Shaun Tucker
Well-Known Member
love the look of the new Avs but i dont need that big of an engine..
Rumor Mill - Let's talk ST future
- Thread starter Mike Ioco
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
Because of the midgate, there is no support between that area. To keep the body from collapsing, that is a support.
The midgate is a good idea, though not very practical. I have yet to see any Avalanche owner actually use it.
The idea of dirt getting in the interior of my truck is a turn-off.
The Sport Trac will get the ax. The new Trac is ugly. Sales will continue to drop while the engineers/designers/execs scratch thier heads wondering why they are not selling as many as they used to.
Tom
Mike Ioco
Active Member
I confess, I haven't used the midgate yet. If it doesn't fit in the bed, it sticks ou the back, not in the cab!
Well said. They'll blame the economy, the gas prices, and lack of interest. Not poor styling.
Then you have to ask yourself. "How practical is the midgate? Is it really that cool of an idea or more of a sales gimmick?"
Remember the Envoy XUV? GM quoted a quote from a compeditor said "Why didn't we think of that first?" That was a few months before that idea got the ax too.
Fortunatly for the Avalanche, it is big enough to carry its own. The Sport Trac, on the other hand is watered down now. IRS sucks.
Tom
Gypsy me
Well-Known Member
I just can't even think of the ST every being discontiued. But knowing FORDs history of thought...they probably will do something idiotic like that, somewhere down the road. That will be a sad day for all of us, active members here.
Ford will in hind site wish they had done and made more of the 08 Adrenalin.
I do firmly believe, they will have more order requests for them than they realize. It's a pretty street toy. Kids are gonna love them. If they/FORD would just keep both body styles (Gen1 and Gen2 and the 08 Adrenalin Concept) around and bring back the solid axel, at least as an option. and PUSH MARKETING them on the Public... (if only they would only get a clue) duh.
Give the people choices and make sure the dealerhship owners and managers have their sales people at the dealerships "educated" on their vehicles. If Ford can not give people what they want...then make the customer service so impecable so that consumers will not want to leave their business and products.
Stylin, that's a nice Av -That one, I would drive.
As for Ridgeline...it is no secret how I feel about it. Always looks like an unfinished design to me.
The RLs with Honda, and GM with Avs are successful in popularity and the sales with them...because Honda and GM, spent the money to promote them, something Ford has never done much at all for the ST not matter what year or model.
I've gotten soo many compliments on my trac across the country now. People asking what it is etc...
People, that have never owned them, do like the ST alot. (well my st body style they do) I found when asking these folks, that Most people just have never heard of them. (go figure)
FORD "Here's your sign" doh!
Ford will in hind site wish they had done and made more of the 08 Adrenalin.
I do firmly believe, they will have more order requests for them than they realize. It's a pretty street toy. Kids are gonna love them. If they/FORD would just keep both body styles (Gen1 and Gen2 and the 08 Adrenalin Concept) around and bring back the solid axel, at least as an option. and PUSH MARKETING them on the Public... (if only they would only get a clue) duh.
Give the people choices and make sure the dealerhship owners and managers have their sales people at the dealerships "educated" on their vehicles. If Ford can not give people what they want...then make the customer service so impecable so that consumers will not want to leave their business and products.
Stylin, that's a nice Av -That one, I would drive.
As for Ridgeline...it is no secret how I feel about it. Always looks like an unfinished design to me.
The RLs with Honda, and GM with Avs are successful in popularity and the sales with them...because Honda and GM, spent the money to promote them, something Ford has never done much at all for the ST not matter what year or model.
I've gotten soo many compliments on my trac across the country now. People asking what it is etc...
People, that have never owned them, do like the ST alot. (well my st body style they do) I found when asking these folks, that Most people just have never heard of them. (go figure)
FORD "Here's your sign" doh!
TomT
Well-Known Member
I still think the Avalanche is fudging ugly as sin. Just my opinion.
The Trac defiantly needs a better engine.
