2018 Ranger Raptor

[naddis01]

Originally Posted by jpd80

It's not the same situation, there is broad acceptance of turbo I-4 diesels in this segment, the V6 trucks are the exception because, manufacturers like VW desperately needed something to stand out with their Amarok to get noticed.

You could argue that there was acceptance of 4 cylinder large cars with the Camry as well considering its the same car as the Aurion.

Generally most of those 4 cylinder diesels utes have around 20% (or more) greater capacity than a 2.0L. To me the VW example highlights what buyers in this segment are after. With the current Ranger, what percentage are 4 cylinder? About 15%?

The PX Ranger became popular because it was such a step change for the segment. I feel that if the 3.2 is replaced with a smaller capacity engine with similar outputs, albeit more efficient, the Ranger will allow the competition to catch up. Especially when there will be the 3.0 V6 suitable sitting in the wings. It is for this reason I think Ford will employ a similar strategy to what they currently have and will run with the 2.0 and 3.0 engines for our market.

[nstg8a]

All this talk about economy and efficiency.... Since when was a raptor any of those things? It's supposed to be the biggest baddest off roader you can buy.

Not the most sensible.

[roKWiz]

Can't wait to see the racing stripes and 2.0ltr bold black sticker pack.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by naddis01

You could argue that there was acceptance of 4 cylinder large cars with the Camry as well considering its the same car as the Aurion.

False analogy, large cars were dominated by six and eight cylinder engines, the Camry is the lead example of large mid size followed by Mazda 6 and Mondeo, all four cylinders.

Generally most of those 4 cylinder diesels utes have around 20% (or more) greater capacity than a 2.0L. To me the VW example highlights what buyers in this segment are after. With the current Ranger, what percentage are 4 cylinder? About 15%?

The PX Ranger became popular because it was such a step change for the segment. I feel that if the 3.2 is replaced with a smaller capacity engine with similar outputs, albeit more efficient, the Ranger will allow the competition to catch up. Especially when there will be the 3.0 V6 suitable sitting in the wings. It is for this reason I think Ford will employ a similar strategy to what they currently have and will run with the 2.0 and 3.0 engines for our market.

I'm not saying that there won't be a 3.0 Powerstroke, just that it seems unlikely for the moment,
Thailand launch would suggest a 2.0 litre diesel Raptor, one with similar power to the current 3.2 I-5.
Such an engine would suit Ford's purposes perfectly, allowing it to cut the 3.2 loose and maximize I-4 sales.

Toyota Hilux, Ranger's main competiton uses a large 2.8 I-4 diesel as does Colorado,
what better way to punish the main competition than with a smaller more efficient 2.0 diesel
that has the same get up and go as their bigger units....

Originally Posted by nstg8a

All this talk about economy and efficiency.... Since when was a raptor any of those things? It's supposed to be the biggest baddest off roader you can buy.

Not the most sensible.

i understand that you can't get your head around this but consider the high series 2.0 litre diesel as a substitution for the 3.2 I5 with absolutely no penalty and in fact picking up a lot of fuel economy.

Think who is buying the bulk of these vehicles, cashed up tradies who want more than just outright power at any cost. If Ford can give them more efficiency with no loss of performance, then that's the real game changer.


The 3.0 v6 Powerstroke could well be coming as another engine option but given Raptor's Thailand launch, the 3.0 V6 seems a remote chance at this point..

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Think who is buying the bulk of these vehicles, cashed up tradies who want more than just outright power at any cost.

All the 'cashed up tradies' that I know buy the bog standard ute for work and have a 'proper' car for after work/weekend use.

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

All the 'cashed up tradies' that I know buy the bog standard ute for work

Or a real truck that can carry a payload.

[383hq]

So they'll be buying the Chevrolet Silverado from HSV then?
6.6 litre v8 duramax diesel with allison trans....


https://www.goauto.com.au/future-mod...-08/68035.html

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by jpd80

It's not the same situation, there is broad acceptance of turbo I-4 diesels in this segment, the V6 trucks are the exception because, manufacturers like VW desperately needed something to stand out with their Amarok to get noticed.



.

