Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Frontier vs Ranger - II
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I'm going to jump on the sales issue here because using sales figures (especially the ones the general public sees) to show quality differences is not viable. I'm not saying this because I own a Nissan but because I'm in sales/marketing. Vince, if you remember in earlier responses when I shut you down on this issue, I mentioned that you are reading figures that these companies want everyone to see, i.e. IRS, investors, commercial lenders, ceditors, competitors, and yes most imporantly the 'RULING CONSUMER'. Tell me what you think that these figures include? Do you think that they include just the consumer vehicles sold? If you do then you are sorely mistaken. Ford in particular used sales figures that included ALL sales, including: Rental Car Companies(BTW, ones that Ford owns), gov't agencies(BTW, who get special dicounts for buying American), Fleet sales. Now don't get me wrong GM does the same and so does Chysler.
I will finish this response later...running late, sorry. I lost track of time.
Now what I was trying to get at, is think about the reasons these companies might want to use these inflated or even deflated figures. Reasons I thought about why to use higher figures: maybe to lure investors(stock buyers, for example) or maybe to establish confidence in the company(which this is where Vince comes in) and it's organization is planning. But lets take why a japanese corporation might not show everything. Aside the fact that it's not customary to brag in Japan and they are very quiet about business dealings. If these(japanese) corporations start showing big profits and sales figures they might believe it will set off red flags to the U.S. Commerce Dept. Just like it did in the '80's, remember? Then heavier import taxes get laid on or other penalties(btw, don't bring up that most of the japenese cars are built in the US, 'cause they still get taxed just not as much). Now, by showing losing margins or profits you can also attract investors as well, these are the kind of investors looking to get in cheap. I'm not trying to throw stones, but let's say the figures you have read do compare, that's to say that they are comparing the same thing, Ford's should be higher. Because this is their own backyard, they have more dealers, their dealers are generally bigger(ever seen a Nissan, Toyota or even a Honda dealership with 20 mechanics and it's own bodyshop?)and there are alot more 'shade tree mechanics' that can work on American vehicles(this makes easier to have work done after warranty is out). I won't even bring up how many Ford's are sold in Japan..because it's not fair because they won't let them in.
I'm not trying to teach a business course, but there are many aspects as to what you're reading. If you're reading it(especially in a newspaper, magazine or on t.v.) it's because they want it read. Sales figures don't go up solely on quality increasing, no way. Even if it were possible it would take ,many, many, many years for Ford to see increases in sales based on just quality alone(as it would for any company, not 7-10 years)why not? Because if you produce as much product that Ford produces and sell as much that they do,many, many, many people will get burned. Guess how many people each of them tell about their bad experiences. The first problem any salesman will ever have when he/she starts selling will be the consumers lack of knowledge and shopping skills. Ninety-nine percent of my customers don't compare apples to apples, which to me is the most difficult part of selling something. That's what I'm doing here, trying to sell you on the idea that sales figures aren't the only measurement of quality. Especially in an industry that has quality laws(lemon Law), because corporations in this game are held at a standard.
See, this is a statement in which alot of people make " It's not a bad quality product for the price". In this statement, they didn't get it for the quality or price alone, the combination of the two.
It's not for me. At least when I purchased a truck in '98. Also, I would have had to wait a few months to even test drive a '99 V6 model (only 4 cylinder offered, and I needed something that can tow). Then, it would probably be on back order for months after that, as I'm quite particular with options. Also, the dealership sucked.
The lease which you're talking about is for the 3.0L XLT 4x4 (very limited options) for $199 for I believe 5 years.
Guess what? We're nearing the end of the model year, and the factory and dealerships want to clear out the rest of the trucks sitting on the lots and at the factory. They offer great deals to clear out the rest of the inventory, so they can start focusing on selling next year's models. EVERY manufacturer does this, even Nissan. It's just the way that the car biz goes.
Another little factor to think about is the upcoming redesigned Ford Ranger in 2001 with the new engine. They've got to move the soon to be dated-looking product off the lots. They'll be hard to sell sitting next to the new 2001 Ranger with the Cammer engine for only a few hundred dollars more.
I do not believe the article was referring to a specific lease program,such as you pointed out.It is included but the fact is Ford will finance anybody.
