preliminary numbers
With a compact, mid size, and full size pickup lineup, Ford has more flexibility to make their smallest offering more appealing to those looking for a vehicle that actually fits the definition of…small. While the extended wheelbase Transit Connect offers very good capability, it still comes up a bit short when compared to the 2011 Ranger. Basically, Ford just needs to offer something a little longer in overall length and with a longer wheelbase. And maybe get the towing numbers up too. Then again, the Connect has a longer length in terms of the cargo area floor and a wider width between the wheelhouse, so maybe those changes don’t have to be excessive.
In terms of performance and fuel economy, the new truck would also have to be relatively good on gas while offering reasonable performance. The 2019 Transit Connect will offer one gasoline engine: the 2.0 four cylinder offered in the EcoSport and the 2018 Focus. Paired with the new 8 speed automatic transmission, an EPA rating of over 30mpg should be doable. Ford would also have to offer a more powerful engine, and they could do that with the 2.0 turbo, which outputs 245 horsepower and 275 Ib.-ft. of torque in the Fusion and Escape. Obviously both potential powertrain options would need to offer some type of four wheel drive capability as well.
So there you have it. Based on the products Ford currently has, a compact pickup based on the Focus platform seems totally within the realm of possibility. If it started at about $22,500, came in at around 200″ in length, 83″ in width, with a 125″ wheelbase, and was able to achieve a payload capacity of at least 1,600 Ibs. and be able to tow about 3,000 Ibs. while getting at least 30mpg highway, it could attract some buyers.
But would you buy one?
heh, I can see the conversation now:
salesman: Why don’t you get a pickup? It’s what everyone wants.
me: I don’t want my stuff in the back covered with dirt/rain/snow/schmutz.
salesman: you can get a cap to cover the bed to prevent that.
me: make the back of the truck enclosed, like a station wagon?
salesman: yes, it would be just like a station wagon.
me: I already have a station wagon. What’s the point?
A pickup with a topper is not very much like a station wagon beyond the enclosed cargo feature. Unless your pickup is the Avalanche with the midgate, you have to choose between bed length and cabin length unless you want a longer-than-standard vehicle (I would, but some people don’t have room for such a thing). A topper can always be removed to haul tall items, and a metal bed (even with spray-in bedline) is more easily cleaned than a carpeted wagon interior.
A pickup with a topper is not very much like a station wagon beyond the enclosed cargo feature.
I was lampooning the collision between a salesman who has been ordered to push a particular product, and a person whose needs are not met by the product the salesman is pushing.
But there are many vehicles on the market in the US which are clearly doing the job of the station wagon, it just seems people don’t want to be seen in a wagon – so a capped Focus based pickup might get a small share of the “it’s not a wagon, honest” market.
That’s most of the Subaru Bajas here… go get an Outback.
I suspect that for many folks, these would make a lot more sense than a full-sized pickup, but that gets into “needs vs wants” territory and I’m all for personal choice.
Heck, parking spots in many areas are now so narrow that our 4Runner (not large) fits between the lines with maybe four inches on either side… have to skinny out carefully or ding someone’s door.
Now I know it’s not available (yet?) in the US, but the only proper apple to apple comparison in this case (I’m referring to the chart) would be the Ford Ranger vs the Ford Transit Custom.
Overall length SWB: 196” (4.97 m)
Overall length LWB: 210” (5.34 m)
BTW, it’s also available as a double cab van, unlike the Transit Connect.
Personally I would ALWAYS prefer a panel van to a pickup.
I wonder if that might actually appeal to the type who pays through the nose for a battered VW T4 van.
Maybe Ford would have to offer a dents and rust decal package though.
THIS is the type of van we need in the United States (it’s already available in Mexico). The SWB model is roughly the same size (just SLIGHTLY longer) as the extended-length Aerostar (190.3″ length) while the LWB is nearly as long as a typical full-size van in this country. The space efficiency of a “one-box” style van (where the hood & windshield are nearly at the same angle) within a given overall size simply can’t be beaten by anything other than rear-engine vans like the VW Microbus. Add to this the low loading floor enabled by the front-wheel-drive layout, & you have substantially more cargo/passenger room than any minivan offered in the US today without breaking the bank at the gas station. It also has a high-roof option just like the larger vans. Want to tow anything big? THAT’S when you get a pickup.
Actually, there’s also a true minivan edition (so all glass/all seats) of that Ford Transit Custom van, it’s called the Ford Tourneo Custom.