Acceptance of I4 diesels in manufacturers that only sell I4 diesel. Every ute that offers a larger diesel engine sells more of the larger engine over the I4.

Also look at most duel cab utes, they are owned by non enthusiasts who want a good all rounder.
Ranger Raptor isn't targeting the average person, it's for enthusiasts. People who drop 80k on a car are not going to be worried as much about fuel economy of a V6 diesel, which is pretty low anyway compared at half the vehicles on the road.

Originally Posted by roKWiz

Can't wait to see the racing stripes and 2.0ltr bold black sticker pack.

Ford will charge 10k for that pack and people will buy it too.
Put on some sweet badges and black alloys too.

[spvd02]

I was under the impression that under-sized engines with turbochargers tend to drink much more fuel than the factory claim. Real-world economy is much further off the claim than larger capacity, particularly n/a engines. You would want to be able to coast 'off-boost' if fuel saving is the aim. Smaller engines will rely more heavily on boost, and there goes your fuel economy...

That, and fuel economy should be nowhere near top priority for the Raptor. It is a performance vehicle, so it should have better-than-adequate performance. A 2.0L diesel will not provide such performance - it's as simple as that. If a 2L diesel is what it turns out to be, I would not expect it to sell. I certainly would look elsewhere if it were my money...

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

All the 'cashed up tradies' that I know buy the bog standard ute for work and have a 'proper' car for after work/weekend use.

Then how come Ford sells so many $55K XLT crew cabs, and even more expensive WildTraks?
Figures don't like, a lot of people that buy Ranger aren't afraid of opening their wallets
and a lot of people who buy Ranger don't use them as a work truck per se...
That's the great misinterpretation by people outside looking in with their own values.

$80K for a Raptor is expensive but do we know that's the actual price or journo talk?
or is it about to replace the Wildtrak?

In any regard, it's no more expensive than a high series Everest or Prado
and I'd bet there will be a bit of cross over between those brackets.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by spvd02

I was under the impression that under-sized engines with turbochargers tend to drink much more fuel than the factory claim. Real-world economy is much further off the claim than larger capacity, particularly n/a engines. You would want to be able to coast 'off-boost' if fuel saving is the aim. Smaller engines will rely more heavily on boost, and there goes your fuel economy...

In petrol, you are correct but when it comes to diesel, you're clearly mistaken,
huge advances have occurred in the smaller turbo diesel in recent years,
the power and torque achieved by the latest 2.0 D approximates the 3.2 I-5 and
Terrirory's 2.7 V6 diesel, that's how far we've come in the last 10 years.

[jpd80]

Once again, I'll be happy to be proven wrong and we get a 3.0 Powerstroke,
but with the announcement in Thailand, I just don't see it happening.

But wouldn't be funny as if dear old Geoff Polites' 2.0 Ecoboost Ranger Mules became something years later....

[CyberWasp]

Could there be any hope of different Engines for different markets?

Does anyone know the sales of Ranger in the different markets and where Australia actually ranks?

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Then how come Ford sells so many $55K XLT crew cabs, and even more expensive WildTraks?
Figures don't like, a lot of people that buy Ranger aren't afraid of opening their wallets
and a lot of people who buy Ranger don't use them as a work truck per se...
That's the great misinterpretation by people outside looking in with their own values.

I have no idea why they sell so many.

As for the 'outside looking in' comment, I'm only going on what I see tradies drive when they come to my house, my wife's business and various building sites around town.

[spvd02]

Originally Posted by jpd80

In petrol, you are correct but when it comes to diesel, you're clearly mistaken,
huge advances have occurred in the smaller turbo diesel in recent years,
the power and torque achieved by the latest 2.0 D approximates the 3.2 I-5 and
Terrirory's 2.7 V6 diesel, that's how far we've come in the last 10 years.

How is it different for diesel than it is for petrol? Plenty of diesel owners have been disappointed with their real world economy figures compared to the factory claim. These 'huge advances' you're speaking about relate to power, but not real world fuel economy.

The Territory's v6 was already old when it was launched, so the technology has not necessarily progressed as quickly as you say. Everyone was hoping for a 600nm 3.0L v6 that was quite new at the time. Not much progression from those figures in the last 10 years...

