By on June 8, 2021

Ford’s latest addition has officially arrived, with the compact pickup showing off its surprise standard hybrid powertrain. While we knew there would be a hybrid motor, we weren’t anticipating it coming as default equipment — especially since it seemed important that the manufacturer keep it priced a healthy distance from the midsized Ranger.

However, the Maverick starts at $21,490, distancing itself from its bigger brother by a few grand and maintaining a healthy amount of financial space from the unibody Honda Ridgeline. We’re likewise dubious that Hyundai will be able to price the upcoming Santa Cruz low enough to match the Ford. Though we’re going to need to dig a little deeper before any serious assessments can be made as to whether or not that’s meaningful. It could turn out to be a complete dud, nullifying any value its price tag represents. 

Someone seeking a body-on-frame pickup can stop reading here, however. The Maverick is a unibody construction with the absolute cheapest configuration being the XL with the 2.5-liter inline-four assisted by an electric motor. The setup uses a continuously variable transmission turning the front wheels (though Ford said AWD may come later) and offers 191 combined horsepower. Towing on the hybrid model maxes out at 2,000 pounds. But Ford has said that customers should be able to enjoy 40 mpg in the city (the area where the Blue Oval thinks the Maverick will sell best), which could be handy if gasoline keeps getting more expensive.

For those looking to double their pulling power to 4,000 pounds, the pickup offers an optional (non-hybrid) turbocharged 2.0-liter that ditches the CVT for an 8-speed automatic. Available in front or all-wheel drive, the unit delivers 250 horsepower and 277 pound-feet of torque. Payload is pinned at 1,500 pounds, regardless of powertrain.

Dimensionally, the Maverick has little to do with the compact pickups of yore. At nearly 200 inches, it’s over half a foot longer than anything that would have been in the segment two decades ago. Original Supercab Rangers were about 193 inches while the standard variants were roughly 176 inches long. The Maverick’s 68.2-inch roofline also makes it appear fairly tall and it’s wide enough (72.6 inches, sans mirrors) to just about match the girth of modern midsize pickups. But terms like “compact” and “midsize” are only relevant in the present context.

If you need a visual representation, cross-examine a Honda Civic from 1990 against one from today and note the gently hysterical sizing disparity. You could also tell someone under the age of 35 that the lightest Maverick is going to be 3,563 pounds and watch them oink in objection before realizing that the current Ridgeline is almost 1,000 pounds heavier — though there is an appreciable size difference between them.

One aspect of Ford’s latest pickup that’s undoubtedly small, however, is the bed. Opting to provide additional room for passengers, the Maverick is being introduced with four doors and a 4.5-foot box. That’s petite for something one might want to use for a working truck, though we imagine many will appreciate the extra cabin space. Ford has wisely stated that you can fold the gate down to accommodate 6 feet of cargo, you just need to be mindful not to dump too much weight on it. The rear seats can be similarly configured to provide more room for storage.

The bed wisely includes several tie-down points, D-rings, and threaded holes that will allow you to bolt in makeshift upgrades. Ford even has a scannable QR code that gives you ideas while the manufacturer undoubtedly cooks up some concepts of its own. There’s an option to outfit the bed with electrical ports, too. The truck comes with 12-volt prewired power sources and is available with 110-volt and 400-watt outlets.

The interior layout looks like someone updated the Escape to be a bit more work-focused. It’s somewhat bland but practical and not unattractive. It might actually be better looking than what’s inside the crossover. Customers receive an 8.0-inch touchscreen infotainment system (with Apple CarPlay and Android capabilities) as standard and more storage cubbies than they’ll know what to do with. Seating is manually adjusted and looks like it will hide stains rather well, though you can option the Lariat model if you find yourself needing leather upholstery and powered seats.

You’ll need to have $26,985 for that particular trim. But you’ll also be ditching the 17-inch steelies for a set of more fashionable wheels and some other accessories (e.g. wireless device charging). There’s also a mid-grade XLT model and an FX4 package that tweaks the suspension, adds all-terrain tires, skid plates, hill descent, and a couple of extra drive modes for sand and mud. Sadly, Ford is still keeping a few cards close to the chest and hasn’t yet provided full specifications for any of the above.

However, this is sufficient to give us a sense of what the Maverick is about and there aren’t too many surprises here beyond the default hybrid powertrain. It’s sounding like it could be a decent alternative to the pricier Ridgeline and comparable to the prettier Santa Cruz. We’re just not sure it makes a lot of sense for someone who was already in the market for modern midsize like the Ranger or Chevy Colorado. Some testing is definitely in order.

Expect more details in the coming weeks and for Maverick production to commence later this year at Ford’s facility in Hermosillo, Mexico.

 

[Images: Ford Motor Co.]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

155 Comments on “2022 Ford Maverick Arrives in Hybrid Unibody Guise, Turbo Option...”


  • avatar
    APaGttH

    This is going to sell – if anything under $22K entry point is going to goose sales.

    16-2/3 feet long and 6’1″ wide before mirrors. I get it is all relative in 2021 but yikes! 4.5 foot bed – that’s not going to go over well with the tradesman universe and it does negate using the bed with a tent for light camping.

    I want to love this, but Ford product launch quality has been bad going back almost a decade now. I wouldn’t be first in line for this.

    But this is going to sell. This is the “Buick Encore” of pickup trucks. I think people on paper are going barf at the specs etc. etc. and it is going to sell.

    • 0 avatar
      thegamper

      I am shedding a tear right now…..a tear of hope that our future may in fact not be a future filled two full sized 1/2 ton trucks (or larger) in every driveway in America. Thank you Hyundai and Honda. Because I doubt the Maverick would exist if competitors weren’t potentially stealing sales from Ford’s body on frame full and midsized lineup.

    • 0 avatar
      dwford

      This is 100% going to sell – to old guys. They’d have already preordered one if they knew how to use the internet.

      • 0 avatar
        Imagefont

        I’m trying to figure it out right now! I like that it doesn’t try to look like anything other than what it is supposed to be, and it WILL sell to old people. Easy in and out, good visibility, upright windshield with a good view ahead, doesn’t look like a Star Trek shuttle craft.
        Hyundai and Kia have some great new designs in my opinion, very aggressive and daring, risk taking styling. But it wears on you after a while. Too much tension, too ambitious. Boring is highly under-rated, this is something you can live with long term. I’m sold. Give me a base model with manual crank windows.

      • 0 avatar
        jalop1991

        define “old”.

        My 19 year old daughter thinks you’re old.

