Transit Connect pick-up as a Ranger replacement?

[pow]

I got the idea from today's Autoblog post on the new Fiat Doblo Work Up.

With all the love for a small, compact pickup here and elsewhere on the interwebs, would a vehicle like this -- a small commercial van-based truck -- work in the US? I don't know anything about trucks, and how they're used, but on paper at least, it seems to fare pretty well.

Doblo Work Up bed size vs. Ranger 2dr bed size

L: 90.6 in vs. 72.7 in

W: 71.7 in vs. 54.2 in (40.5 in between wheels)

H: 13.8 in vs. 16.5 in

Doblo payload: 2204 lbs

Ranger payload: 1580 lbs

Doblo 1.6 Multijet = 105 hp @ 4,000 rpm, 214 lb-ft @ 1,500 rpm

Ranger 2.3L I4 = 143 hp @ 5,250 rpm, 154 lb-ft @ 3,750

Personally I think the 2.0 EcoBoost would suit the US market more. That motor moves the 4,500 lb Explorer just fine and gets 28 mpg highway. I wouldn't be surprised, then, if a Transit Connect pickup loaded with 1,000 lbs of payload would be quicker and more efficient than an empty Ranger 2.3L. Unladen it could get 30+ MPG and do hot hatch 0-60 times. The current Transit Connect is a bit smaller than the Doblo, but I could see this working on the next-gen model...

Import it from Turkey as a CKD with the EcoBoost from Spain and assemble it here. Only downside I can see is that it won't tow and it can't go off road. It also looks like a commercial vehicle, which may turn people off looking for an "image" active lifestyle pickup.

It comes with under-bed storage and everything... though I would make the bed sides 2" taller.

Edited August 31, 2011 by pow

[Drew Dowdell]

The Transit connect is already 136hp @6300 rpm and 128 lb-ft @4750 rpm while weighing less. That engine would be fine.

[Satty]

Not a bad idea. Ford needs something, the F100 seems to be revived then die every other day.

[wildmanjoe]

The only Rangers with a large off road following are the TTB models and they haven't been made for 14 years. If it was positioned along the lines of a cheaper and smaller alternative to the Tacoma and Frontier (neither of which have been lighting up the sales charts) they could sell every last one at a sub-$18,000 price point. Any higher than that and they'd probably be eating into F-150 sales.

[pow]

The Transit connect is already 136hp @6300 rpm and 128 lb-ft @4750 rpm while weighing less. That engine would be fine.

Yes, but US pickup owners want more POWERRRRR than they know what to do with. The 2.0L would be a fine base engine.

[GMTruckGuy74]

I could see these in Home Depot and Lowe's parking lots for rent to the DIYers....

But as a truck guy, I could never own one of these for personal use like people do with the Ranger...

[Drew Dowdell]

these are vehicles for people with basic lawn services or some other light-duty-but-still-need-a-truck type jobs like say.... landlords.

[Robert Hall]

Something like this would make sense for the commercial market, but I don't see it gaining traction w/ the personal small pickup market. Ford does have a pickup version of the large Transit (in single and crew cab versions) in Europe with a similar mini bed like this.

[daves87rs]

these are vehicles for people with basic lawn services or some other light-duty-but-still-need-a-truck type jobs like say.... landlords.

+1

[balthazar]

What is that lift-over height??

Are those bed sides a full 12" high?

There's no way I would consider this mini-trucklet over a basic F/S truck with way more capacity.

EDIT: I've said as much (above) before.... and I'm always open to compelling arguments, but the small truck FOR WORK/HAULING argument always fails to convince me. Just like to motor around in a small truck, occasionally grab 3 bags of mulch? -knock yourself out.

Want to put an extension ladder & a cement mixer in a truck?? How about a nice, capable, high-bed/low tailgated F-150, and you ALWAYS have extra capacity instead of bouncing off the load limiter. The small WORK TRUCK is the nissan leaf anxiety issue with a bed, IMO.

Edited August 31, 2011 by balthazar

[Drew Dowdell]

Price

Fuel Economy

Physical clearances

[Robert Hall]

Maybe a very minimal yard service with one small mower that trims postage-stamp yards in subdivisions in the burbs could use this. Or someone in a city that carries around cones and barrels or other stuff.

Around here in the PHX, I see the yard crews using mostly older full size pickups (usually Silverados)--usually crew cabs or extended cabs--towing enclosed or wire mesh sided trailers w/ their equipment..that's how the Yard Men roll (the crew that does my lawn every two Saturdays--they went from an older Silverado to maybe a 5 yr old Ram Crew Cab last year).

[balthazar]

Oldsmoboi ~ >>"Price, Fuel Economy, Physical clearances"<<

Price - buy a 1-yr old F/S truck for the same or better price, get more capacity.

Clearances - ??? Have never seen this ever be an issue in any environment (including inner city).

MPG - have to give you that one.

Cubitar ~ >>"Maybe a very minimal yard service with one small mower that trims postage-stamp yards in subdivisions in the burbs could use this."<<

This a fictitious scenario, right? A 1-man, 1-mower business buying a brand new truck?

>>"Or someone in a city that carries around cones and barrels or other stuff."<<

Private contractors or city services use F/S trucks and up.

Again; if the foreman wants to tool around from job to job in a Ranger/ et al, go right ahead.

As a truck owner/driver for over 15 years now, privately & commercially... pushing this as a WORK truck just doesn't make much sense. From a OEM POV, a cheap-o conversion on the van is worth the dice roll, but from the consumer side, there's just not a lot there to attract buyers.

Maybe the best case scenario is a smaller rental truck, like at the Depot, and make it a fleet-only thing.

Edited September 1, 2011 by balthazar

[Drew Dowdell]

I would see this as purely a fleet/small biz vehicle as the Transit Connect is, not a true ranger replacement. Pittsburgh uses some weirdo tiny Japanese looking things for city maintenance. I think these would fit right in.

edit: even the large lawn service companies could use these for their smaller jobs.

[Robert Hall]

I would see this as purely a fleet/small biz vehicle as the Transit Connect is, not a true ranger replacement. Pittsburgh uses some weirdo tiny Japanese looking things for city maintenance. I think these would fit right in.

edit: even the large lawn service companies could use these for their smaller jobs.

I could see an electric or hybrid version working in cities as well, as part of a green initiative. I've seen tiny Japanese trucks (Diahatsus, etc) used on college campuses, and I've noticed a few w/ city maintenance logos in Scottsdale and downtown Phoenix (which has a fleet of Prii and hybrid Escapes--small electric trucks would fit well w/ their fleet).

Not every municipality needs obese gas guzzling full size trucks for every use case.

Edited September 1, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[PurdueGuy]

Since it would take VERY little cost to make this, I think it could be a good product. Perhaps call it a "Ford F50 Transit"? But I think a real Ranger replacement ("F100"?) would be a good product in the lineup as well. The Transit-based vehicle could be very good for specific purposes, but doesn't come near filling what the Ranger could do, and leaves a pretty big hole in the product lineup. And if Ford had to decide between a Transit-based small truck and a more Ranger-like product, I'd think the Ranger-like product would be the better way to go.

[Camino LS6]

Worthless to the contractor segment, but small trucks do have their place. The problem with this configuration is that it has no appeal beyond a very limited utility application. A true compact pickup (Ranger replacement) would be a much better direction to go - it can encompass the market this little thing would have as well as the wider market.

Edited September 1, 2011 by Camino LS6