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by spvd02

I was under the impression that under-sized engines with turbochargers tend to drink much more fuel than the factory claim. Real-world economy is much further off the claim than larger capacity, particularly n/a engines. You would want to be able to coast 'off-boost' if fuel saving is the aim. Smaller engines will rely more heavily on boost, and there goes your fuel economy...

I had an Ecoboost Kuga as a loan car once. It was using about 12L/100 around town.
Yes I confirmed it was pretty accurate when I filled up the fuel based on my Kms traveled.
Maybe it should be called the 'Boost' because there was nothing Eco about it. I wasn't aiming to achieve the best economy, just driving as quick as I do in every car I drive.

My V6 petrol Grand Cherokee uses similar amount of fuel around town even though it's larger in every way and even a bit quicker. GC isn't know as a fuel miser or at cutting edge of fuel economy technology.

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by jpd80

i understand that you can't get your head around this but consider the high series 2.0 litre diesel as a substitution for the 3.2 I5 with absolutely no penalty and in fact picking up a lot of fuel economy.

Which makes sense for the every day models, but a raptor is certainly not that.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by spvd02

How is it different for diesel than it is for petrol? Plenty of diesel owners have been disappointed with their real world economy figures compared to the factory claim.

Seriously a Turbo I-4 petrol engine in a Ute is going to give even worse fuel economy than a diesel, we know that every manufacturer is gaming Euro test cycles but diesels still give much better fuel economy than their turbo petrol counterparts, those engines drink fuel in heavier vehicles.

I'll give you an example,
a 2.7 EB F150 with 10AT towed 7,000 lb trailer over a 98 mile test loop and got US 9.1 mpg (26 litres / 100 km)
On the same test loop, a 3.0 V6 Diesel Ram 1500 got 13.1 mpg (18 litres/100 km) That's nearly 50% improvement with a heavier truck.

These 'huge advances' you're speaking about relate to power, but not real world fuel economy.

See, the buyer has the choice of driving it gently and getting better economy or driving it
like his older larger 3.2 I-5 and getting similar performance, the tech and brake specific
fuel economy is getting better. A possible advantage I see for Ford is that they can drop the 3.2 I-5
and supply the lower cost I-4 with similar power - does that sound like the Ford we all know?

Another example,
The company I work for switched from D22 Navaras 4x4 crew cab ST - average 10 litres/100 km
to Renault Kangoo Vans with 1.5 TD, 18 months of running and the new vans have a delivered
fleet average of 5.5 liters/100 km. Sure, they're different vehicles but it shows what is possible
even with continually loaded vehicles.

The Territory's v6 was already old when it was launched, so the technology has not necessarily progressed as quickly as you say. Everyone was hoping for a 600nm 3.0L v6 that was quite new at the time. Not much progression from those figures in the last 10 years...

The the Land Rover engine deal made the 3.o Lion V6 engine exclusive to them, only the 2.7 was available.
The reason that technology in diesel engines has not advanced as quickly in Australia
is mostly due to less fuel pricing pressure than Europe, we are getting trickle down advances
as our country can afford to keep fuel price pressure off our leading vehicles.

[roKWiz]

Seems like these little turbo 4 cylinder, 3.0ltr and under (car) diesel engines don't have the reliability of their truck diesel relatives as there are so many of them for sale in wreckers yards around Oz. Just a flick through ebay and gumtree shows there's plenty of has blown motor description, diesel engine cars and vans for sale.

As for the advances in bigger diesel engine economy, last time I heard, many a truck owner and driver were sick of lousy fuel economy brought on by computer controlled emission diesel technology compared with mechanical injected engines.
Commercially these things are costing transport companies money which is then past on to Joe consumer.