      • 0 avatar
        bunkie

        Some of us “Old Guys” were using the Trumpet protocol stack to access the Internet using dial-up routers (I had a NetHopper on my ArcNet LAN) allowing shared access) when most of you “young guys” were in diapers.

        • 0 avatar
          Lie2me

          Thank you, bunkie, some of us “old guys” were using the internet when it actually took a little intelligence to use it. The good news was the people you met on the net also had a bit of intelligence as well

          Not so much anymore :(

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            Back in the nntp days. Speaking of the old days, I’m here avoiding working on logic to connect to bare metal ethernet. A high-speed financial transaction machine and an operating system would slow the beast down. Young guy python and OS vs. old guy bare metal. Like a CUV with cvt vs. a go-kart with a pulsejet on the back. Ah, the days computer science degrees required logic design courses which have been replace by required athletic courses.

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            I don’t know…I am certainly not young but it didn’t take a ton of intelligence to log onto AOL and jump in to a chat room to argue about weather or not the Stone Temple Pilots could be a grunge band since they weren’t from Seattle.

            You did have the challenge of getting your modem drivers to work with Windows 3.1 though or NT 3.5 if you were hard core. The pre “plug and play” era was fun in that respect.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            I was thinking of actual internet back in the uucp/nntp/usenet/ppp days. Luckily had management with attitude that if you pulled parts out of the trash and managed to cobble together a PDP-11, you could take it home on a property pass. Had a microvax II at one point running ultrix at home. As a teenager, I was pretty handy with a wirewrap tool, soldering iron, and scope.

      • 0 avatar
        Shockrave Flash Has Crashed

        Old guy here, yep. 24 months left on my lease, supply should have caught up by then.

    • 0 avatar
      Lie2me

      In other words, APaGttH, it sucks, but it’s going to sell

      You just made Ford very happy :)

    • 0 avatar
      bunkie

      Had this been available back when I was one of the Internet-using pioneers, I would have gotten one of these instead of the Ranger I did get. In the ensuing decades, my needs and wants haven’t really changed all that much, I like being able to buy sheets of plywood and the occasional piece of furniture and the like.

      Back then, owning a small pickup was about commuting to work and carrying home-ownership-related things evenings and on weekends. Not much has changed.

      Except, of course, the price of plywood…

      • 0 avatar
        Lie2me

        “I was one of the Internet-using pioneers”

        Do you remember when the internet was a series of tubes? I do ;-)

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          Well, it’s relative, which is why I think the Encore analogy fits well.

          If you walked up to the rental counter and they offered you an EcoSport, a 500X, a Trax, or an Encore – you’re taking the Encore. You can’t convince me you’d pick any of the other 3. The EcoSport is wretched. The 500X is wretched. The Trax is just an inch above wretched. The Encore addresses a lot of the shortcomings of the Trax and becomes — passable.

          For good, bad, or indifferent, the Encore launched the class of subcompact SUVs and has stood up against all competitors.

          The class sucks…but when you’re near the top of the class in a class that sucks.

          Ya, the Maverick is going to sell.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            So, if we go back in time and kill Encore before it is born, we can create a whole new timeline where the segment doesn’t exist?

          • 0 avatar
            APaGttH

            @28 cars

            Does the class not exist? I’m not Rick Sanchez.

            Does it get delayed – I definitely think so.

            Look at how flat-footed several other automakers were on entering the class. Ford gave us awful as a stopgap, Toyota is struggling with an answer, the Honda “Encore killer” didn’t.

            I can’t stress enough – I’m not defending the class. But it’s very hard to build an argument that the Encore didn’t create the subcompact SUV class in the United States, did it successfully, and has fought off a series of competitors that on paper, should have done a lot better.

  • avatar
    FerrariLaFerrariFace

    They are going to sell a crap ton of these things, although as usual, the lowest priced versions will be non-existent as buyers will add on all the doo-dads to goose the price up into the mid-20s.

    That said, I’m seriously considering this vs the Santa Cruz for light household chores and occasionally maybe towing a small British sportscar a couple times a year. Maybe. Space at my house is limited so size matters. The SC is a bit smaller and can tow 5000#, so it’s winning at the moment.

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      Same here mainly because of the style and the extra power of the SC.

      The SC at least looks interesting, the Maverick looks… well like a truck. The interior in particular looks outdated already (iPad on the dash again? Analog gauges?) but it does feature actual buttons vs SC’s piano black, screens everywhere Telsa-look. While I am on the fence my wife LOVES the Santa Cruz and hates the Maverick based on looks alone.

      • 0 avatar
        RHD

        This is the truck for people who don’t plan to use if for what trucks are for. A 4.5 foot bed is a joke, and only superior to what the Subaru Baja offered. Heck, the old Rabbit-based VW Sportruck had a bed longer than 4.5 feet.
        How about we ditch the rear seats, because honestly, no one is ever going to sit there, anyway? Then you have a truck that is actually useful… but a threat to F-150 sales… which explains a lot.

        • 0 avatar
          FerrariLaFerrariFace

          It’s the truck for people that don’t need a four-ton behemoth to do what they need to do, and don’t want to stink or dirty up the interior of their SUV. I really don’t understand the hate. If you want a monster truck, go get one. No one is trying to take away your guns or your jerbs or your freedom or your all-American F-teen Thousand. They aren’t going away. This is a truck for people that want a truck but don’t want Bigfoot in their driveway. This is the truck for those people that you see hauling around one bag of mulch in the back of their F-150 and you ask, why the hell did they buy such a big truck?

          • 0 avatar
            Imagefont

            One bag of mulch, and then need a ladder to retrieve it.

          • 0 avatar
            JMII

            Truth! In the 25+ years I’ve own a pickup I’ve never needed a 6 foot bed. I’ve managed just fine with the tailgate down in an old Ranger Splash and Dakota Quad Cab. I had to haul plywood just ONCE during a hurricane. I’m not a contractor… I’m a home owner. And I do use the rear seats since our other vehicles are both coupes, one being a C7.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            For one bag of mulch, why did she get a truck at all??

            Seriously, the F-150 with the 6.5 ft bed is the Goldilocks of trucks, for non contractors (or it depends on the trade) or similar Ram, etc. Besides, it’s the only way to get a full 2nd row (up to 6 pass) vs a 2+2.

            You’re never there (or paying attention) when pickups are used to their limits. And it doesn’t have to be every trip, both ways. Even Class 8 semis are totally empty most of their miles

            Except a lot of material only come in 12 ft stock/sheets/etc.

