Ford is giving up on its Ranger pickup. I drive a full size diesel Ford, but often considered buying a Ranger. I never pulled the trigger on one because the mileage of its 4x4 versions sucked, not much better than the F150.
The 2wd 4 cylinder versions got as high as 29 mpg highway. For the 4wd they used a 4.0 liter 6 cylinder dog of an engine that got about 20 mpg. I think Ford lost a big opportunity to make a high mpg 4x4.
A properly geared Ranger 4wd 4 cylinder 2.5 with a six speed could have gotten highway mileage in the high 20's. They would have cleaned up versus the Chevy Colorado and Toyota Tacoma.
Capitalism: The cream rises. Socialism: The scum rises.
With everyone else abandoning the compact pickup segment, the writing was on the wall...if consumers didn't ante up then the Ranger would disappear.
Even the Toyota Tacoma has grown. What's left? Is Nissan still offering a compact pickup?
It's too bad. A base model compact pickup is lightweight, efficient, utilitarian, and inexpensive. The Ranger is known for lasting forever, too. Maybe that's why they can't sell new ones, the old ones won't die.
I looked at the S-10, Colorado/Canyon, and Sierra when I bought The Beast. The S-10 was too small for me, and it was cheaper for me to get the Sierra than buy the Colorado/Canyon and both trucks got pretty much the same EPA mileage rating, so I went for the Sierra.
This is a shame. I loved my Ranger.
I never understood why the 4cyl. wasn't offered with 4x4.
On the EPA site, the only compact pickup left was the Ranger and its Mazda twin. With size bloat being nearly universally with model updates, it may not have remained so. Sounds like it from the article. I swear, the new Tacoma is as big as the first gen Tundra.
But newer regulations set a higher bar on fuel economy for smaller footprint trucks. It's easier for Ford to offer more fuel efficient V6 models of the F150 than redesign a new, small Ranger. The cries of "no unibody" from the fan base probably didn't help the truck's future.