No, it's just the market, with all the manufacturers setting an MSRP and then discounting from it. Again, we're seeing $4k discounts on Tacomas and $8k discounts on Colorados in this area. If Ford were advertising $15k discounts, then that would be noteworthy--but all they're doing is holding steady with the competition.
I think Ford people "getting it" is really a non-issue. The issue is that people don't do their research. Ford has marketed the numbers as best they can. Every single review, even the negative ones, acknowledge the good power the Ranger makes. I'm proof that you don't have to be a Ford guy. I've traditionally been a Tacoma guy (hence the Taco in my username) and I have owned 3. When I decided to get a new truck I looked at the marked, read reviews, and did my research. The Gen3 Tacoma is a huge letdown to me. I looked at the ranger, saw the engine and the reported numbers and said "no way in hell they are getting that kind of power!" A bit of research later, and I know it's true.
Ford will release 2nd quarter sales the beginning of July. Let's just wait and see what those numbers are before we argue that much about Ranger sales.
Or even better, just don't worry about it at all. Ford seems to be doing fine. No matter what numbers they hit, Tacoma World will complain that they're not selling "enough". So what?
Quote one insult. I do not insult in posts. Just add my opinion to the subject matter.
I agree Ford really should do a better job of communicating how well the 2.3/10 speed does - haven't really seen anything in the few ads I've seen that talks about it. The only place I've seen anything about it was in some of the early reviews when Ford engineers were being interviewed.
'
Ford certainly isn't pushing hard on ads for the Ranger. I suspect that's because they are still building up inventory: if you spend a bunch of money on an ad and convince someone to go to their dealer and the dealer doesn't have what you want, you've wasted that ad money. If you look at sales numbers for April & May, they've been selling reasonably well. (I understand some people only want to look at Jan/Feb/Mar and reject all other data, who knows why.) Some of the manufacturers have switched to quarterly numbers because they don't want to deal with monthly invester calls over sales figures, but the data is still out there. Take a look at http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/ford/ford-ranger/ and you'll see that the sales are increasing steadily. Production numbers are much harder to find, but they seem to be making somewhere between 5k & 10k per month now that they ramped up. Subtracting the number sold, that's not all that many per dealer given 3k dealerships in the US. Most cars & trucks have at least a couple of months of inventory on the lots, and there's no way Ford could possibly have been at that target for the first four months of the year. Maybe they are now, it'll be interesting to see the June sales figures and I'd love to know their current production rate. If we see them hit their inventory targets and they think they need to increase sales, then we'll see more ads. But I think they're playing a long game, and instead of trying to convince people that they made the right engine choice I think it makes more sense to simply get the trucks out there and let them speak for themselves. As long as they continue to sell, why spend money trying to push trucks on people who don't want them instead of selling the same truck to someone who doesn't need a hard sell to be convinced?
Based on postings on the blue oval forum, it sounds like they are building an average of around 500 a day, so monthly production at this point is somewhere in the neighborhood of 12,000 units give or take.
Cool. The last I remembered reading was 200/day but couldn't find anything newer.
I think it's definitely a long game. Among other things, I expect the bronco will also have the 2.3 engine, and the more they can do to get it out now on the ranger the easier that rollout will be. By the time they're at full capacity for bronco & the next ranger, it'll be a much easier sell of "look at how much we've added to this already solid performer that you can find all over". Or they'll have a string of engine issues and crater, but there are no guarantees in life.
LOL That didn't work for me. I have mismatched seams on the hood and dust under the paint in some areas which is not enough of a bother to deal with it.. Fit is my biggest complaint. but not enough to sway buying another. Also, paint blemishes. Possibly new truckitits. We Early adopters usually have more fit and finish issues. I get that.
One of the reasons I decided to order a "first model year" vehicle was that this really isn't a first model year - All the important stuff in the truck has been vetted already. New sheet metal panels aren't going to cause any major failures and the powertrain has been proven in other models. The frame was beefed up, and some suspension changes occurred, but pretty much everything else is like it has been since 2012.Cool. The last I remembered reading was 200/day but couldn't find anything newer.
I think it's definitely a long game. Among other things, I expect the bronco will also have the 2.3 engine, and the more they can do to get it out now on the ranger the easier that rollout will be. By the time they're at full capacity for bronco & the next ranger, it'll be a much easier sell of "look at how much we've added to this already solid performer that you can find all over". Or they'll have a string of engine issues and crater, but there are no guarantees in life.
I think we all hope that.
yeah the 2.3 eco and 10-speed are proven. That was a big factor for me.One of the reasons I decided to order a "first model year" vehicle was that this really isn't a first model year - All the important stuff in the truck has been vetted already. New sheet metal panels aren't going to cause any major failures and the powertrain has been proven in other models. The frame was beefed up, and some suspension changes occurred, but pretty much everything else is like it has been since 2012.
I'm hoping it is more like the former ("a solid performer") than the latter ("crater").