        • 0 avatar
          ToolGuy

          On the topic of truck sizes [and choices, and skillsets…]:

          Ventured out to Home Depot the other week. Saw a guy with a new Ranger. Based on TTAC Wisdom, I considered telling him how dumb he was for not just going ahead and buying an F-150, but then saw that he was busy giving assistance to a Tacoma driver, who had managed to run his vehicle up onto one of the orange platform carts. (True story.)

        • 0 avatar
          modemjunki

          “This is the truck for people who don’t plan to use if for what trucks are for. A 4.5 foot bed is a joke…”

          Well, I think you are correct in your first statement but I would not say the short bed is a “joke”. Clearly this is not designed to be a heavy hauler to compete with the full sizers or even something like the Ranger.

          My wife – all 5′ 2″ of her – took one look at the press photos and wants to go look at one as a replacement for her beloved Golf. If she can see out of it she might be convinced to buy one for herself, hinting at the target demographic.

          With the tow package the Maverick attracts me. I see it as a practical second vehicle to accompany our (thirsty) minivan and not as a work truck. I can rent a trailer for $20/day should I need it for something the van isn’t suited to carry and I normally have really heavy stuff delivered. The Maverick would easily fit in my garage next to the van. The short bed is fine for hauling a few bags of gardening stuff home or a weekends worth of camping supplies. The crew cab looks suitable for hauling dogs and kids and overall this could be a daily driver for most folks without the penalty of high fuel consumption.

          Admittedly I look forward to seeing people struggle to load some big purchase into one of these little trucks at a big box store as I slide sheet goods and lumber into the minivan.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            “Admittedly I look forward to seeing people struggle to load some big purchase into one of these little trucks at a big box store ”

            Why would it be a struggle? There’s an optional bed extender and the tailgate can take 400lbs. They say it can carry 4×8 sheets of plywood.

            https://media.ford.com/content/dam/fordmedia/North%20America/US/product/2022/maverick/pdf/2022-Ford-Maverick-FLEXBED-Graphic.pdf

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            One of the things in the other intro videos says that they took the reach of a female at the 5th percentile of height, which google says is 4′ 11″, into the design of the bed. So yeah it sounds like a good fit in that respect.

            As far as using it for truck things one of the nice touches is that it was designed to be able to carry 4×8 sheet goods with a “plywood position” for the tail gate. That positions it right at the height of the wheel wells.

  • avatar
    Steve Biro

    I have to give credit where credit is due. I think the Maverick will work for a lot of people and the XL version is a great value. I also think equipping the base version with a hybrid powertrain is a big win for Ford.

    Alas, saddling (pun intended) the Maverick hybrid with a CVT is a deal killer for me. With Ford’s recent history of transmission problems, I am not predisposed to trust this CVT. It would be nice if it was equipped with a genuine first gear like Toyota’s CVT but I’m not holding my breath.

    I am also disapointed there is no two-door version of the Maverick. I think the foot-and-a-half in length that went for the back seats would be put to better use in a six-foot bed.

    I was on Ford’s Build and Price page earlier and was sincerely trying to find a way to like this vehicle. But this is the kind of thing that just puts me off:

    “Adding Manual Rear Sliding Window also requires the following changes: Add Ford Co-Pilot360™”.

    Also: automatic start-stop is standard — even in the hybrid. And so is 24/7 internet connectivity. Both of which I would work to disable if I were to buy. I seriously doubt I can find a build of the Maverick that doesn’t piss me off. Which is a shame.

    But I think there are plenty of people who will disagree with me and love the Maverick. I think it’ll be a hit.

    • 0 avatar
      Imagefont

      Does it have the expanding cone and belt CVT (bad), or is it like previous Ford hybrids such as the Fusion with the Toyota based planetary CVT (good). The term CVT is applied to more than one design type.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      This is not a CVT, it is an eCVT of the same basic architecture that has been used in recent Toyota Hybrids and all Ford FWD Hybrids.

      Auto start stop is how all of the Toyota and Ford FWD hybrids have always worked long before it came to other vehicles it is an intrinsic part of the design. It is nothing like the start stop feature on standard ICE vehicles that use a traditional starter for restart and doesn’t shut down the engine at speed.

      I also noticed the fact that the sliding window required Co-Pilot 360 I just don’t see why they are doing that other than to pad the price since it appears you can get Co-Pilot 360 w/o the slider.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      Yeah this and the 6 speed RWD automatic that was replaced by the 10 speed are probably the most reliable automatics Ford has built in some time and the hybrid drivetrain has many miles as mentioned in Taxi fleets. I don’t think I’d let that scare me off.

      There will likely never be a regular cab, but I am going to hold out hope on an extended cab by the time I am ready to do something.

      • 0 avatar
        Wheatridger

        The eCVT in my 2014 & 2017 Ford Hybrids is a perfectly enjoyable transmission. Transitions between either side of the powertrain are seamless non-events, and so is the start-stop action. It’s not really a transmission at all, and the gear ratio doesn’t vary, so it’s poorly named. It’s more like a power-sharing agreement. You do get a droning sound with hard acceleration at constant RPMs, but that never lasts more than a couple seconds before my C-Max reaches cruising speed.

    • 0 avatar
      bunkie

      What good is a manual sliding rear window in a four-door cab pickup? In my old regular cab Rangers, I loved it. In my Access Cab Tacoma, I practically had to dislocate my shoulder to operate it from the drivers seat. In this truck it would be unreachable.

    • 0 avatar
      Russycle

      I’d like a longer bed and fewer doors. But given how hard it is to get an extended cab F150 (friend of mine had to special order his), I don’t see Ford going that route.

  • avatar
    ajla

    That picture of the woman getting something out of the bed while standing along side the vehicle is why I’m into trucks of this size.

    That said, unless it comes out that the Hyundai DCT likes to nuke itself I still favor the Santa Cruz.

    • 0 avatar

      This will sell better than the Santa Cruz, I predict, even if it’s a worse overall vehicle.

      The Ford badge means something on a “truck,” even if this is technically an Escape XUT. All about the image: This will play well with Ford Truck Men who would never be seen in a Santa Cruz Not Man Hyundai.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “This will sell better than the Santa Cruz”

        Oh definitely. Probably at least 5:1. Maverick vs Santa Cruz is Mustang vs 240Z. People don’t go to Hyundai for trucks and they aren’t even willing to call the SC a “truck” in marketing materials.

