By on June 10, 2021

Ford CEO Jim Farley was interviewed in a New York Times article apparently devoted to praising him and the company. It was reminiscent of those segments on Good Morning America where they have healthy cooking tips sponsored by the American Egg Board and — surprise, surprise — end up recommending people incorporate eggs into meals.

But it wasn’t entirely devoid of substance, either. While pretending that Farley had just taken the job and was somehow solely responsible for a gaggle of successful debuts planned ages before he took over, NYT did mange to convince him to open up about the future of the Maverick pickup and its potential family.

The CEO said he already sees the compact truck as a winner for the brand and with good reason. Despite going against the grain of presumed American tastes, the Maverick has garnered a truly impressive amount of attention over the last week. Part of that was due to Ford’s marketing efforts. Rather than trying to target the traditional truck buyer, the manufacturer is pinging urbanites who might want to a vehicle that can handle more-modest chores and remains incredibly fuel efficient.

Larger pickups can handle things like carrying a motorcycle or heading to the store to pick up the necessities for some d0-it-yourself work. But the Maverick is supposed to excel at those tasks — leaving the truly heavy lifting to its bigger brothers yielding steeper price tags and larger motors.

“This is the product for people who never thought they wanted a truck,” Farley explained.

From NYT:

Ford, known for its brawny engines, made the Maverick’s base model a hybrid that goes 40 mile [sic] on a gallon of gas. The truck starts at $19,995, or nearly $10,000 less than the cheapest F-150. Hyundai is introducing a similar truck called the Santa Cruz this summer but has not said how much it will cost.

Sam Abuelsamid, an analyst at Guidehouse, noted that compact pickup trucks had not been very successful and that most automakers had done away with them. But over the last 10 years, American tastes have gravitated toward trucks and S.U.V.s, so Ford may be smart to try again. “You have a lot of people who’ve concluded a pickup fits their lifestyle now, so this is going to be interesting to watch,” he said.

Mr. Farley expressed confidence that the Maverick would be a hit, saying he could envision Ford producing a family of Maverick variants, including an electric model.

The electric model might be a stretch but the public interest is undeniable — at least anecdotally. Numerous people have reached out to me from out of the blue to ask me about the Maverick and if they thought it would suit their needs. The more Ford can tailor the model for individual tastes, the better it’s likely to perform in terms of sales.

While I’m not enthralled with some of the packaging decisions Ford has made and wish the bed were a wee-bit longer, it would be an untruth to suggest I wasn’t similarly interested in the compact truck. I also happen to fall precisely into the automaker’s assumed demographic of people that never thought they wanted to own a pickup. As a lifelong advocate for oversized sedans and squirrely hatchbacks, I always imagined I would purchase another van (my third automotive fetish) for lugging around motorbikes and plywood. But the Maverick is looking so cheap and potentially versatile that I’m finding myself thinking again.

“The electrification of the industry is a big change, and I think it wasn’t clear until we launched Lightning and Mach E that Ford was going to be a winner in this new electric reality,” Farley said in response to the automaker’s evolving lineup. “Now investors are betting on Ford, and what they’re telling me is, ‘The strategy is attractive, Go execute it, Farley.'”

Offering good products that resonate with consumers is always a sound strategy. If Farley can keep that in the front of his mind, perhaps he’ll be a great CEO after all.

[Images: Ford Motor Co.]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

81 Comments on “Ford CEO Already Sees Maverick as Successful, Suggests Variants...”


  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Call me crazy, and as a reminder, GM sold over 800K of them during the run.

    To create an “urban-friendly” version of a pickup truck it is about length for parking and security of cargo.

    I know GM holds the patents on the Midgate which is why it hasn’t been copied. It seems to be a crewcab “small” truck with a Midgate would shorten the length while creating a 6′-ish bed with the Midgate down, and 8′ with the tailgate dropped.

    For the rarer bigger trip it can haul two people and a bunch of stuff, for urban running about and squeezing into parallel parking spots, problem solved by shaving another 12″ to 18″ off the truck length while still being able to seat 4 comfortably, and 5 in a pinch.

    Just thinking out loud.

