Newer smaller Toyota truck model?

The good ole' days

 

Outgoing full-size model with very few changes over the years versus a brand new economic model.... i don't see how comparable the two could be.

 

Lets settle out of court. Ill take one of these for the compact size, and Toyota can keep their current body size vehicles.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CFIcwZRjDhp/

 

They just need to bring back the regular cab Tacoma and there you go- about as small as a truck you can want.

They aren't going to pour the R&D into creating an entirely new smaller platform pickup.

 

The comparison is that they are both new vehicles that are selling well. However the Tundra is largely dominated by other models (F510, etc.) when it comes to sales in a mature category (full size trucks). The Maverick seems like it could soon dominate its category until viable competition comes along. Hence my speculation/wish that Toyota could produce a competing model.

Whatever you think of the Maverick and its specs, it's quite remarkable how much demand there is for it.

 

Especially since Crossovers and SUV's sell more than pickups.

 

Down here by the border, I see them quite often. Once you’re next to one in person, they’re pretty small and rather awkward.



A car lot near me has 2 of them registered in Texas, but they literally doubled the overall value. The MSRP in Mexico is right around $430,000 MXN ($21k USD) and these guys are selling them used at $40k flat. Wonder what strings they pulled to legally register them here.

 

Yes Sir. This picture is at least 12 years old when my babies still lived at home. The black one is a 1990, the blue one a 93, and the gold one a 95, first year Toyota started calling them "Tacomas"

 

Yeh, weird stuff happens in Texas

 

My prediction of what you will see, as gas keeps rising, is a glut of used trucks of all marquees in the market as all the folks who realize they don't have a real need for a truck dump them.

This forum has a lot of 'adventurers' and truck needing workers. But most truck sales aren't to those types of folk.

 

I was being a little factious with those numbers, but something like a rav4 can tow up to 3500 and gets up to 35mpg. Hell, my Corolla can tow 1500 which is about what the total cargo capacity (not towing) of the Maverick is.

Of course I'm projecting my own likes/dislikes/uses here, so of course take it with a grain of salt. But with the kind of capacity that the Maverick has, you're not likely to use it a TON as a "pickup". I'm thinking the occasional trip to home depot type stuff. And for that, a small utility trailer strapped to a car does effectively the same thing.

Again, the specs of the Maverick just don't seem all that impressive to me given what's already out there. Plus, the idea of a pickup truck with IRS and unibody construction (basically; a car) gives you all the disadvantages of a car (low weight capacities), and not really any of the advantages of a truck (that couldn't be accomplished with a small utility trailer).

 

I think one major thing you are missing is the fact that it is only 20ish to start. You can't find a Taco, Frontier, Ranger etc in that price range. Pickups used to be cheap not $50k luxury trucks. I agree with you on everything else a 4.5 foot bed, crappy mpg for such a small truck (Hybrid is pretty awesome though 37mpg) and styling is questionable. But the price... is tempting. My base Taco cost me 32K.

When I bought my Ford Ranger way back when it was $17k MSRP

I had hope for the Santa Fe but for a stylish little ute it's expensive so I'd rather have the Taco or Ranger over that little thing. That should also be a 20k car/truck thing.

 

If I lived in a big city or an apartment and could only have one vehicle a 2nd or 3rd gen Tacoma would be my choice. Fortunately, I have plenty of room so a 1st gen Tacoma and a 2500 Duramax are my choices. Little truck for little truck stuff and big truck for big truck stuff.

 

the maverick is really close to 1st gen Tacoma capabilities. Don’t we all sit here and lament that nobody makes trucks like ours anymore?

 

I don't think I'm "missing" that, but yeah, it's definitely a much lower price point. Point: Maverick.

But that's assuming you're looking at only new. Rarely is new ever truly a sound economical decision. As has been said, an older 5 lug can tow almost as much, gets better mileage, and can cost half as much. Point: old dumpy 5 lug.

I've never said the Maverick is necessarily worse than anything, I guess I just expected more, given what 10-20 year old technology gives us, and what other new trucks are capable of.

Also, yes, the Tundra that I've compared it to can approach or exceed $70k. But you strip away all the leather and fancy electronic shit and you have a ~400hp truck that gets very similar mileage and tows almost 3x as much for a pretty reasonable price (35k).

For me, if I were shopping for a pickup truck (I am actually), that extra cost is easily worth it based on my needs. I don't need (or want) all that leather and crap in the higher end Tundras, but I do need the cargo and towing capacity. Just a basic truck that fits the family, dogs, motos, and the travel trailer.

It'd be nice to see what companies could do with more of a "no frills" pickup. For whatever reason all the big truck makers think if you want to tow 10k pounds, you also need tons of leather and other fancy crap. It's either that or the "government special" with crank windows and wooden seats, lol.

 

Except that the maverick will do it FAR better, more safely, and actually at highway speed. Towing 3500lbs with a 5 lug is an exercise in terror. And the maverick will do it with AWD.

10-20 years of tech gave us the 3g Tacoma and tundra and f150 raptor and a bunch of other niche filling vehicles. The maverick is designed as a small pickup, so it’s obvious that it wouldn’t be designed to tow 9000lbs. That’s not the mission.

It’s also gigantic and lacks tons of features the maverick has at that same price point. Not the same mission.

 

And to add to the above, If you don’t want all the fancy lariat stuff that drives maverick prices into the 30s, you can get a stripper with a tow package that will do what a first gen Tacoma does (but better) for $10k less than the stripper tundra.

you pay more for more capability. The fact that a maverick does what it does for $25k stripper model (oh that includes AWD, which the tundra doesn’t) is awesome.

but it’s unibody!!!!

 

I realize I'm in the minority of truck buyers in general, but I would much prefer 4wd and a body on frame + rear axle for off-roading, over a unibody IRS setup with AWD that will greatly limit it's offroad capabilities. I have no doubt it does great on the road and tows well for it's class

 

You're missing my point.

I've never said I expect Tundra or Dodge 3500 tow numbers out of a this little thing. I've certainly said I'd choose a Tundra over one of these, but that's because even if the Maverick got 100 MPGs it still doesn't fit my requirements for cargo or towing. I don't expect it to.

ONLY reason I even brought up the Tundra is to show there are far bigger/more powerful vehicles that get about the same mileage. The cost is irrelevant in my comparison.

All I've been saying is that for such a small vehicle, I'd expect more MPGs.

 

Of course it’s not as good as a solid axle for off roading, but for the 90% who don’t (and even a lot of “fire road off roaders,” it’s great.