Maybe if they made it amphibious I would buy a new one.
The Trac defiantly needs a better engine.
Maybe if they made it amphibious I would buy a new one.
Rich Stern
Well-Known Member
IMO, one of the key marketing factors for the ST is how many buyers eventually move up to the F150.
There are a lot of sedans and coupes out on the roads, driven by young folks living in apartments. As those drivers age and gain families, a good number will switch to SUVs and extended/crew cab pickups. Hence, the Ridgeline, which tries to keep that type of Accord owner in a Honda product.
The ST gives them another place to go, one stop short of a genuine pickup truck, and the 2nd gen ST is a worthy all-around landing spot for those buyers.
Cayman, I disagree with your take on the 2nd gen ST. It's easier to find a framed truck of nearly any size, one that can take rugged use and be lifted/dropped, set up for off road, than it is to find a compromise small truck/SUV substitute for someone stepping out of a sedan or minivan. The 2nd gen ST moved to where the market needed it: Refinement instead of truckness. Ford also had to overcome the rollover and safety objections (real or not). Remember the recent judgement in the most expensive Explorer rollover case? $120 million. Thats equivalent to the net profit on about 50,000 SUVs. Ford has an oustanding platform with all the necessary safety improvements in the new Explorer. It would have been foolish to develop another ST platform and try to make it safer. It was the right move for the market and the business.
There are a lot of sedans and coupes out on the roads, driven by young folks living in apartments. As those drivers age and gain families, a good number will switch to SUVs and extended/crew cab pickups. Hence, the Ridgeline, which tries to keep that type of Accord owner in a Honda product.
The ST gives them another place to go, one stop short of a genuine pickup truck, and the 2nd gen ST is a worthy all-around landing spot for those buyers.
Cayman, I disagree with your take on the 2nd gen ST. It's easier to find a framed truck of nearly any size, one that can take rugged use and be lifted/dropped, set up for off road, than it is to find a compromise small truck/SUV substitute for someone stepping out of a sedan or minivan. The 2nd gen ST moved to where the market needed it: Refinement instead of truckness. Ford also had to overcome the rollover and safety objections (real or not). Remember the recent judgement in the most expensive Explorer rollover case? $120 million. Thats equivalent to the net profit on about 50,000 SUVs. Ford has an oustanding platform with all the necessary safety improvements in the new Explorer. It would have been foolish to develop another ST platform and try to make it safer. It was the right move for the market and the business.
I completely disagree.
Ford could have simply taken part of the Explorer frame, modified it to use an solid rear axle, and designed a Sport Trac body all its own. Make it agressive like the 1st gen Trac. The 2nd gen Trac is flash and gawdie. Can't stand the front end of it. The 1st gen Trac looks just as good as a lifted truck as it would be on the ground. It looks like it belongs in the dirt and the opera.
With that new frame, Ford would have already had a new frame to use in a new Ranger redesign instead of the Ford execs scratching thier heads wondering why Ranger sales have been slipping. (We know it can not be the fact that the current Ranger is about 20 years old)
Other manufacturers have better roll over ratings than Ford has, so we know it is possible to get the results by using a solid rear axle.
Tom
Gavin Allan
Well-Known Member
Don't forget that they will also blame the government and the MPG targets, even though it gets 11-13 MPG with an underpowered couple of engines.
Are you saying the 292 HP V8 in the Trac is underpowered?
Maybe it is just me, but I feel my 2002 Trac has plenty of power and my 20 MPG is good for me. I have nothing to complain about.
Tom
I think the future of the ST lies in whether or not there is an F100 or major remake of the Ranger. If there is an F100, there is not much point in having the ST. Too much overlap of the market I would think. I think there is a market for a truck in the Ranger/ST size. Clearly the ranger is on the way out, or at least 10 years overdue for a remake, and the Explorer is supposedly going to a unibody so something has to give. Ford needs a truck that seats 4 adults comfortably, has a bed at least as large as the ST, preferably a touch larger, and gets decent mileage (20+). If they make it look really cool they'll sell like hotcakes.