    • 0 avatar
      Rocket

      Any patent GM had on their midgate is likely expired. Good engineers probably could have worked around the patent anyway. Sooner or later we’ll see one again. I honestly thought either Hyundai or Ford was going to come up with their own version. Compact pickups are an ideal application for it.

    • 0 avatar
      Matt Posky

      Wonderful idea. Security is one reason I always slant toward vans and it’s the main reason they’re everywhere in NYC while pickups are fairly uncommon.

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      A mid-gate would really make this vehicle class a win-win.

      I think bed security is one the reasons the Santa Cruz comes from the factory with a retractable cover. The SC also copied the Honda’s in bed solution (the “brunk”) but the Maverick doesn’t have this.

    • 0 avatar

      I think the price point on the maverick might prevent the midgate. But I still think its a good idea and baffled that Hyundai didn’t do it. I mean the Skoda Felicia Fun did it in revere se, with midgate that extends the cab.

      • 0 avatar
        Matt Posky

        I also believe the battery compartment is right below the rear passengers. It might not be possible with the hybrid.

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          On the Avalanche, nothing folded into the floor. You folded down the rear seats first.The window was removed (a weakness is cracked window frames if you off-road from body flex) and went into a storage area within the Midgate. The Midgate then dropped with the of a knob about 45 degrees and the Midgate would just flop on top of the folded seats. It wasn’t perfectly flat.

          You also could leave the window in place, and just drop the Midgate. If you left the window and cargo cover in place, you still had a water-tight cab (something a lot of people didn’t realize).

          the cargo panels originally came with a storage bag and straps to stow them along the edge of the bed (inside) if you had to remove them. It was dropped as a cost-cutting measure in later years.

          The first Gen Ridgeline had the same cargo cover panels made by the same third-party as an option that the Avalanche had.

  • avatar
    Scalewoodman

    And there you have why the New York Times is a faint shadow of the Grey Lady and epidemic of agenda-driven media with no credibility: An entire article written to support a premise (Farley the Wonder CEO) without any journalistic integrity… addressing how all of these expensive and intensive products were planned years ago but that he is not the responsible person even as he is fortunate to be in the CEO slot and enjoy all of the benefits. Ford has sacrificed and paid the price for development of a pretty amazing string of hits and potential hits and should be congratulated!

  • avatar
    Pig_Iron

    Or, you know, get a utility trailer.

    • 0 avatar
      Matt Posky

      There’s nowhere to park one in cities and renting them hasn’t gotten any more enjoyable.

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      Brilliant. Buy a truck that’s so bad at being a truck you also need to buy a trailer.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        And according to you, you need a truck that can tow more than 5k across the country on one tank of gas.

        Now it needs to haul instead of tow.

        You see a blue oval and start whining.

        Beetlejuice

        • 0 avatar
          EBFlex

          “ And according to you, you need a truck that can tow more than 5k across the country on one tank of gas.

          Now it needs to haul instead of tow.”

          Yeah I’ve actually never said any of that. So on top of being a racist you are a liar…..or simply….a liberal.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @EBFlex-

            “Does it matter if I only do “truck” things a few times a year? Say I have a boat/trailer that weighs 4500-5000 pounds.”

            You said that.

            It’s a compact truck. It isn’t meant to compete with full-sized trucks. It’s supposed to compete with small to mid-sized CUV’S.

            Racist, Liberal, Liar……

            Sounds like a new book someone ghost-wrote for Donny Junior.

            LOL

            Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            “Racist, Liberal, Liar……”

            Coming from an honest, intellectual, fascist… Lol

            Man, my autocorrect went nuts typing that

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “ “Does it matter if I only do “truck” things a few times a year? Say I have a boat/trailer that weighs 4500-5000 pounds.”

            You said that.”

            Yep. Sure did. Now show me where I said I need to tow more than 5,000 pounds across the country on one tank of fuel.

            You are a racist and a liar.