One of the reasons why I am currently driving a P71 is so I can save as much as possible for the new Ranger. But now that I have used the “Build it” configurator on Ford’s website I am thinking they aren’t interested in offering my kind of small truck.
For starters, there is the limited color choice, as in the obligatory black, charcoal, silver, white, and a few other colors. (Heck, even the Transit Connect can be bought as a more colorful vehicle.) Then there is the price, no doubt demanded by that powerful, turbo 4 cylinder engine / automatic transmission combination.
It is a shame Ford dumped the V6 engine from the Mustang as that is the engine the new Ranger should have.
I am considering a compact truck, just not so much the Ranger anymore as a 2018 T.C….Before they dump the 2.5 non turbo engine for 2 smaller turbo engines.
You may want to check out the prices when the Ranger debuts – it wouldn’t surprise me if there are substantial discounts offered when it hits showrooms. It’s a competitive segment and Ford probably already made enough money from the Ranger where it could happen.
And they did dump the 2.5 for the 2019 model year. In its place is the 2.0 naturally aspirated four cylinder.
It seems there has been some pretty extensive re-working of the Ranger for the US market. I can understand that they might need to beef up the front of the chassis for different crash testing requirements, but there are some other changes that to me only introduce cost and delay – changing to a metal bumper and re-working the front panels to close up the gaps by 0.5mm!
Incidentally the width including mirrors for the Australian market Ranger is 85.2″.
The diesel seems to be the big seller I’m not even sure they bother with a petrol model nobody wants them anyway incidentally the outfit Ive signed onto for milk transfers this year just bought 200 Rangers no doubt at a discounted price.
Regardless of the power output, the Ranger will have expensive engine technology. That’s the only way it can get better mileage than an F150 with acceptable performance. The only question is how big and heavy the engine’s actual parts will be.
The biggest obstacle to the popularity of the Ranger is that the F150, and other full size trucks, are sharpened to a fine point and priced to sell. Even if a small truck is designed to be cheaper to manufacture with cheaper technology (because it can get acceptable mileage without expensive materials) the volume of full size truck sales makes up for the more expensive materials.
I had a 96 Ranger, bought new, and it was the hypothetical one that I judge any new versions against. That truck was just big enough to be useful and small enough to be practical for me. I had the regular cab, 5 speed, 4 cylinder, XLT version, not base but not top of the line. The only issue was the slider window in the rear; it was easy to break into the truck (it happened twice!) by jimmying the slider. Other than that, 5 years of use, no issues, but it confirmed that my lifestyle did not require use of a pickup. Carrying groceries in the bed was not practical, yet I don’t remember hauling much else during that time, either. Oh, and it got 20 MPG. Everywhere, city or highway. Seems the gearing was not good for highway mileage, but it did make city driving okay.
Now, if this Courier/Focus truck comes out, I will admire, but chances are, I will not even kick the tires. Size works, but I don’t need a truck. If I move, I will hire movers. If I need stuff brought home in bulk, I will pay for delivery. I am at a point where I am willing to pay for hauling rather than obligate myself to having a pickup for just occasional needs. This may be a good choice for fleet use, in cases where size is not a concern, but the Transit Connect should already fill that niche. I can see younger folks wanting one, especially homeowners, but the lack of 4 doors will probably make families pass them by in favor of the larger sized ones. It will be a niche vehicle, and probably work better in other markets, so I wish them well, but I for one will not be buying one.
Edward, I think you’re riffing off of my “Transit Connect Pickup” comment from the Ranchero piece, and I appreciate that.
Around here, I still see many businesses eking the last life out of ’90s small pickups from Toyota and Nissan, as well as the Ranger. Other businesses with small-truck needs have switched to the TC van and the RAM ProMaster City, and to a lesser extent the NV200 from Nissan.
But some businesses *need* an open-bed truck, and the enclosed cargo space of a van doesn’t fit their needs. The first one that comes to mind are swimming pool service companies, for whom storing the chemicals in the same space as the driver is a big no-no.
Dealers nationwide are selling base TC vans for $19,999. I think a similarly-priced pickup would do just fine. Other folks have differing opinions.
Edward, I think you’re riffing off of my “Transit Connect Pickup” comment from the Ranchero piece, and I appreciate that.
You can stop thinking that now, as Ed emailed me about this post several hours before your comment appeared. Sorry.
All good by me, Paul. GMTA and all that.
The old joke about the Dodge Rampage is that after every swimming pool cleaner in the country bought one, the market was saturated.
