Think trucks are portly and pricey? Ford's $21.5K, 40-mpg Maverick would like a word | Hagerty Media

[Hagerty]

It's no secret that pickup trucks are the golden geese for the Big Three automakers here in the states. They're big, cushy, ridiculously capable, and laden with more tech than your local Best Buy. People are buying them in droves. But sometimes, bigger isn't always better.
https://www.hagerty.com/media/news/think-trucks-are-portly-and-pricey-fords-21-5k-40-mpg-maverick-wo...

[Hagerty Fan]

Your right. I gotta 95 2.3 XL. Fine truck. Oil and filter changes and timing belts are the only troubles I've had. If you shred a cam belt, no worries, no interference. Gotta cute little factory header on it too. There is a cam timing trick you can do on that motor that will give you 6-10 extra horses without purchasing a single part.

[vrooomie]

My descendants will check back in with ya, in 2050!

😬

[Pbgray]

PS: Final point of assembly for the Maverick is Ford’s Hermosillo, Mexico plant, built on the same frame as the Focus.

[Tim]

It shares the same platform as the Escape and now Bronco Sport. The Focus platform was considerably shorter.

[uweschmidt]

So much for BUY American !!!!!

[Olduglycarl]

That's a shame, both, the frame and where it will be built, although, no one wants to work for their money here in the states anymore.

The commies have taken over...

[cwpm]

Seems like another very smart bet by Ford. Buying their stock at $5/share turns out to have been a wise move!

[slammin]

It's go that "small" pickups are starting to be offered. 20 years ago a buyer had many choices. I have own several early S10s and late 90's Rangers. Great little trucks. I know I'm not the only one to miss them.

[uweschmidt]

It aint the starting Price thats counts( good comeon though) its the amount that people have to Pay interest on when its all added up and the whole effort has very little to do with Trucks its all about creating and finding more Markets to sell more stuff to people with imagination that can be fired up( and thats OK too!) but most peoplewould be better off to buy a good Sedan and use a utility Trailer for the occasional Hauling Job ( but that would deprive most prospective "Truck owners" from spending more Money on aCanopy)

[Air_and_Water]

What 40 mpg sedan can I get with this capability at this price point, though? We all have our different wants/desires, and this fills a niche that hasn't been occupied for a long time, even if the formula is a bit different than the old Ranger.

I actually HAVE an old '92 Ranger (and I like it a lot), but if I were to get one of these for my next car I wouldn't need that second vehicle to do what I could do with one. It'd get the stuff away from the house that I don't want, I could put dirt and mulch in the back and not mess up the interior, carry bikes, appliances or whatever. I could then open up my driveway to another vehicle that's more fun than the Ranger.

[uweschmidt]

Your Point is well taken

[Guitar74]

Point taken. 

[Tim]

There's always more than one way to do it, but each has it's trade-offs. A pickup offers the ability to keep messy things outside that cab/trunk. An auto can't put 1,500 pounds in the bed, meaning there are many tasks a Maverick can do without a trailer that an auto needs a trailer. The tow package (you'll want to seriously consider more than just a hitch and add a transmission oil cooler) and trailer are additional expenses to an auto that costs at least as much, if not more. Then you need a place to store the trailer out of the elements. Sometimes it's better to get a vehicle intended to do the things you need rather than try to make something do what it wasn't designed to do.

[uweschmidt]

of course you have some excellent points its just in my world I always liked to come home unhook the trailer and leave the unloading for later Leaving valuable stuff in a pickup leads to thievery but like you say there is always more then one way ( I love to have good cnversations)

[BMD4800]

But then people on Internet forums will call me wasteful because they don’t see me towing 7,400 lbs every day.

[StevieJanowski]

Smart move by Ford. Few people in this market will care that it has a CVT as standard equip. For those that do, they’ll spring for the EcoBoost engine to get the 8-speed auto. Of course I’d love to see a true budget-friendly regular cab, 6-spd manual, non-turbo 4-cyl like the Rangers of yore, but that ain’t happening.

[MrKnowItAll]

A car with an open trunk, not a truck. Hybrid? Eco-boost? I see no long term truck usefulness or reliability.
I'd rather buy an older 4 cylinder stick Toyota or Ranger with a useable bed.

