2018 Ranger Raptor

[FTE217]

Just wish pass on some thoughts over the last 2 pages on certain posts....and yes I would have preferred a V6 at least - but I know at the same time this rig will run very well on dirt roads etc....but most will be on road.
Its a great off roader no doubt about it and Congrats articulated I love its look and suspension - ballsy looking beast.
In all my years traveling to the US - thats about 25times + and being in the Aftermarket attending AAAPEX/SEMA shows as well each year, never once have I heard any American I've come to know go on about fuel economy like we do here over the years, especially on V8's and F150/250/350's etcetc.....like give us a break for we know how cheap fuel/GAS is over there compared to ours hence our penchant re L/100 but when people buy performance do they really consider fuel economy ? I know I don't.
Newbies interested or buying a RR will get to know Raptor history for like any new purchase you do google searchs etc and what comes up, our RR and many F150 Raptors etc quoting V8's so they would get to learn Raptors to date have been V8 and its history pure interest, not just about its power or lack of re the 5.4, its the sound, I've watched owners typically there just do burn outs for kicks as they do, the ride feel a V8 sprung rig brings incl the FOX set up.
So there is/was expectations on my part.
Yep now a TTV6 will come/a Ecoboost - great stuff.
Times change and yes for certain markets today the power plant is not the same, we get the toe in the water 2.0T - it will still get you to work and back, it will be a hoot on hols going offroad and the beachs, the beachs I frequent north of Sydney have a speed limit mind you - can't go ballistic there, well you could till Mr Ranger gets you.
I'm looking forward to the next product cycle, I want it unless my lifestyle needs change before then.

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by articulatedsphinx

Can I just add something about all these BS reviews again.

Everest 2019 Bi-Turbo (2413kg Kerb Weight)

CarsGuide: "But this working partnership is a better match here, in the Everest, than it is in the Raptor, in terms of smooth delivery of power and torque at low and high speeds, as well as doing everything in an unfussed manner – low-key but still effective. "

Which Car:

"The 2.0-litre twin-turbo unit is a little vocal on cold start up but soon settles into a more mellow timbre, providing a real contrast to the 3.2-litre, which always sounds about as sultry as one of Marge Simpson’s sisters.

An allied bonus of paying the piffling $1190 impost for the 2.0 over the 3.2-litre engine is the inclusion of Ford’s ten-speed automatic transmission, rather than the six-speed unit that continues in 3.2-litre models. Look at the numbers and the 2.0-litre seems to hold all the aces. It’s more powerful by 14kW, generates 30Nm more torque, returns 7.1L/100km as an all-wheel-drive model rather than 8.5L/100km for the five-pot, and tows 3100kg rather than 3000kg. Having said that, there were some of my colleagues who preferred the more long-legged rangy feel of the old powerplant over the more terrier-like delivery of the 2.0-litre."

Ranger Raptor (2332 Kerb Weight)
Same engine and same transmission...less weight. "M8 the engine is ****, only orange juice and milk.."

So somehow, the same engine and transmission in one vehicle is a "bonus" and they sing its praises in the Everest, but a total cataclysmic disaster in the Raptor? I realise that the 2L is not what people wanted, but I really don't understand the ongoing bias towards the powertrain? Ford has still brought to market something that no other manufacturer had the cojones to do. Even Toyota wouldn't bring their TRD here. Instead they bring a bumper and sticker pack. Maybe they will put a better engine, maybe they won't, but it's still better than what we had before.

Not to mention the Everest is nigh on 74k for the Titanium which is the same price as a raptor!

One vehicle is an Everest Titanium, the other is a Raptor.

I trust you're able to differentiate between a premium model 4WD/SUV and a performance oriented 4WD/Truck.

No doubt the 2.0 in the Everest appears better than the 3.2; how much difference does the transmission make? How would the 3.2 compare to the 2.0 with an A10 behind the 3.2 and an A6 behind the 2.0?

This argument that the 2.0 in the Raptor is good is about as palatable as Turnbull selling the NEG to his colleagues.

[articulatedsphinx]

Originally Posted by Romulus

One vehicle is an Everest Titanium, the other is a Raptor.



I trust you're able to differentiate between a premium model 4WD/SUV and a performance oriented 4WD/Truck.



No doubt the 2.0 in the Everest appears better than the 3.2; how much difference does the transmission make? How would the 3.2 compare to the 2.0 with an A10 behind the 3.2 and an A6 behind the 2.0?



This argument that the 2.0 in the Raptor is good is about as palatable as Turnbull selling the NEG to his colleagues.

I’m not saying it’s better or even good. Forget the arguments of 2L this or that.

What I’m saying is they are comparing the identical features of the same motor and transmission combination. As in the shifting and powerband and driveability. Complaining about how smooth it is in the Everest and how “hunting and underpowered” in the Raptor.

It’s all a matter of perception.

