The new 2018 Ranger Raptor with the Lawnmower engine

Submitted: Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:49
ThreadID: 136270 Views:3527 Replies:21 FollowUps:64
This Thread has been Archived
Well, it looks like Ford have shot themselves in the foot again.

They produce a new model Ranger in 2012 with a decent sized 3.2L diesel - then they produce the new top-of-the-wozza 2018 Ranger Raptor - and fit it with a twin-turbo 2.0L diesel - and then they reduce the towing capacity by a full tonne, to 2500kgs!

Good one, Ford! It looks like the same marketing people who tried to sell us their big Australian-built sedan for over 25 years - and who failed miserably with regularly-declining big-sedan sales, for those 25 years - are still in charge.

I guess these are the same people who totally resisted the introduction of any diesel to the Ford range - constantly telling us buyers only wanted petrol engines - while the Japanese and Europeans cleaned up with roaring sales of lightweight, economical, long-life diesels.

Only when the foreign-produced diesels had a stranglehold on the market, did Ford belatedly introduce diesels to their range. Another own goal.

I can only guess that this new 2.0L twin-turbo engine in the Ford Ranger Raptor makes its maximum torque at 5800RPM - and it will consume fuel with a thirst equal to a 4.0L 6 cylinder petrol Falcon.

I can see where, not long after the official release of the new Ranger Raptor, there will be a burgeoning market for companies involved in engine upgrade swaps and engineering increases to GVM and towing capacity.

I don't know why Ford didn't go the whole hog, and outsource the new Raptors engine supply to Rotax, for this joke of a ute!

Cheers, Ron.
Back Expand Un-Read 1 Moderator

Reply By: Pauly_T - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 13:47

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 13:47
It's not about the engine. It's all about the suspension. The off-road racing suspension is the reason why people want and buy the raptor or so the PR people would have us believe.
AnswerID: 616886

Reply By: Malcom M - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 13:52

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 13:52
Guess you wont be buying one then?
AnswerID: 616889

Reply By: Member - cruza25 - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 14:04

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 14:04
Is it the same ingenium engine from the jag/disco/range rover stable
2 litre twin turbo
132 kw 430 nm torque 7lts/100 kms

Better than a 2.8 prado

Seems too small to me but the euro and us markets are where the sales numbers are. They wouldn’t redevelop a big 4.2 turbo for the relatively small Aussie market.
Cheers
Mike
AnswerID: 616890

Follow Up By: gbc - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 14:26

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 14:26
Don't forget the 10 speed auto box. It's not a van dragger, it is a production class desert racer and for that it should be just great. There's no surprises that the 'target demographic' of EO is largely unimpressed.
If you want a big cubic inch engine you'd better dig one out of the recycling bin and keep it because with the emissions standards they won't be coming back anytime soon.
2
FollowupID: 888298

Follow Up By: Member - peter_mcc - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 14:41

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 14:41
gbc - haha, I'm under 50 so don't fit the EO target demographic according to another post! To me it looks great - I want tow a camper trailer so 2500kgs towing is fine. If you're going to drag a huge van around you don't need desert racer suspension 'cause the van isn't going to hold together at those speeds.

I'm not sold on a dual cab ute - my Prado is so much nicer than the BT50 I borrowed for a bit - but something like the Raptor might be better. It will be interesting to see how much it can carry - no doubt it will be reduced from the standard Ranger as well
1
FollowupID: 888299

Follow Up By: Ron N - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 14:42

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 14:42
No, Ford are saying it's a completely brand-new design engine.

157Kw (210HP for us old geezers) and 500Nm torque (368 ft lbf).

Not even a mention of fuel consumption in any of the reviews.
Obviously, if you desperately want a Raptor, fuel consumption is of no concern.

Nephew has a full-size F150 Raptor with the 6.2L V8.
Got to admit, the off-road performance is stunning - but the fuel consumption is not something you want to worry about.

Neither is the pricing, I seem to recall it cost him over $180,000 more than 2 years ago.
He loves it, reckons it's the best 4WD he's ever owned - and he uses it regularly on freshly-bulldozed firebreaks, chasing his dozers as they fight fires.

Myself, I cannot ever bring myself to owning a Ford ever again, after my Ford ownership experiences of poor backup, faulty assembly, outrageous parts prices, and poor resale values.

I love my Toyotas, and I think I'll be sticking with them for the foreseeable future.

Cheers, Ron.
2
FollowupID: 888300

Follow Up By: gbc - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 14:55

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 14:55
Fuel consumption will be good or it won't pass emissions requirements. We've got a fleet of utes and the Toyotas are middle of the road. I'm no Ford fan either but my PX ranger will be 5 y.o. this year and is doing the business just fine. Hilux buyers can thank a Ranger owner for their prices and upgrades - it has made Toyota sit up. One of our subbies has an F150 Raptor as well - can't park them anywhere. And most importantly - I'm under 50 too - just haha.
1
FollowupID: 888304

Follow Up By: 9900Eagle - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 15:04

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 15:04
Guess some have to hate something in their lives to be happy. So I think I might start hating my faultless 5 1/2 year old Ranger. Hang on I am happy so I cancel that last statement.

6
FollowupID: 888305

Reply By: mountainman - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 15:22

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 15:22
Another arm chair critic alive and well. ...
Have you actually driven the vehicle....noooo
Do you know of anyone that has..... nooo

Its a new model.
How about take a chill pill than boast your superb blind expertise on something you havent even seen in person.
Stats and specs are just that , in the real world it could actually drive really well.
Look at the recent 2ltr twin turbo navara.
Selling quite nicely considering the doomsday sayers
Or even the vw has a twin turbo 2ltr
Selling heaps.