          • 0 avatar
            Yankee

            @EBFlex

            Why so angry? Can’t we all just talk about vehicles here without calling each other names? Can’t there be any space where we check our politics at the door and just talk cars like we did in the good old days? Relax man. I’ll ready your thoughts about the vehicle in question along with everyone else’s. That’s why I read the comments – to make me think about things I didn’t before. Peace.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            @Yankee

            “@EBFlex

            Why so angry? Can’t we all just talk about vehicles here without calling each other names? Can’t there be any space where we check our politics at the door and just talk cars like we did in the good old days? Relax man. I’ll ready your thoughts about the vehicle in question along with everyone else’s. That’s why I read the comments – to make me think about things I didn’t before. Peace.”

            I am not angry but I will always respond in kind. When I am blindly attacked, I will respond appropriately. I never throw the first stone though. Lou loves to make everything personal and will attack anyone he disagrees with. Your comment would be better directed at him.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            @yankee: He lives about 30 minutes from the former twin cities plant that made the ranger, so there could be a connection.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            @mcs

            “He lives about 30 minutes from the former twin cities plant that made the ranger, so there could be a connection.”

            That’s it, old Henry must have yelled at him and he’s still butthurt

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “@yankee: He lives about 30 minutes from the former twin cities plant that made the ranger, so there could be a connection.”

            Hahaha….more lies. Not even close but don’t let facts get in your way.

        • 0 avatar
          Lynchenstein

          LOL. I’ve never seen any full-size body-on-frame manly trucks towing trailers. The tow rating on full size pickups is a theoretical number strictly for marketing purposes. It’s right there in the owner’s manual next to locations of the child seat restraint hooks and the brake pedal/pedicure machine safety guidelines.

          EBFlex is clearly the only real manly man who needs to do serious manly things with his trucky truck. If it doesn’t crack the concrete when it rolls on by, it’s just a sissy-man wanna-be poser-mobile.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “I’ve never seen any full-size body-on-frame manly trucks towing trailers.”

            You’ve *never* seen a full size truck towing a trailer? I don’t want to call you a liar but I don’t know what else to call you.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            Ajla…..liar works.

            That was a laughably dumb statement he made. Or perhaps he’s blind and can’t see anything at all.

            But I guess towing a boat, in his world, is something only real men do because it’s a seriously manly thing.

            Sounds like inadequacy and jealousy to me.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      A utility trailer is just a Pita compared to having a pickup. It just isn’t practical to stop at HD on the way home from work, it is a pain to deal with it in the parking lot and then you have to deal with the hooking, unhooking and storing. I’ll take the Mav over any small car or CUV and utility trailer combination if you have enough need to use the trailer more than 2 or 3 times per year. Plus the fact that this is cheaper than small cars and CUVs with similar interior room and it is a no brainier to not screw with a trailer.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Tradeoffs. The utility trailer is a PITA when you actually use it, but for people in the city an open bed is a PITA the rest of the time (and, no, a tonneau cover really is not a substitute for closed vehicle). Personally I’d rather have my car and a utility trailer than a pickup, on balance. The balance will be very different for others. It would also change if the Maverick had a frunk like the Lightning or a brunk like the Ridgeline.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        I hate towing anything on rough gravel roads or in the winter. I’d buy this over a comparable CUV and besides, the aftermarket will have soft and rigid tonneau covers and caps for it.

        • 0 avatar
          PrincipalDan

          @Lou – Fords Build and Price already has listed a soft tonneau, ridgid folding tonneau, and ridgid roll up tonneau. Also showing sprayed in factory bed liner and a drop in bedliner.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @PrincipalDan Thanks for the information. An open bed can be covered but you can’t easily saw the roof off a CUV for that odd shaped load or build a bulkhead to keep the smell of manure or fuel out of the passenger compartment.

  • avatar
    eggsalad

    For other small trucks – Colorado, Ranger, Tacoma – the extended cab is cheaper than the crew cab. I know it will never happen, but if Ford built a Maverick with a foot less cab and a foot more bed, I’d happily buy it for the crew cab price. Don’t even bother with a vestigial seat or doors; they’d be too tiny anyhow. Then Ford can rake in all the fleet buyers and make more profit.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Too bad they jacked the Ranger up to trophy truck height.

