New Ford Maverick

[Blademaster91]

11 hours ago, vetali said:

Maverick has AWD options in the 2.0t model. People gonna compare it to the ridgeline a lot because they are both unibody transverse based trucks. I don't think 2 doors would've sold at all besides some fleet sales. Plus the tooling to adapt a production line for a 2 door long bed unibody would be much more than a body on frame.

 

I shopped a TRD pro tacoma as well when I was looking. I hated the seats and seating position way too much. Felt like a car on stilts, which didn't work well with being a tall truck. Much rather have the tundra if getting a toyota, but that MPG....

Was there any fuel mileage estimates given with the 2.0T model? I would wait for reviews but this truck makes a more sense as the hybrid model, there should've been an option for an electric motor in the rear as an AWD version.

But I think there is a market for a basic compact 2 door long bed pickup, I see a lot of old 90's Ford Rangers and Chevy S10's so there might be a market for that. The hybrid battery has to go somewhere though, so a 2 door Maverick might not have been an option.

Yeah I think thats a real drawback  with the Tacoma, maybe fine if you're used to a car, although I don't know of any other cheap truck as the Ranger and Colorado are both overpriced IMO.

[Mister Woof]

9 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

It makes sense, lots of people like high end stuff because of the experience, or if you don't even take advantage of the hardware it will last much longer than just buying lower end hardware, like say buying a full size truck it will last a very long time if you never use it as a truck.

Except theres lots of comparing to the Ridgeline in this thread, its not even in the same category, although the Ridgeline is in a interesting spot where its a between a compact a midsize pickup.

Yes the Tacoma is more expensive, but if i needed a truck it would be well worth it IMO, also resale value on just about any Toyota is excellent.

I don't really understand how a compact truck compares to the Honda Civic, besides fuel economy. I've heard that pointed out a lot and it sounds like something some marketing board at Ford came up with. If you're shopping for a Civic, you'd probably compare it to a Toyota Corolla, Hyundai Elantra, and a Mazda 3, not a compact pickup.

Just because people do it doesn't mean it's really appropriate.

 

This is definitely not targeted at your conventional truck owners. It's targeted against your compact car, and sedan city owner who sometimes need the utility of a bed, and think having a "do it all" vehicle at the right price makes sense. The Ridgeline does that too, but at a price point that makes the trade off from an actual truck unappealing. The Maverick resolves that.

 

Ford themselves: "Maverick challenges the status quo and the stereotypes of what a pickup truck can be," Todd Eckert, Ford truck group marketing manager, said. "We believe it will be compelling to a lot of people who never before considered a truck."

[Mister Woof]

14 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

Was there any fuel mileage estimates given with the 2.0T model? I would wait for reviews but this truck makes a more sense as the hybrid model, 

 

I completely disagree with you here - the hybrid makes the most sense due to what I stated above. If you're upgrading to the 2.0T version for more capability, you've chosen the wrong vehicle to begin with.

 

There's a reason they made it standard drivetrain as a hybrid (beyond fleet emissions reasons) and I feel a big part of that is the target demographic for this is more concerned with MPG than they are if they can tow 2000 more pounds than the 2000 lbs they already don't really need to be able to tow. I think if people opt for the 2.0T, it will be more for "performance" so they can drive faster than to actually tow a whopping 4000lbs. Or for people who actually need the AWD.

 

As far as rear wheel electric motor version - I think this would have made more sense than the 2.0T at all. Perhaps that is coming if sales are robust. Then it would also appeal to people in all climates.

[Commodus]

11 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

I completely disagree with you here - the hybrid makes the most sense due to what I stated above. If you're upgrading to the 2.0T version for more capability, you've chosen the wrong vehicle to begin with.

 

There's a reason they made it standard drivetrain as a hybrid (beyond fleet emissions reasons) and I feel a big part of that is the target demographic for this is more concerned with MPG than they are if they can tow 2000 more pounds than the 2000 lbs they already don't really need to be able to tow. I think if people opt for the 2.0T, it will be more for "performance" so they can drive faster than to actually tow a whopping 4000lbs. Or for people who actually need the AWD.

 

As far as rear wheel electric motor version - I think this would have made more sense than the 2.0T at all. Perhaps that is coming if sales are robust. Then it would also appeal to people in all climates.

I see a PHEV or pure EV as virtually inevitable for the Maverick if it lasts more than a couple of years. You don't redesign your flagship truck for electric power without thinking about how another brand new vehicle will get similar treatment.