Nothing like a arm chair critic blabbing off crap when the vehicle isnt even in the country yet.
If you want to tow a decent load they (ford) may be pushing the market to a f150 or sized vehicle.
Who am i to know.
These might just be show pony vehicles that are all about the looks
I dare say for some people 2500kg towing would be amble for a certain percentage of thepopulation.
And those that never tow, this would be ample
Raa raa raaa
Back to my nanna nap.....ha ha
AnswerID: 616891

Follow Up By: Ron N - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 15:36

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 15:36
Didn't say I'd driven it, or know anyone that has.
Bit hard to do so, when the model hasn't even been delivered to our shores yet.

I'm reading the release news, and the reviews from the journos allowed to drive it.

Going for a drive in it, is nothing like owning a vehicle for an extended period of time and finding out the faults the journos reviews omitted to mention.

Never seen any 2.0L engine perform like a 3.0L or 4.0L engine, no matter how much the breathless hype tells us it's the equivalent.

A large number of us punters used to drive 1.5L and 2.0L 4 cyl engines in the 1950's and 1960's - and then we all realised that they were only good for Pommy roads and conditions, so we all wised up and bought 6 cyls and diesels.

I guess the true believers will still fork out $80K just for the ride, and keep telling themselves that engine size doesn't matter! LOL
3
FollowupID: 888306

Follow Up By: Shaker - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 16:15

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 16:15
Does size really matter?
In the early 1980s F1 cars were either 3.0 litre single turbo or 1.5 litre twin turbo, the 1.5s put out well over 1000bhp & consistently beat the 3.0 litre cars.
So, it might pay to wait & see what happens!
"Jesus loves you"
Nice to hear in church, but not in a Mexican prison!

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 888307

Follow Up By: RMD - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 19:53

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 19:53
Comparing F1 engines and cars to 4WD’s is a bit pointless.
3
FollowupID: 888322

Follow Up By: Shaker - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 08:09

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 08:09
F1 is a development ground for vehicle technology of which some is incorporated in modern 4wds, anyway an engine is an engine!

"Jesus loves you"
Nice to hear in church, but not in a Mexican prison!

Member
My Profile  Send Message

1
FollowupID: 888341

Follow Up By: Steve - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 21:40

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 21:40
Ron #888306

Not just Pommy roads but roads that they drive on in the “outside world”. Australia doesn’t loom large in their considerations with our crap roads.

0
FollowupID: 888405

Reply By: rocco2010 - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 17:34

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 17:34
There is a market out there for blinged up utes that will most likely never be used for the purposes that many people on here use utes for.
Remember when Toyota sold the supercharged V6 Hilux TRD? I didn't see many of them on Pilbara minesites or towing camper trailers through the Kimberley.
Saw one at my local shop ocasionally driven by a young guy with pretty girl in the passenger seat. It had been further modified with 20 inch or something alloys and low profile tyres. Practical? No. But I bet he loved it.
If Ford reckon they can make a dollar selling these good luck to 'em. Buying one won't be compulsory.
Cheers
AnswerID: 616896

Follow Up By: Dean K3 - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 17:46

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 17:46
I could say same thing about the maloo ute and ford eqivelents with the V8 engines low profile tyres - some couldn't even get over a gumnut.

Let alone as a tradies vehicle be parked on kerb of a road, I do accept watchign them as side show to v8 super cars was more excitign then main event cars
0
FollowupID: 888309

Follow Up By: rocco2010 - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 18:23

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 18:23
Dean

My neighbour's son had one of those utes, some sort of Holden that was lower than a snakes belly with rubber bands for tyres.

I didn't need an alarm clock when he was starting work early in summer. It would rattle my windows at idle. But he was a good kid, never revved it hard in his own street.

Now he has gone the other way. Has an 80 series Landcruiser, lifted and on big muddies that he is putting drawers and stuff in the back.

Cheers

0
FollowupID: 888312

Follow Up By: rumpig - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 18:48

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 18:48
Builder I used to work for had a nicely modded SS ute that carried plenty of gear for the renos we did, inside the tray looked ordinary but the bling on the outside (lowered and nice wheels) and work done on the motor didn't hinder it being a work ute at all. I doubt the tyres legally stood up to the vehicles weight carrying rating, but I could be wrong.
1
FollowupID: 888313

Follow Up By: Member - David M (SA) - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 22:05

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 22:05
"Buying one won't be compulsory"
Unless it comes with a pretty girl in the passenger seat. :)
Dave.
2
FollowupID: 888328

Follow Up By: rocco2010 - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 22:10

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 22:10
David

I will buy two

1
FollowupID: 888330

Reply By: Michael H9 - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 19:38

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 19:38
Ford's been doing 2 litreish CRD diesels since at least 2000, (Puma), long before the Japs were. They just didn't put them in local Ford branded cars. They've been in Land Rovers, Volvos, Peugots etc all with FMA (Ford Motor Company) stamped on them. The Fords in Europe like Mondeos, had the small CRD diesels in them. The Japs have been late to the party with smaller high output CRD motors. My little Ford branded 2.2 CRD circa 2008, has 300k on it and hasn't been touched yet, so longevity doesn't seem to be an issue. Emissions standards are the driving force behind all of this, so we have to get used to it.
AnswerID: 616899

Follow Up By: Shaker - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 19:47

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 19:47
I am fairly sure the Puma motor was in the Ford Transit van.

"Jesus loves you"
Nice to hear in church, but not in a Mexican prison!