The Connect has averaged about 40K per year since introduction, peaking at 50K, but sales have been decreasing for a few years. Ford, Nissan/Chevy, and Ram have steadily sold about 60K total for a few years.
The only plus factor is that the little vans probably are more “extra” business than usual, because buyers might switch brands to get a unique package.
Which is a problem for either the Ranger or a Connect pickup. Ford is the top truck brand in the US, so a lot of smaller truck sales will come from the F150. The same thing happened with the 1960 Falcon. It was the most popular of the 1960 compacts, but a lot of the extra sales came at the expense of the standard size Ford.
Like todays cars………….they are starting to look the same. That said…i would buy a Colorado with the Z package.
No I wouldnt and its not like theres a shortage of these utes on the market here new or used Rangers, Hiluxes, Amaroks, Colorados et al are common both new and used, but I dont like them much as far as driving goes harsh ride and other issues, and the few times I need more carrying capacity than my 5 door hatch back already has I can simply hitch a trailer to it.
I’ll just stick with my Focus wagon for now thanks. But I do see the appeal of compact pickups as reg. sized pickups have gotten HUGE!
I’d never buy a pick up truck for any reason. If I were a tradesmen, for example, I’d buy a used Hino or Isuzu NPR and save a lot of money.
Dropsides can be very handy.
Your approach is very similar to the British one – the owner operator of a smallish construction or landscaping business might have a Defender or a double cab pickup, but most likely he’d have something more fit for purpose, and a nice sedan or SUV for when he’s off duty.
That is hilarious, you are not going to be saving money driving a truck like that when a 1/2 ton pickup or van is more than enough to do the job. Plus spending time in the penalty box that is a NPR, or fighting to get your supplies in and out of the truck just isn’t worth it even if you were actually saving a significant amount of money.
Well, the people who laugh at a Ranger as being too tiny for proper work (like the F150 driving Canadian Christmas tree farmer I once met) would have more carrying capacity in a Hino or Isuzu, and dropside trucks are more flexible and often more useful.
Having said that, I used to have the pleasure of driving a 7.5t Isuzu car transporter everyday and it was indeed horrific.
The first generation Dodge Dakota was the ideal small pickup. 2 adult males fit comfortably in it, it had real world payload and tow ratings, reasonably powerful and economical powertrains, and were easy to handle, park and drive around town. I like the old S10s and Rangers but at 6’2″/280, I never fit in them well. El Caminos and Rancheros are cool and somewhat useful but there are no car platforms that offer that kind of strength (i.e., full frame) anymore.
I would not buy a Focus-based “pickup”
I actually saw a Dakota on the freeway yesterday and thought “That is America’s right-sized pickup”.
I have to agree with LTDan, the Dak was the best small pickup. I had a 1995 SLT extended cab with the V6 & automatic. I will counter that the 3.9L was not the most economical setup, but the Dak was fairly heavy. On the other hand, it could tow 3500 lbs easily and haul anything I could put in the bed.
It was a great ride up until the kids got too big for the back seats. By then, we needed something more practical. I was thinking minivan, my wife wanted (and got) a SUV.
I still drive a 95 Dakota Extended cab I’ve had for 5 years and find it to be the perfect size.
The current crop of midsizers are all almost identical in size to the Dakota.
No. Unless we are talking a cheap old used one found by accident, then maybe if it hits the sweet spot of condition and price that I would need. But new? Nope. When I buy a new car it has to fit a specific purpose. Any new car would probably replace my Fit, and truthfully the Fit takes pretty good care of me right now with its combination of size, efficiency and ability to handle passengers or cargo. A small pickup is too purpose-built for a purpose that does not really come up enough in my life.
I wonder just how well it will do. The Tacoma and the GM twins seem to sell mostly 4×4 crew cab versions, which have a very specific appeal to folks who go outdoors, or want to look like they do. The new ranger is obviously going to go for the very same segment.
Who wants a passenger car based pickup, especially in a single/extended cab version? These car based pickups sell in certain parts of the developing world where they serve a utilitarian function. But small vans have totally taken over that role here now.
How well did the Subaru Baja sell? And how is the Honda selling, even though it is as big (and roomier inside) as the current mid-sized trucks.
I’m not seeing it. But then I don’t really know just what Ford has in mind.
The 2nd gen Ridgeline started out meeting sales projections, but has tapered off since then while everybody else has seen increases. Even Nissan is selling the heck out of the ancient Frontier.
