• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Ford Maverick

Kornholio said:
Because neither the Baja nor the Sport Trac have been manufactured since 2006 and 2010 respectively. The Sport Trac did well early on, but competition came in and pushed it out. I won't opine on the Baja...I think it speaks for itself. :green
Click to expand...

The Sport Trac was pretty big as well. It was bigger than the Ranger of that time (which was not sold in the US at the time, but was available in other countries. )

This new one slots below the Ranger in size. It's not quite as small as the 2 seater small trucks that Toyota, Mazda, and the like produced years ago, but it's the closest there has been in a while.

I think that Ford is missing a step for not having a 2 seater version that has a larger bed and/or is even shorter. But I think that a lot of people will look at the hybrid version of this truck for a work truck.


The Baja is cool, leave it alone.
 
ScarySpikes said:
This new one slots below the Ranger in size. It's not quite as small as the 2 seater small trucks that Toyota, Mazda, and the like produced years ago, but it's the closest there has been in a while.
Click to expand...
Did they have 2-seaters? The ones I remember had a front bench seat, & could seat 3. Though examples I'm thinking of are Datsun & Mitsubishi.

The Baja sure would have been cool if it had an extending bed, like what Hyundai omitted from the production Santa Cruz. Not nearly as useful if they won't carry a motorcycle.

The Maverick hybrid sure seems like it would be a good car for me.
 
davidji said:
Did they have 2-seaters? The ones I remember had a front bench seat, & could seat 3. Though examples I'm thinking of are Datsun & Mitsubishi.

The Baja sure would have been cool if it had an extending bed, like what Hyundai omitted from the production Santa Cruz. Not nearly as useful if they won't carry a motorcycle.

The Maverick hybrid sure seems like it would be a good car for me.
Click to expand...

The point was the short cab, instead of the larger crew cabs. 2 seats vs. a bench seat, whichever it is.

I'm guessing that the extended bed thing which a lot of these small trucks have promised is a lot more complicated and expensive to implement in production, which is why we have never seen it.
 
I really don't understand why they can't just add another foot to the bed length to make everyone happy and make the bed actually useful.

I guess they don't want to eat into potential mid/full size pickup customers.
 
mrzuzzo said:
I really don't understand why they can't just add another foot to the bed length to make everyone happy and make the bed actually useful.

I guess they don't want to eat into potential mid/full size pickup customers.
Click to expand...

Huh, please lookup this chassis, they can't just add another foot to it lol
 
Yakoo752 said:
ewwww a sport :thumbdown
Click to expand...

:laughing

ScarySpikes said:
The Sport Trac was pretty big as well. It was bigger than the Ranger of that time (which was not sold in the US at the time, but was available in other countries.).
Click to expand...

The Ranger was absolutely sold in the US at the same time as the Sport Trac. The Sport Trac was available from 2001-2010 except in 2006 (for some reason...) and the Ranger wasn't discontinued in the US until 2012. And yes, it was bigger since it was based on the Explorer which was already larger than the Ranger at that time.


ScarySpikes said:
The Baja is cool, leave it alone.
Click to expand...

No, it absolutely is not.
 
Kornholio said:
:laughing



The Ranger was absolutely sold in the US at the same time as the Sport Trac. The Sport Trac was available from 2001-2010 except in 2006 (for some reason...) and the Ranger wasn't discontinued in the US until 2012. And yes, it was bigger since it was based on the Explorer which was already larger than the Ranger at that time.
Click to expand...
Sure.

The point is, this fills the role that the ranger used to in fords lineup. The ranger now fills the role the sport trac did as a mid size, the Maverick fills the role the ranger did as a compact.
 
I'd actually be considering the new maverick if I didn't think it was ugly. And the number of times my boss' 2020 exploder has been back to the dealer doesn't inspire confidence. Though in fairness, he's the worst customer :laughing
 
Yakoo752 said:
ewwww a sport :thumbdown
Click to expand...