[Tim]

Sounds similar to what people said about unibody SUVs not so long ago. "Not a real SUV. Can't take it off-road. Etc." Then people rode in them and said, "Whoah, this rides way better!" Lots of people have needs that don't require more than this. For those who need more and those who think they need more but really don't, there are larger trucks available.

[Guitar74]

I just priced it, you can still get a full size Ford in Xl trim without all of the bells and whistles for around $28k (standard cab short bed).

[Air_and_Water]

Please expand on how it's "not a truck". It's a truck, it just isn't a big one, which is exactly the point. Also, hybrids and turbos are certainly not new technology at this point and have long ago proven their reliability and durability.

[BMD4800]

A guy with a lifted Silverado says a Canyon isn’t a real truck.
His neighbor has a 2500 and says half-tons aren’t for real work, just party trucks.
Guy down the block has an old-school Dana 60/Dana80, 12 valve Cummins dodge with a 5-speed, laughs at them both. A little while later, another guy shows up with a class 6.

Be honest with yourself, get what works best for YOU. Let the trolls, the Karen’s, the hill-billies, and the eco-nuts do and say their nonsense.

FWIW, Ford EcoBoost has some questionable reliability and is worthy of concern. Especially the 1.5 and 2.0 4cyl.

[Hagerty Fan]

Ecoboost V6 have cooling system concerns. Turbo cooling especially and costly. Even though the turbo problems do come up they are also mistakenly diagnosed by drips from other cooling system components and these misdiagnoses are very costly. Customers are not always given the honest truth of the root cause of the leak and are often burnt for the cost of the misdiagnosed repair with the replacement of a 50 cent "O" ring.

[64jeepsrt]

They just need to rebirth the Ranchero and the Chevy Elco... car with a bed..

[JGeske]

Some amazing facts for you: 1) definition of truck in USA for legal purposes: a 4 wheel vehicle with an open cargo bed. 2) there are people who do not tow more than a 10-12 foot fishing boat or an ATV and therefore don't need 8k, 10k, or 12k of towing capacity. In fact they find they can tow what they need with a minivan if needed. 3) Some people prefer the ride and fuel economy of an SUV, but do activities which involve dirty/smelly things, and therefore like the idea of a truck bed. 4) The vast majority of truck owners do not off-road.

The fact of the matter is, many "truck guys" think the definition of truck is body on frame, 4x4, with massive towing ability. This is patently untrue. The bed is the only feature that defines a truck. Many F150s, for example, are Rwd only. F150s can be bought in configurations that only tow 3-4k lbs with a payload of around 1000lbs (looking at you Raptor). The Jeep Commanche of the 80s was unibody. All still trucks.

So, let's say someone likes to go to Home Depot a lot, perhaps hauls muddy mountain bikes, or wet dogs. They own a UTV or ATV or fishing boat they need to trailer. 90% or more of their driving is the daily commute to drop the kids at school then off to work. A fuel efficient hybrid vehicle with an open bed is the perfect solution to their needs, and I am pretty sure this description fits a gigantic swath of the US population that currently buy 2-3 row CUV/SUVs like the Rav4 and Highlander due to the previous lack of a vehicle like this (not counting the Ridgeline, as that only gets high 20's MPG highway and 21 Combined and is much more expensive, otherwise fits the description).

[JGeske]

Also, your user name seems to be a lie, given the complete idiocy shown in stating this is not a truck.

[MrKnowItAll]

That's your privilege. I still maintain that this is a front wheel drive sedan with an open, near useless trunk.

[Hagerty Fan]

Your right. I'll never trust or purchase a hybrid. There are to many potential problems all costly after 3/36 basic factory warranty. And even with extended you'll be payen through the nose for your downed vehicle.

[drhino]

I continue to be astounded that it is impossible to buy a truck (of any sort) with a manual transmission. (I guess you can still get a Tacoma with one, maybe.) It’s a truck, for goodness sake! Makes me shake my head whenever I hear some big burly truck with loud exhaust accelerate up the road, only to hear the wimpy sound of the automatic up-shift. Completely ruins the moment. Like hearing “I have a headache”.

