What does Ford think the Maverick is for?

[stmitch]

I'm guessing it's more about how many they can actually produce. And then, how many of those they can produce without cannibalizing sales of higher profit vehicles.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

And that highlighted part in a nutshell is the big reason I'd hesitate to order a Maverick. A number of new Fords have had serious issues. EcoBoost, anyone? Undercarriage rust on brand-new pickups, anyone?

Ive noticed that really since 97 (99 for superduty) the pickups seem to rot underneath worse then any of the old ones ever did. The bodies seem to do better, but shackles, crossmembers, bed crossmembers, springs, and frames in general seem to be worse.

Ive had several 75ish to mid 90s trucks and frame rot was never an issue...even never being washed and being run in michigan salt, but ive seen numerous (espicially the 97-08 1/2 tons and 99-10 superduties) that rot like crazy.

 

[Snoranger]

I'm guessing it's more about how many they can actually produce. And then, how many of those they can produce without cannibalizing sales of higher profit vehicles.

They got about 86K orders in those 5-6 days.
I’m sure if Ford can build more, (open another shift at the plant, source parts and materials, whatever else is in the way.) they will open the order banks back up. Even if it’s just for dealer stock production.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

That’s because they underestimated its popularity. They expected the order bank to be open a LOT longer than 5 days (for the hybrid, it was 6 for the ICE version.) They really should have opened the build and price a day or so before the order banks… but Ford hasn’t really had their shit together in the past few years.
FYI: You can place an order for a vehicle today (not the Maverick, obviously.) and change every option that you want all the way up until the day the schedule it for production.

Once you get a VIN you are done.

Then they jocky around playing games with scheduling until they got tired of screwing with you.

They need things locked in a bit before production to make sure they have enough parts to either build it or limp it to a racetrack parking lot for long term storage.

 

[sgtsandman]

Ive noticed that really since 97 (99 for superduty) the pickups seem to rot underneath worse then any of the old ones ever did. The bodies seem to do better, but shackles, crossmembers, bed crossmembers, springs, and frames in general seem to be worse.

Ive had several 75ish to mid 90s trucks and frame rot was never an issue...even never being washed and being run in michigan salt, but ive seen numerous (espicially the 97-08 1/2 tons and 99-10 superduties) that rot like crazy.

My experience is limited to Rangers. It seems that the front of the beds, the bottom of the tailgates, and the lower doors are the main issue as far as rust. So far, the tailgate on the 2011 is holding on strong but even with the rust mitigation steps, the front, passenger bed mount needs repaired. The bottom lip of both doors is blistering even though the interior of the door is well sealed and clean. And the bottom of the interior section of the driver’s door where it curves down to meet the exterior sheet metal has rusted through, even though the seam sealer is still intact and clean. Frame is in great shape but it gets doused with fluid film every year along with the entire underbody and the space between the inner and outer bed as well.

The one Explorer Sport and Sport Trac I worked on both had rotted out lower kick panels.

Everything is 1998 and up.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

My 02 F150 needed rockers, door bottoms and a bed.

Bed was rotting in all the usual places, rockers and above wheel arches.

Frame was perfect.

200k mile truck.

 

[superj]

a guy i cycle with got his maverick a few months back and loves it. he got the awd and said it pulls the boat out better from the ramp than his old f150 (2wd though). said even though traction is better, the ecoboost feels like it has more power than the old v8 did for coming up the steep wet ramp.

all i know is he got an xl and totally regrets not getting an xlt. it sucks to drive a cross texas with no cruise control is his comment, which is my exact feelings.

 

[bilbo]

a guy i cycle with got his maverick a few months back and loves it. he got the awd and said it pulls the boat out better from the ramp than his old f150 (2wd though). said even though traction is better, the ecoboost feels like it has more power than the old v8 did for coming up the steep wet ramp.

all i know is he got an xl and totally regrets not getting an xlt. it sucks to drive a cross texas with no cruise control is his comment, which is my exact feelings.

My wife's Maverick is an XL too. When we were driving it home we were looking all over for the cruise control until I looked it up and realized it didn't have it. We never thought they would even build a car without it nowadays with throttle by wire. After researching it appears there's a couple of ways to do it. You can install the switches or a wheel with the switches and program with FORScan, or install the aftermarket kit. She went with the aftermarket kit. It's around $300 and not as elegant as OEM, with an extra lever there and stuff, but it works and she's happy with it. The kit looks easy to install.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I am very surprised anyone even builds a vehicle without cruise at this point.

 

[superj]

me too, very surprised but since its an expensive add on option, ford saw a way to get some more money out of people.

i would do the aftermarket add on kit with no problem

 

[Ranger850]

I am very surprised anyone even builds a vehicle without cruise at this point.

Come on, Ford can't be just giving away the good stuff. Gotta make that up sale so they can say "XL's just dont sale well, We should only make expensive models and forget about the Little Guy"

 

[rusty ol ranger]

I am very surprised anyone even builds a vehicle without cruise at this point.

Its optional on F series too

 

[superj]

isi t only optional on trucks? we had an se excape and it had cruise. i didn;t sit in an s model so i don't know

 

[Blmpkn]

I'm relatively sure it's an option on the new rangers as well.

 

[Garth Libre]

This is on the Maverick page on the Ford site. What's Ford marketing shooting for here? I don't have the literary prowess to summarize my confusion with this pic.

View attachment 82605

Ford is marketing the new Maverick as some kind of recreational, sport vehicle, not a work - landscaping, laborer's vehicle. It's not for picking up a scoop of dirt, hauling lumber; it's not a knock around truck. It's not even ideally suited for hauling bikes and kayaks as the bed is too small.