      • 0 avatar
        JMII

        Exactly. This is why I don’t want one, its a good 4″ to 6″ higher then necessary for reasons I can’t understand other then that lifted look is the current hotness. And yes even the 2WD version is sky high. A neighbor had one in his driveway and at 6’0″ the bed walls were chest high to me.

        Here is a good picture: old vs new Ranger
        https://www.ranger5g.com/forum/attachments/ueo2npu-jpg.685/

  • avatar
    deanst

    “ While pretending that Farley had just taken the job and was somehow solely responsible for a gaggle of successful debuts ..”

    Wait, Ford has had a gaggle of successful debuts? What did I miss?

    How Ford can introduce a hybrid truck for $20,000 and not be efficient enough to profitably market any gas cars in North America (on platforms already developed for other markets) is highly suspicious. I would be interested in some of Fords recent debuts if they were made by Toyota and didn’t have injurious pricing in Canada.

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      How Ford can introduce a hybrid truck for $20,000 and not be efficient enough to profitably market any gas cars in North America (on platforms already developed for other markets) is highly suspicious.

      +1 excellent question.

      • 0 avatar

        My guess is that the material quality is going to be pretty bad and their hoping the form factor and specs will win over people that would turn away from a sedan built the same way. I’m expecting this will be the Nissan versa or Mitsubishi mirage of trucks. I still find it appealing if that is the case thou.

        • 0 avatar
          JMII

          Based on YT reviews the interior materials are cheap. Somehow a truck can get away with this because its “rugged”, put the same materials in a car and it would be considered a joke.

          The SC’s interior is 180 degrees in the other direction… my wife LOVES its ultra modern vibe, button-less, full of screens and piano black with silver accents.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Thin profits don’t go as far in the US. Every major recall can easily cost Billions. And no automakers are immune. Then there’s lemon laws and other annoying consumer protections. Plus tough emissions, CAFE and safety/crash regs.

        When cars aren’t moderate to extremely profitable, why do it? Especially when you can focus all your energy on what is?

      • 0 avatar
        Mustangfast

        Easy, no one will opt for less than the XLT. Built in Mexico alongside its platform mate Bronco Sport which is also platform mated to the Escape/Kuga globally and Mach-E before they refresh the platform. Using Hybrid tech that’s already been developed, with parts from the same suppliers. It will have evidence of cost cutting but because it’s a truck and less expensive it will be tolerable and add to “ruggedness” and durability, so negative becomes positive. I’m pretty sure they made their money on the Fusion many times over, and would have on the Focus of not for pushing DCT. Not to sound hyperbolic but this is the same cleverness that they did with the original Mustang, a parts bin platform remake that checks what people want for the time. Combining with the Lightning and Mach-E it shows some strategic thinking that is rightly catapulting them to front of mind in the craze for the “next big idea”. It’s the truck 70% of non tradesmen truck buyers need, and cleverly differentiated from the Ranger and F-150 such that it won’t be cross shopped by people who actually need a truck for capability. It’s competition is CUVs and economy cars that now push mid-20s in pricing and really only Toyota could execute something similar because they’re the only other player with good hybrid tech and a broad portfolio.

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      “ Wait, Ford has had a gaggle of successful debuts? What did I miss?”

      You missed Ford telling you they are successful therefore it’s fact. A realist sees most all of Ford’s recent introductions as evidence of a company that has no idea what it’s doing.

      As for Ford not figuring out how cars work, remember this is the same company that, just 10 years ago, told the entire world that they don’t want or need a small pickup and just go buy a fiesta instead. They declared the small market completely dead (despite other manufacturers being wildly successful with them) and that there was no point in bringing the global Ranger here because it was 9/10th the size of the F150. Now we have the (awful) Ranger and this Escape pickup. This is a company with no clear direction

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      It wasn’t that Ford didn’t make money on their sedans it was that they were at the end of their cycles and they thought that the investment in other products would be more profitable. Yes the base price is low but they intend to sell a lot more that are priced closer to 30K or beyond than $20k ones.