[Guitar74]

Even though I have an auto behind my straight 6, I couldn't agree more. A manual should still be standard, or a lower cost option versus the 20 cagillion forward speed slushbox autos they have now. If your torque curve on a stock engine is so poor that you need THAT many forward gears to keep it in the power band, you need to rethink your engine design. That is ESPECIALLY true with the v8s. They should have a broad enough torque curve to not need anything more than 4 forward with an overdrive top gear being the 4th. I mean the older chevy 5.0s and 5.7s as well as the Ford v8s made little more than 200 horse if they were lucky in the 80s and pulled along just fine with an overdrive auto or 5 speed manual.

[Maestro1]

Nathan, thank you. What's going on here with Ford is sanity. The regular trucks are totally out of hand. I know a Vintner here on the Left Coast who has a couple of Chevy Colorados which he will
trade for Mavericks after seeing some road tests to make sure the trucks are what Ford says they are.

[Guitar74]

I know I kind of slagged the Maverick, but.....There is a market for it. I couldn't agree more with you on full size truck prices, and to a certain degree, mid size truck prices. They are ridiculous. Of course, you can get something like a single cab Ford XL for a reasonable cost, but finding one on a lot is another story.

The other side of it is that vehicles are priced based on the median income in whatever area they happen to be in. The other thing is that as long as people are willing to pay a ridiculous price for something, it will remain ridiculously priced. 

Example: My brother in law got a Ram Rebel for what was a good price maybe three yrs ago ($42,000). What does he do? He sees my nephew's Rebel that has the air lift suspension and decides to buy it for $55K which is considered a good price around here. Of course it's loaded with an h.u.d., the eco torque thing (which I tried to explain to him would NOT give him any better of a holeshot over his previous Rebel due to the due to the added weight-10lbs=1hp), and whatever else is completely unnecessary for a TRUCK!!!!!!!!

[RH-41]

I think Ford will sell a lot of these Mavericks, but I'll save $35K and keep my '99 Chevy S10. Love it! 4.3L, power windows, mirrors, locks, A/C, 4wd. Extended cab, 6 foot bed and NO 'infotainment screen'. Hate those things. Just buttons and knobs and it fits in my garage!

[JGeske]

An updated crew cab s10/sonoma would be nice, but with CAFE standards and other safety requirements, something that size and price will never again be made. A sad fact, but still a fact.

[Guitar74]

The new Ranger is bigger than my full size '95 short bed. 

[DanielD]

I wonder what kind of mpg the ecoboost engine will get.

[MustangJim]

I think this is a great move by Ford. Every time a new truck comes out all that you here in the message boards is : who can afford this, why don't them make a small truck like the old Ranger, why not this, why not that. People belly ache to darn much . This is a small modestly priced pick up truck that will likely fill a huge market. Is it what everyone wants?? Nothing is. I just hope that Ford gets the roll out right and does not have another new vehicle launch plagued with stupid problems. And I'm a Ford guy! But that is why I never buy in the introductory year. I am hoping!

[Guitar74]

I can see the market segment they are targeting. That being said, I will just keep a stash back when I finally DO have to replace the straight 6 in my '95 so I don't have to resort to a truck that's really not a truck. I didn't get the L6 for economy. I got it for longevity and towing power. It has both. Economy is for my wife's Fiesta which I use for the commute most days.

If I were in the market for a small truck, I would gladly buy something that was equipped like the original Ranger. I had one. It was a great little truck. Durable, peppy for  the engine it had (2.9 V6 5ps 3.73 gears which I am sure helped with the grunt), and fun (4wd). I don't see any of those things, with the exception of possibly fun, but......With fwd and a cvt transmission, I am betting it is nowhere NEAR the fun I had in my 4wd v6 Ranger, with nowhere near the durability (perimeter frame, ibeam front suspension). 

I keep trying to find things to like about it, and then I find out about more of the design and it just turns me off. It's almost like this is designed for the segment that my segment makes fun of. I could really see my younger brother going for this. He already wears glasses with no prescription, skinny jeans, and has that Japanese cartoon haircut. Don't get me wrong, I love the guy, I just don't quite understand him...or his glasses.

[JSievers]

I think Ford just captured themselves a big new piece of the market with an economical small pickup that seats four and has all kinds of well thought out features. Kudos.