The V8 is definitely not underpowered. Also, it gets 18mpg in mixed driving and 20-21 on the hwy. Not too bad. I was getting 19mpg with the Gen1 ST on the same mixed driving. And the V8 sounds awesome with the Magnaflow exhaust!
The V8 is definitely not underpowered. Also, it gets 18mpg in mixed driving and 20-21 on the hwy. Not too bad. I was getting 19mpg with the Gen1 ST on the same mixed driving. And the V8 sounds awesome with the Magnaflow exhaust!
blksn8k
Well-Known Member
It's easy to criticize the new ST when you don't own one. I wasn't particularly thrilled with the idea of the IRS either until I bought mine. With the switch to BFG All-Terrain TA's I have been able to take my 07 ST everywhere that I used to go with my 02 Ranger FX4. Absolutely no problem. I'm not trying to say the ST is just as capable off-road as the Ranger FX4 because it is not. But the 07 ST can go anywhere a sane person would want to take a new 4x4. The 1st gen ST is really just a current gen Ranger with a four door body and a smaller bed. The 07 is nearly as capable off-road with the right tires and it is considerably better on the highway which is where most people drive 99% of the time. The 3V 4.6L/6-speed auto has nearly 60 ft lb more torque than my FX4's 4.0L/5-speed stick and it gets better mileage than my FX4 did with it's 4.10 axle ratio. Oh, and the FX4 couldn't tow a fart.
As far as any future replacement for the ST from Ford, I agree with everything PRM stated.
As far as any future replacement for the ST from Ford, I agree with everything PRM stated.
Gavin Allan
Well-Known Member
I am saying that Ford doesn't seem to get very much HP per liter as many other automakers seem to get. Ford has larger engines that put out comparable power and torque as many other smaller engines, such as the afore-mentioned GM 3.6 liter V6 with 304 hp and 273 lb-ft of torque. Also, the Trac is not a very big vehicle, and because of its weight it gets lousy fuel economy to boot.
Regarding torque, I agree that the '07 has decent horsepower for the size vehicle, but the gearing in the transmission and the rest of the drivetrain, as well as the shift programming sure makes this 292 HP seem a whole lot less most of the time, especially at starting from as top and lower speed driving.
As for the future of the Trac, as well as most other SUVs and light-duty trucks, all I can say is that I hope we learn to like unibody construction and vehicles like the Ridgeline.
Last edited by a moderator:
Gypsy me
Well-Known Member
unibody....ugh.... :wacko::unsure:
:wacko::unsure:HP per liter is more important than actual performance?
I take it you like the Honda S2000 since it has 210+ HP out of 2.0L? Shift it at 5000 RPM and it will run the 1/4 mile at 17 seconds. Shift it at 10,000 RPM and it does 13's.
How practical is that?
I guess the engine in my dad's motorhome sucks. It is a big block that puts out only 230 HP.
Tom
p.s. That engine in the motorhome can push/pull 21,000 LBS 85 MPH on the highway...all with 62 LESS HP than the currant Trac has.
Gavin Allan
Well-Known Member
How long does it take that motorhome to get to 85 MPH?
My Dad's Agco-Allis tractor can out pull my Trac-- it could drag the poor V8 Trac all around the farm all day long and the tractor doesn't even have 4WD. It's also got a little 3-cylinder engine.
How practical is that?
My Dad's Agco-Allis tractor can out pull my Trac-- it could drag the poor V8 Trac all around the farm all day long and the tractor doesn't even have 4WD. It's also got a little 3-cylinder engine.
How practical is that?
Does it really matter? I mean, when anything is pushing 21,000 LBS, it is going to take a while.
Bet the Honda S2000 engine in that motorhome could not push it past 20 MPH. It just hasn't got the power.
Remember, HP is imaginary. Torque, actually usable torque, is real.
Tom