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by articulatedsphinx

I’m not saying it’s better or even good. Forget the arguments of 2L this or that.

What I’m saying is they are comparing the identical features of the same motor and transmission combination. As in the shifting and powerband and driveability. Complaining about how smooth it is in the Everest and how “hunting and underpowered” in the Raptor.

It’s all a matter of perception.

But the comparison between the 3.2 and 2.0 isn't accurate as they are using different transmissions.

[articulatedsphinx]

Originally Posted by Romulus

But the comparison between the 3.2 and 2.0 isn't accurate as they are using different transmissions.

But they are comparing the same engine and transmission set in two near identical weight vehicles.

[jpd80]

What's not being seen is the benefits of the much lighter all alloy diesel in terms of weight over the front axle...

[Falcon SXR8]

Originally Posted by jpd80

What's not being seen is the benefits of the much lighter all alloy diesel in terms of weight over the front axle...

I doubt a few kg off the nose of a heavy 4wd will be anything noticeable.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Falcon SXR8

I doubt a few kg off the nose of a heavy 4wd will be anything noticeable.

We’re talking around 100kg, I’d imagine that makes a difference to the way
the steering feels and how it reacts when cornering, every bit helps.

[simon varley]

did anyone drive the EB Falcon compared to the Barra? that's the handling difference with 100kg off the front end that you'll see here. it transforms the car.

[Hemihunter]

Ford should have NOT have used the name RAPTOR in relation to this 2.0 TT.

Call it something else and none of this discussion would be taking place.
The SVT Raptor was specifically designed V8 and built for a purpose.

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by articulatedsphinx

But they are comparing the same engine and transmission set in two near identical weight vehicles.

Agreed. But the advantages of the 2.0 being touted over the 3.2 is inaccurate because of the different transmissions.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by Romulus

Agreed. But the advantages of the 2.0 being touted over the 3.2 is inaccurate because of the different transmissions.

You don't get it. read the articles he posted again.

Both 2019 Everest Titanium & Raptor have the same engine & trans. & both vehicles will be sold around the same price point.

[articulatedsphinx]

Originally Posted by Bevsta007

You don't get it. read the articles he posted again.



Both 2019 Everest Titanium & Raptor have the same engine & trans. & both vehicles will be sold around the same price point.

I think what the 3.2 club is trying to say is that the 3.2 with the 10 speed would be better.

[RANGEREST]

Originally Posted by articulatedsphinx

I think what the 3.2 club is trying to say is that the 3.2 with the 10 speed would be better.

Another thing to consider is putting 33 inch tyres on a 3.2 powered Ranger slows them down as well.
Possibly why they liked the 2.0 in the Everest but thought the RR was slow?

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by Bevsta007

You don't get it. read the articles he posted again.

Both 2019 Everest Titanium & Raptor have the same engine & trans. & both vehicles will be sold around the same price point.

I do get it. What I’m saying is there is no accurate comparison between the two engines as articulatedsphinx said.

[Vesper Martini]

You could put the 6 speed behind the 2.0 and it would still have more power and Torque & refinement.
but I see what your saying, I can only imagine how much better our 96KW Prado would go with 10 gears rather than the 4 it has..

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Romulus

I do get it. What I’m saying is there is no accurate comparison between the two engines as articulatedsphinx said.

And you can take it as read that Ford wanted it that way, no point in adding polish
to the 3.2 I-5 when it has less than three years to live....

The saddest part for me is that the Americans wanted in on smaller diesels, so took the
3.2 I-5 as a commercial grade diesel in Nth American Transit but then grab the 3.0 V6 Lion
for their F150 and give it the 10-speed auto....all of that happens when this last refresh
of Gen 1 T6 Ranger and Everest is already locked in.....a real F** my brown dog moment.

Blame America for being stop outs on T6 for so long and then deciding they want back in
right at the end of the product cycle. There was nothing stopping them asking for this
5, 6, or even 7 years ago...yeesh.

[Craig@AUDI]

Just drove the Everest 2.0L with the 10 speed and it's certainly a lot smoother and quieter than the 3.2L. No doubt people will have their concerns until they drive it themselves. Be interesting to see what the Ranger feels like in comparison.

[articulatedsphinx]

Originally Posted by Craig@CumberlandFord

Just drove the Everest 2.0L with the 10 speed and it's certainly a lot smoother and quieter than the 3.2L. No doubt people will have their concerns until they drive it themselves. Be interesting to see what the Ranger feels like in comparison.

Craig! Just the man I wanted to ask for the inside scoop on the ford delivery process. Do Australian trucks come with window stickers like in the US? I was told by the dealer a while back that my Raptor will enter production today, and I've got a VIN number.

However on ETIS the build date is still not updated, is their any way to track it more closely? How quickly do rangers go from factory to ship and where do they stop in Australia? Is it offloaded at one main port or a port in each state?

Thanks!