[psg]

This is not a truck its a cute car without a trunk. "Fun" features but I wish they would make a small affordable truck that gets dirty, dented and put away wet. Very disappointing. psg

[Dave404]

What no diesel? It won't be landing in my driveway then. I guess the GMC Canyon and Chevrolet Colorado will continue to rule the midsize market in durability, capability and fuel economy . Nevertheless, this truck is very much needed in a world where full sized trucks have gotten so stupid big that they actually look ridiculous. Good for Ford. I think they will sell a lot of them.

[hyperv6]

There is a lot of hype here that is going both ways here. As Jimmy Buffet would say this truck is simply complicated. 

Here is the deal. Mid size trucks cost about the same to build and design as a full size truck but they lack the scale that attributes to difficulties in pricing and profits. The mid size share little with any other vehicle so they can be expensive to develop but since they don't move a ton of them they lack large profits. 

The trick is to keep the price down to not lose buyers to the full size and still server those who want a smaller yet still functional truck. 

Here is where the CUV platform based truck comes into play. Since they share much with a number of CUV models they can be sold in fewer numbers yet at higher profits. 

But the problem is this. FWD based trucks have never set the world on fire. They have struggled and failed. Even the best selling one the Ridgeline is not even close to the other side size trucks in sales. 

Now we have the Maverick and Santa Fe. The Hyundai is not claiming to be a truck. I think this is a smart move. Ford is selling the Maverick as a small truck. 

The truth is neither truck is that much smaller than the mid size offerings. Much of the space lost is bed and back seat. Their MPG is not really much better  either. Hyundai is getting the same as what I averaged over 16,000 miles in my Canyon V6 4x4. The Ford is promoting a hybrid, FWD 4 base truck with high miles but the Eco Turbo with 250 HP and AWS is going to be closer to my mid size MPG. 

The other issue is The price for both will not be much less than the mid size when you factor in the options most people buy. What Ford is not saying is the base truck is not going to have a ton of things that most people come to expect. Also you could get a Colorado WT for $19K before the truck shortage. Heck you could get a LT2 4x4 for low $30K range. 

The Maverick is a truck for people who need a truck but hate trucks. It is more CUV than truck and may serve light duty suburban needs. The question is who is going to buy this. Most will not be truck buyers and I expect many to come from the CUV segment. Will it cannibalize the sales of Ford other CUV models?  Or will Honda, Ford and Hyundai still fight over the same small pool of buyers. 

This is not a bad vehicle but it is a new segment that we all do not have all the answers to. GM is watching this and ready to move if people respond but will they respond. 

The Ford Flex a few years ago came about to rave reviews. But yet it really  never went anyplace. It was a good idea for a question the market never asked. Was it a wagon or was it a SUV? It lacked the high seating of a SUV and I believe that is what killed it. If they make it sit higher people may have gone crazy over FWD or not. 

Ford is claiming truck here but Hyundai is saying don't call the Santa Fee a Truck. This may be a good move and sell it more as a Ute. 

On the other hand the Maverick is more Ford Sport Trac and it did well with limited group of buyers due to really small bed size. 

I hope they can sort this out as I like to watch companies invent new segments. I will not be in the market for a FWD based Unibody truck but it would be cool to see GM take a Blazer and make a crew Ute out of it. 

[CitationMan]

Time will tell, but I think Ford should have made the Maverick part of the Bronco family with the Bronco trim levels. The Maverick is a lifestyle vehicle like the Bronco Sport more than it is a truck. Maybe it’s in the Ford truck line because they anticipate many fleet sales as a work truck. I think this will be popular with price sensitive buyers in urban and suburban areas who would not be caught dead driving a CUV.

[BMD4800]

This is the kind of vehicle that would be perfect for my 76 y/o father. Small enough to fit in the garage, can haul lumber for his projects, and tow his small boat.

It’s a good buy for many folks, but it lacks any macho characteristics.

The CUV based AWD is perfect. Good enough for snow, rain, and a little dirt road action.

It isn’t a fit for me, but that doesn’t mean it has no merit or use. FWD only Hybrid, or EcoBoost. Count me out. On paper the EgoBoost looks great. The reality is they need 91 or 93 octane to make decent power in heat, their mileage isn’t that great, and they have questionable longevity.

[merlebalke]

You're right. I'm a geezer too and I always get a chuckle watching guys my age and older trying to park their full size crew cab behemoths at the supermarket.