Everybody says the Ridgeline is the truck people should be buying, but actual buyers are saying otherwise. I have a feeling these small trucks will be the same. Despite popular opinion, most truck buyers still buy trucks for their utility.
These car based pickups sell in certain parts of the developing world where they serve a utilitarian function.
Good point. I just returned from Mexico, the VW Saveiro and the small (Brazilian) Chevrolet pickup are very popular there, but all them are used commercially. Nobody appears to be using them as a private vehicles, all of them are bare-bones.
Big fullsize American trucks like the F-series and the GM trucks on the other hand are mostly passenger trucks and often full-options (and the favoured transportation for those engaged in less than legal activities I’ve been told).
Most common overall are the (smaller) Nissan NP300 and Toyota Tacoma, mostly work trucks.
I like the idea of a small pickup, but could never see myself actually buying one new.
If I lived in an area where 2 cars wasn’t a huge PITA, I could see buying one of the last original Rangers used as a backup/beater, though.
No. Shocking, I’m sure.
While the situation in my life could change (but it’s doubtful it’ll be anytime soon), there is nothing about them that merits my consideration at this time. There have been too many instances in my life where the available tool was too small and I see no need to add to this frustration with a too-small pickup.
There are indeed uses for these things, but I haven’t yet encountered one or had that particular life situation.
Also, I hope I read the next to last paragraph correctly – a pickup that can tow 3,000 pounds while achieving 30 mpg? Perhaps I’m missing something (which wouldn’t be the first time), but those two things seem mutually exclusive with a gas engine.
I definitely didn’t mean to suggest that this theoretical truck could do both of those things at the same time. Rather, this small pickup would probably need those two things as selling points in order to be attractive to buyers.
Even being able to drive on the highway fully loaded (and not having to change down at the first sign of a gradient) and achieving 30mpg unloaded was mutually exclusive – the not changing down part meant the engine has to be further up the rev range than the most efficient cruise rpm.
Mind you with a 10 speed auto, this is less of a problem compared to a manual transmission.
last year I bought very clean low mile 34K 2013 Cadillac Escalade EXT Premium paid 47K for it. the problem is I just bought brand new Quad ATV just for some off road fun I found out wont fit in EXT bed !!! A $47K Cadillac pickup that Cant haul a ATV!!!
Could’ve told you that. Escalade/Avalanche weren’t real pickups, just like the Ridgeline. Son’s Ranger could get two quads in the bed (one vertical, the other horizontal).
As far as the smaller pickups- I can’t see where the buyers would be coming from. The mid-size has a market, but it’s still a fraction of what the fullsize trucks sell. The F-Series outsells the segment leading Tacoma by what- 15:1?
A pickup is just a vehicle with an open bed–it doesn’t matter how big or small that bed is. The Avalanche and Ridgeline are most certainly “real pickups,” and the Avalanche is also a “real truck” thanks to BOF construction shared with the Suburban. In fact, in some ways, the Avalanche was more utilitarian than a conventional truck, because the midgate feature made it either a crew cab/5′ bed or a regular cab/8′ bed pickup.
I’ve thought about a Colorado crew cab w/4-wheel drive. A colleague drives one as a company truck and is lovin’ it more and more. Has the 300-horse V6, which he says will knock back 28 hwy on the interstate.
In a word, “no.”
Yes . Make my new Courier a base model standard cab with a manual transmission, AC, and a radio. Price it under $20K and I am in . I could use a small runabout when I don’t want to fire up the big Cummins Dodge.
Would have bought an Aussie built Pontiac badged Ute if GM didn’t scrap the whole brand in 2009.
Not for me thanks. I owned an F150 for several years, around 20 years ago, and finally realized that 99% of the time all I was transporting in the bed was air. The F150 was comfortable enough to drive but was hard to park and even with the 4.6 V8 and two wheel drive the mileage in normal driving was 11-12 MPG. It was a little bit better (16 MPG or so) on the highway but still a thirsty proposition to be sure. Now, on the one or two occasions a year when I have to haul something that won’t fit in one of our other vehicles, I borrow my brother and his Silverado and the problem is solved.
I prefer to think of air as “sailboat fuel”.
Sounds classier.
I know you jest, but I’ve got to comment a childhood friend’s parents used to regular pull a speedboat to Spain (1300 km one way) using their Opel Omega, better known as the Cadillac Catera, back 20 years ago. Even that argument doesn’t fly in the truck’s favour.
If it fits my 6’3/250 frame, I’ll consider it.