        • 0 avatar
          JMII

          Agreed. Ford has given people exactly what they asked for: a fuel sipping mini-truck for $20k.

          Since I have a Corvette my man card is already stamped so I can drive a SC with no shame.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Not just the Ford badge, but the silhouette. It Looks Like A Truck, and the failure to Look Like A Truck is what doomed the Baja and will doom the Santa Cruz.

        Part of the reason the old-school mini trucks were such huge hits is that they unapologetically Looked Like A Truck, while being cheap to buy and run and easy to park.

        • 0 avatar
          JMII

          Unpopular and DCT are my two biggest worries with the SC. There is nothing worse then owning an orphaned or rare vehicle. We had a Volvo C30 and finding parts was a nightmare. The vehicle was rear ended and the guy at the paint shop had never seen one. Our local Euro-car repair shop had the same reaction when I brought it in for some clutch work.

          If the SC doesn’t sell keeping one long term becomes a scary proposition. I bought my last truck 20 years ago so yeah I hold onto vehicles if they do what I need them to.

        • 0 avatar
          Mackey

          I feel like the real death of the Baja was the same as the Aztec; the styling execution.

          Add in a dash of “ahead of it’s time” (not unlike the old 4wd AMC wagons and hatches), and it was doomed to not overcome it’s origins in the eyes of anyone other than Subie lovers who haul bags of mulch and a shrub.

          Both the Baja and the Aztec were the right vehicle at the tip of the spear, executed in an early 2000s over the top, plastic fantastic style that made it hard for others to take seriously.

          • 0 avatar
            JMII

            Add the Isuzu Vehicross to that list. And maybe even the FJ Cruiser. Relaunched in today’s market I bet both would sell given the hype around the Bronco.

          • 0 avatar
            golden2husky

            …And maybe even the FJ Cruiser…

            Didn’t that sell well? I know the early ones had frame crack issues, but the used ones sell for big bucks…

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          Although I don’t think it will be a major seller I do hope the SC doesn’t sell in “doomed” volume.
          Subjectively, I think the Hyundai looks good and it does offer decent power (if Sonata N-Line tests are any indicator the SC might be nipping the heels of a 6.2L Silverado). The Baja was also pretty pricey and hopefully Hyundai doesn’t try to sell the SC for Genesis money

        • 0 avatar
          Art Vandelay

          I have to think there is a reason that each successive revision of the Ridgeline looks more like a traditional truck.

      • 0 avatar
        RHD

        And, it’s flag-waving, baseball-hat-wearing, beer-loving American*, built Ford Tough!**

        *Made in Mexico

        **Components made in China

  • avatar
    dal20402

    The size is reasonable for something with a crew cab. Quite tall at 69″, but only 200″ long (roughly the same length as a large sedan or three-row CUV) and 73″ wide. This would actually (just barely) fit in my old garage, and it wouldn’t be a huge challenge to drive or park in the city. It’s the first pickup about which you can say that since the old Ranger finally went out of production.

    The standard hybrid powertrain will also be appealing to people who want a truck in the city.

    Pricing is good too. If Ford can execute at a reasonable level of quality, this is going to be a very popular product.

  • avatar
    Imagefont

    The minimum MSRP for an Escape Hybrid FWD is almost $29,000. This thing, with admittedly less standard equipment (that you probably don’t care about) is $21,500. The pricing makes no sense, this is now the cheapest vehicle you can buy with the word FORD on it. His is also the cheapest hybrid vehicle you can buy of any type. Something is wrong.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      It is the value buy of the century. The best MPG and lowest price of anything with a bed. The reality of course is that it will probably be very hard to find an XL for a long time unless you are a fleet customer.

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      What’s wrong is people don’t buy cars anymore. So your new Focus is here, say hello to Maverick. I think Ford has realized that most F150 drivers are commuters and not truck users. They just want the cool factor of driving a “truck”. Now that CUVs are only for soccer moms Ford took one and put a bed on it to fix that image problem.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        “So your new Focus is here, say hello to Maverick.” Yup.

        • 0 avatar
          eng_alvarado90

          I bet the executives at Ford realized they were indeed losing market share after they got rid of their sedans and the Ecosport wasn’t enough to get those customers stay in the showrooms. Let’s face it, that one is hot garbage.

          Pricing the Maverick so low with an interesting powertrain and utility will likely bring some of those customers back and maybe bring some others from next door and across the street. Is it perfect? Heck no but it screams value for the money.

          Brilliant, just brilliant

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        Agreed this is priced right for that former Focus buyer but way more cool.

    • 0 avatar
      dwford

      Even an XLT for around $23k is a screaming deal. The sweet spot is the XLT with the luxury package for about $26k with the hybrid motor.

    • 0 avatar
      Varezhka

      Dunno, I recall in the 80s and 90s the Ford Ranger used to be the cheapest vehicle you can buy off the lot, while the cheapest Escorts cost a little bit more.

      Escape is basically the modern day Escorts while I see this Maverick as basically what the Ranger used to be. So a stripper work truck costing less than a compact family car makes a strange sense, hardware similarities notwithstanding.

  • avatar
    Astigmatism

    If I were in charge of strategy at ZipCar, I’d be on the phone today with Home Depot and Lowes trying to figure out how soon I could have a half dozen of these stationed in every home improvement store parking lot to rent at $15 an hour. It’s not just that they’re cheap, it’s that (to ajla’s point) they’re not intimidating.

    • 0 avatar
      RHD

      Good idea! They would hold an entire barbecue (still in its box) in the back, and maybe a bag of charcoal or two.
      ZipCar would make an additional fifteen bucks when the renter makes a second trip to haul the new lawn mower.

    • 0 avatar
      Wheatridger

      Good idea! The last “pickup truck” I rented from HD for a garden manure run was a heavy duty F 350 flatbed! This is not my usual style, so I found driving it was horrifying. (I never realized that some vehicles have ZERO self-centering in the steering, so you have to actively steer them back straight after a corner.) Shoveling the “product” into the bed was difficult, because the bed was almost at chest level. I would have much preferred this smaller pickup, even if it took two loads to do the job. But the contractor crowd will turn up their noses at any so-called truck that can’t haul a full kitchen set at once, so it’ll probably never happen.

  • avatar
    tankinbeans

    Is this the eCVT found in the Fusion Hybrid? Is that holding up well?