[merlebalke]

I'm surprised that Ford doesn't offer a green in the Maverick color palette. My neighbor has a new Tacoma painted a lovely Army Green, so I've decided the answer is to order my Maverick in white and then have it wrapped in that color.

[Johnny-T]

What I really want is a two seater version of this which they could bring back under the Courier moniker. Maybe include an underbed storage space (like that on the Ridgeline or Hyundai's Santa Cruz). And don't whine to me about needing a place to put the kids, they are just going to be a pain in the ass at the nursery/lumberyard/garbage dump for both me and you, please leave them at home. Those two extra seats are a waste of space, give me more bed!

[Still443]

There's two types of people in the world...People who have a truck and people that need a truck.

[roadio55]

I am intrigued. If I was in the market for a truck, or would consider buying a Ford, this would be music to my ears. If the Maverick name is ready for a reboot, is Comet poised for another round?

[roverlord]

I think this Maverick is pretty brilliant, and I bet Ford will sell a ton of them in places like the PNW and outdoorsy towns in the intermountain west. It's not going to take sales from traditional truck buyers -- as the article notes, if you need to tow a 28-ft boat or a $100K+ apartment-sized camper, the automakers have you covered already, and spending another $50K+ on one of those Truckasauruses to do it probably isn't a big deal to you. But there are a lot of people who will never tow anything, and wouldn't know what to do with 6" of suspension lift, 33" mudders, and a low-speed transfer case. Or simply aren't able or willing to spend $40K+ plus on any vehicle no matter what size it is.

The automaker who should be worried about this is Subaru. All of the people who bought Crosstreks, Foresters, and Outbacks may come to realize that having an external bed to stash lightweight but bulky and often filthy sports gear is often preferable to squashing it inside the cabin. Ever share a Forester cabin with three ultrarunners who just finished a 24-hr event? Well I have, and I'm not sure my sense of smell has fully recovered. Same thing with bike events. Bikes aren't particularly heavy, so the payload capacity of a full-size pickup isn't needed to haul them, but fitting both bikes and passengers inside a car can be a dirty and annoying hassle. Provided the aftermarket comes up with a cheap fork mount for the bed, this seems like a good vehicle for carrying a couple of bikes plus passengers without resorting to annoyances like roof racks or hitches. AWD is all you need to drive on the asphalt or nicely graded gravel roads that access a lot of trailheads and outdoor areas in the West. I bet the majority of trucks here with a low-range transfer case spend their entire lives without ever shifting into 4L, or tackling anything more rugged than a damp grassy parking lot at the kids' soccer practice. (You don't actually need AWD with the right tires and if you know where you're going -- but explaining what the "right tires" are to most people is an exercise in futility I don't want to repeat.)

Subaru tried this concept back in the 00's with the Baja (and the BRAT before that). It failed, because Subaru being Subaru at the time, it was styled weirdly, and they marketed it as a "multiple-choice vehicle." That was simply too many choices for Americans to handle. Ford is smart in calling the Maverick a "truck" and styling it as such, rather than a X-Road-Multi-Trekka-Combo-Treme-Sport or something.

Also, not everyone lives on the King Ranch, a copper mine, or a powerboat factory/steel mill like truck ads suggest. Some people live in places with garages where a full-size truck simply won't fit. Like my neighbors in my 90's-vintage condoplex. There are plenty of fancy luxo behemo-trucks around, but not one of them fits inside a garage. For example, my neighbor's gorgeous burgundy Ram 1500 Ultra-Lariat Platinum Diamond Quadro-Cab Edition with an interior to rival an S-class is forced to endure an existence of constant bombardment with rain, hail, crow feces, moss, pollen, lichen, and pine sap. Sad.

The comments about the CVT are funny. The type of customer who would buy the Maverick hybrid with a CVT cares most about mileage, and probably thinks a CVT is a new kind of cable that plugs into their iPads. The whiny, rubbery CVT in the Crosstrek didn't stop Subaru from selling a truckload (ha!) of them. Their customers don't even know it's there. The PNW is lousy with those things, they're everywhere.

[Hagerty Fan]

There are going to be alotta 70-77 Ford Mavericks out there taking offence this sort of P/U sort of truck?