Ford Maverick Pickup Revealed! Standard Hybrid, 40MPG City, Under $20k Starting Price!

[bsb78]

ITT: a lot of insecurity in one’s manhood over a vehicle

Sponsored

 

[ilbastarge]

What's the tow rating on the Maverick now?

 

[j_marinelli]

What's the tow rating on the Maverick now?

and ground clearance? Asking for a friend

 

[Calicorks]

and ground clearance? Asking for a friend

I’d like to know this too...

 

[TJconvert2.7]

Yeah, duh, that was Toyota; but with their history they didn't have an excuse either.

You would still need to explain why a history of jet engines and F1 engines means more to the design of a pickup truck then actually designing pickup trucks.

A jet or formula one engine is more impressive than farm equipment.

and the maverick is basically a butched up Subaru Baja just like the Bronco Sport is a butched up Subaru Forester. Citing fords history of making pick ups (when many buyers won’t even consider Toyota or Nissan out of ignorance or worse) is silly.

that’s like saying wow! The cobalt SS! This should be good seeing Chevys history with the corvette!

 

[Rick Astley]

A fully loaded Lariat FX4 with the 2.0 and AWD for $35k. And it will tow 4000lbs. Not bad Ford. Not bad at all.

This thing is going to sell. But they should be a little worried about the dent it will put in Ranger sales. Outside of the people who want to tow 7500lbs.

My fully loaded '19 Ranger SuperCab, Lariat, FX4, with tech package was only $6K more than the Maverick you priced above and obliterates it in performance, specs, capabilities and any metric you have except MPG.

How on earth somebody could make a comparison that the Maverick was the better purchase at those fully loaded prices is beyond me. Tarting up a Maverick to anything above a $27-28K transaction price gets you to the point where the vehicle doesn't make a compelling argument and there are better vehicles in the same stable.

 

[JTBros]

My fully loaded '19 Ranger SuperCab, Lariat, FX4, with tech package was only $6K more than the Maverick you priced above and obliterates it in performance, specs, capabilities and any metric you have except MPG.

How on earth somebody could make a comparison that the Maverick was the better purchase at those fully loaded prices is beyond me. Tarting up a Maverick to anything above a $27-28K transaction price gets you to the point where the vehicle doesn't make a compelling argument and there are better vehicles in the same stable.

Because some people don’t want a truck as large as a ranger and the Maverick gets significantly better MPG. Plus the interior on the ranger is getting pretty tired.

 

[Rick Astley]

Because some people don’t want a truck as large as a ranger and the Maverick gets significantly better MPG. Plus the interior on the ranger is getting pretty tired.

Your argument would hold more water if:

• There was a material size difference between the 5g Ranger and Maverick.
  • There is not. Perhaps for 6th gen Ranger that will be a better argument?
• Not sure what you're talking about with the interior. Maverick has essentially the same materials in a slightly different layout. The 8' screen on Maverick is the same as used on Ranger.
  • Leather quality on both (and likely including Bronco) is atrocious.
• I already stated that MPG was the metric that Maverick has in it's favor. So you saved $1,000 in gas (over 10 years and 150K, plus replacing the batteries for about $8,000) on a vehicle which is very poor at being a truck. Still a highly questionable decision at any price point over $28K.
  • You're at about net <$7,000> in fuel savings when taking the cost of battery replacement into consideration.
  • If you don't need a vehicle to haul things or have a bed..... Then why would you look at Maverick at all?

 

[Ksjrb03]

A fully loaded Lariat FX4 with the 2.0 and AWD for $35k. And it will tow 4000lbs. Not bad Ford. Not bad at all.

This thing is going to sell. But they should be a little worried about the dent it will put in Ranger sales. Outside of the people who want to tow 7500lbs.

Yup Rangers days are numbered, already poor sales to begin with. Ranger was in a weird spot of too small to be a real truck but too expensive for those that don't need a real truck. This is the mini truck that will win.

