The Thailand Special Thread - New Developments/News

[kevino]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

It's the first time I've been keen on a Thailand Special, I'm interested in what the povvo spec

Really?
Last week it was a Tesla 3.
Next week it will be a Mitsubishi ASX.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by kevino

Really?
Last week it was a Tesla 3.
Next week it will be a Mitsubishi ASX.

Nah, thats your territory of the gormless SUV

[CyberWasp]

If they are making a Super Duty then what Duty are the current Rangers?

[kevino]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Nah, thats your territory of the gormless SUV

With your lower back issues
12 months from now you ll be in a lovely Kluger or the like

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by CyberWasp

If they are making a Super Duty then what Duty are the current Rangers?

Worksite supervisor with collared shirt, with fresh hi-vis vest with fold lines out of the packet duty.

I've seen a couple water companies with big fleets of single cab new Rangers though that use them for the getting shit done crew.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by CyberWasp

If they are making a Super Duty then what Duty are the current Rangers?

Light commercial seems to be the catch all description in this country

[prydey]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Not to distract,
I then took a look at Everest current GVM and GCM, it’s close to 79 series LC station wagon,
The GVM is pretty much there but the GCM would ned a lift by about 250-300 kg.

I feel some manufacturers use GCM as the real world limit, which then allows them to still market the car with 3.5t Max towing. While towing 3.5t may be possible in some unique circumstances, the GCM keeps things under control.

Ironically it doesn't really work because to allow yourself to tow something heavier, you have to keep the tow vehicle lighter, which is not what you want.

Everest is a heavy car so even though 70 series wagon gvm is slightly less, the payload is a couple of hundred kg higher, which is fairly significant. No rear axle ratings in the link you provided but I'm pretty sure 70 series is significantly higher than Everest in this area also.

I don't think it's worth trying to chase those buyers with Everest.

I think Ford are on the right path with SD and building a car to suit the purpose, rather than just tweaking an existing platform.

[whynot]

Originally Posted by naddis01

I was following on from my previous post saying that it would be the perfect vehicle for those with large caravans and do a lot of touring. If Ford can't see that then they are leaving a substantial piece of the market on the table. You see it all the time from all brands, where people buy a dual cab and load it up with the tray, fridge, batteries, 2 spares hanging off the back, bullbar, scrub bars, bash plates, winch etc etc. Then hang a 3.5T caravan on the back and wonder why they are overweight. Or even worse, they obviously to the fact.

Those people don't want an XL (assuming it is specced the same as the normal Ranger).

Oh, I will leave it to the in-house product development folk at Ford to pick and choose (and defend) what they think the company can sell. They have been the ones talking to the fleet managers and fleet sales; and one would have to assume they have better access to data on customer trends and intentions. However, I will say that when I look at the concept of selling a Super Duty to fleets, it makes a lot of sense to me.

This article appeared in The Australian Mining Review a few days ago.

“Ranger Super Duty further strengthens our commercial vehicle portfolio, with an offering for all kinds of work,” he said.

“As we move closer to launch, we will continue to work closely with fleets and vehicle modifiers across Australia to be sure that Ranger Super Duty does everything they expect it to, and so much more.”

The Super Duty concept originated in 2019 and, over the years, Ford actively sought feedback from extensive visits to Ranger customers, including Australian mining companies.

“The Ranger Super Duty has been specially engineered and designed to support the needs of heavy-duty fleet customers who need higher levels of payload, towing and off-road capability – backed by OEM levels of engineering, durability and warranty,” a Ford spokesperson said.

“Its mid-size design makes it ideal for navigating tighter spaces while still delivering the capability needed for demanding tasks.

As for the difference between an XLT and, say, a Platinum; one has to ask oneself what essential kit is missing from the XLT that would put a private buyer (who is chasing all available load carrying capacity) off the purchase? It has all of the essential safety kit, so it cannot be that. Would the lack of electric powered and ventilated seats kill the deal? Lack of expensive sound system? Vinyl floor covering (which is brilliant when camping)? Lack of heated steering wheel? Cup holders? LED auto headlights?

Thinking about the Ranger's development road map a bit more and making a few wild guesses ... it makes me wonder if the Super Duty is a subtle way to avoid some of the flak from the current ALP/Greens/Teal/YourABC about "SUV" size and emissions. One would assume that the Ranger PHEV (which will be premium priced) will take some of the demand off the V6 production. Assuming that a Super Duty pinches some sales from Toyota, with a GCM of 8,000 kg, it would be a nice way of keeping the V6 production line at full steam in what is clearly a highly specialised work vehicle (as opposed to an F150 as an urban runabout).

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by prydey

I feel some manufacturers use GCM as the real world limit, which then allows them to still market the car with 3.5t Max towing. While towing 3.5t may be possible in some unique circumstances, the GCM keeps things under control.