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by articulatedsphinx

Craig! Just the man I wanted to ask for the inside scoop on the ford delivery process. Do Australian trucks come with window stickers like in the US? I was told by the dealer a while back that my Raptor will enter production today, and I've got a VIN number.

However on ETIS the build date is still not updated, is their any way to track it more closely? How quickly do rangers go from factory to ship and where do they stop in Australia? Is it offloaded at one main port or a port in each state?

Thanks!

Your excitement is infectious...safe travels when the Raptor is in your hands.

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by jpd80

And you can take it as read that Ford wanted it that way, no point in adding polish
to the 3.2 I-5 when it has less than three years to live....

The saddest part for me is that the Americans wanted in on smaller diesels, so took the
3.2 I-5 as a commercial grade diesel in Nth American Transit but then grab the 3.0 V6 Lion
for their F150 and give it the 10-speed auto....all of that happens when this last refresh
of Gen 1 T6 Ranger and Everest is already locked in.....a real F** my brown dog moment.

Blame America for being stop outs on T6 for so long and then deciding they want back in
right at the end of the product cycle. There was nothing stopping them asking for this
5, 6, or even 7 years ago...yeesh.

For a country that prides itself on proclaiming being the greatest free market, the self protectionism in some of these corporates/US government is staggering. Yes Ranger would have diluted F-150's absolute cash cow sales however not competing with its opposition until now is a bigger problem. Finally they realized there is no point just protecting F-150 sales if you're going to lose the sale to the opposition...which is the bigger sin.

[articulatedsphinx]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

For a country that prides itself on proclaiming being the greatest free market, the self protectionism in some of these corporates/US government is staggering. Yes Ranger would have diluted F-150's absolute cash cow sales however not competing with its opposition until now is a bigger problem. Finally they realized there is no point just protecting F-150 sales if you're going to lose the sale to the opposition...which is the bigger sin.

But the thing is, the price of an f150 is nearly the same as a ranger. Also people don’t generally care about fuel economy as our trucks don’t even need to disclose these figures. Why buy a ranger when you can get an f150 for similar?

Ford kept itself afloat during the financial crisis by keeping relatively lean. I suspect this might have something to do with it. Also the ranger we had in the past was way, way smaller than the current model.

[articulatedsphinx]

https://youtu.be/0llFJ7oUcww

[jpd80]

Since the launch of T6 Ranger in early 2011, two things happened:
1, Last year, Ford sold 896,764 F-trucks in the US,out of 2,586,715 Ford vehicles.
2. F150 price creep now sees the preferred crew cabs up around the US$40K-$70K mark,
opening a nice little price gap below it for Ranger to go to work selling against Tacoma and Colorado.

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by articulatedsphinx

But the thing is, the price of an f150 is nearly the same as a ranger. Also people don’t generally care about fuel economy as our trucks don’t even need to disclose these figures. Why buy a ranger when you can get an f150 for similar?

Ford kept itself afloat during the financial crisis by keeping relatively lean. I suspect this might have something to do with it. Also the ranger we had in the past was way, way smaller than the current model.

The thing is -
$US40K to $US70K F-150 equates to approximately
$Aust58K to $Aust101K, add transportation costs and you're over $Aust-105K for the higher spec versions based on Comm Banks converter today. This is the cost of buying an F-150 in a Ford US dealership, not exporting. So you don't really get an F-150 for near Ranger money unless you take a budget F-150 and high end Ranger. And I assumed you can buy a RHD F-150 in the US. When Ranger is sold in the US we might get a better idea of cost differential in their market, putting aside market positioning.

[jpd80]

2019 US Ranger Configurator & Pricing - https://shop.ford.com/build/ranger/#/select/

Lariat (Wildtrak) Supercrew 2.3 EB 4x4 = USD$38,385 (~AUS$52,000)

[articulatedsphinx]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

The thing is -
$US40K to $US70K F-150 equates to approximately
$Aust58K to $Aust101K, add transportation costs and you're over $Aust-105K for the higher spec versions based on Comm Banks converter today. This is the cost of buying an F-150 in a Ford US dealership, not exporting. So you don't really get an F-150 for near Ranger money unless you take a budget F-150 and high end Ranger. And I assumed you can buy a RHD F-150 in the US. When Ranger is sold in the US we might get a better idea of cost differential in their market, putting aside market positioning.

The lower end F150s cost no where near 40k

[simon varley]

plus delivery
plus sales tax

and that's with no options. you don't even get a CD player! and you certainly don't get a towbar.

compare apples and apples why not?

[prydey]

Originally Posted by simon varley

. you don't even get a CD player!

What's a CD player?

[Nu66et]

This was the argument that came up when Ford first dropped Ranger. If you look at GM, the US Colorado starts at $20.5K whilst the Silverado 1500 starts at $28.3K. You can safely assume the build cost is alot closer than the $7.8K retail. Maybe now for Ford with the F150 going to an alluminium body, the difference in costs are better aligned.