2019 Ford Ranger May Feature Raptor Variant To Take On Chevy Colorado ZR218
Ford is late to the party when it comes to its mid-size truck. The Ford Ranger went away in North America in 2012, but will resurface once again in 2019. That gives General Motors a multi-year headstart after reinvigorating the segment with the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon.
However, Ford doesn’t seem to be messing around. Spy shots show what could very well be a Ranger Raptor testing in Australia. The Ranger has been a smash hit down under, and the North American Ranger is expected to ride on an updated Asia-Pacific T6 platform. Translation: what we see likely reflects what the U.S. will get.
Photographers also say the Ranger was sporting some decent upgrades. There were disc brakes at all four corners—something not present on regular Rangers—and the truck featured a Watt’s linkage rear suspension setup, broad fender flares and a raised ride height. Off-road tires were also pointed out on the prototype.
What’s under the hood? Spy photographers say it sounded decidedly turbocharged, meaning an EcoBoost V6 may be present. We doubt Ford’s 3.5-liter unit would be present, and our sister publication Ford Authority believes a 2.7-liter unit may do the trick.
If and when a Ranger Raptor surfaces, it will have to face the 2017 Chevrolet Colorado ZR2. The Colorado ZR2 has been heralded for its poise and finesse off-road. To be fair, it can’t quite be compared with an F-150 Raptor. However, a Ranger Raptor? That’s a whole different ball game.
- Sweepstakes Of The Month: Win a 2023 Corvette Z06 Convertible. Details here.
GM should offer more power at mid cycle refresh time. Get that V6 up to 350hp and 300lb-ft. Or a, albeit heavier, a detuned version of the 3.0TT
Offer the 3.6L 464-hp Twin-Turbo producing 445 lb.-ft. of torque so Colorado owners can tow a bigger payload.
So does this mean Silverado needs ZR2?
Offer the 6.2L 640-hp and 630 lb-ft of torque Supercharged V8 so Silverado ZR2 owners can dominate Raptor owners off-road.
So your going to hunt down Raptors off-road? You must have very small hands.
This country was built by big trucks and equipment that had 25-50 HP. Built roads, bridges, dams, mined coal, iron, copper. 150-Hp Cadillac powered tanks crossed Europe during WW11 and Korea. 115-hp Dodge/Ford/International 2-5 ton trucks supplied troops and dragged fuel and artillery across Europe.
My still like new 1988 Chevy 2500hd 4×4 with 210-hp has, in nearly 30 years, hauled 100’s of cars on trailers, construction materials by the tons, been past the Arctic Circle three times and been through Mexico to Belize twice hauling 5-6 tons, and never once has lacked for adequate power to get the job done.
Are the egos of today’s truck buyers so delicate that their manhood is only secure if they have the biggest output engine available. 250-350 Ft. lbs. of Torque is all you need.
And since most of these so called pick-ups are just cars in their use for their owners, and anything with a short or ‘standard’ box and not a long box(8′) is a wannabe truck and nearly useless. You can’t haul a 4’x8′ sheet goods and close the gate. You can’t haul a yard of sand or gravel. You can’t put a full size camper on those shorter box pick-ups. With their shorter wheelbase they are less safe hauling big trailers. And you still have to hunt for an adequately sized parking spot.
To justify the expense to buy and the expense to run, utility vehicles should earn their cost and running expenses by working like they were originally intended, hauling loads and trailers. I use my 88′ for big loads(it is parked most of the time), and 98′ S-10 for lighter stuff and as a daily driver. When I want to have fun, I grab the keys to the Miata or the 91′ 318is or 96′ M3, or my 92′ Camaro RS with an LS-376 and my soon to arrive Camaro 1LS_1LE. I can afford those toys, because I haven’t made and expensive truck payment ever, and no truck payments in the past sixteen years.
Most let their egos select their purchases, and not their real needs. But then the need to quell feelings of inadequacy is a need, for the weak.
My 115-Hp 1998 S-10 has enough power and size do the job and it gets 20-21_mpg in town and up to 31_mpg on the highway. GM and Ford should focus on bringing back some semblance of the original compact pick-up.
To show were we are today my new crew cab 3.6 Canyon gets 19.5 in the city and I have yet to test the highway but the claim 24 mpg. This is on a 308 hp engine and a 4500 pound truck.