 

And a PHEV Maverick would be kinda perfect for me in the current automotive landscape. I want something that could carry both my (eventual) kids and the cargo from the local garden centre, but has gas if I need to travel far and won't be too big for packed parking lots and streets. An EV would be the ideal, of course, but I know range might be an issue until next-gen battery tech arrives.

[Mister Woof]

3 minutes ago, Commodus said:

I see a PHEV or pure EV as virtually inevitable for the Maverick if it lasts more than a couple of years. You don't redesign your flagship truck for electric power without thinking about how another brand new vehicle will get similar treatment.

 

And a PHEV Maverick would be kinda perfect for me in the current automotive landscape. I want something that could carry both my (eventual) kids and the cargo from the local garden centre, but has gas if I need to travel far and won't be too big for packed parking lots and streets. An EV would be the ideal, of course, but I know range might be an issue until next-gen battery tech arrives.

I think that is the goal too. Right now, it's getting the mindshare and the foot in the door.

 

I think being priced as it is and being a hybrid are two big points that needed to get met. And assuming reviews are good, it will probably meet those goals.

[Velcade]

If it can't fit a full sheet of plywood in the bed is it really a pickup?

 

Price seems to be moving in the right direction.  These 80k trucks that feel more like luxury SUVs don't make any sense to me.  A truck should be for work.

[dalekphalm]

4 hours ago, Velcade said:

If it can't fit a full sheet of plywood in the bed is it really a pickup?

A standard full size sheet is 4ft by 8ft, correct?

 

If so, the vast majority of trucks sold today don't have an 8ft bed. Even the F-150 comes with only a 5.5ft bed as standard.

4 hours ago, Velcade said:

Price seems to be moving in the right direction.  These 80k trucks that feel more like luxury SUVs don't make any sense to me.  A truck should be for work.

Most truck owners don't use their trucks for truck reasons, or "work". Most just use them as regular commute vehicles.

 

Personally, this looks awesome. I agree that an AWD Hybrid option would be appealing, as would a PHEV option (and eventually a fully electric version). But for the first model? Yeah. This looks good. Tempting enough to maybe consider it for my next vehicle (I've also been considering the RAV4 Hybrid and the RAV4 Prime, among others - but not purchasing anytime soon).

 

For those who don't understand this and think that it's too weak/underpowered/too small to be used for "real work"? Yeah. That's kinda the point. Most truck owners don't do any of that stuff. But further to that, this truck is to entice non-truck owners. It's to convince people who normally buy Civics, etc, to buy a "truck" instead.

 

If you think this truck is too small, too underpowered, etc - it's not for you. You are not the target demographic. It's for people like me, who normally buy compact sedans, but sometimes get annoyed because I can't fit whatever thing from Canadian Tire or Home Depot I just bought inside the trunk.

[Mister Woof]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

A standard full size sheet is 4ft by 8ft, correct?

 

If so, the vast majority of trucks sold today don't have an 8ft bed. Even the F-150 comes with only a 5.5ft bed as standard.

Most truck owners don't use their trucks for truck reasons, or "work". Most just use them as regular commute vehicles.

 

Personally, this looks awesome. I agree that an AWD Hybrid option would be appealing, as would a PHEV option (and eventually a fully electric version). But for the first model? Yeah. This looks good. Tempting enough to maybe consider it for my next vehicle (I've also been considering the RAV4 Hybrid and the RAV4 Prime, among others - but not purchasing anytime soon).

 

For those who don't understand this and think that it's too weak/underpowered/too small to be used for "real work"? Yeah. That's kinda the point. Most truck owners don't do any of that stuff. But further to that, this truck is to entice non-truck owners. It's to convince people who normally buy Civics, etc, to buy a "truck" instead.

 

If you think this truck is too small, too underpowered, etc - it's not for you. You are not the target demographic. It's for people like me, who normally buy compact sedans, but sometimes get annoyed because I can't fit whatever thing from Canadian Tire or Home Depot I just bought inside the trunk.

Regarding the 4x8 sheet of plywood - they thought of this actually. Apparently, the tailgate has a multiple point latching mechanism that makes it perfectly aligned with the wheel wells so that you can lay 4x8 plywood sheets flat.

 

 

IMO more than capable for regular folks with extra-light duty needs

[Beerzerker]

On 6/9/2021 at 11:00 AM, Blademaster91 said:

Was there any fuel mileage estimates given with the 2.0T model? I would wait for reviews but this truck makes a more sense as the hybrid model, there should've been an option for an electric motor in the rear as an AWD version.