Ironically it doesn't really work because to allow yourself to tow something heavier, you have to keep the tow vehicle lighter, which is not what you want.

Everest is a heavy car so even though 70 series wagon gvm is slightly less, the payload is a couple of hundred kg higher, which is fairly significant. No rear axle ratings in the link you provided but I'm pretty sure 70 series is significantly higher than Everest in this area also.

I don't think it's worth trying to chase those buyers with Everest.

I think Ford are on the right path with SD and building a car to suit the purpose, rather than just tweaking an existing platform.

Correct, I agree mostly with what you’re saying and realised that while I was typing that post.

The 70 series SW specs are just a bit more in critical figures but my thoughts were also
about being able to safely towing 3,500 kg with a fully loaded Everest and whether a
slight upgrade is needed to keep owners on the right side of the law, a note to just how
good the older LC SW was.Im also mindful that the Toyota may do something like that
with new LC Prado in the near future……..

Edit,
Toyota already done it with LC Prado GCW 6600 kg while Everest is 6,250 kg
Both have GVM in that 3,100 to 3,150/3,200 kg zone so the new Prado has
a about 350 kg more to load up the vehicle….something for Ford to think about.
(not looking at the SD 8,000 kg GCW figure, something a lot less..)

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by whynot

Oh, I will leave it to the in-house product development folk at Ford to pick and choose (and defend) what they think the company can sell. They have been the ones talking to the fleet managers and fleet sales; and one would have to assume they have better access to data on customer trends and intentions. However, I will say that when I look at the concept of selling a Super Duty to fleets, it makes a lot of sense to me.

This article appeared in The Australian Mining Review a few days ago.



As for the difference between an XLT and, say, a Platinum; one has to ask oneself what essential kit is missing from the XLT that would put a private buyer (who is chasing all available load carrying capacity) off the purchase? It has all of the essential safety kit, so it cannot be that. Would the lack of electric powered and ventilated seats kill the deal? Lack of expensive sound system? Vinyl floor covering (which is brilliant when camping)? Lack of heated steering wheel? Cup holders? LED auto headlights?

Thinking about the Ranger's development road map a bit more and making a few wild guesses ... it makes me wonder if the Super Duty is a subtle way to avoid some of the flak from the current ALP/Greens/Teal/YourABC about "SUV" size and emissions. One would assume that the Ranger PHEV (which will be premium priced) will take some of the demand off the V6 production. Assuming that a Super Duty pinches some sales from Toyota, with a GCM of 8,000 kg, it would be a nice way of keeping the V6 production line at full steam in what is clearly a highly specialised work vehicle (as opposed to an F150 as an urban runabout).

If any private buyers were wanting a SD Ranger, it may be easier for Ford to offer
a luxury pack on the XLT trim rather than a whole new vehicle trim like Platinum..
With such a specific build, minimum production line changes are probably better
in regards to building a stock item that dealers can add to their fast moving inventory

[prydey]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Edit,
Toyota already done it with LC Prado GCW 6600 kg while Everest is 6,250 kg
Both have GVM in that 3,100 to 3,150/3,200 kg zone so the new Prado has
a about 350 kg more to load up the vehicle….something for Ford to think about.
(not looking at the SD 8,000 kg GCW figure, something a lot less..)

A quick google suggests 2025 prado actually has a reasonable amount less payload than Everest. Payload varies for both depending on model but prado loses that battle across the board.

The higher gcm with the Toyota will make it easier to stay legal if you're towing a trailer approaching the legal max.

[naddis01]

Originally Posted by whynot

Oh, I will leave it to the in-house product development folk at Ford to pick and choose (and defend) what they think the company can sell. They have been the ones talking to the fleet managers and fleet sales; and one would have to assume they have better access to data on customer trends and intentions. However, I will say that when I look at the concept of selling a Super Duty to fleets, it makes a lot of sense to me.

This article appeared in The Australian Mining Review a few days ago.



As for the difference between an XLT and, say, a Platinum; one has to ask oneself what essential kit is missing from the XLT that would put a private buyer (who is chasing all available load carrying capacity) off the purchase? It has all of the essential safety kit, so it cannot be that. Would the lack of electric powered and ventilated seats kill the deal? Lack of expensive sound system? Vinyl floor covering (which is brilliant when camping)? Lack of heated steering wheel? Cup holders? LED auto headlights?

Thinking about the Ranger's development road map a bit more and making a few wild guesses ... it makes me wonder if the Super Duty is a subtle way to avoid some of the flak from the current ALP/Greens/Teal/YourABC about "SUV" size and emissions. One would assume that the Ranger PHEV (which will be premium priced) will take some of the demand off the V6 production. Assuming that a Super Duty pinches some sales from Toyota, with a GCM of 8,000 kg, it would be a nice way of keeping the V6 production line at full steam in what is clearly a highly specialised work vehicle (as opposed to an F150 as an urban runabout).