    Can we can it with subjective analyses of styling stated as fact? I can see the Santa Cruz, and I don’t think it’s prettier, not that the Maverick is much of a looker

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      This is a planetary power split device like you find in most Toyota hybrids and all four-cylinder Ford hybrids to date. They are extremely simple mechanically, and very reliable and durable since there is not much to break. It’s a totally different technology from the belt CVT you find in non-hybrid cars.

      https://gr8autotech.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/working-of-a-power-splitter/

      Older Escape Hybrids using a close relative of this powertrain were successful in NYC taxi service, about the most brutal test of a car there is.

      • 0 avatar
        golden2husky

        My Altima hybrid had the Toyota CVT – 140K before the car was replaced and the trans was still perfect even after a life of NYC commuting…I would not worry at all…

        • 0 avatar
          Wheatridger

          No belts, no pulleys, no transmission fluid, only one gear. That’s how I understand it, at least. The car I’m most familiar with, the C-Max, had many transmission failures in the first model year. This was one of several factors that spoiled the car’s rollout year of 2013, but a couple years later the C-Max climbed onto Consumer Reports’ recommended lists. Word has it that a key transmission flaw was corrected in mid-2014, with no common problems since.

  • avatar
    JMII

    I am impressed by this, especially the 4k towing with a real tow package, oil cooler, upgrade radiator, brake controller, AWD, plus an FX4 offroad package. I thought it was going to be under-powered FWD joke.

    The Santa Cruz has so much more style both inside and out, so much so that the wife has pretty much vetoed the Maverick based on looks alone. The SC has the power advantage so for someone who tows (like me) I’ll take all the torque I can get thank you very much.

    Both are due out in the “fall” but big props to Ford for having their build site up and running TODAY. The SC had a month’s head start yet still no MSRP or configurator online. I wonder if they were waiting and will attempt to undercut the Mav’s pricing. The Hyundai is nicer, more upscale, more CUV like so I assume its pricing will be a touch higher but they will be walking a thin line here since Ford is proven winner in this market.

  • avatar
    kcflyer

    over at Alex on Autos he pointed out that CAFE killed the regular cab minitrucks. Which is ironic since this truck with a smaller cab and longer bed would have been the mpg king of mini trucks. Come on ford, do it.

  • avatar
    conundrum

    The “CVT” on a Ford hybrid like this is surely their version of the Prius eCVT Hybrid Synergy Drive which isn’t really a mechanical CVT like a Nissan or a Subaru or a Honda wheezer at all. Far as I recall, back about 2008, Ford came to terms with Toyota about who invented the two electric motor hybrid drive. Can’t be bothered to research all the details, but the Wikipedia page on Toyota Hybrid Synergy Drive says: “Ford Motor Company independently developed a system with key technologies similar to Toyota’s HSD technology in 2004. As a result, Ford licensed 21 patents from Toyota in exchange for patents relating to emissions technology.”

    Not surprised Ford is talking 40 mpg in town. None of the other hybrid drive systems has ever beaten the Toyota system at efficiency, despite much arm-waving, grand pronouncements, lies and general BS. Honda has gone through about three systems that are not as good, and the VW system sold in Europe is a laugh by comparison, as is H/Ks.

    Pretty good deal getting this powertrain standard in the Maverick for $22K. If Ford can screw them together properly, that is.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Actually it is Toyota that currently uses a version of the Ford design they started using back on the original Escape Hybrid a parallel axis power split system, while the original Toyota architecture was a single axis system that severely limited the maximum engine off speed.

  • avatar
    Arthur Dailey

    The ‘base’ version seems to tick just about all of my boxes, with the exception of the Ford badging.

    Just wish there was some way to remove that Etch-A-Sketch from the instrument panel.

    If the price point in Canada is close to that quoted for the USA. If the dealers get enough and do not add on ‘fees’. If its standard features include blind spot monitoring and heated seats (which I have been told are non-negotiable for any vehicle that I bring home now or in the future), and if its quality/reliability meet above average standards, then I hope to have this or something similar in our driveway sometime in the next 24 months.

  • avatar
    Alex Mackinnon

    Too bad this doesn’t have an optional electronic rear axle or a PHEV sized battery. I think that would have been a much better up-market option.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    Cube meets Ridgeline and after a torrid affair.. a love child.

    I’m undecided.

    I wonder what ebflex will say?

  • avatar
    Firestorm 500

    Cute. They will sell everyone they make. It’s a trucky-type vehicle that is not intimidating.

  • avatar
    Scoutdude

    It will certainly be a hit, maybe even the biggest hit out of Ford’s recent and near future introductions.

    Highs
    $19995 Base Price, that puts it right in budget for compact car buyers.

    Hybrid power train standard will give typical mixed use MPG right there in the range of those compact cars.

    The bed seems well thought out as does things like the under seat storage.

    Tow and off road packages that are decent values and give you real mechanical upgrades. Though you seem to get double charged for some things if you select both options.

    Lows

    No AWD with the Hybrid power train.

    Price, I don’t expect that you’ll be able to find many under $25k on the lot and many will be sporting ~$30k stickers.

    No leather seating

    Good stereo not available in XLT

    Lots of fleets will buy them like crazy and I think this will convert a lot of former car and CUV owners into pickup people. It also serves as a entry level vehicle that is way cooler than a compact sedan for about the same price.

    • 0 avatar
      Astigmatism

      About that price: imagine if Ford actually decided to make a pile of these in essentially base form, for $20k and change. It would be spunky, cheap, practical, with great fuel economy, and appeal to all kinds. This thing could be the VW Bus for Gen Z; they’d sell a half-million of them a year.

      They won’t, but damn I wish they would.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        I do expect Ford to make a pile of them in absolute base form, they just won’t sell them to anyone but fleets that order and wait for them.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Takes me back to 1988, when the local Nissan dealer had a huge pile of bright red standard cab 2WD Hardbodies out front with a giant “$7999” sticker on them. They sold every one they could get.

    • 0 avatar
      eng_alvarado90

      Better yet, this one is way cooler (and cheaper) than the puny subcompact CUVs with laughable lawnmower engines and a trunk only good for 3 carry ons…

  • avatar
    dwford

    Everyone is focused on the $20k base price. No regular buyer is getting one of those. Those are spec’d out just for fleet buyers. You’ll have every business that has an old guy delivering things buy those. Those businesses will love that it gets 40mpg bumping around town. Retail buyers will get into the XLT, which is still very cheap

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      “You’ll have every business that has an old guy delivering things buy those.”

      Agreed, and it should have Nissan very scared since that has made up a huge chunk of the Frontier production for the last few years. I can definitely see Oreilly’s retiring the old Rangers and Frontiers early for the fuel savings.