But I think there is a market for a basic compact 2 door long bed pickup, I see a lot of old 90's Ford Rangers and Chevy S10's so there might be a market for that. The hybrid battery has to go somewhere though, so a 2 door Maverick might not have been an option.

Yeah I think thats a real drawback  with the Tacoma, maybe fine if you're used to a car, although I don't know of any other cheap truck as the Ranger and Colorado are both overpriced IMO.

I'm one of the guys that has an older compact pickup (91 S10 4x4) and I love it, no need for me to go out and get another one.
This one is in good condition yet it's also been used as a truck and still is if need be - Like I told the guy that did the paint and bodywork to it last year I won't be keeping around as a cream-puff, it's gonna get used sometimes.

Speaking of new, isn't there a problem now about having enough ECM's/modules for the new vehicles?
Personally I can't confirm it but I've heard brand new vehicles are being made and then stashed somewhere simply because they don't have control modules to go in them right now.

[dalekphalm]

6 hours ago, Beerzerker said:

I'm one of the guys that has an older compact pickup (91 S10 4x4) and I love it, no need for me to go out and get another one.
This one is in good condition yet it's also been used as a truck and still is if need be - Like I told the guy that did the paint and bodywork to it last year I won't be keeping around as a cream-puff, it's gonna get used sometimes.

Speaking of new, isn't there a problem now about having enough ECM's/modules for the new vehicles?
Personally I can't confirm it but I've heard brand new vehicles are being made and then stashed somewhere simply because they don't have control modules to go in them right now.

The silicon shortage is seemingly affecting all industries. I've heard that demand in the auto industry is adding to that shortage, but I've not heard any specific details.

 

I wouldn't worry about it too much though.

[Mister Woof]

https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a36697224/ford-maverick-had-to-be-a-hybrid/

[Sarra]

It looks great, overall, but it's not what I'm looking for, that's for sure.

[Donut417]

I wonder where its built? Cant be in the US for that price. My dads 2007 Toyota Camry was more American than the 2006 Ford Focus I used to have. 

[Mister Woof]

1 hour ago, Donut417 said:

I wonder where its built? Cant be in the US for that price. My dads 2007 Toyota Camry was more American than the 2006 Ford Focus I used to have. 

Mexico or Canada IIRC

 

Mexico

 

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a36619035/2022-ford-maverick-vs-competition/#:~:text=Mavericks will be built alongside,longer than the rugged crossover.

[dalekphalm]

5 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

Mexico or Canada IIRC

 

Mexico

 

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a36619035/2022-ford-maverick-vs-competition/#:~:text=Mavericks will be built alongside,longer than the rugged crossover.

According to the wiki entry it’s Mexico, but given how new the vehicle is that information may not be complete. 

[Mister Woof]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

According to the wiki entry it’s Mexico, but given how new the vehicle is that information may not be complete. 

I'm good with it - any NA to me feels local enough. 

[dalekphalm]

17 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

I'm good with it - any NA to me feels local enough. 

With NAFTA (sorry... uh, CAMUSA? USCAM? Whatever the hell NAFTA 2.0 is called), it ultimately doesn't matter too much where it's assembled, since parts come from all over North America. Obviously it's most ideal for (in my example, Canadians) to buy a car manufactured in the country you live in (Canada, in my case). But realistically as long as it's built within NA, that's probably good enough.

[Donut417]

2 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

But realistically as long as it's built within NA, that's probably good enough.

Many Americans dont feel that way. And I think thats the reason Toyota has been a success here because they were smart enough to employ American workers to build some of their cars here in the US. Many American's view NAFTA and what ever the fuck its now called as America selling out American workers. Because many people in this country have lost their jobs over that trade agreement. 

[dalekphalm]

3 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Many Americans dont feel that way. And I think thats the reason Toyota has been a success here because they were smart enough to employ American workers to build some of their cars here in the US. Many American's view NAFTA and what ever the fuck its now called as America selling out American workers. Because many people in this country have lost their jobs over that trade agreement. 

It’s certainly mixed, but people that feel that way need to realize that even though cars manufactured in - Mexico, say - the parts that make up that car are a spiderweb of manufacturing all across the continent. 
 

In any case, one of the points of the agreement was to drive up wages in Mexico. This does a few things, including better living wages for those Mexico workers, but it also lowers the incentive to *move* jobs away from America. 

 

Anyway that’s getting off topic lol 

[atxcyclist]

It's a shame they didn't call it the Ranchero.

[Sarra]

2 hours ago, atxcyclist said:

It's a shame they didn't call it the Ranchero.

It doesn't have the same 'base' as a Ranchero had. It just wouldn't make sense to call it that...