  • avatar
    spookiness

    I think this product will be a great hit. At it’s price, it competes with compact CUVs and most cars. I’d don’t need or want a truck either, but I’ve done several online “builds” and I keep coming up with an orange (!) pickup in the XLT trim for just a tick over 25k with the options I’d want and nothing I don’t want.

    • 0 avatar
      Matt Posky

      Packaging is one of my biggest issues with the truck. The other is whether or not the crew cab effectively ruins the vehicle by making both the rear seat and bed too small to be of any practical use. Eager to test one and find out.

      • 0 avatar
        Rocket

        Packaging won’t work for some for sure, and yet I’ll wager packaging will be the exact reason many people are drawn to it. The Maverick will seat four people comfortably, but it has a trunk big enough for four golf bags, many bags of mulch, or monthly runs to Costco. It works better when you view it more as an open bed utility vehicle, which is precisely what it is.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Don’t forget it’s a subcompact so something’s gotta give. OK all of it.

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          Only in America could anyone say with a straight face that a 200-inch-long vehicle is “subcompact.”

          Edit to mention that a typical compact van that would do similar jobs in Europe, the Citroën Berlingo, is 173″.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            short bed F-Series were less than 200 inches up until 1996.

            “bed too small to be of any practical us”
            With the bed extender, they say you can carry 4×8 sheets of plywood. That sounds practical to me.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Hey do you want a pickup or not?? 200 ain’t bad for what it is. Or just mount a custom rack on the roof of a CUV. Then you can do a full 4X8 or bigger if you want. Sounds sweet, no?

            Yeah no body wants that. Nor a subcompact van.

          • 0 avatar
            Rocket

            Vehicle size classifications make little sense, but that’s beside the point. Regardless of how it’s classified, the Maverick is small for a pickup truck.

            The Transit Connect starts at 174″, so that option exists here, too. Obviously, it’s not what most buyers are looking for.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Extended cab, 6.5′ bed mini-trucks were around 190″ back in the day. The shorter bed and crew cab are a wash. The extra 10″ is bloat.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “ “bed too small to be of any practical us”
            With the bed extender, they say you can carry 4×8 sheets of plywood. That sounds practical to me.”

            Except even with the goofy bed extender (if you need a bed extender you’ve admitted you messed up and made the bed too small) you’re still only at 6 feet

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            You forgot the reasons for a pickup, if not style.

            But screw Europe. Anyway small/midsize pickups are catching on like wildfire over there.

          • 0 avatar
            Rocket

            An extended cab first generation Ranger was about 193″, and it only had a 6′ bed. That truck was body-on-frame, and it would never meet today’s crash standards, passenger space requirements or refinement demands. Call it bloat if you want to, but it seems more like market evolution to me.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            8 ft stuff is fine for 4.5 beds. Beyond that you should flag it. Or 12 ft with a 6.5. Rookies!

  • avatar
    JMII

    This truck’s success, which is still TDB, at this point comes down to two things: 1) its only $20k and it gets 40 MPG, and 2) its looks like a truck. A car with these same figures wouldn’t sell because its just another uncool, crappy Prius. Its all about image, I expected MANY de-badged hybrid Mavericks. What? Hybrid? Me? Oh no, that is not the model *I* got.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    The more I read about the Maverick and see the reviews the more I like it. A hybrid power train as standard makes this truck a really great buy.

  • avatar

    Build and price. I would take an XL with the bigger engine and tow package, puts it right around 25k.

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      My builds come out around $31K but I’ve got to have AWD and the towing package. I wouldn’t mind the high end stereo but they’ve got a pretty steep buddle of options as part of that.

      I wish Hyundai would have put their MSRPs up. You can go on there and start playing around with the trim levels but no prices are given.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    Must be nice to be a CEO like that. Just say whatever you want with no need to back up what you say. Ford bungled the Escape pickup for sure, but I guess in a reflection of today’s society, as long as you feel like it’s a success then it is.

    Or is his definition of success a severely compromised “truck” that isn’t good at truck things?

    Maybe Ford’s next vehicle should be a minivan designed and built for large families but it only comes with one seat. Or a convertible with a fixed roof. These people are delusional. And it’s very telling that Ford has recently released two trucks that are actually awful trucks while Hyundai has shown them how to do it right with their very first truck.

    When a truck company fails at making trucks, they are in huge trouble.

    • 0 avatar
      Dave M.

      Ford is highly successful at making trucks. What makes you think this won’t be successful?

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        Are they though? The trucks themselves are actually mediocre. It’s more the marketing that sells em.

        Trucks that are impractical or suck at being trucks (this Escape pickup and the non-Lightning) and have to rely on gimmicks to draw attention (like the mildly refreshed 2021 f150 that was just recalled for complete loss of steering) are not well thought out products.

        And Hyundai built a far better small truck than Ford did. Hyundai.

        • 0 avatar
          Lie2me

          You righties really know how to twist a truth to fit your narrative

          “Ford is highly successful”

          “Are they though?”

          By every single measure of what is a successful truck, yes, but don’t let that interfere with all that luscious Ford hate you thrive on

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            Twisting the truth is better than just making things up like you people do.

            But this more centers on your definition of success. For me, success also relies heavily on having a quality product. Success isn’t simply sales numbers and pencil whipped capability ratings. Is a mediocre product that sells well due to blind cheerleading and clever but deceptive marking a success? Is it still successful when you have endless recalls because you went so cheap on everything? Is it really “success” when you have to charge your customers almost $4,000 just for Sync 3?

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Ford is not making you – or anyone else – buy this thing.

            Lighten up, Francis.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “Ford is not making you – or anyone else – buy this thing.

            Lighten up, Francis.”

            Who said they were?

    • 0 avatar
      Daveo

      Show me on the Maverick where Ford touched you. Seriously, you seem clearly displeased with Ford’s achievements that there must be something in your past that made you litter this forum negative comments even when presented with factual data to the contrary.

  • avatar
    dwford

    An obvious spin off is that this becomes the basis for the next Transit Connect, which would also benefit greatly from the hybrid powertrain.

    A 2 door would be obvious, even if only for the fleet market. They’d probably rather have the extra bed length than have the drivers alone in a 4 door truck.

  • avatar
    conundrum

    I read the NYT article because on Tuesday night I had read the Autoextremist’s rant on Farley. Which is not their first one, by the way, but it caused me to have a delightful laughing spell. Farley has the gift of the gab especially when it comes to praising himself, and of course, all this about-to-be wunnerful Ford stuff is mostly due to his gimlet-eyed far-forward-into-the-future-looking digital thinking. How long’s he been on the job? Six months? So he’s a miracle man. Ford is no longer a vehicle company, but a wazoo amazing customer-friendly company that wants to cuddle up with you which also just happens to make trucks and crossovers as a sideline to fulfil your amazing social media life. Yup, friendly “journos” have been co-opted to glorify this new Scion Farley of the once moribund Ford auto company, to save the world, goddammit, and maybe raise the stock price. Once Ford actually manages to make the Bronco and Maverick in real sheet metal and present at dealers and available for purchase and with door-handles that don’t fall off, maybe we can all get to see whether they’re long-term game changers as the years roll by.

    As for all the people wishing they’d done this or that re the Maverick, like a bigger cab or a smaller cab, or a longer bed, etc, etc, why bother dreaming? It is what it is. If it suits, buy it. Otherwise look elsewhere. Seems simple enough to me. I have so much trouble opening the trunk on my car to load groceries that the one second I’d save just tossing them in the bed would be a life-changer! I figure this thing will be like a Swiss Army knife – useless at everything. Although I did find the special tool steel saw quite good for harvesting broccoli.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      People are like Goldilocks and the three bears. Nothing is “just right”. As you said, ” It is what it is. If it suits, buy it. Otherwise look elsewhere.”

      Life is about compromise unless you happen do be as wealthy and/or intelligent as Elon Musk.

    • 0 avatar
      ToolGuy

      @conundrum, your posts lately are awesome. (Not saying I agree or disagree, but you are a talented writer.)

      @Lou_BC,
      “Life is about compromise unless you happen do be as wealthy and/or intelligent as Elon Musk.”