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 888319

Follow Up By: gbc - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 19:50

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 19:50
Ranger has had a 2.2 since the px was released also. Just don’t hear about them too much. The 3.2 never made it to a lot of euro countries, they are mostly 2.2 over their. I drive one when mine gets serviced. They aren’t terrible.
1
FollowupID: 888320

Follow Up By: 9900Eagle - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 04:51

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 04:51
Shaker,quote from the workshop manual. "SECTION 303-01C Engine — 3.2L Duratorq-TDCi (148kW/200PS) - Puma"
0
FollowupID: 888336

Reply By: Hoyks - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 20:48

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 20:48
I'd give it the benefit of the doubt. Its a Sports Utility, probably the first real effort from the factory. Toyota tries with the HiLux, but not real hard.

In a sports vehicle, then weight is the enemy, so shedding a few kg in the engine bay is a good thing.Yes it lacks the cc's, but the spec isn't that bad.
The current 3.2 has 147kW and 470Nm
Raptor with a 2L has 157kW and 500Nm

The difference is that the new one will have a 10 speed auto and will keep the motor in the peak power/torque band for longer.

I don't think they would sell many towbars for Jaguars. Its more aimed at the cashed up young bloke to stick some dirt bikes in the back than haul a 2 ton van from one end of the country to the other.
AnswerID: 616901

Reply By: swampy - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 22:48

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 22:48
HI
Ford released dyno charts for the earlier Ranger PK/J /bt50
The engines were 2.5 and 3.0lt . The 3.0lt made 30% more torque !!!

Now get a 2 ltr . Unless it revs like a F1 car ,the 2ltr will most likely rev a little higher than other diesels and be boosted of its face . All these adjustments will possibly give higher consumption when driven hard and wear and tare will effect all components at rebuild . Remember lazy engines do last and lug loads well .

Ford has not listened to customers for years .

4---5ltr diesel now ya talkin minimum.
Oh look the Usa Raptor great petrol /diesel not the poor excuse we get here .
Another European influenced piece of crap.
to small a engine
poor economy when pushed hard
load capacity a joke
AnswerID: 616904

Reply By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 22:50

Tuesday, Feb 13, 2018 at 22:50
Read somewhere its going to retail for $70k - nobody is going to pay that for a 2L ute.
2012 Landcruiser 200 Altitude
2015 New Age MR16E Deluxe
2003 Tvan

Member
My Profile  Send Message

AnswerID: 616905

Follow Up By: Member - silkwood - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 23:24

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 23:24
I'll bet they will.
1
FollowupID: 888367

Reply By: Member - DOZER - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 08:57

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 08:57
so go buy a silverado then...
b4 you bag me out, walk a mile in my shoes, then your a mile away and have my shoes :)

Member
My Profile  Send Message
Classifieds: Bt50/Ranger Speedy grande2 18x8 alloys (x4)

AnswerID: 616912

Follow Up By: Members - Bow & Nan - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:11

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:11
Close, I bought a Ram
"Work interferes with living"

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 888344

Follow Up By: Ron N - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 15:21

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 15:21
Buying Silverados and Rams and F150 Raptors is limited to those amongst us who rank in the multi-millionaire stakes - and that is less than 0.01% of the population.(According to official figures, there's just over 300,000 millionaires in our population of 24 million).

I don't think anyone who is contemplating purchasing a Ford Ranger Raptor at $75,000 to $80,000, is going to purchase a Silverado, Ram or F150 Raptor, at $160,000 to $180,000, as an alternative.
0
FollowupID: 888352

Follow Up By: Members - Bow & Nan - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 15:37

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 15:37
You can buy a good used yank tank for $80,000 and a new one for just over $130,000
"Work interferes with living"

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 888354

Reply By: Mick O - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 09:11

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 09:11
It seems that we have come full circle. I'm not really in a position to, nor prepared to comment on the new Ford but I am reminded of my first 4x4, one of the first Nissan 720 Kingcab 4x4's to grace our shores in 1983. I'd previously had the 2WD version of the same ute. Both were powered by a naturally aspirated thumping huge L18 motor fresh from the Datsun 180B. Yes 1800cc'c of gut wrenching power.....NOT.

I remember checking out the 4x4 mags at the time and lamented the yanks version which held a V6 petrol and even a turbo option. What I could have done with that!

Regardless, that ute went most places that I would travel today in conditions that are probably worse, on tyres that are old tech when considering the scientific marvels of today involving Kevlar etc.

I wouldn't have towed a van with it, or even a heavy trailer, but as a stand alone ute, with a bit of thought, careful driving and not being bloody stupid about where I put it, I never had a serious issue in quite a few kilometres of outback travel 1983-1989.

My point I suppose is that we might all be surprised at the capabilities, providing it's used in manner that's fit for purpose and within the specifications that clearly outline it's capabilities. Try hauling your 23' Bush Tracker up the Frenchmans Track in FNQ, well maybe not but an Ulti or serious O/R camper, another matter all together. Even my 4.5 T/D V8 Diesel won't cope if you ask too much of it.

''We knew from the experience of well-known travelers that the
trip would doubtless be attended with much hardship.''
Richard Maurice - 1903

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message
Moderator

AnswerID: 616913

Follow Up By: Ron N - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:27

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:27
Mick - Ha! Now we know exactly who the real oldies are, when they start reminiscing about the good ol' days of their first crappy 4WD! LOL

I'd need a couple of pages to relate the stories of my first 4WD - a 1960 Series II Landrover with the 2.25L petrol four cylinder engine!

But the greatest concern in the 21st century is how every new model has a smaller and smaller engine, producing more and more power!

I can't wait for the latest "engine improvements" of 2024, when they go to 1.2L engines producing 250HP!

But these 4WD's still weigh more each year, and the engines are still expected to haul around that weight, plus heavier and heavier trailers and 'vans!

Cheers, Ron.
0
FollowupID: 888347

Follow Up By: rocco2010 - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 19:23

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 19:23
Nice memories Mick.

Of course that engine, or a form of it, was the basis for a very successful rally car in the Datsun 180B. It seemed to lend itself to "souping up" and the platform must have had the right mix of size, weight and handling.

I reckon if you went to a car club rally today you might still see amateur enthusiasts punting 180Bs around the tracks. Or even its predecessor the Datsun 1600 from the 1960s.

Cheers



1
FollowupID: 888358

Follow Up By: peteC - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 19:55

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 19:55
You got ripped off with the 720. Should have waited for the 94 king cab like mine with the Z22. 2.2lt out of the Skyline
0
FollowupID: 888359

Follow Up By: Member - Outback Gazz - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 20:24

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 20:24
Hey Mick

Wouldn't ya love to have that back again ?????
.
.
.
.
.
.
I'm talkin' the physique not the Nissan King Cab lol


Cheers

Gazz
4
FollowupID: 888361

Follow Up By: KevinE - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 20:57

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 20:57
I had the lovely yellow coloured dual cab version of the 720. Bought it new at a Datsun dealer at Fawkner Vic in 1982. I had previously owned a 180B SSS, which was in a different class. It would blow most 253 V8's into the weeds. But it wasn't much good at carrying stuff, or in the sticks. The 720 did those very well.



1
FollowupID: 888362

Follow Up By: Mick O - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 22:31

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 22:31
Strewth, how to be diplomatic.....!

Rocco...know what you mean. Spent a little bit of time shitting myself around the edge of Lake Tyrell in the odd desert rally in a 180B driven by "The Bandit" Murray Stewart.

Outback Gazz...What do you mean... truly have my boyish good looks and charm not carried over into the new Millennium...How rude :-)

Pete C Nine (9) years to wait man. There was an urge to get out there and get it done if you know what I mean. The only thing that stumped us was our mid 80's crossing of the Simpson and it was rain that drove us out not the conditions. We spent 10 days marooned at Marie. Not so bad but for the fact that the beer ran out in a day and a half!

Kev... Mate that was "mustard", not yellow!. Don't let anyone else tell you otherwise. Yes you are right except for those god damn rotary mothers. They would blow a 15 foot flame across the straights as they put everything to shame but were buggered in the sand. That's where the 180B or a small V8 mounted into the back of a buggy would crucify them lol.

I loved the 1980's. Sooooo much fun!.
''We knew from the experience of well-known travelers that the
trip would doubtless be attended with much hardship.''
Richard Maurice - 1903

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message
Moderator

2
FollowupID: 888364

Follow Up By: garrycol - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 13:10

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 13:10
@ PeteC - "You got ripped off with the 720. Should have waited for the 94 king cab like mine with the Z22. 2.2lt out of the Skyline"

Your loosin it - getting old maybe - it was an 84 not a 94.
0
FollowupID: 888382

Follow Up By: peteC - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 13:45

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 13:45


Yep 1984
0
FollowupID: 888383

Follow Up By: gbc - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 15:10

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 15:10


You can imagine the exhilaration when my f50 towing a boat broke 90kph once a week :)

Yes I wish my gut was that big again - and I had that hair haha.
0
FollowupID: 888388

Follow Up By: Steve - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 21:48

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 21:48
Shorts and shades pretty sharp too, pal

;)
2
FollowupID: 888406

Follow Up By: Shaker - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 16:11

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 16:11
Daihatsu F50 was 4wd of the year around 1980.

"Jesus loves you"
Nice to hear in church, but not in a Mexican prison!

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 888424

Follow Up By: gbc - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 16:36

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 16:36
I really did like that thing. Nothing much stopped it off-road apart from landcruiser tracks in sand and mud haha. I was always in one of them but never two. Long runs were usually done tucked up some semi trailer’s behind.
0
FollowupID: 888426

Reply By: RMD - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 14:44

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 14:44
Even Triumph Rocket 3 cylinder motorcycle is 2294CC. Sufficient wouldn't you say?
AnswerID: 616916

Follow Up By: Ron N - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 15:11

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 15:11
Sorry, RMD, I fail to see any link between new 4WD Ford Rangers and Triumph motorcycles??
0
FollowupID: 888351

Reply By: swampy - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 17:53

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 17:53
HI all
Decent tow vehicles donot have engines with ever DECREASING engine capacity .
Life style utes do !!
Very obvious which sector some makers are pushing there customers towards .
Just wait and see the Hilux and others are just a few examples .
This also makes the manufacturer earn that little bit more profit by using less materials . Little regard for the cust expectations !!

Toyota downsizes the Lux to push u towards the cruiser V8 .

Anybody want a base or mid level luxury v6 diesel most of us right !!!!!
say 4lt diesel v6
and a 5 ltr v8 diesel

Around 30,000G usa Extra cab D/Ram
AnswerID: 616921

Follow Up By: Ron N - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 18:10

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 18:10
I wonder how long before the 2.2L and 3.2L Duratorq engines are deleted from the Ranger range, and new, smaller "high performance" engines takes their place??

No doubt, some Ford bean counter will soon point out that it makes more "economic sense" (read more profit) to ditch the "old technology" 2.2L and 3.2L engines and install the "latest technology" 2.0L engine right through the entire Ford Ranger range.

Personally, I suspect the behind-the-scenes scenario is that we are constantly being softened up to expect 2.0L engines as the new "norm" - and that this is leading to all-hybrid drive rigs, with primary electric motive power, with a small engine driving a generator, for electricity storage replacement, as well as additional power.
0
FollowupID: 888357

Follow Up By: Jackolux - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 21:32

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 21:32
All the new Rangers will be 2Lt twin turbo .
0
FollowupID: 888363

Follow Up By: 12HT75 - Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 15:49

Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 15:49
Ron N posted:

"and that this is leading to all-hybrid drive rigs, with primary electric motive power, with a small engine driving a generator, for electricity storage replacement, as well as additional power."

Not a bad idea IMO. High startup torque from electric motors, gets rid of the range anxiety of pure electric and means the diesel can run at optimum revs all the time as it is not directly connected to the driveline.
1
FollowupID: 888502

Reply By: Michael H9 - Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 19:24

Wednesday, Feb 14, 2018 at 19:24
At the end of the day, the important numbers are 157kw and 500nm. If the engine can stand up to those figures reliably then who cares how many cubes it has. I'll take my 2.2 against any 3 litre Nissan or Toyota any day. Neither of those have been particularly powerful or reliable in my opinion. The Nissans explode and the Toyotas need injectors replaced, plus the fuel economy on both is ordinary. The jury is out on the Ford motor until the facts from actual use are in. I remember back in 2008 everyone saying CRD's were not reliable and wouldn't last. That was baloney.
AnswerID: 616922

Reply By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 06:33

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 06:33
Imagine quoting that the four shock absorders cost as much as a smal engine, Hmmm! So after 30,000ks it going to need a new set, now thats a great selling point. Quote below.
“Quite literally, those four shock absorbers from Fox Racing Shox cost as much as a small engine, and that’s not an exaggeration, either".
Michael.
Patrol 4.2TDi 2003

Retired Xmas 2016 and now we are Out and About!

There's time to rest when you're dead,
Get out and do something instead!

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 616927

Follow Up By: Ron N - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 10:48

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 10:48
The Mastercard Ford Ranger Raptor ...

1. 2018 - Buys new Ford Ranger Raptor = $80,000

2. 2019 - Gets advised by Ford Dealer, vehicle needs new shockies = $10,000

3. 2020 - Gets advised by Ford Dealer, 2.0L engine is at the end of its design life, and needs replacement.
Dealer advises, "the good part is, the new engine won't cost any more than 4 shock absorbers" ...
"The bad part is, the labour bill to find the engine, and pull it out and re-install it, is more than the engine cost ..."

4. Look on owners face - Priceless ...
2
FollowupID: 888372

Follow Up By: Member - peter_mcc - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 10:50

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 10:50
They aren't likely to die after 30,000kms - that's why they are so expensive
1
FollowupID: 888373

Follow Up By: 9900Eagle - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 13:00

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 13:00
Well looks like we have some reliability engineers on EO.

1. Statement. 2020 2 years old and engine needs replacing because it is at the end of it's design life. Guess the 5 year warranty will have to be thrown out the window. Verdict: Rubbish.

2. Statement. Shockies shot at 30000K. Really, that is probably very true if the vehicle has done the Dakar. Verdict: Rubbish.

3. Statement Fox racing shockies $10000. Don't know about this one as I haven't been able to get a price on them as the vehicle is not available yet. PX2 for Fox racing 2 front assemblies $3000. Fox racing 2 rear shocks $570. Total $3570. Just a wee bit short of the $10000. Verdict. More substantiation required.

4. Keyboard warriors: Rubbish.

0
FollowupID: 888380

Follow Up By: Ron N - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 18:23

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 18:23
1. Seen more Ford engines that needed replacement, at 2 years old, than any other brand (apart from Kia).

2. Seen plenty of original shockies thrown in the bin, not long after the owner purchased the new vehicle - because the originals were supplied by the cheapest tenderer.

3. Take a BIG jar of Vaseline with you when it comes time to replace those Fox shockies on the Raptor.
These are "special" Raptor Fox shockies, that "cost the same as a small engine" - remember? - and you will only be able to buy them through Ford - at eye-watering prices.

4. "Keyboard warrior" - standard putdown for anyone who feels aggrieved - when they don't even know the poster, or his level of experience and knowledge .
0
FollowupID: 888398

Follow Up By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 19:57

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 19:57
Sorry 9900 Eagle, I wish I was an Automotive Engineer like you. Sadly I'm only a mere Fitter Machinist. We await your next informative post. Michael
Patrol 4.2TDi 2003

Retired Xmas 2016 and now we are Out and About!

There's time to rest when you're dead,
Get out and do something instead!

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 888401

Follow Up By: 9900Eagle - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 07:52

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 07:52
Micheal, check my post it doesn't say anything about me being an automotive engineer. My post was about the comments where it has been decided that the shocks are only going to last 30000K, the engine is US after 2 years and a price for the shockies. Where did the price come from Ron.
This is on a vehicle that has never been owned, driven or is available to anyone here.

Ron, I like to put the other side of the story to get some balance instead of speculation and miss information. If that is a put down then good.

BTW. Have had two of your loved C15 cat engines let go, one with 2 hours on it and the other 4 days old, turbo's let go and electronic injectors fail, does that mean cat engines blow up NO. I have seen plenty of all brand engines that needed replacement, I guess they are all no good by your standards.

0
FollowupID: 888414

Follow Up By: Ron N - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 09:49

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 09:49
Tony - Unfortunately, Ford have a major problem with a constant drive for cheapness, led by their beancounters.
As soon as Ford produce a reasonable product, the beancounters are driving down the cost of every single component ruthlessly, thereby making the product unreliable.

If you ever get the chance, compare a stripped-down Ford 7.3L Powerstroke V8 diesel against the original product - the Navistar 7.3L V8 diesel.
The Navistar engine is the original design, the Powerstroke is the Navistar built under licence by Ford.

The difference in build quality with the components is eye-opening. Typical of the differences, Navistar use cast rocker arms, Ford use stamped sheet metal rocker arms. The differences are too large to go into detail here, but they are extensive, and everywhere on the Powerstroke, you can see Ford beancounters at work shaving 50c off here and 20c off there.

The St John Ambulance in W.A. gave up on using F250's with Powerstroke engines due to their poor levels of reliability and their horrendous maintenance and parts costs.
Mercedes now provide all of W.A.'s ambulances - at far lower cost, both in purchase cost and maintenance costs.

This constant chiselling to produce parts and components at ever-cheaper levels, eventually leads to lower levels of reliability.
Typical is the EA Falcon Ghia wagon I bought new in 1990 - for over $40,000.
Beautiful car to drive - but typically, the power windows stopped working after 18 mths.
Ripping them apart, I found Ford had cheapened the window regulator gearbox by utilising plastic gears instead of metal ones.

But you couldn't buy the stripped plastic gears, you couldn't even buy the gearbox, you had to buy the WHOLE window regulator mechanism, including the electric motor - at around $200, from memory. That was serious money for parts in 1992.

Then when I came to trade the Ghia in 1992, at 70,000kms and in mint condition - I got offered $16,500 for it!!
I eventually sold it privately for $18,000 - but that was a major depreciation from the $40,000 I paid for it just 2 years previously.

Another example is comparing the original ZF automatic transmissions, with the ZF transmissions built under licence by Ford.
Ford brag about "ZF transmissions fitted" to their products - but they aren't original German ZF's - they're cheap copies, built by Ford, at far lower cost than the original ZF's.

My Ford experiences go back to the first Ford 4WD I bought in 1977 - a new F100 4WD that cost me $11,000 - nearly twice the cost of a Statesman or Fairlane at that time.

The F100 gave me constant grief - from the dangerous non-power-assist steering that meant the F100 was all over the road - through to the crappy crossply 10.00 x 15 Goodyear tyres - and right through to the lousy assembly where even major suspension components regularly came loose where they bolted to the chassis.

The last problem was found to be oversize holes fitted with undersize bolts. Redrilling the holes and refitting the correct, snug-fitting larger size bolts eventually cured the problem.

The long front axle radius-rod design of the F100, where the radius rods were bolted to the chassis under the centre of the cab, meant that F100 was a real handful in the handling stakes on gravel, when empty.

It wasn't the first time I would be travelling along a gravel road, empty, and hitting a series of wide corrugations, and finding the F100 going sideways instantly at 110kmh - due to that poor front end design, that exerted extensive leverage on the chassis.
This poor design was purely a lack of testing and engineering on Fords behalf - yet they were happy to ask outrageous prices for F-series trucks and F-series parts. $600 just for a grille in 1980 was typical of the F100 pricing.

So, you may be happy with your Ranger - but I can tell you it will be a cold day in hell before I buy another Ford.
I bought a Landcruiser HDJ80 (turbo auto diesel) new in 1990 for $50,000, did a faultless and highly enjoyable 170,000kms with it in three years - and sold it in 1995 for $40,000 - and I was knocking back buyers with a stick.

That's the difference between vehicle makes with a reputation for solid build quality and high resale values - and those with varying build quality, varying reliability, and lower resale values. I know what I prefer.
2
FollowupID: 888416

Follow Up By: 9900Eagle - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:54

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:54
Ron, the biggest problem here is you don't seem able to move into this century. The most modern vehicle you had from Ford was 48 years ago.

Just letting you know that I don't give a rats about fords or any of the other makes. I have only owned one other ford, a 1976 xc falcon which never gave me any problems.

What I will do, is question information about a vehicle that can't be substantiated, especially when the claims are about a vehicle no one has OWNED, TESTED or DRIVEN and that is not even available yet.

You may hate fords but it would be far better to keep an open mind and not speculate.
0
FollowupID: 888417

Follow Up By: garrycol - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 13:17

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 13:17
Quote "Ron, the biggest problem here is you don't seem able to move into this century..............You may hate fords but it would be far better to keep an open mind and not speculate."

And not write "War and Peace" posts.
3
FollowupID: 888419

Follow Up By: Ron N - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 16:40

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 16:40
Tony, I trust your vehicle assessment skills are better than your maths?

Where did you come up with 48 years ago?

I don't have any trouble with moving into this century, all the vehicles I own are under 5 years old.

But I'm very wary of buying the "latest technology" which involves products half their size, trying to do the work of the previous larger models.

Every model I've ever owned has always produced a new model with an equivalent or a larger engine.

You should know the old saying amongst truckies - "You don't employ a boy to do a man's work".
0
FollowupID: 888427

Follow Up By: 9900Eagle - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 19:45

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 19:45
Ron, I was out by 10 years with the 1980 F truck at 38 years.

Well I am off on a midnight run to Melbourne tonight for a mate, guess this old truck driver is just a boy.

No Ron, you made a statement about the SPECULATED life and COSTS of this new vehicles components. I couldn't give a rats about the engine size and never mentioned it, you posted that about the sewing machine engine but were quick to give your learned knowledge about how long the engine would last and the costs of the parts. Fess up and give some proof.

I have to say it again, Those statements you made about the above are RUBBISH.

I have been called many names but never Tony, Antony, Antoine, Anton, Antun, Ante, Antonio, Anto. So I guess that is not my name.

0
FollowupID: 888431

Reply By: swampy - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 10:38

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 10:38
HI
A 2.0ltr motor cannot have the same TQ as a larger motor eg 3.0ltr unless u boost the sh,t out of it . The variable vane turbo helps but the FACTS are there already .
Although peak TQ HP numbers are important they are ONLY HALF THE PICTURE .
This is what the car makers want u to look at !!
Street motors are built for Tq every where in the rev range .
Race motors are built for peak to peak figures.

Remember when an engine is pushed hard at rebuild time most parts are worn out .
An engine that does it easy does last longer and more suitable for rebuild .
AnswerID: 616931

Follow Up By: KevinE - Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 10:39

Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 10:39
It depends on how the smaller engine is engineered Swampy.

I know that chainsaws & cars are chalk & cheese, but an engine, is an engine - Stihl used to make a little 35.2cc chainsaw named a 200T. It was the benchmark for all small to medium sized chainsaws. In fact, it still is, even though Stihl stopped making them several years ago, because of emissions regs. That little saw would rev harder & cut harder than most other professional model saws up to 70cc. Forget the homeowner stuff!

That makes most saws between a 200T & a 70cc saw redundant, and there are LOTS of them!

And they lasted! I have a colleague who has an old 200T that has been taking down big trees every work day for over 10 years. It's seen several 70-92cc saws come & go, and he doesn't baby his gear!

0
FollowupID: 888436

Follow Up By: swampy - Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 14:19

Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 14:19
Hi
KevinE
Talkin 4 Stroke not 2 stroke

Re chain saws typically 2 stroke and can have piston and liner coatings plus being specially shaped . All in 2 stroke helps performance and longevity.
1
FollowupID: 888447

Follow Up By: KevinE - Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 21:17

Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 21:17
"Talkin 4 Stroke not 2 stroke"

We're actually talking diesels in this thread, but as I said, an engine is an engine.

"All in 2 stroke helps performance and longevity"

I'd strongly disagree, but that wasn't the point I was making.

The point that I was making is that a small 2 stroke/4 stroke engine properly engineered will out perform & outlast a poorly engineered larger cousin.

The 200T I mentioned out performs & out lasts other, much larger 2 stroke chainsaws by a HUGE margin. That's 2 stroke vs 2 stroke & it wins hands down in every test ever done (and there have been many)

"typically 2 stroke and can have piston and liner coatings plus being specially shaped"

Yup! as can well engineered 4 strokes & diesels!

0
FollowupID: 888459

Follow Up By: swampy - Sunday, Feb 18, 2018 at 00:51

Sunday, Feb 18, 2018 at 00:51
Hi


The design of 2 strokes can be very very different to other 2 strokes & almost completely different to 4 strokes

As it stands the Ranger will have 2 turbos in series . JUST BOOOOOSTing the sh.t out of it for both low end and high end eng speed .

Expectations are 99% parts will be worn out at rebuild time . + 2 turbo rebuilds
$$$$$$$$$

0
FollowupID: 888464

Reply By: Member - Outback Gazz - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 14:41

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 14:41
I keep hearing from my European friends in the motor industry that they are planning to ban all diesel car engines in the very near future !

Could this be true ?

Thoughts on this from people in the know would be good !

Cheers

Gazz
AnswerID: 616945

Follow Up By: 9900Eagle - Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 16:00

Thursday, Feb 15, 2018 at 16:00
Yes there is a fair bit being reported about it Gazz. Have a read of this article.

Petrol and diesel bans

Things are changing fairly quickly with the likes of Cummins producing an electric truck by 2019, Tesla also in 2019 and Nikola fuel cell trucks in 2020. Volkswagen with there Scanias,Man's and navistar affiliation are also into it with some commercial vehicles being electric by 19/2012. Walmart have ordered 15 Tesla semi's with 5 being tested in the U.S. and 10 in Canada. Guess they would run them local out of their d.c's and see how they go.

Bob Dylan. The times they are a changin.
0
FollowupID: 888392

Reply By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 17:06

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 17:06
We will all have wait till we see how sales go. It appears not to tick the box for towing or retires so it would mainly appeal to younger weekenders. The high price tag may stop a lot of younger guys and the vehicle is being marketed as a go fast desert blazer/ sports jobby with twin turbo so the insurance would be prohibitive and if it was under hire purchase it would much more. I think the market will be very small and sales low. We shall see! Michael
Patrol 4.2TDi 2003

Retired Xmas 2016 and now we are Out and About!

There's time to rest when you're dead,
Get out and do something instead!

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 616984

Reply By: Member - Boobook - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 18:07

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 18:07
Well you have to hand one thing to Ford. They have every Forum and every online motoring site buzzing in a frenzy of speculation and comment.

What do they say? Any publicity is good publicity.

Tony
200 with 2012 Tvan Canning.
Happiness >= your perception of the events in your life minus your expectation of how life should be.

Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 616986

Follow Up By: Michael H9 - Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 20:45

Friday, Feb 16, 2018 at 20:45
Especially if you are selling lawn mowers...
1
FollowupID: 888434

Follow Up By: swampy - Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 14:23

Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 14:23
HI
Ford get good advertising on a poor product .


THIS HAS BEEN DONE BY FORD B4 !!!!

There is going to an awfull lot of suckers out there
1
FollowupID: 888448

Reply By: Ron N - Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 22:24

Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 22:24
Ford have made a serious marketing error here, in the new 2018 Ford Ranger Raptor.

It should have carried the new name of Ford Ranger Bantam.
It may look like a Raptor, but I'll wager the overall performance is more like a Bantam.