  • avatar
    jimmyy

    Did you see this comment made by a Ford Executive:

    “These are customers, they’re creative, they’re makers, they’re doers, they’re very diverse in kind of who they are, where they live and what they do,” Ford trucks marketing manager Todd Eckert

    What the heck … what is a maker .. looks like a code word … I am thinking Ford has gone full woke.

    Ford … No Republican will do business with a firm that is politically biased to the left. Toyota is smart and is staying politically neutral. Won’t be long before Toyota passes Ford.

    • 0 avatar
      Wheatridger

      So you’re such a good American that you’d give money to a Japanese company than an American company? That sounds like your partisanship got in the way of your patriotism.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        I see alot of “patriots” in Dodge, Chrysler, Ram,and Jeep products and they are as American as Toyota.

        • 0 avatar
          Arthur Dailey

          Here in the GTA we get ‘Peachtree TV’ the Atlanta based ‘superstation’ as part of our cable package. In between all of the ads for personal injury lawyers, there is some loudmouth touting his Chrsyler dealership. His tag line is “Be American. Buy American.” The first time I saw this ad I spit out my drink. Now I just nod my head and despair at the lack of critical thinking among so many Americans, and the use of ‘patriotism’ among so many pitchmen.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            I do believe that all the rollin’ coal HD’s are Hecho en Mexico.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I wonder if there is a Mexican euphemism for “rolling coal”?

          • 0 avatar
            jack4x

            Ford Super Duties are made in Kentucky.

            I forget the breakdown but I believe at least some of the GM HDs are made in Fort Wayne and Flint.

            Rams are all hecho though.

  • avatar
    JD-Shifty

    GM said they built $22k WT Colorado’s too but I never saw any.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    The hybrid drivetrain is ok, but AWD should be available with all powertrain combinations. Seems to me kind of a must-have option for anything that resembles a pickup. Also, I think an extra foot to the bed should be the minimum size…frankly its nice to see a truck that is not hulking caricature of its former self.

    I’m concerned though that in order to keep the price low the interior materials will be crappy. They should look to the old Toyota Tercel – it was cheap in price but they made sure certain items – touch points and the dash housing for example – were made from quality materials. It matters.

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      Just looking at the pictures and descriptions from several YT video the interior is made from cheap materials. This is the only way to hit the price point they are offering, plus being made in Mexico. I don’t see anything wrong with this as something had to give.

      Ford has the interior of the $20k vehicle – which it is. Upgrading gets you fake brown leather but doesn’t change the other materials so even if you spend $30k you still have the base interior. Hyundai went the opposite direction, the SC has the interior of a $40k vehicle. All flat panel screens, button-less and piano black, very Tesla-like. Many hate these hi-tech interiors, I’m on the fence but could learn live with it. My wife LOVES that minimalist look and has firmly rejected the Mav based on a crappy interior that has random colors and flat boxy shapes.

      • 0 avatar
        golden2husky

        JMII – I get the idea about the price point. But have you ever been in a vehicle, looked around, and wondered how much nicer it would be if there were $500 in better materials? And would have been willing to pay it? That’s what I’m feeling about this. Maybe there would be slightly less profit but imagine Ford making a reputation for better than ho-hum interiors. But I forget that such thinking is not normal in the. American business model. Max profit now, the future be damned…

    • 0 avatar

      So I’m curious if this plays out. One of the problems with entry level cars is that they don’t sell alot anymore (used is the new entry level). So in order to bring those customers in you need something compelling but still cheap to make. So I’m guessing the bet is that the pickup form factor is enough of a draw they can cheapen out the rest to make the price point and still have a profit. I think they may be right.

  • avatar
    Scoutdude

    Where is Vulpine??? I know they haven’t released all the specs yet but I am honestly interested in his take on what is known so far.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    Yep I called it. This is the second introduction in a row of a completely pointless “truck”. You’d almost think Ford is releasing such compromised and poorly thought vehicles for sheer entertainment.

    No AWD on the hybrid is probably the stupidest decision made by an automaker in recent times. Equally, it has the towing capacity of mobility scooter. So it’s a truck that can’t do truck things.

    The interior is laughably cheap and the front end is absolutely hideous.

    It’s sad when Hyundai builds their very first truck and it blows this pathetic Escape pickup out of the water.

    Ford needs a new CEO and a new board immediately

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Don’t hold back. Tell us your unbiased opinion?

    • 0 avatar
      Imagefont

      I’m shocked, I really thought you were going to like it.

    • 0 avatar
      Oberkanone

      I officially award you the title of contra-indicator.

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        I prefer “realist” but whatever.

        There’s a lot of people here that are setting themselves over an Eacape based, FWD “truck” that has the same capability numbers as a power wheels.

        Add in the major quality issues with all new Ford’s, the cheap interior and the hideous front and you really have to wonder what is wrong with people. I can’t imagine there is a large group of people out there thinking to themselves “I really want a low quality small FWD truck with a CVT that looks horrendous and can’t do truck things”.

        • 0 avatar
          ToolGuy

          Ugly face on truck makes the driver look better:

          https://www.theguardian.com/science/shortcuts/2016/oct/02/ugly-friend-effect-you-had-better-read-on

          Bonus – Why vehicles at the dealership are parked in groups:
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheerleader_effect

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          “Eacape”

          Was projection the excuse used for spelling that word incorrectly?

          “I prefer “realist” but whatever.”

          On the subject of “head in the sand”.

          “Can’t do truck things”

          “Trucks are also classified more broadly by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which groups classes 1–2 as light duty, 3–6 as medium duty, and 7–8 as heavy”

          “Class 1 – Light truck: 0–6,000 pounds (0–2,722 kg)”

          By definition, it’s a truck.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            Using your interpretation of a Wikipedia definition so is the Escape and Ecosport.

            https://resources.nctcog.org/trans/air/programs/fleet/policy/calculator/type.asp

            But go ahead and take everything so literal. You must be a blast at parties.

            Guest: “Oh I’ve been so busy today. I walked a million miles at the office today.”

            Lou MR: “Um that’s impossible because the average adult walks at 3.5 miles per hour so it would take you over 285,000 hours to walk a million miles.”

        • 0 avatar
          Lie2me

          “I prefer “realist” but whatever.”

          And here I always that that you were a Republican

    • 0 avatar
      Dave M.