I love the little Brazilian and South African utes but I couldn’t justify buying any pickup, certainly not new. Maybe a battered regular cab Silverado. If I bought a brand new vehicle it would have to be with the family in mind.
I’d like to think Ford could sell enough of them if their marketing is clever enough, and I’d bet the percentage of buyers for whom it’s a daft move would be smaller (or at least no bigger) than it is for most pickups and SUVs.
Related to Steve’s point at the top, with a cap it would give an option to those who want a small wagon that isn’t a VW or a CUV.
When I decided to buy a new truck, it was between a base Titan king (extended cab), and a Frontier king cab.
The Frontier’s rear seat was only usable for small children or people with no legs, the crew cab had such a small bed it was pretty much useless, and besides the 4 cylinder 5 speed drivetrain was only available in the king cab, V6 otherwise. A base Frontier with optional AC and radio/CD player was about 2k cheaper than a base Titan, which came with AC, radio/CD player, + tilt and cruise which were optional on Frontier. If I went for the crew cab with V6 and manual trans and lived with the small bed, the MPG ratings were only about 2 MPG better than the 305 HP automatic Titan king cab. The V6 engine brought the price to within 1k dollars of the Titan. Also can tow 7200 lbs so I can get a decent size RV to tow if I decide to get one.
So I went with the base Titan king cab, plenty of power, lots of room in bed and acceptable rear leg room for short trips, can do 20 MPG at around 65 MPH highway, though only around 12 to 14 around town. I keep an old Jetta for around town driving, this combination works well.
No, I would not be interested in buying a truck based on the Focus platform. We do miss our old Chevy S10 though, and I would be interested in something like that again, with a V6.
I’d buy something Ranger sized and Ranger priced. I had a Ranger for 9 years and I actually haul things that work better in an open bed than a van.
I’m concerned about cost. Although my vague recollection form 1993 is that a nice Ranger and a basic F150 were close in price.
Adjusted for inflation, the base price of a 2011 Ranger was about $21,800. So Something even $1,500 more expensive would be a pretty decent deal if it matches the old model in size.
A true comparison would be the single cab – I wonder what the fleet price is.
A small truck would be ideal for me as I already have a Ranger. I have a small engine business & pick -up lawnmowers etc. A full size truck is too high for me to lift a lawnmower into. I would buy a ranger in a min if it was a reg cab with air & cruise. Thats all I need…
I admire, and secretly long for, compact pickups, but in reality I probably wouldn’t buy one. For example, I always find myself eyeing a 2005 or so Mazda B2300 that lives down the street from me — it’s a manual transmission, basic truck, and I love it.
But right now, with two kids and a consistent need for vehicles to serve multiple needs, it simply wouldn’t make sense. Maybe if I was retired, and wanted a truck for relatively light duty hauling and gardening needs… maybe then I’d consider one. Until that point arrives, I’ll just admire them from afar.
I have owned 3 smaller trucks, an ’88 and ’95 Ranger and a ’99 Dodge Dakota. The Rangers got a little better gas mileage, 22-23 while the Dakota delivered 18-19 MPG. That is highway mileage on all of them as I used them mostly as a car in my job where I averaged 200 miles a day on all kinds of highways and conditions. They all gave good service with all of them accumulating between 179K and 216K miles. I kept the ’88 for my youngest daughter to drive in high school and she put 10K miles on it before I sold it. I would say the Dodge was the best of the bunch. I finally realized that I really didn’t need a truck and decided to buy something fun to drive since I spent so much time on the road. That’s when I sold the Dakota to my son in law and bought a Mustang. I have to say that I am kind of the exception in the area where I live. Almost every other guy I know owns a truck. If I was to buy one now it would be a small one as I like the size and maneuverability. It would fit in my garage better, too. Of course, my dream truck would be a ’73 Ranchero like I owned in the ’80’s. I loved that thing, battering ram bumper and all.
I would be interested in a Focus based pickup. I live in snow country. Front wheel drive would be a huge plus for winter traction. Yes I know that loaded, it isn’t ideal in snow, but, while you might drive it loaded in snow on occasion, you definitely will drive it empty in snow and likely most of the time. I had a 2001 Ranger 2wd. With all season tires, it could get stuck on a soft plum. With snow tires and 500 pounds of cinder blocks behind the rear axle it was unstoppable. However, 500 pounds of blocks eats up a lot of bed space. I think a Focus pickup would be a good compromise. Unfortunately, I don’t think that there are too many of us.