[bernbo]

All this debate about whether the new diesel is any good gets away from the fact that the raptor's history in the f150 line is in off road racing i.e plenty of power, revs and suspension travel. I think if the rumours are true theu have missed the mark in the name. It seems that the ranger peacock is an upgraded wild track not a true raptor; another example of ford aus takibg us all as uneducated and unable to use Google.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by bernbo

All this debate about whether the new diesel is any good gets away from the fact that the raptor's history in the f150 line is in off road racing i.e plenty of power, revs and suspension travel. I think if the rumours are true theu have missed the mark in the name. It seems that the ranger peacock is an upgraded wild track not a true raptor; another example of ford aus takibg us all as uneducated and unable to use Google.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Yes, If you want to sell a performance look, use a performance engine.

[Bossxr8]

There’s more to off road performance than speed. These will handle a bush trail like a king. How many people who buy one will do baja style high speed desert running? 2 fifths of f all. It’s not even really a thing in australia.

Some people on here need to get real. We don’t really have anything like the americans do in terms of baja style tracks. Need to face facts that big petrol motors in dual cab utes is a US thing only.

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

There’s more to off road performance than speed. These will handle a bush trail like a king. How many people who buy one will do baja style high speed desert running? 2 fifths of f all. It’s not even really a thing in australia.

Some people on here need to get real. We don’t really have anything like the americans do in terms of baja style tracks. Need to face facts that big petrol motors in dual cab utes is a US thing only.

Plus I'm tipping it'll have a 10 Spd auto that'll be tuned to make the best of the engine.

[bernbo]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

There’s more to off road performance than speed. These will handle a bush trail like a king. How many people who buy one will do baja style high speed desert running? 2 fifths of f all. It’s not even really a thing in australia.

Some people on here need to get real. We don’t really have anything like the americans do in terms of baja style tracks. Need to face facts that big petrol motors in dual cab utes is a US thing only.

2 fifths of f all of these things will see a bush track as well. I doubt anyone who can afford one will take it bashing. You can buy a rig set properly for tracks for a lot less coin. These will be purchased by posers who drive all year round with a roof top tent on for their yearly weekend at the national park.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

There’s more to off road performance than speed. These will handle a bush trail like a king. How many people who buy one will do baja style high speed desert running? 2 fifths of f all. It’s not even really a thing in australia.

Some people on here need to get real. We don’t really have anything like the americans do in terms of baja style tracks. Need to face facts that big petrol motors in dual cab utes is a US thing only.

Doesn't need to be petrol, just a decent improvement in power and torque over the 3.2.
I agree, a big petrol engined double cab would have a very small market here, but surely there's a diesel in the ford world that is better?

[spvd02]

If they're going the 2L, call it 'Sauropodamorph' instead (google it), forget Baja mode and replace it with crawl control. At least then it can live up to expectations :-)

[Hemihunter]

Just drop the name "raptor" as it will never be.

[simon varley]

Originally Posted by nstg8a

Doesn't need to be petrol, just a decent improvement in power and torque over the 3.2.

well the bi-turbo Mondeo has 210PS and 450Nm (compared to 200PS 470Nm in current Ranger) so you'd be pretty sure the Raptor would be better than that.

[jpd80]

Could it be that everyone is correct?

This is all about how to transition all of Ford's 3.2 Ranger buyers onto something new
we are not sure what that will be exactly but some here have strong views that
capacity should not be diminished - i get that i really do.

So, are we going to see the Thai launch of Ranger Raptor give Asian markets
an new strong engine that suits their needs and another engine option for elsewhere.

Thinking about this, it's clear that Raptor will mean different things to buyers in Asia,
Australia and North America where Ranger starts production in about ten months time..

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

There’s more to off road performance than speed. These will handle a bush trail like a king. How many people who buy one will do baja style high speed desert running? 2 fifths of f all. It’s not even really a thing in australia.

Some people on here need to get real. We don’t really have anything like the americans do in terms of baja style tracks. Need to face facts that big petrol motors in dual cab utes is a US thing only.

How many people on this forum own XR8 and XR6T? Why would you? You cannot use it's full capabilities on the road. 2/5s of f all people take high performance cars to race tracks. They should just buy a Camry hybrid and save money on fuel costs.

Some people need to get real we don't have autobahns like Germany does. Need to face the facts, fast cars on public roads in a German thing only.

But also as others have said, I doesn't need to be a V8 petrol in the Ranger Raptor. Just something that has decent power gains over the standard Ranger.