      Totally disagree. If they hold pricing in the general vicinity as they’ve said, there’s a huge demand for small trucks. I’m hoping they come out with an extended cab with another 12-15” of bed. That said, this would work just fine for my homeowner, adventure and commuting needs.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I would be interested in the Maverick in the XL base trim. I don’t need all the extras since I would be using–this as a compact truck. I wonder if you could order the base trim? If you could I would be interested especially since it is a hybrid as well. With a loaded CRV and a loaded Buick Lacrosse I don’t need another well option vehicle. A base utilitarian vehicle that gets good MPGs would be ideal.

  • avatar
    Dan

    Color me impressed bordering incredulous on the pricing here. I didn’t think there was enough room under the Ranger to make this very appealing. Ford undercut the chit out of it – and the Escape and the Bronco Escape and pretty well everything else on the market that isn’t a Chrysler Voyager.

    They’ll get a big piece of it back with the $3300 AWD markup. That’s egregious. But with no loss leader extra cab or three cylinder they’ve got to make it back somewhere.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    I think that’s the biggest “compact” I have ever seen.

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      Not sure if its the squareness of it but it does seem bigger then I was expecting. However pictures of it parked next to a new Ranger indicate its actually normal-sized. I guess its “compact” in comparison to the fact that full size is now massive and mid-size is the old full size: https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a36651899/sizing-up-the-2022-ford-maverick/

  • avatar
    bumpy ii

    This far in and no mention of the Explorer Sport Trac?

    • 0 avatar
      Dave M.

      I remember being at the auto show when the Sport-Trac came out. Despite several new introductions of some mighty fine performance cars, the Sport-Trac had a crowd around it each of the 3 times I went that year. There’s definitely a need for a medium sized passenger pickup.

  • avatar
    Lightspeed

    “Ford has wisely stated” and “The bed wisely includes” I had no idea Ford was so wise. They will sell as many as they can build. They’ve ‘wisely’ styled it to look like a real truck.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    Funny, that blue vinyl-esque interior is the same as my parents’ 1974 Maverick, which also had a powder blue exterior.

    But me, I’ll take the Santa Cruz.

  • avatar
    ToolGuy

    I don’t understand Ford’s promotional photography.

    2nd picture: To show off the capacity of the bed, we’re going to load the World’s Shortest Kayak, *with* the bed extender [hence blocking the rearview mirror], and then secure the load by strapping (twice!) to… an elastic cord? Head-scratcher.

    4th picture: To show how user-friendly the bed is, show the talent standing on tiptoes and still not able to place a watering can *with a handle* on the bed floor *at the most accessible point* (directly next to the side of the truck). [How did the flowers at the center of the bed get loaded – by drone?]

    Still on 4th picture: Who selected the props? (We sprang for the Milwaukee power tools, but cheaped out on the garden hose? Makes no sense.) Those appear to be solid concrete blocks – are we really standing them up on the narrow side for reduced stability in transit, Ford? Is the driver planning to make any left or right turns on the way home? (First hard right turn is going to execute a crush test on Milwaukee’s shipping carton; the mulch bags *are* going to break open with a left turn.) Shovel handle has a pending interference condition with the tailgate. [I am genuinely interested to watch this vehicle being unloaded at home – the reach past the tailgate is Not Trivial.]

    (Ford has engineers, Ford has marketing people, Ford has truck people. Is it impossible for them to speak to each other ahead of time?)

    [Alternative theory: Ford knows all of this already, but really wants you to buy the F-Series instead.]

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      Simply put they are trying extra hard to show how the Escape Baja really is a tough truck and not a FWD turd that has the capability of a Power Wheels.

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      Ford has engineers, Ford has marketing people, Ford has truck people. Is it impossible for them to speak to each other ahead of time?

      Based on my experience working for two large corporations – yes these people never talk to each other. Then when it came time for the creative review the emperor had the most beautiful clothes ever seen. I’ve been in these meetings and the sucking sound is like a jet taking off.

      I immediately noticed the women on her tip toes. Get a taller model to fool everyone, this is 101 level stuff.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      The woman in that picture is actually fairly short when you take into consideration the height of the truck. Ford in the other videos you can find if you watch the one embedded here says that they factored a woman at the 5th percentile of height in designing bed access.

      Yes they should have put the tail gate in the part down position to show the kayak in it but of course they wanted to show the availability of the bed extender.

      • 0 avatar
        JMII

        “they factored a woman at the 5th percentile of height in designing bed access”

        Interesting… one of the reasons I’ve taken the Ranger off my list because even as a 6 foot tall guy its bed height is at nose bleed levels for reasons I can not figure out, well other cool lifted truck is COOL logic.

        • 0 avatar
          Scoutdude

          Here is the video where they mention that and where the photo being referenced is clipped from. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dru9oZu5J9c

          • 0 avatar
            ToolGuy

            That video is awesome, thanks Scoutdude.

            My favorite part is the ‘mad scientist’ expressions shown here:
            https://youtu.be/Dru9oZu5J9c?t=33

            The “maker” perspective makes a lot of sense. (But this video makes me wonder if I’m doing it better? Which is not a compliment to Ford.)

            Pause the video here. In which Ford Motor Company learns to build with foamcore, but has no concept of “peel strength” (or physics in general?) with regard to adhesive tape [focus on the structural failure on the left side – “tape it again!” “tape it again!” “more tape!”]:
            https://youtu.be/Dru9oZu5J9c?t=71

            Pause here to see the group of individuals (and work style) who are turning customer dreams into reality:
            https://youtu.be/Dru9oZu5J9c?t=77

            [Comment A: Here’s Your Problem. Comment B: Ford’s workspace is less organized than mine?]

            Hopefully there is a group of Really Smart People somewhere at Ford who *really* developed this product – where is that video?

          • 0 avatar
            ToolGuy

            When carrying a full load of cabinet-grade plywood with the ‘built-in bed extender’ (as shown in the video), remember that the sheet on the bottom is going to have a permanent indentation (or worse) from the 90 degree tailgate lip [if there are any bumps on the road between the hardware store and your destination, which there might be, but why would the OEM notice or care about such real-world unpleasantries]:
            https://youtu.be/Dru9oZu5J9c?t=237

            This could be greatly alleviated by forming the proper angle on the inner tailgate edge (even 10mm would help dramatically; 20mm would be better). But this would mean that Some People would have to talk to Some Other People and do it Ahead Of Time. [And that is Really Difficult.]

            (If I were driving home with that load, I would also have a strap around the *back* of the plywood so that no individual sheet(s) could slip out. But I’m no Automotive Engineer.)