You ar correct that ALL of the dealerships will be offering great deals to clear their lots,and that may be where the competition will get closer.
The new engine on the new Ranger may not be that big a factor to the majority if the people.Look at the 3.0L and basic Ranger accounting for the majority of the sales now.I seriously doubt that it will change unless Ford discontinues the 3.0L
I do not believe the article was referring to a specific lease program,such as you pointed out.It is included but the fact is Ford will finance anybody.
You ar correct that ALL of the dealerships will be offering great deals to clear their lots,and that may be where the competition will get closer.
The new engine on the new Ranger may not be that big a factor to the majority if the people.Look at the 3.0L and basic Ranger accounting for the majority of the sales now.I seriously doubt that it will change unless Ford discontinues the 3.0L
Or, did she have the "wacky wipers"? It requires a new turn signal stalk of a slightly revised design. It's about a $100 fix with parts and labor. There was something on the Tacoma vs. Ranger board about a program replacing the malfunctioning modules or reimbursing you if you already paid to have it done. Maybe call the local Ford dealer and get a fix or some cash?
No, Ford doesn't finance anybody. If they did, they wouldn't be in business today.
Have some 18 year old go in and ask the salesman to test drive a Cobra. Just watch how fast they blow him off, let alone get around to financing him.
BTW, Ford is discontinuing the 3.0L Vulcan. I've heard that for the 2002 model year that it will possibly be replaced with an I5. I wouldn't hold my breath, tho. The cammer 4L was supposed to be offered in Rangers starting with the '98 model year.
The trend will probably show that the basic model with the small engine will be the one to drive the sales figures.The larger engine will appeal to a portion of the people looking at them,but I do not believe it will be a large deciding factor.
In any case, I believe that the vast majority of people have their vehicle picked out before financing even comes into play. Who hits the finance manager before taking a test drive?
I can't agree with you that the possibility of an engine upgrade in the next model year won't be an important factor in current year sales.
http://fordranger.com/RangerProgram.html
Highlights:
(1) New cammer engine is a real screamer
(2) Revised rear suspension eliminating wheel hop
(3) Great new styling, baby F150
(4) S/C Ranger a possibility
(5) My favorite! V8 Ranger? No 302, but maybe the 4.6 or 3.9 with the 3.9 being the likely engine.
Could you imagine a 3.9L V8 5-speed Ranger? Where do I sign up? And, where can I find the "bandaid" [supercharger for those of you not paying attention] that's being put on the Lincoln version of the 3.9? That would be around 300hp and 325ft/lbs of torque in a Ranger! Well, maybe I'd just "settle" for the 252hp in naturally aspirated form...
I like how I can stay on ONE topic, Frontier vs RAnger and the Nissan clan has to jump all over to other cars/trucks of each manufacturer..
Actually Nissan does have its own financing arm, NMAC, and I have had ALOT and I do mean ALOT of customers that came to me for financing with bad credit, and they were either too bad for any of my programs or the only thing that would work is a $7-8,000 used car which they did not want, only to find out later they were on a red carpet lease on an escort or some other ford, it is true, Ford will finance just about anyone, I even sent my friend's sister to a Ford dealership because her credit was shaky and she had to get out of her Saturn that was broken down and she was WAY upside down on, and I could not help her even on a family deal, she now drives a new escort.
The links and articles were quite interesting.I see some exciting things coming out if they come to pass.
For shame,that one statement cannot be true.vince says there is no wheel hop.Why would they fix something that vince says is not there?My dig.
They did need to do something about it.
A V8 Ranger would be interesting.I wonder what the weight difference between the 4.6 and the 3.9 is.That may be a factor in the engine selection.
I still wonder about why the 3.9 V8.You usually want more engine.I know that the 2 extra cylinders will add a bit more torque then the 4.0 V6,and you have a 4.6L V8 as the next engine.Maybe Ford figures they might have better longevity in the future with the Jag engine.
Why should a normally aspirated Nissan 3.3 V6 equal the Ford 4.0 SOHC? Different Displacements ring a bell. I guess not.
Do you expect the 4.7 V8 in the dakota to match the 5.9 rt V8 dakota.
So Nissan puts an SC on a motor, gives a 60000mile warranty.
So Ford gives a bigger normally aspirated engine with equivalent power to the Nissan SC 3.3 V6 but with the regular Ford warranty?
Just remember,My Frontier has MORE POWER then YOURS.HA HA
(*gooba everytime you hit refresh after posting to update, it reposts data from the form)
Club Torque. It looks like a good place for people like you. How's it feel to be TORQUED!
Good to see you again, thought maybe you were pulling your disappearing act again, OK, let's go over this again, I guess you couldn't understand it the last five times it was posted,
In response to the crash tests;
The test was not done on ANY 2000 models after improvements have been made, also the only part of the testing that the frontier did any worse than the ranger on was the offset test, the Driver/Passenger Front and side impact ratings were almost identicle and the real world injury ratings were the same, translation, in the real world there aren't any more injuries in a frontier than a ranger, and I don't know about you, but I equate safety with the prevention of injuries.
JD Power survey;
yes in this survey obviously there were fewer complaints from this survey on the ranger than the frontier, just like in previous surveys, the Frontier was rated the HIGHEST in initial quality,
which I don't remember the ranger winning any time recently. SO what does this mean? IN previous surveys more people had more complaints about their rangers, in this one it was the other way around, even though these have been basically the same trucks for the last couple of years, just the luck of the draw sometimes when you are dealing with a statistically variable survey.
WHy is it that you have been comparing the future ranger engine to the current frontier engine, not only do you refuse to talk about the two biggest selling ranger engines, (4cylinder and 3.0l)even though you spout sales figures and talk about how the customer rules, but now you have forgotten about the 4.0l ranger engine, and talk like the OHC is already out! ANd actually the S/C 3.3l engine does not match the ranger OHC it exceeds it, same torque rating, but the frontier will have 5 more HP.
Did you happen to read the link Cthompson posted?
I find it really fortunate for you that you bought the only ranger that did not have wheel hop, you are very lucky, And if the ranger engine is so great, why are they talking about putting a what on it? Oh that's right, they are talking about putting a SUPERCHARGER on it, man that engine is such a JOKE they have to BANDAID it with a supercharger! WHy is that Vince? It is just like I said, if they decided to put a SC on the ranger you would shout its praises from the highest mountain top, so let's hear it.
You stay on one topic???? It must have been someone else that brought in the Edmunds family comparison test and the taurus and the maxima, you really should contact Edmunds, someone else is using your ID.
OK Vince now that we have amused your questions for the umpteenth time, how about those questions you have been avoiding for the last 300 posts? Where are all of the links you said you had about the ranger suspension beeing superior? Where are your responses to the braking issue? What about responses to the cost of ownership facts? What about ANYTHING new and intelligent? Why are you scared to recieve the article from Open road? You
gave your excuse that you haven't read it, I offered to fax it to you twice! But you still choose to ignore that.
Wait a minute, I got it figured out, when someone shuts you down or puts up some facts you don't like, you say you need to research it or you haven't read the info yet, that way you can hide out for a few days and hope everyone forgets. Then you can come back in and demand that everyone pay attention to your ravings even though you can't respond to anyone elses posts. Well let me take a page out of your book, "gee, I haven't read the crash test or JD power material, give me some time to research it, I have been really busy, I have a life outside of Edmunds, I'll be back in a day or two with the same misinformation I have been throwing around for months" Hey that's pretty cool, I kinda like it, very creative, you get to spout off whatever and whenever you want and you have an automatic excuse when something comes up you don't like, I still say you should go into politics.
What's wrong with your head?
HAVE YOU RESEARCHED THOSE SALES FIGURES YET? No you haven't, so don't use what you don't know..makes your hypothesis(BTW, that means EDUCATED guess) invalid.
And, my truck is nowhere near underpowered with around 185hp and 250ft/lbs of torque with the help of $300.
Production - Sucking capacity from the mainstay of the Mustang vs. ramping up production for a new engine
Emmissions - CAFE standards. Less emmissions with the newer 3.9
Weight - Probably no front suspension changes as would most likely be required by the heavier 4.6
Tranny - the new HD 5-speed and 5-speed auto tranny should probably be able to holster the power of the 3.9 with little or no mods. the 4.6 might need a new tranny or extensive mods
Efficiency - the 3.9 will provide better mpg than the cammer while still being more powerful, win/win
I'd actually prefer the 3.9L V8. Pleanty of power, very good mpg, weight savings, and the availability of a factory produced supercharger (if I decide to make a pony-car hunter).