I’ve never really been a pickup guy, but really see the appeal of the new Ranger. I could see such a vehicle in my future. My wife really misses her S-10, and my ex and I had an S-10 and it was handy. The current wife really wanted an F-150 when she saw one recently at the dealer where I had the Tacotta airbags replaced on my Mustang, but I really think that’s too much truck for us. I told her, “Wait ‘til you see the new Ranger!”
No, likely nothing smaller than the current mid-size Tacoma, Colorado and maybe the Ranger, at least not where I live now and for what I do. But even then I’d be more likely to get a full size one, it’s just not that much more money and has more capability.
Frankly I already think most of the fullsizers aren’t big enough in the bed area or that I’d want a large rack for carrying long lumber etc. A 5.5ft bed wouldn’t cut it for the load of 12 and 16 foot lumber I just had delivered in my driveway. Neither would a 6.5footer, MAYBE a longbed but…And I certainly don’t have room for a trailer in addition to everything else.
The 5.5′ bed truly does suck for hauling lumber of that length. I hauled a bunch of drywall on several occasions last winter and spring and dropping the tailgate made it perfect for 8′ pieces.
Other, smaller items are all possible but it does lead to having to get creative. Attached is a picture I took of mine back in June – I was hauling a washing machine, four wrought iron lawn chairs, sixteen pairs of shoes, four suitcases, various pieces of lumber, three moving dollies, a small coffee table, and some other miscellaneous items to go along with the upright bed extender. There was still some empty space in the bed, but this stuff can be reconfigured; lumber can’t.
Had I an 8′ bed, I could have hauled three times as much. Plus, with the frequent moaning about the size of current pickups, it’s easy to overlook the bed rails on my F-150 are much taller than are the bed rails of my father’s ’98 Ram 1500 – which means one can squeeze even more into the bed.
You point out something that people always seem to ignore, despite the fact that Ford did advertise that the higher bed sizes means more volume in the bed.
Yes, that extra bed height is nice and immediately noticeable when looking at other trucks. I think the F-150 is about 3″ more than the Ram. Does make it difficult to reach much of anything over the sides though, even at 6’3″. I’d prefer more depth instead of height. 😉
I find the new Rangers to be quite attractive. Of course, like every other vehicle I’ve ever bought, I won’t be considering a purchase until it’s 10 years old and affordable to me.
Would not mind a hot/mega hatch analogue of a small pick-up / van derived from a Fiesta or Focus.
As for the Ranger and upcoming Bronco it could do with a 6-cylinder at least.
Yes, I’d be interested. Small pickups were hot in the 70s and 80s. Part of the appeal was an inexpensive ride with customization possibilities. At one point around ’88, I had a friend with a Mazda B2200 with a convertible roof conversion which was really fun. They were an alternative for subcompact sized and priced cars. The Baja (and Ridgeline) was too expensive to meet the cheap and fun criteria.
I’d also like to find a truck whose bed isn’t jacked up super high.
While I think a Focus based pickup could be a economical little hauler for small loads I just can’t see myself in one or any less that full size pickup at this point. As was mentioned by Jason this tool would be too small for a lot of what I use a pickup for. Since I prefer to drive cars and I can go weeks w/o the need of a pickup, I have a pickup as a second vehicle. Too many of the times I’m using a truck I do use that full 8′ of bed and while sure you can drop the tail gate and haul that 8′ stuff it is just easier to close the gate. So I put up with the excess capacity, fuel economy penalty and the pain of parking a full size crew cab 8′ bed truck when what I’m carrying is well within the range of what a smaller or really small truck would do.
I live in the EU but am neither a building contractor, reside in an Alpine region nor a member of the outdoors club. I think it answers the question…
Yes, we have them here, also as a 4 door. Still no.
https://www.ford.at/nutzfahrzeuge/ranger?vehicleNavCategory=vans%20&%20pick-ups
Were I living in the US, still no, not with your fuel prices and roads.
I think I’ll keep my old Falcon ute (which has not been my daily driver for years). There is a lot to be said for a passenger car based pickup in terms of basic roadholding – a conventional pickup gives up a lot in this regard (mind you I have not driven one of the current Rangers or seen any skidpad type testing here).
At the same time I doubt a Focus-based ute would have the towing capacity I want. Maybe one based on a larger vehicle like I think Hyundai or Kia would work.
I’ve driven a few Rangers and a few old Falcons, The Rangers are nice but nothing spectacular, high loading height is against them and lack of ride comfort when empty. Falcons were ok.