      And yet Elon Musk is embracing minimalism:
      https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/01/elon-musk-sells-all-california-real-estate-moves-to-texas

      Hmmm…

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Of course Ford is going to start with a crew cab model – that will be the volume seller whether the small truck jihad likes it or not. If it is successful then other variants will be considered. If they’re selling like gangbusters and enough fleet buyers come forward to beg for say standard cab AWD hybrid models – Ford will find a way to make it happen.

    Personally I’m happy to see more options in the market. Ford will sell these like gangbusters because it’s a crew cab hybrid truck for the price of the old Fusion.

    I’m a suburban homeowner seriously considering either the Maverick or the Santa Cruz (not shopping for a few years so they’ve got time to work out the first MY bugs.) I’m considering them because yeah there is a few times a year I could use a truck but these would actually be pleasant to commute in, park, maneuver in tight spaces, low enough to easily load and unload. Plus add a hard tonneau and treat them like a sedan.

  • avatar
    JMII

    Regarding all the talk of bed size:

    I’ve own a pickup for 25+ years – an older Ranger Splash which according to the internets has a worthless bed since its narrow (step side) and short. Then I got a Dakota Quad Cab which is also compromised with an apparently silly and tiny 5 foot bed.

    I’ve hauled full sheets of plywood ONCE and that was thanks to a hurricane in my tiny Ranger. The load went in at angle and the tailgate had to come down… no big deal. I’m not a contractor, I am home owner with a 16 foot boat I have never needed to haul sheetrock. In fact I have yet to encounter a load that was too much for a 5 foot bed – just put the tailgate down, use straps and flag longer items. I’ve relocated two 10′ jon boats and one 12′ kayak this way. I’ve moved myself once and helped friends and family multiple times. I will survive just fine even with a 4 foot bed.

    My experience and observations are objects that find themselves in pickup beds are mostly household furniture, exercise equipment, gardening supplies and trash. Beyond that the other pickup applications are all commercial vehicles doing landscaping, pool cleaning, pressure washing, pest control, etc. These people clearly require a full size truck AND sometimes a utility trailer too.

    And for anyone who thinks forget these baby trucks and just get an SUV instead: I had one of those (Isuzu Rodeo) and found it wasn’t versatile at all since the height or shape of objects was limited to the rear hatch opening. Plus you didn’t want your SUV full of dirty or smelly items like mulch, pavers, mountain bikes, paint or fuel… all items I’ve easily carted around in my pickup.

    If you need a 6’+ bed then by all means get a full size “real” truck, but understand for many if not MOST people a 4 foot bed is a 98% workable solution. The other 2% of the time they can rent a trailer, larger truck or van.

  • avatar
    Russycle

    Even with the tailgate down, I’m not sure you’ll get a motorcycle in that bed. Diagonally maybe, but it would be nice if it could haul two.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I would go for the XL base with the hybrid. With an AWD CRV I don’t need another AWD especially with front wheel drive. There is enough electrical nannies that I wouldn’t want to add anymore even though I would like cruise control it would not be worth it to add an extra package of things I don’t want or need. I like the cactus gray color but I would take white. The hybrid for me is a game changer with 40 mpgs which would tilt this truck as a choice for me over the Santa Cruz even though I like the Santa Cruz a lot. If the Maverick had the turbo 3 as a base then I would not be that interested in it. Very glad to see the hybrid power as standard which is a selling point over the competition.

  • avatar
    JMII

    One quick note I haven’t seen mentioned – the Mav hybrid requires premium fuel.

    Scroll all the way to the bottom: https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2021/06/08/all-new-ford-maverick.html

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • teddyc73: “Not to mention that in a very un-FCA/Stellantis move, most materials feel nice or at least...
  • teddyc73: I can’t believe how many times I have heard this same story. It is always the wives who vehemently...
  • bradfa: When do we get a Hellcat version of the Pacifica? I guess they’d need it to be under the Dodge brand,...
  • mcs: MitchConner: “Get rid of the overhead.” How about getting rid of the financial drain of these...
  • ShoogyBee: Here in Milwaukee, Kias and Hyundais are being stolen left and right. Visit the Milwaukee subreddit and...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

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