To everyone else...Vinny's been doing this for months. He will not change. Be careful, though. If you don't own a digital camera or scanner, he will tell you that you don't even own your truck because you haven't posted any pictures. Whatever, Vinny. Different topic, same old Vinny.
The emissions should be less.It depends on how efficient it is.
The weight should also be lighter on the 3.9l,but the difference may be small.If there is 100lbs difference,the 4.6L would be better.
The transmission mods would be more likely with the 3.9L,especially it having higher numbers.
The mpg should also be better,but it will depend on what it is put into,the hp to weight ratio and the gearing of the vehicle.
It has the potential to be a good thing.Of course this is all assumption at this point.
BTW, the 4.6 put out more power than the 3.9. It's rated at 260hp and 300ft/lbs vs. 252hp and 267ft/lbs for the 3.9.
I'd assume the 4.6 to be worse on emissions due to amount of fuel burned and the fact that it's 5 or 6 years older than the 3.9 (newer technology).
One more thing. I believe that the Ford engineers were talking about the possibility of supercharging the SOHC 4L. It's numbers would probably be around the same as the 4.6L V8 found in the Mustang GT.
You are right more power always costs $$$ and some people have more $$$ then sense.I would like to fall into that category for awhile.
I think that a market does exist for a V8 compact pickup. It just hasn't been exploited yet. I don't consider the Dakota to be a compact either. It's a mid-sized truck along with the Tundra (at least to me).
I agree with you that something like the Ranger's 3L or the Nissan's 3.3L are adequate engines for most compact pickup buyers.
It's hard to argue against a truck with almost as much power as a Mustang GT that will still get gas mileage as good as the current Vulcan 3L.
I think that there isn't a huge demand for the OHV 4L because it's more of a "truck" type of engine. People only see 10 more horsepower for another $1500 or so more than the 3L. Let's face it. Most people don't buy a truck to haul and tow, the duties to which the 4L is best suited.
Maybe this will change with the SOHC 4L. I think it will be a very popular option box to check.
I think as gas prices rise (supposedly 2.00/gal by the end of summer) the demand for the larger stuff will decline.
I think cncman makes a good point about going to the larger truck if you want the bigger engines and higher horsepower.
(That sound you heard behind you was a Lighting CRASH). I think the Lighting's days are numbered!
Also, those V8 Dodge trucks are incredibly expensive if you add just the few common options like A/C and power group.
If Ford could build a 3.9L V8 that is more efficient than the 4L and still keep it reasonably priced, they're gonna have a real winner. It sure would take a whole lotta convincing for my wife that I need a new truck already... ;oD
I'd sure give it the 'ole college try.
You are right the Dodges are expensive,but the Fords with the V10 is not real cheap either.Like I said the sales figures on the big engines will be the telling factor.
mahimahi,you are right that the potential is there,but it would not be a factor.You would have to change the air cleaner system to insure that it would be able to handle the increased flow and to catch the particulates.The longevity would depend on how well you maintain your engine.i have friends who have put superchargers on their vehicles as well as a couple that I help maintain and we have no internal engine problems.We usually run on the holidays in the dunes,and the dirt does fly.Put dual paddle tires in the back and 30ft rooster tails and the fun begins.
With all of the testing that goes into a vehicle before production, I highly doubt you would see problems like that, Nissan knows their truck buyers work and play hard in the trucks and will test everything like it will actually be used before production, BTW if you want to read more on the 01, check out the current issue of Open Road,
there is a pic of the supercharger in it, also the
holes in the fender flares do not look like they will be difficult to wax around, there is a good shot where you can see that the holes are not that deep so should be easy to wax. Also, and maybe I am just reading it wrong, but it seems to me that it says that the CC will only come with the SC. It will be optional on the dessert runner and the king cab 4x4.
to be a pretty good read. Lots of info on various kinds of superchargers.
http://www.trucktrend.com/oct98/super/super_f.html
I don't think that drawing comparisons of a V8 Ranger with a V10 F-series is representative. People don't buy a V10 full-sized truck for running around town. It's a serious tow/work vehicle.