A Focus ute with turbo diesel and manual would be ok light economical with good torque for carrying loads it’d tow a tonne without issues.
I wouldn’t buy a compact truck. I have owned a Super Crew F-150 for the past 7 years. Prior to that, I had a 2007 Ranger Super Cab 4.0L. I replaced that with the F-150, as we purchased a 29′ travel trailer, and the F-150 got noticeably better fuel economy than that old 4.0. The kids didn’t like sitting in the jump seats either.
The kids are older now and don’t really want to travel with my wife and I as much, so the Super Crew is a little wasted now. I’m looking to replace it in the next couple of years with a Super Cab and a longer box.
The Ranger is on my list when the time comes. I saw one at the Toronto auto show this past spring and it looked good to me. We now have a 18′ travel trailer that is fairly lightweight (3,600 lbs dry), and I frequently haul ATVs and a 14′ utility trailer around as well.
The Ranger would (presumably) be able to handle all of the above, but the payload and towing capacity of a “Focus Ranchero” would not be high enough to meet my needs.
I don’t get why anybody would spend $26ish grand on a Ford Ranger when that same amount would get them a Mercedes-Benz Metris with more payload than an F150 and an enclosed cargo compartment to boot.
Yes but what good does that do if the thing is broken down on the side of the road or in the shop?
Mercedes are overpriced, unreliable and have next to no resale value. In short junk.
Like others here, I also do like compact pickups, but when it comes to buying one, I haven’t myself and probably wouldn’t. I won’t rule it out, but it hasn’t made sense in my situation. The issue is that in my experiance, most are going to be 4x4s m, which is how I would buy one also, and as such don’t get better fuel economy or cost much less than their full size counterparts. I have had plenty of seat time in Dakotas, Rangers and Tacomas. I find that the only real difference, at least with respect to the the models on the market now is that they are smaller, and therefore less useful to me. My 2013 F150 with a 5.0 V8 gets only gets one MPG less than my coworker’s Tacoma. And the Tacoma wasn’t cheaper..
Though, I am watching with interest. My only vehicle at the moment is a supercab F150, btw. My current plan though is to not buy another truck to replace this one, but keep it for as long as it runs. Then use the truck when I need it and use a car for my routine communting. I don’t need a truck every day, but when I do need it, I use both the 4WD and the large bed. But
And apologies for all of the misspellings. Jeeze, I need more coffee…
Yes, but not a car-based FWD one. A few days before this post, I was on Toyota’s site, doing a build and price on the most basic 4×4 pickup available. It looks like the 2019 Ranger is a competitive offering, under $30k for a four cylinder automatic 4×4 with AC and painted steel rims.
With California prices for gasoline and diesel, I’m close to being done with full-size. Unfortunately, a narrow bed will make hauling materials from Lowes more difficult and the slide-in camper would have to be traded for a small travel trailer.
I’ve owned two small(ish) trucks, the last one new (2001 Nissan Frontier, reg cab, I4, 5 sp, $14K) which I’ve now had for 18 years and 284K. The first one was a 1982 Toyota SR5 long bed which rusted out from under me after 14 years. The most fun I had with a truck was my dad’s 1975 Toyota Hi-Lux SR5, and I still think of that of a near ideal truck size for a suburban homeowner who isn’t a contractor: compact, highly maneuverable, strong and doesn’t mind getting dirty (my wife likes to garden, so soil and pine straw are hauled). My dad went over to the dark side of minivans (in his mind it’s a covered pickup) and ignored the stigma after he gave away his Hi-Lux in its waning days. When I bought my Frontier I thought it was enormous for my perceived needs, but thought the Tacoma was overpriced and more costly used than the Nissan was new, and the S10 was unimpressive.
Almost 20 years later I see most of today’s trucks to be gi-normous and accessorized like big SUVs with bigger price tags, with an interior that looks like my mom’s living room (afraid to make a mess there) than my dad’s work shop. The biggest pickup I would have entertained was a 1970s F-150, and now that is dwarfed by most of today’s offerings. I’m not sure I could get one into my carport next to my wife’s CRV.
I still remember when VW introduced its FWD pickup in the 1980s; the market said “thumbs down”. Even today I still can’t exactly put “FWD” and “pickup truck” in the same sentence and think it makes sense, even though it’s a very logical arrangement for the small vans running around today.
