Ford Maverick Mini-Truck

Hopefully it doesn’t skyrocket the cost! That would be a bummer. I am really looking forward to buying a base model in two years when my wife goes back to work.

 

In the wild...

 

I’ve been having a hard time trying to liken this truck to a past vehicle and your pic, next to a taco, finally gave it to me. They look like the equivalent of a Dodge Neon when they first came out. I’m not discrediting it’s ability to sell at all, but it has a styling that isn’t going to age well to me.

 

Not sure what it is that makes you think of a Dodge Neon, lol. I’m just the opposite. I think it’s got enough of the boxy, F-150 look, that it’ll age pretty well. I spent some time looking at it, up close and personal, last week at the Houston Auto Show. I think its combination of good size and economy of operation will be really popular. I drive an AC and sometimes wish I had room for more than 1 passenger. While the Maverick would be pretty tight for backseat passengers, it’s better than the access cab. I also like the prospect of better mileage. I just wish that it would light a fire under Toyota to build something similar.

 

I think (but am probably wrong) that he is saying it's like a Neon in that it is, in his opinion, ugly and will look even uglier in a few years not that it necessarily looks like a Neon

 

I’m not doing a good job of articulating my thoughts lol. I don’t mean it as a direct comparison. Just the lines over all lots of rounded corners etc give that feel to me. I guess time will tell how well it ages. I always thought the rangers had a truck look to them, but the front end of this doesn’t seem truck like to me at all. The rest of the body is decent though. That frontend though. Woof.

 

This is the thought that I failed to effectively relay. Thanks!

 

I really understood what you were saying. I just thought it was funny that you picked the Dodge Neon. Personal taste is just that…personal. I’m really not a fan of the Honda Ridgeline. Although the second generation is better, it just doesn’t do it for me, yet there are some real similarities to the Maverick. I drive a 2nd gen truck and have been on this forum since before the 3rd gen trucks came out. I couldn’t believe how many members were really dissing the looks when it came out in 2016. Now you don’t hear that…except for hard core 2nd generation owners.

 

I saw one in the wild the other day. Ugly little bastard. Have to say that the Santa Cruz walks all over the Maverick in both features and looks.

Just my opinion.

 

Okay that’s funny. I almost added to my last post that I did not like the Santa Cruz at all. See…personal taste. But I will agree that it has some great features. But boy…those things get pricey when you loaded up.

 

I test drove one when car shopping last month just for funsies. Thing was so loaded with gadgets and screens it was a shock. But yes, they wanted 45k for the trim we tested. That's a little too steep for my budget.

 

Yes the Santa Cruz is beautiful and feature laden. But at $32K vs. $22K the Maverick has its appeal.

 

Here I am thinking they are both awesome little trucks. The Maverick has a the "real" truck good looks and the Santa Cruz has the weird good looks that I'm always a fan of. Trying to convince my father in law to buy either of them to replace his CRV.

 

The headlights keep reminding me of 2000s Trailblazers

I think Ford intentionally went with a somewhat tame, somewhat lame front end styling to not have people choose it over other Ford trucks if style is really important to them. I’m sure it wouldn't be good for them if potential Ranger buyers found the Maverick just as attractive (or even close to it) as they might be able to convince themselves to buy it so save some money over the Ranger.

Case in point: https://www.thedrive.com/news/44188/ford-maverick-outsold-the-ranger-and-toyota-tundra-in-january

If the Maverick can do that looking as it does, it doesn't make sense to give it better (subjective) styling.

 

Got over 1000 miles on mine now. I'm really liking this little truck. It's had no problems (knock on wood). The ecoboost 2 liter and transmission work well together, no lugging or excessive shifting. I'm averaging 30 mpg, although that includes lots of highway miles.

It does have a...unique look. But for $10k less than the next option, I don't care.

 

How is the highway noise? Do you get pushed around in the wind or when a semi- passes?

 

Totally agree with this. It is...unique but it’s also far from being a Pontiac Aztek or PT Cruiser.

 

Seems like a very practical vehicle for someone with an active lifestyle. You easily carry bikes, camping gear and still make that Home Depot run when needed. Probably about as much truck as the average persons really needs if they were truly being honest with themselves.

I've seen a few Hyundai Santa Cruz running around too. Cool looking vehicle....but the bed is quite small. Again...good vehicle for someone active.

The problem with the Hyundai is if you mistakenly check one too many option boxes you can go north of $40k. For that kind of money I would be looking at a Ridgeline. Or better yet....buy a loaded Maverick and put some coin in your pocket. Even better....buy a mid level Maverick and put a bunch of coin in your pocket.

 

I’m curious how many people can stand to drive a stripped down version of this vehicle in order to make the price difference worth it. The ones listed in my area are all over 36k. So to me it’s not really about cost savings on the front end as much as it is about the mpg. At least for the every day buyer. Most people aren’t as minimalist as some on here.

 

Base models are often there to meet a price point.....even if just on paper. We'll see how many entry level Mavericks Ford actually produces. But even that model seems fairly well equipped.

I'm old enough to remember when "strippers" really were no frills vehicles. But these days even entry level, base, strippers....whatever you want to call them are quite well equipped.