  • avatar
    Ol Shel

    Don’t look now, but the Marxists are infiltrating ‘Murrica with their tiny Yer-O-Pee-On trucks. They somehow managed to last this long without 3/4 ton monsters that can tow 20,000lbs (how many Socialist units is that?…). Before you know it, you’ll be eatin’ croissants, wearing buckle sandals, and surrenderin’ to Hitler. Mark(xist) my words!

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Is that snark or are you serious?

      There are some around here that would be 100% serious.

      • 0 avatar
        Lie2me

        Hey, if these are made in Mexico you going to have to check that back seat for some of them sneaky illegals tryin’ to take our good life away from us

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          Isn’t that why Ram made the Ram Box? 2 free vegetable pickers with every truck.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “ Isn’t that why Ram made the Ram Box? 2 free vegetable pickers with every truck.”

            I love when liberals are openly racist. But let me guess “I can’t be racist because I’m liberal” right?

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            Sorry, EB, guess we forgot the “/sarcasm”. Sometimes we forget that irony and humor is completely foreign to those on the far right

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @EBFlex –

            “But go ahead and take everything so literal. You must be a blast at parties.”

            LOL

            @Lie2me – looks like joking about illegals crossing the border triggered someone. Better not mention walls that Mexico will pay for…

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “Sorry, EB, guess we forgot the “/sarcasm”. Sometimes we forget that irony and humor is completely foreign to those on the far right”

            Whatever you and Lou MR have to tell yourselves to be ok with your racism. Personally, I think just not being a racist would be a better plan but then you couldn’t be liberal. Tough spot for both of you to be in.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Oh look, EBflex is throwing orange coolaid at the wall to see what sticks… that Mexican wall or a metaphorical one? Both are imaginary.

            “Personally, I think just not being a racist would be a better plan but then you couldn’t be liberal.”

            I’m puzzled, is that your way of saying that one can be racist and republican?

            You speak as eloquently as the former one term president. It was a perfect post er call.

            Oh, let’s see, you’ve covered Ford,and liberals. One more Beetlejuice to go.

            “Tough spot for both of you to be in.”

            Not really, getting inside your echoing cavern of a cranial cavity isn’t all that tough.

            Thanks for playing. Better luck next election er time.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            Lol, I love watching EB twist himself into a pretzel to justify his lack of understanding of, well, just about anything

            EBFlex is the Louis Gohmert of TTAC

            “ORBITS: Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) asks whether the Forest Service or the BLM can alter the orbit of the moon or the Earth in order to fight climate change during a House Natural Resources hearing”

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @Lie2me – Exactly.

            He needs to sell a few Fiats to feel better. Convince a few people that the Spider is better than a Miata.

  • avatar
    Red Miata

    I’m disappointed in the lack of a single/extended cab with a larger bed (5 or 5.5 would be great). I was holding out for this truck hoping it could replace my 2001 Ranger, but I suppose I’ll have to pony up for a Midsize.

    Would be nice if they’d bring a hybrid system to the new Ranger – I’ll take a CVT over the Ford 10 speed any day

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      The RWD based Ford Hybrids, the Explorer and F-150 use the 10sp not an eCVT like the FWD based versions so yeah when the Ranger Hybrid shows up it will almost certainly be with the 10sp.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    Humph! I find this thing pretty innocuous in its appearance inside and out. Leaving aside Ford’s record of dismal product launches and atrocious new product assembly quality, this seems not bad. If it really specs out at a payload of 1500 lbs., that’s actually quite good as compared to any number of “1/2 ton” models. I think a 5 foot bed would be more useful; but everyone seems to be demanding a crew cab. So, I don’t fault the lack of a two seat option.

    As a pickup owner and without seeing the thing in the flesh to assess materials and assembly quality, I think this thing is a winner at the price. And, having learned to drive in an era when four wheel drive was pretty much confined to military vehicles, the lack of AWD is fine with me.

  • avatar
    wolfwagen

    If this and the SC takes off it will be interesting to see what the competition brings to the Market. We know FCA has something similar in South America, What does GM have? Toyota? Nissan? Mazda? Mitsu? VW? Could this segment, if it takes off, in the future help Bremach or Mahindra?

    Tim – Anyway we can get some analysis on this?

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      If this market takes off figure any CUV on the market now gets chopped and a bed added. Pilot/Ridgeline = Tuscon/Santa Cruz = Escape/Bronco Sport/Maverick, insert in your favorite brand’s CUV here.

      I would think that the OEMs would want to leverage current US vehicles due to all regulations vs trying to bring in foreign choices which judged to be too slow, cheap, rough, etc.

  • avatar
    jimmyy

    VW made this same mistake … remember the Rabbit pickup truck?

    This is the same. A fake pickup that is really a FWD car dressed up like a truck.

  • avatar
    Arthur Dailey

    TTAC’s parent company it today’s newspaper announced that the starting MSRP for a Maverick in Canada will be $24,900 Cdn.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    I looked at Ford Canada site:
    2022 Maverick $25,900
    2021 Transit Connect $30,835
    2021 F150 $33,429
    2021 Ranger $34,573
    2021 Transit $40,619
    2021 SuperDuty $42,119

    The Maverick is the 2nd cheapest vehicle in the lineup. It falls between the 2020 Ecosport at $20,649 and the 2021 Escape at $27,799. The 2020 Fusion is slightly cheaper at $25,485.

    It is definitely competitively priced.

    Ford is becoming just a truck manufacturer.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    There will be shortages of the Maverick due to the chip shortage. Might take a couple of years before most can buy them especially if you don’t want to pay above MSRP. The Maverick will sell but it will be sometime before we see them in any number and some time before we see the Ranger XL. Ford will make more of the top trims because they yield more profit especially if Ford has to allocate their chips.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    The styling is boring and nondescript, like a Nissan Cube with a pickup box. And that front end? Yawn. Maybe that’s what their marketing research said would sell?

Read all comments

Recent Comments

  • Master Baiter: The Plaid is typical Tesla: Some amazing drive train technology marred by poor ergonomics, like the...
  • golden2husky: DenverMike: Good point about incarceration. I was on a jury a few years ago and the way the cops were...
  • golden2husky: Alcohol ok for the heart? There are plenty of studies showing alcohol consumption causes irreparable...
  • mcs: The youtube videos are starting to show up. Here’s a race at a dragstrip against a Doge Challenger. The...
  • mcs: @ajila: I exaggerate about my height. Because of my work in medical research, I have an exact number on my...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber