Ranger Sales & Production Report - August 2026

[Texasota]

no where does it say that the aussies were awarded a new mission. It’s the same mission, design the ranger. I think it’s pretty likely that will continue through the next generation ranger.

i think that is probably bad for your F100 scenario, as if they had transferred design to Asia, I could see the F100 arising as a North American specific design like the Toyota Tacoma. But that is not the case.

The ranger has about the same amount of inventory in terms of months of sales as other vehicles like the maverick and bronco sport.

so the demand for the Ranger is being met at the current facility, MAP.

it doesn’t make sense to dedicate TTP to ford ranger, the demand isn’t there.

I think it likely TTP will be producing something else that looks more like the skunkworks electric vehicles, only hybrid. I guess the question is does that replace the maverick and bronco sport And shift production from Mexico? Or do they keep that line running?

that’s not what I read. Farley was making noises like maybe Ranger development would move out of Australia. It’s expensive and if Australia is going to ban diesels, does it make sense to be engineering a world ranger in Australia?

I read the same articles but we have known (since June) that Ford has confirmed the T6 development mission remains in OZ. That's what I was trying to point out.

no where does it say that the aussies were awarded a new mission. It’s the same mission, design the ranger. I think it’s pretty likely that will continue through the next generation ranger.

it doesn’t make sense to dedicate TTP to ford ranger, the demand isn’t there.

I understand where you are coming from if you think what is coming next is another generation Ranger with modest changes, but I don't think that is what is coming. I think this new truck (F-100 or whatever you want to call it) is going to slot in size between the current Ranger and the F-150.

Farley has said that it is going to be an affordable truck. I think they are going to achieve that with some of the same major design changes that we'll see in the next gen F-150. That will likely include a zonal electrical architecture (learned from the skunk works team), likely steer by wire and possibly even brake by wire. Think of all the semi-conductor chips, electronic modules, hydraulic systems and mechanical components that could be eliminated with these changes. That (and more) is how Ford makes this an affordable truck while also achieving healthy profit margins.

I also believe Ford is going after fleet sales in a big way with this affordable truck by providing multiple bed/cab configurations and a hybrid power train with Pro Power Onboard that contractors (and retail customers) love.

I think Ford sees this new truck significantly outselling today's Ranger and eating into Tacoma market share because of what I described above. Customers will get more truck at a more affordable price. And this is why it will be built at TTP. TTP is huge and there may be something else built there besides this T6.3 truck. Lots of speculation on BOF about what this might be.

So, I guess we can quibble about whether this is a "new mission" for OZ, but I don't think this is a next gen Ranger. It is an all new and very different truck that replaces the Ranger.

Sponsored

 

[purdyd]

I read the same articles but we have known (since June) that Ford has confirmed the T6 development mission remains in OZ. That's what I was trying to point out.


I understand where you are coming from if you think what is coming next is another generation Ranger with modest changes, but I don't think that is what is coming. I think this new truck (F-100 or whatever you want to call it) is going to slot in size between the current Ranger and the F-150.

Farley has said that it is going to be an affordable truck. I think they are going to achieve that with some of the same major design changes that we'll see in the next gen F-150. That will likely include a zonal electrical architecture (learned from the skunk works team), likely steer by wire and possibly even brake by wire. Think of all the semi-conductor chips, electronic modules, hydraulic systems and mechanical components that could be eliminated with these changes. That (and more) is how Ford makes this an affordable truck while also achieving healthy profit margins.

I also believe Ford is going after fleet sales in a big way with this affordable truck by providing multiple bed/cab configurations and a hybrid power train with Pro Power Onboard that contractors (and retail customers) love.

I think Ford sees this new truck significantly outselling today's Ranger and eating into Tacoma market share because of what I described above. Customers will get more truck at a more affordable price. And this is why it will be built at TTP. TTP is huge and there may be something else built there besides this T6.3 truck. Lots of speculation on BOF about what this might be.