 

[JTBros]

Your argument would hold more water if:

• There was a material size difference between the 5g Ranger and Maverick.
  • There is not. Perhaps for 6th gen Ranger that will be a better argument?
• Not sure what you're talking about with the interior. Maverick has essentially the same materials in a slightly different layout. The 8' screen on Maverick is the same as used on Ranger.
  • Leather quality on both (and likely including Bronco) is atrocious.
• I already stated that MPG was the metric that Maverick has in it's favor. So you saved $1,000 in gas (over 10 years and 150K, plus replacing the batteries for about $8,000) on a vehicle which is very poor at being a truck. Still a highly questionable decision at any price point over $28K.
  • You're at about net <$7,000> in fuel savings when taking the cost of battery replacement into consideration.
  • If you don't need a vehicle to haul things or have a bed..... Then why would you look at Maverick at all?

You’re right, the Maverick shouldn’t exist and the ranger is a superior vehicle in every way.

 

[Rick Astley]

Can you please confirm, where did you get an official cup holder count on the Maverick?

I'm not a truck guy and think the Ranger hits the sweet spot of "full sized truck via decade-old sizing of trucks" and thought Maverick sounded like a joke.

However, being hybrid standard this thing should sell like stink on a pig. It absolutely fulfills the needs of so many urbanites who actually want to, you know, be able to drive the thing near other humans or park it in their garage/driveway.

You’re right, the Maverick shouldn’t exist and the ranger is a superior vehicle in every way.

Allow myself to quote..... Myself.

Love that you have the "stupid sarcasm" arrow in your quiver. You must be a Bills fan as your last shot went wide right of the mark.

 

[JTBros]

Allow myself to quote..... Myself.

Love that you have the "stupid sarcasm" arrow in your quiver. You must be a Bills fan as your last shot went wide right of the mark.

Sarcasm is fun, keeps people on their toes whether you’re serious or not.

Don’t follow football, prefer F1. Your dig was about as good as Hamilton’s brakes in T1 of Baku.

 

[steevenk]

A jet or formula one engine is more impressive than farm equipment.

and the maverick is basically a butched up Subaru Baja just like the Bronco Sport is a butched up Subaru Forester. Citing fords history of making pick ups (when many buyers won’t even consider Toyota or Nissan out of ignorance or worse) is silly.

that’s like saying wow! The cobalt SS! This should be good seeing Chevys history with the corvette!

Rolls Royce makes impressive jets engines and Renault makes F1 engines, would either make a better more accessible pickup truck than Ford?

Being impressed, or making bad analogies, doesn't answer my question.

edit: RR for Boeing

 

[Techun]

Your argument would hold more water if:

• There was a material size difference between the 5g Ranger and Maverick.
  • There is not. Perhaps for 6th gen Ranger that will be a better argument?
• Not sure what you're talking about with the interior. Maverick has essentially the same materials in a slightly different layout. The 8' screen on Maverick is the same as used on Ranger.
  • Leather quality on both (and likely including Bronco) is atrocious.
• I already stated that MPG was the metric that Maverick has in it's favor. So you saved $1,000 in gas (over 10 years and 150K, plus replacing the batteries for about $8,000) on a vehicle which is very poor at being a truck. Still a highly questionable decision at any price point over $28K.
  • You're at about net <$7,000> in fuel savings when taking the cost of battery replacement into consideration.
  • If you don't need a vehicle to haul things or have a bed..... Then why would you look at Maverick at all?

Why do you think you'll be replacing batteries? Long do fusion/cmax hybrid battery packs last?

 

[Techun]

My fully loaded '19 Ranger SuperCab, Lariat, FX4, with tech package was only $6K more than the Maverick you priced above and obliterates it in performance, specs, capabilities and any metric you have except MPG.

How on earth somebody could make a comparison that the Maverick was the better purchase at those fully loaded prices is beyond me. Tarting up a Maverick to anything above a $27-28K transaction price gets you to the point where the vehicle doesn't make a compelling argument and there are better vehicles in the same stable.

Are you comparing your sales price to a theoretical maverick MSRP? Or mrsp to mrsp?

Sponsored