I can just imagine that these twin turbos are pumping 50psi of air into the intake.

An engine producing 210HP is going to consume the same amount of fuel as any other 210HP engine - despite what the marketing hype states.

So the fuel consumption is going to be little different to the current 3.2L diesel.

For a 2.0L diesel to produce 210HP, it needs to be fairly humming.
You won't get any real grunt until the thing hits 4000RPM. Under that, it will just drop its guts.

A 2.0L diesel works O.K. in small sedans - but not in a 2.2 tonne kerb weight 4WD.
The comments and feedback on the new Raptor review sites range from "appalled", to "utter disgust", through to "WTF were Ford thinking?".
AnswerID: 617017

Follow Up By: garrycol - Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 16:47

Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 16:47
What you have just said is 90% crap - 2 litre diesels have worked ok in the Amorak and they dont spin at 4000rpm, 2.2l diesels work ok in Defenders and they dont spin at 4000rpm.

My 2.7 TDV6 pulls a 2.5t vehicle and rarely gets above 2000rpm in normal driving.

Make your point based on real facts not make up stuff.
0
FollowupID: 888509

Follow Up By: Ron N - Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 17:01

Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 17:01
Bit of a difference between a 2.0L 4 cyl diesel, and a 2.7L V6!

Like, 35% bigger capacity, and 2 extra firing strokes per revolution!

All small displacement engines are the same, you've got to "pedal them" to get any decent performance out of them.

They do not have the reciprocating mass that bigger engines have, that gives better torque and lugging ability.



0
FollowupID: 888513

Follow Up By: garrycol - Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 18:22

Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 18:22
Yes ignore the other aspects of my post - So the VW spins out over 4000rpm in normal driving - I dont think so.

My previous 2 litre turbo diesel never saw 4000rpm in normal driving, and really never over 3000rpm unless overtaking.

Facts Ron, show us the Facts.
0
FollowupID: 888517

Follow Up By: Michael H9 - Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 18:30

Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 18:30
My 2.2 rarely gets anywhere near 4000, there's a red line up there somewhere. It operates really well between 1500 and 2500 and lots of grunt down low. Maximum torque on the 2 litre Amarok is between 1500 and 2000 and is above a 3 litre Hilux everywhere except 3600 revs.
0
FollowupID: 888518

Follow Up By: Ron N - Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 19:11

Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 19:11
Yeah, we all know how the Amarok, with its massive engine size, and great performance, is just making a killing in the ute market!

"The Amarok only accounted for 5.7 per cent of the 4x4 ute market in 2015 which left it at the bottom of the sales charts."

Amarok sales were down .02% on that figure in 2016 - and then they bragged about a .6% upturn in Amarok sales in 2017!

Amarok annual sales - around 7,500 to 7,700 units
Ranger - around 31,000 units sold annually
Hilux - around 32,000 units sold annually.

0
FollowupID: 888519

Follow Up By: Michael H9 - Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 19:51

Monday, Feb 19, 2018 at 19:51
I thought we were discussing engine size and whether a small engine has to rev too high to produce the power and torque, I think 4000 rpm was mentioned elsewhere. This is clearly wrong because the figures say otherwise. Whether a car sells well or not is influenced by many other factors, mainly brand reputation.
0
FollowupID: 888520

Follow Up By: nickb - Sunday, Feb 25, 2018 at 19:32

Sunday, Feb 25, 2018 at 19:32
They did some acceleration tests on 2.0L Amarok vs 3.0L Hilux. One test was with a 500kg load and the other was towing a trailer (can’t remember the weight, maybe 1.5T?). The Amarok beat the Hilux each time. This shows nothing about longevity but that smaller displacement can easily compete on power and torque. Doing the test in 10yrs time with 300,000km on the odometer might bring different results!
1
FollowupID: 888740

Follow Up By: Ron N - Sunday, Feb 25, 2018 at 19:57

Sunday, Feb 25, 2018 at 19:57
Nick, in "ancient times" of the 60's and '70's when we were young, and 6 cyl (red) Holdens and 6 cyl Falcons were put up against V8 Holdens and V8 Falcons - the zippier 6 cyl powered units with adequate horsepower, could always beat the V8's off the mark - and often beat them up to 80 or 90kmh.

After that, the V8's won with superior power and increased top speed, as the smaller 6's ran out of puff.
The 6cyl rigs always had lower gearing, too, as the V8's were higher geared to try and improve their fuel economy.

The 6 cyl engines were usually shot by 160,000 - 200,000kms, while the V8's would do well over 300,000 kms before they needed a teardown.

So a short sprint test really does nothing for a good all-round comparison - as fuel economy when fully loaded is one of the other important measures to be taken into account - and engine life and replacement cost can only be measured after a considerable period of ownership.

I, like many others, find motoring journalists reviews not worth a cupful of cold water, as they report according to their personal bias - report only on short test runs - report nothing on parts and maintenance costs - report nothing on dealership or manufacturers handling of clients - and rarely report with full-load/full towing load tests, over an extended period.

0
FollowupID: 888741

Reply By: Member - Boobook - Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 22:53

Saturday, Feb 17, 2018 at 22:53
Maybe the Raptor wasn't designed with Australia in mind. It's a global car from Thailand. I was just in the Philippines and I have never seen so many Rangers ( or Fortuners) in my life. They're everywhere. Must be 10 times as many as I have seen in Australia.

Jut like the new Nissan Patrol. they'll sell as many as they can but the reality is that Australia is a fringe market.
Tony
200 with 2012 Tvan Canning.
Happiness >= your perception of the events in your life minus your expectation of how life should be.

Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 617018

Popular Content

ExplorOz Shop Suggests (12)