I’m keeping my Nissan until I have to give up my keys or the wheels fall off. A truck should not have to be a pristine vehicle, so I don’t see the need to buy new. I get about 21 mpg based mostly on highway driving. It’s paid for and still find need for it, though I find my hauling needs getting smaller by the decade. I moved myself in 2013, but now that I’m nearing 60 I’ll likely have to acquiesce to paying others to move the big stuff. The Achilles heel of my Nissan is the transmission–it can’t pull a trailer without lunching it. Any truck worth the label should be able to pull a 5×8 trailer without costly consequences.
I’m glad to see Ford make an effort, but I have no idea what the market will say since I’m aging out of it.
For 15 years that’s all I had. A succession of Nissan hardbody trucks that began in 1991 with a 4cyl Kingcab model, then a v6 version of the same and finally a v6 4×4. After that it was small 4dr sedans with one exception. After 2006 I really missed having a truck. I got by renting roll on dumpsters when dump runs could not be made and U-haul F150 rentals for other small jobs. I really wanted another small truck.
Last year I remembered what a freind told me years ago. Keep the convenience of a small sedan, add a trailer hitch and get a utility trailer. I picked up a 5×7 galvanised box trailer. The front folds open to make it a5x8. The back is a ramp for things with wheels and it has a low lift over height. No more lifting large Items like sofas up to chest height into modern pickups. What a relief that is. Most of what I haul is brush so not much weight there anyway. Occasionally I have to do mental approximate calculations to not overload it though.
I no longer look at small trucks but when I do I think back to the thirsty 4×4 and reality takes over. I don’t need one anymore.
Id go for a smaller pickup, but what I want isn’t gonna happen. Either an ElCamino type ute based on the Charger or Challenger packing at least the 345 Hemi and 6 spd, or an updated version of the original Scrambler. I had an ’85 Scrambler, one of the best rigs Ive ever owned. Gimme that with a single cab setup, 345 Hemi/6spd (surprise) and I’m in. Basically some practicality sprinkled on to my fun and self indulgent ride.
Something like the Holden Maloo?
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/first-drives/holden-maloo-r8
I’m still hoping I might see one of these locally, given we’ve got a Vauxhall VXR showroom a few miles long the coast. Contrary to what was said when that article was written later versions did get imported into the UK and sold as part of the Vauxhall range.
You are in luck. https://www.smythkitcars.com/charger-ute I have to say it is tempting to get a retired police car, preferably complete with push bar and do one up. Doesn’t look that difficult of a build, once you get the courage to take a sawzall to a perfectly good car. Of course that is one of the reasons to start with a retired police car because it will be cheap thanks to the mess they make with the rear passenger compartment which of course would go away in the ute build.
The idea of a pickup based off of the likes of a Focus or Transit Connect is indeed interesting, but I’m making do just fine with my “old-school” Ranger. It’s a proven design (look how many businesses still use them), it’s easy to work on & get parts for, the base engine CAN tow if you plan ahead & keep total weight within reasonable limits, and I’ve been able to get up to 32 mpg out of mine with coasting & staying at consistent speeds as long as possible. Take that, RAM EcoDiesel & Chevy Colorado Duramax! It will be interesting to see how well the Ecoboost in the upcoming Ranger will do.
Having had a 2010 regular cab Ranger, I can if I had hindsight, I would have bought the extended cab version. The truck was roomy enough for my legs but I had to have the seat all the way back and everytime I turned to look sideways I was practically up against the back window.
My regular cab 2011 Colorado has a lot more in cab room, if I put the seat back, I can barely touch the pedals and I am 6ft 1in tall.
I think smaller pickup trucks would have sold better if the Big Three did not try to push folks into the bigger is better option and throw enough money on the hood for a F series truck to sell it over the small truck.
I think a Ranger/ Corado/Canyon/ Tacoma is probably the truck for most folks but when a F series is only a few dollars more they get that.
I could easily afford a brand new loaded F Series truck or GM truck but the smaller Colorado fits my needs for everything.
I actually think my next “rrucklet” is perhaps the Honda Ridgeline. I consider it to be a successor to the El Camino and it does everything I need with a truck.
Guys, it looks like this plan has been shut down before it even began: Ford has cancelled plans to sell any of the Focus variants (including the Active) in this country b/c of China tariffs. I’m normally not one to talk politics, but you can thank the Trump Administration for this sudden news. This leaves the Mustang as the only remaining “car” in Ford’s entire US lineup after the end of this decade. Guess we’ll have to hold on to our existing “compact” pickups while we still can. Shouldn’t we be building more vehicles here anyway?