Now I do agree there is room for a smaller truck. A more car like truck like a Ridgeline would do well here in the size of the old S10. It also would do well in the global market.
The Canyon/Colorado with the 3.6 Crew is a pretty good combo if you need the bigger accommodations and need to tow a bigger trailer. I would pick the 2.5L extended cab with the long box in a ‘Base’ – WT – or LT. This model equipped with the 2.5L gets about the same(claimed) mileage(22-30) as my S-10. At the end of the model year you can buy a ‘Base’ or ‘WT’ for several 1,000’s off MSRP. if you can find one. Most dealers don’t order anything with the 2.5L. But, if you can, you can get a new truck for under $20,000
Reg; “A more car like truck like a Ridgeline” Might as well buy an SUV and put a trailer hitch on it. You can get bed-extenders, but who wants to deal with those on a regular basis.
A question for you … What is the point of a Ridgeline type vehicle? It is not a car or a truck. A guy came to pick up several cords of free firewood from me in one of those Cadillac wannabee a pick-up. He spent the whole day and many loads hauling it away. A full size truck with racks could have done the job in two loads. With a trailer in one trip.
I like where this is going ! I think that it will force GM in to adding a more powerful engine . A while back I read about the Buick front / allwheel drive ,was offered with 3.6 turbo ,that was tune down to about 365 HRP and 385 TQ , that would be the perfect engine for the ZR2 !
I would love more power too but you have much more to consider.
#1 mpg is a major concern here. They already have a large air dam that is for mpg that hinders off road. Then the ZR2 is only getting 16 mpg in the city and 18 highway. Adding more power will only bring this number lower.
#2 just how much are you willing to pay for this truck. The crew ZR 2 with gas is $44k and with the Diesel can go to $48k. You add a more expensive twin turbo and you will be reaching $50k.
At best we may see a modest gain in power as GM under rates their engines and increases the power rating over time with little change of actual power. The new 3.6 this year is nearly 1 second faster but only 3 hp more. The new transmission has helped but I suspect the power rating is conservative.
At best we may see a option for the Camaro V6 but you will not see a tt V6 here in this gen.
The 400hp 3.0TT is rated the same city and hwy MPG as the 335hp 3.6 in the CT6.
It’s about competition. If ford offered the 2.7TT with 325hp and 400lb-ft (updated for 2018) then GM should offer a parallel
The Silverado / Sierra with the 6.2L engine gets the exact same MPG as the Colorado ZR2 with the 3.6L. The full size trucks are heavier and shaped like a brick. The 6.2L or 5.3L put in the smaller lighter ZR2 should deliver the same or better MPG. GM should give potential Colorado shoppers a choice of engine options and packages just as they do with their Camaro lineup.
And if you put the same kind of off-road nose on the full size anditsmpg will drop just the same.
My Canyon get much better mileage than my father inlaws Z71.
Believe it or not that brick is more aero than that exposed tires of the ZR2
I own a new ZR2 Crew cab V6 . It has plenty of power for 90% of what it is designed to do. Any more HP would cost MPG and I’m not convinced its worth it . This truck is well designed with the 8 speed tranny so you rarely are out of the best performance envelope for the engine . If Uncle Sam wasn’t forcing MPG thresholds down the manufacturers throats they would be dropping the 5.3 V8 in the Colorado and Canyon like they did a decade ago .Some people never have enough power ,they can buy the superchargers.
Richard Morris , I believe that kind power is not needed ! All that the Colorado needs is , power to deal with the Ranger’s 2.7 Turbo power , So a detune Twin Turbo 3.6 or a 3.0 Twin Turbo with 380 / 390 HP with 400 TQ would be great !! Now the big power 3.6 Turbo would be better for the Silverado .
What the ZR2 need most of all is more distinction between it and the regular Colorado. I was at a dealer the other day and saw one. The only way I knew it was a ZR2 was the salesman pointed it out. You see a Raptor and you know right away what it is. By the way if For comes out with significant more HP and TQ then Chevy needs to follow. This would be one case where wait and see would not be a bad idea.
It has a wider wheel base, entirely redesigned front and rear bumpers with significantly better approach and departure angles,, a 2″ lift, 31″ all terrain tires, an entirely different suspension system w/ Multimatic shocks, and front and rear diff lockers…
That’s a hell of a lot of distinction imo.