Right?

Kornholio said:
Trade it in...you'll likely get 10-15K more than you paid for it. :laughing
Click to expand...

Totally...gonna run it at the same auction it was "bought" at. How did I end up with this thing you ask? Don't leave your phone on the live auction screen w/ the "bid" button accessible to shower water while you're in the shower listening to the auction. It just may bid that thing for you when hot water hits the screen at the exact right time....

First time for everything...ugh.
 
ScarySpikes said:
Sure.

The point is, this fills the role that the ranger used to in fords lineup. The ranger now fills the role the sport trac did as a mid size, the Maverick fills the role the ranger did as a compact.
Click to expand...

Uh, yeah no. The Maverick is FWD/AWD with no low transfer case option and is of unibody construction. The previous generation Ranger was RWD/4WD with a low transfer case available and was body-on-frame in construction. It was an actual truck whereas the Maverick is like the Ridgeline...a perfectly fine automobile assuming you're looking for a bit of cargo carrying capacity but don't want the actual feel and experience of owning/operating a pickup truck. The only comparison would be overall size, but that's where the similarities end entirely.
 
Kornholio said:
Uh, yeah no. The Maverick is FWD/AWD with no low transfer case option and is of unibody construction. The previous generation Ranger was RWD/4WD with a low transfer case available and was body-on-frame in construction. It was an actual truck whereas the Maverick is like the Ridgeline...a perfectly fine automobile assuming you're looking for a bit of cargo carrying capacity but don't want the actual feel and experience of owning/operating a pickup truck. The only comparison would be overall size, but that's where the similarities end entirely.
Click to expand...

this is true, but 95% of the population wont see it or treat it this way

im telling you this is the new prius

show me a 20k 40mpg hybrid = new norm for other mfg in a few years playing catchup hehe
 
Yakoo752 said:
Maybe it’s been addressed but CVT is a hard no from me
Click to expand...

This doesn't have a CVT like you're thinking of. It's a constant mesh planetary gearbox with no clutches or other friction elements. It "shifts" only by changing the balance of power input/extraction from each of the gearsets (sun/planets/ring), which changes the effective output ratio.

This configuration is probably the most durable transmission you can put in a vehicle with an engine. That's why there are so many priuses out there with 500gazillion miles on them.

The ecoboost has a conventional automatic.
 
Last edited:
I think the Maverick is built on the same chassis as the Bronco Sport which is essentially a warmed over Escape.
 
Kornholio said:
Uh, yeah no. The Maverick is FWD/AWD with no low transfer case option and is of unibody construction. The previous generation Ranger was RWD/4WD with a low transfer case available and was body-on-frame in construction. It was an actual truck whereas the Maverick is like the Ridgeline...a perfectly fine automobile assuming you're looking for a bit of cargo carrying capacity but don't want the actual feel and experience of owning/operating a pickup truck. The only comparison would be overall size, but that's where the similarities end entirely.
Click to expand...

I have the old Ranger and the payload (1500lb) and towing capacity (2000lb without tow package) are exactly the same on the Maverick.. I'd rather have the Maverick if it had a longer bed.

I
 
This is literally what I meant by the mfg can't just bolt up or extend the bed 1ft, the entire thing is the frame/bed lol
 
The Maverick, Escape, and Bronco Sport have different wheelbases.

Escape: 106.7"

Bronco Sport: 105.1"

Maverick Truck: 121.1"

Sure, Ford could stretch the Maverick out more and increase the bed length. I'm guessing they don't in order to keep the Maverick distinct from the Ranger because the vehicles are aimed at different audiences whom have different needs and expectations.
 
Anyone here took delivery of a Maverick? Saw one on the road couple days ago and it looks better than I was expecting.

My Tundra is getting really long in tooth and I rarely need the payload and bed of a full size truck.
 
Doug is as annoying as ever, but at least you get a good look at the truck...

[youtube]ocHFC03Wmbw[/youtube]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top