Maverick is weird

[fastpakr]

Wouldnt need a trailer if you had an 8ft box

Welcome to missing the point, round 743.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

The Falcon also came with a 90 hp six cylinder, tiny drum brakes, and 5 1/2 turns lock to lock on the manual steering or a non integral power steering system Ford designed for the 51 models that wasn't worth crap even then.

20 years before the falcon they were putting 90hp flatheads in F6's. Contrary to what people seem to think now you dont need a 400+hp whatever to tow your 3000lb boat.

 

[fastpakr]

20 years before the falcon they were putting 90hp flatheads in F6's. Contrary to what people seem to think now you dont need a 400+hp whatever to tow your 3000lb boat.

Contrary to what you seem to think, you don't need a solid axle and leaf springs to build a truck.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Welcome to missing the point, round 743.

Im not missing the point. You guys are totally taking what im saying way to literally and im just having fun with it at this point.

I realize not everyone, well, very few have the same vehicular tastes i do. I just get super annoyed when people compare things like the maverick to the ranger. Its not even in the same class as the 83-11's. The bed is to short, the chassis to weak, etc etc. Thats my biggest point in all of this.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Contrary to what you seem to think, you don't need a solid axle and leaf springs to build a truck.

You do atleast on the rear end. How long do you think that wussy little IRS is going to hold up under anything resembling truck useage?

Look how many IRS equipped exploders/expys running around with the wheels looking like this /\

Yes its poor maintence on the part of the owner but with a solid axle you dont even need to worry about it.

Thats always been my biggest issue with newer vehicles....everything is overall less durable. Espicially underneath. You cant just run stuff and forget about it. Atleast from my experence with stuff.

I havent had a front end alignment done years despite beating down rutted up dirt roads....why? I have I beams. Last thing i had to get lined up was my 97 expedition. It also had coil springs that were totally blown out i had to replace when i lifted it.

Wifes escape rattles and squeaks and shit from underneath alot worse then any of my trucks....despite hardly ever leaving pavement.

Bottom line is unibody/IRS whatever simply does not have the durability of a more rugged traditional truck setup.

 

[fastpakr]

That must be why vehicles made in the last twenty years never last as long as 70's and 80's models.

Oh wait....

 

[rusty ol ranger]

That must be why vehicles made in the last twenty years never last as long as 70's and 80's models.

Oh wait....

You can credit lubrication tech and rustproofing for that.

 

[Snoranger]

I realize not everyone, well, very few have the same vehicular tastes i do. I just get super annoyed when people compare things like the maverick to the ranger. Its not even in the same class as the 83-11's. The bed is to short, the chassis to weak, etc etc. Thats my biggest point in all of this.

We definitely agree that the 73-79 f-series is the best looking truck ever made.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I just get super annoyed when people compare things like the maverick to the ranger. Its not even in the same class as the 83-11's. The bed is to short, the chassis to weak, etc etc. Thats my biggest point in all of this.

Agreed.

My truck of choice didnt have the greatest driveline but to say one is better than the other in all things is a huge farce.

You do atleast on the rear end. How long do you think that wussy little IRS is going to hold up under anything resembling truck useage?

Look how many IRS equipped exploders/expys running around with the wheels looking like this /\

Yes its poor maintence on the part of the owner but with a solid axle you dont even need to worry about it.

Thats always been my biggest issue with newer vehicles....everything is overall less durable. Espicially underneath. You cant just run stuff and forget about it. Atleast from my experence with stuff.

I havent had a front end alignment done years despite beating down rutted up dirt roads....why? I have I beams. Last thing i had to get lined up was my 97 expedition. It also had coil springs that were totally blown out i had to replace when i lifted it.

Wifes escape rattles and squeaks and shit from underneath alot worse then any of my trucks....despite hardly ever leaving pavement.

Bottom line is unibody/IRS whatever simply does not have the durability of a more rugged traditional truck setup.

I rebuilt the front of my 02 two years ago at around 180k. New tie rods and upper balljoints because i was getting new tires. After i put the control arms back where they were and measured the tre's the best i could with a tape measure... the toe was half a degree off. That was it. I have had 0 complaints other than wheel bearings.

And old tib/ttb trucks like to do the /\ thing too...

 

[rusty ol ranger]

We definitely agree that the 73-79 f-series is the best looking truck ever made.

Best overall truck in my book. But i wont quibble.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Agreed.

My truck of choice didnt have the greatest driveline but to say one is better than the other in all things is a huge farce.




I rebuilt the front of my 02 two years ago at around 190k. New tie rods qnd upper balljoints because i was getting new tires. After i put the control arms back where they were and measured the tre's the best i could with a tape measure... the toe was half a degree off. That was it. I have had 0 complaints other than wheel bearings.

And old tib/ttb trucks like to do the /\ thing too...

Ive seen my fair share of them riding like that yes....but you can still drive them that way....never seen a wheel come off a I beam rig like i have on the newer style fronts due to busted ball joints.

ive only replaced one set of ball joints on an I beam and that was my 97. They shoulda just kept kingpins.

 

[G8orFord]

To Rusty's comment on how long an IRS suspension will hold up, we run a stock F-150 front IFS differential and axles with a locker on it in our 500+ cubic inch, 1000 hp Ford mud race truck. Haven't had an issue yet. Conversely, on the Chevy IRS at about 750 hp with an open differential, we've broken many axles and a case or two. We switched to RCV axles on it and solved the axle problem but not the the case problem. Chevy IFS front ends are junk. Basically built to fail. Anyone that knows someone with a Chevy IFS, has probably seen it running around at some point with no axle on one side or the other. That's why, this off-season, we are putting a Ford front end under the Chevy asking with a 9 inch rear. While I realize I'm comparing IFS to IRS, if the Ford IFS can stand up to 1000hp while locked, turning and using all of its suspension travel (and then some) I think the engineering is available to design an IRS that can handle the job.

Technically, I see no need for an IRS for most uses, but that doesn't mean it can't be done reliably. Yes, there are more moving parts, but properly maintained, that shouldn't be much of an issue.

BTW, there were some pretty die hard solid axle folks in our sport that mocked our IFS trucks to start with. That changed pretty quickly when we started wearing their a$$ out with less hp. Most have switched to IFS now.

 

[bobbywalter]

Fargginn hysterical

 

[1990RangerinSK]

Heres a page from an 85 ranger brochure. Only year i can find. It was pretty easy to get a first gen to meet or exceed the mavericks payload even if by a couple hundred lbs. Thats not to mention a ranger would handle way more before breaking shit because it has a real chassis, real axle, and real suspension....

View attachment 69580

But im sure just like when i proved the new ranger was barely more capable then a 92 the excuses will fly.

No excuses from me. In fact, if you look somwhere around page three or four of this thread, I actually SAID that the Gen1 Ranger can haul more than a Maverick.

Payload for a Maverick is 1,500 pounds. Maximum payload for a Gen1 Ranger is 1750. I won't deny that. In fact, I looked it up for myself, and directly stated as such. In fact, you were just blustering out your backside, claiming with no actual numbers that the Gen1 Ranger had a higher payload. You didn't bother to state (until this post that I've quoted) what the Ranger's payload was, and you've NEVER stated what the payload of a Maverick is.

But, you know what? I DON'T GIVE A <CENSORED>. I'll buy a Maverick because it's perfect for me. You go ahead and keep driving your beat up Ranger, and your beat up '250 until the wheels fall off.

Oh, and by the way, I just checked with my insurance company. They classify Maverick as a TRUCK. Therefore, IT IS A TRUCK. You lose.

 

[superj]

I like the mavericks. For 95% of America, that's all the truck they need. Since they can put a lift on it and lights, they are going to sell like crazy and soon you will see them off road.

You cannot pull an RV though so my truck will still be a full size and the family vehicle can be a Maverick, if the wife picks it out in two years.