I think you've missed what I was saying. At no stage have I said that Ford shouldn't chase the fleet sales with the Super Duty. All I am saying is don't limit it to an XL, but offer a higher grade and open up another whole market. And by higher grade I was not thinking Platinum. I just meant XLT or above.

Anyway I'll leave it there. If Ford are happy to market it as a base model only then that's up to them.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by naddis01

I think you've missed what I was saying. At no stage have I said that Ford shouldn't chase the fleet sales with the Super Duty. All I am saying is don't limit it to an XL, but offer a higher grade and open up another whole market. And by higher grade I was not thinking Platinum. I just meant XLT or above.

Anyway I'll leave it there. If Ford are happy to market it as a base model only then that's up to them.

They've always been great at misreading the market and offering the wrong model makeups at initial launch of a few products now.

They did it back when the 7th Gen Fiesta launched in Australia, they brought in 80% of the volume as povvo spec CL models, when the majority of customers wanted the top spec Zetec models, which ended up with huge waits ex Germany.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by naddis01

I think you've missed what I was saying. At no stage have I said that Ford shouldn't chase the fleet sales with the Super Duty. All I am saying is don't limit it to an XL, but offer a higher grade and open up another whole market. And by higher grade I was not thinking Platinum. I just meant XLT or above.

Anyway I'll leave it there. If Ford are happy to market it as a base model only then that's up to them.

No doubt if the SD ranger proves to be successful with demand, ford will probably option up to higher specs for sales, they done this with Ranger & Everest.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by prydey

A quick google suggests 2025 prado actually has a reasonable amount less payload than Everest. Payload varies for both depending on model but prado loses that battle across the board.

The higher gcm with the Toyota will make it easier to stay legal if you're towing a trailer approaching the legal max.

The real issue is not the GVM, it’s the GCW.

Prado GCW = 6,600 kg - 3,200 GVM = 3,400 kg for towing but have 350 kg less ball weight so probably OK

Everest GCW = 6,250 kg - 3,200 GVM = 3,050 kg for towing but have 350 kg less ball weight so maybe less
than 3,500 kg trailer?

I know my math probably has errors in it but the Everest looks to have a bit more issue clearing the combined weight hurdle.

[Sprintey]

Some follow-up dual cab action from Aleppo:

https://x.com/clashreport/status/1862836367551504817

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Sprintey

Some follow-up dual cab action from Aleppo:

https://x.com/clashreport/status/1862836367551504817

Potential Ford Ranger Super Duty customers right there,

Chuck a ZU-23-2 on the back,

[Sprintey]

The Boss would always get a bigger RAM and put a German 88mm flak on the back...

But yeah we are all good for post-apocalypse.

[Franco Cozzo]

MetaAI is junk, can only get it to generate a PXII/III and an extremely poor approximation of a Russian ZU-23-2 on the back of it.



http://menglongli.com/94.html

[prydey]

Originally Posted by jpd80

The real issue is not the GVM, it’s the GCW.

Prado GCW = 6,600 kg - 3,200 GVM = 3,400 kg for towing but have 350 kg less ball weight so probably OK

Everest GCW = 6,250 kg - 3,200 GVM = 3,050 kg for towing but have 350 kg less ball weight so maybe less
than 3,500 kg trailer?

I know my math probably has errors in it but the Everest looks to have a bit more issue clearing the combined weight hurdle.

Basically correct. Prado can potentially reach a higher towing limit at max GVM.

Ford have used GCM to limit the Everests towing ability while still being able to market the car as having 3.5t towing.

It just means if you have a 3t trailer and more than a couple of passengers you really can't utilise the full payload capacity of the tow vehicle.

Prado's issue is, even though GCM is higher, the vehicle GVM and smaller payload will be the limiting factor.

With some models only having around 600kg payload, by the time you factor in ball weight (300-350kg) fuel (100kg) driver (it's a prado so 120kg ) you've basically already maxxed out the payload.

Both cars are examples of manufacturers just tweaking figures to keep sales rather than building a proper heavy duty tow vehicle.

The Everest you can tow the full 3.5t legally but you'd still be limited with how much you could pack in the car.

The extra 100kg GVM is actually more useful than the Prado's increased GCM.

[Sprintey]

Hahaha Franco, now you're talking.

And the Cruiser is actually a 1/35 Meng kit? wow. They do some good kits.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by prydey

A quick google suggests 2025 prado actually has a reasonable amount less payload than Everest. Payload varies for both depending on model but prado loses that battle across the board.

The higher gcm with the Toyota will make it easier to stay legal if you're towing a trailer approaching the legal max.

I believe thats due to the onboard 48v system which comes in handy for running accessories.
Add a full dual battery setup of its kind/capacity to an Everest and you'll lose payload too.