So, I guess we can quibble about whether this is a "new mission" for OZ, but I don't think this is a next gen Ranger. It is an all new and very different truck that replaces the Ranger.

but it’s not like other companies aren’t doing the same thing. Do you thinK GM and toyota aren’t working on zonal architectures?

I don’t think anyone who drives a vehicle really gives a crap if the architecture is zonal or domain based.

Why would ford make a larger than ranger sized vehicle? Isn’t that the f150 already?

look I get you are excited about the future but really all we have now is conjecture.

 

[Texasota]

but it’s not like other companies aren’t doing the same thing. Do you thinK GM and toyota aren’t working on zonal architectures?

I don’t think anyone who drives a vehicle really gives a crap if the architecture is zonal or domain based.

Why would ford make a larger than ranger sized vehicle? Isn’t that the f150 already?

look I get you are excited about the future but really all we have now is conjecture.

Ford cares about zonal architecture because it reduces their costs and that means higher margins. That makes sense, right? And while most customers don't care about the technical details, they do care about cost, right?

I think I said it would slot between the Ranger and F-150. The F-150 is so big now that it doesn't fit in many garages and it's a pain in parking lots. The new truck can grow several inches in size and still be much smaller (at least shorter) than the F-150. So, no that wouldn't be the f-150. It also results in some more size separation between the Maverick and this new truck.

Sure, it is conjecture (plus some reliable sources). But it's okay to talk about it here and share thoughts, right? Or is that unwelcome on Ranger6G? I come from Ranger5G where these kinds of discussions were welcome and fun.

 

[HighDesertRanger]

I definitely hope Ford starts marketing the Ranger (or F-100) at some point in the near future. It's currently the best truck in the segment and it seems no one out side of internet forums knows it exists.

What I guess I don't understand is why Ford would want to make a larger mid-size truck than the current Ranger? Right now it's the same size as a Tacoma/Frontier/Colorado/Canyon. Why go even bigger? Unless the next gen F-150 is getting even bigger, they why?

 

[purdyd]

Ford cares about zonal architecture because it reduces their costs and that means higher margins. That makes sense, right? And while most customers don't care about the technical details, they do care about cost, right?

I think I said it would slot between the Ranger and F-150. The F-150 is so big now that it doesn't fit in many garages and it's a pain in parking lots. The new truck can grow several inches in size and still be much smaller (at least shorter) than the F-150. So, no that wouldn't be the f-150. It also results in some more size separation between the Maverick and this new truck.

Sure, it is conjecture (plus some reliable sources). But it's okay to talk about it here and share thoughts, right? Or is that unwelcome on Ranger6G? I come from Ranger5G where these kinds of discussions were welcome and fun.

sure and other companies will institute zonal architectures and cut costs. And ultimately if you buy a ford, gm, Toyota, etal cost is a factor but zonal architecture seems more like you have to do it rather than an advantage to one manufacturer.

conjecture is fine, but that is what it is. I don’t think everyone has to agree with your or my theories.

 

[daytoncarter]

Investment? Most vehicles are a depreciating asset.

Yes, a vehicle is an investment. Look at the definition: "the outlay of money usually for income or profit."

Emphasis on the word usually. In the strictest sense, the groceries that you bought last week were an investment. You traded that money for the opportunity to eat. Just like you trade the money for the opportunity to travel.

Scenario A: The Used Truck
Start: 40,000 miles. You buy it for roughly 15-20% off the new sticker price.
End: 100,000 miles. You have now crossed the 60k warranty cliff and hit the 100k psychological cliff.
Result: General Ford vehicles lose about 50% of their value after five years. More importantly, you had to pay out-of-pocket for any non-powertrain repairs during your entire ownership period.

Scenario B: The New Truck
Start: 0 miles. You pay full price.
End: 60,000 miles.
Result: The truck is just now hitting its first major depreciation threshold. Because midsize trucks hold value incredibly well, a 4- to 5-year-old Ford Ranger actually retains roughly 70% of its original value in the current market. Plus, almost every mile you drove was covered under the factory warranty.

Sponsored