@@motorheadscom , I want the modern Ford Ranger to be this vehicle, plus all Ford trucks to also have legitimate single cab configurations and short bed options. I also want the Ford Maverick to be a car again.
New to. I’d love to see it with a 6’ bed me day. This would really be strong delivery truck for parts stores etc. Also a truck like this will easily be turned EV in time
@@brandondannys-menary3678 I assume you mean the Bronco Sport crossover. The actual Ford Bronco isn’t on sale yet and will be a traditional 4x4 with low range and lockers. But if you are alright with the Bronco Sport AWD system, which should be a no brainer for Ford, then go for it!
No one is going to buy this. Why? Because no one is buying the Honda Ridgeline. Americans want a small, cheap truck, but a truck truck, not a car truck. FWD based model? Yea right good luck. All they need to do is offer a better price on the Ranger and it would outsell the overpriced Tacoma like hot cakes. But god forbid truck trucks return back to a decent price, between COVID and them now being “luxury” items. Don’t even get me started on the full sized trucks
I agree, there will be a very small market for this especially if it's not insanely cheap. There is a vocal group of neglected buyers that have been wanting compact affordable body on frame trucks and SUVs whom have had to compromise on either price or capability for over a decade now, or else they relented and just financed the half ton.
The Maverick is a unibody construction so basically it is the same as the Honda Ridgeline which I do not like . That is not a truck it is an oversized car .
I'm glad they're bringing back the small pickups but...it sounds like a Ford Focus with a truck body. That defeats the purpose of buying a truck. They should just update the old Ranger and rebadge it. That was a good little truck. I use to have a '97 Ranger (standard cab, V6) it was a great truck. Anyways, nice vid, man.
Thanks, man! I appreciate it! And yes, if Ford uses the new C2 platform, it's kind of a Focus with a truck body, but it's a little more complicated than that. As for the old Ranger, I doubt it could pass current safety and emissions rules.
@@motorheadscom if they updated the old ranger they would upgrade the engines so passing regulations would not be an issue. Making it a unibody would put it directly in the failure category in the USA market.
Compare the standard and upgraded engines on the Maverick vs 97 Ranger. Both Maverick engines beat the 97 Ranger V6 in HP (147 vs. 191/250). Maverick beats 97 Ranger in payload (1500/1250). Base Model Maverick/Base Ranger tie in towing (2000). Upgraded Maverick/V6 Ranger tie in towing (4000). Seems like these trucks are very similar, though the Maverick is more fuel effecient but has a shorter bed.
I’m not interested and will not buy it. Ford Ranger, 2.3L or 2.5L, 2 door with long bed was Fords biggest seller in that class in USA. My family had two of them and miss them. They had 200,000 miles on one and the other 300,000 miles before trade. Ford say they did research and claim people want a four door unibody but I am positive the research was a small control group not in rural America like Ohio, Texas, Kansas etc. because the only people who want four door unibody is families and men who don’t use trucks as intended which leaves out a large segment of men and women who love and miss two door compact Rangers for there use. Four door trucks are seen more as a luxury family vehicle. Ford should of used the same team that researched and made the Bronco (not the sport but regular Bronco coming out). They did a lot of research in many parts of America.
Well, the regular Bronco sits on the same T6 platform as the current-generation Ford Ranger. So if you want a Bronco-ish truck, the Ranger's your only choice. I think car makers have a tendency to make their models (cars and trucks) bigger and bigger with time, for whatever reason. The old Ranger was a compact truck, but the current one is mid-sized, and that's why Ford is now looking into getting back in the compact truck segment. I don't know if it will be a hit - only the market can decide that - and it seems that right now the market is divided between "love it" and "hate it". Maybe after the Maverick is revealed, folks will find it easier to make up their minds.
@@motorheadscom with so many SUV and trucks flooding the market I doubt it. The Ecosport for example is overpriced for such a small tiny suv and it is not selling well in Ohio. The back leg room in the Ecosport is so small people View it as wasted space and the perception is it’s not safe like the micro 2 door car a few years ago that can only be driven under 45 mph in city. The Maverick might sell in the city for those who miss the Explorer Sport Trac but with Bronco Sport, Honda CR-V, and other alternatives that would be similarly priced people will not view it like we think. It will be viewed as another four door SUV. I think Ford shot their foot. Jeeps version of a four door with bed is not a favorite where I’m at and people think it’s overpriced and would rather spend the money on a four door Wrangler, mid size SUV or a large truck. I think if Ford came out with a 2 door short and long bed with optional 4x4 and aimed it at country especially Midwest then they would have had a guaranteed seller because everyone I talk to says the same. I hear; Trucks are way overpriced with some costing as much as a house. Trucks are too car like now and with high cost afraid to scratch or tear up. They can’t wait for the Bronco (even Jeep owners tell me this) and they wish the Ranger was the old fashioned compact two door long bed that used to be affordable to have as a beater truck. Many former Ranger owners do not like the new Ranger. And if they find out a truck is unibody that will factor in as can’t abuse it and one hit the truck is unusable because the frame being unibody is deemed unsafe by law. Truck owners don’t like that and prefer traditional frame. Plus you have to factor in if the Ranger and Bronco is only a few thousand dollars more then why waste money on a tiny truck with no power on a unibody frame when I can get the Ranger or Bronco that is American made and can take a beating. Unibody is still viewed as cars, can’t take a beating and cost money to repair and don’t belong on trucks so if they expect people to use it a lot, traditional truck owners will not buy it and don’t like hearing it’s unibody.
@@motorheadscom I think people easily forget the real reason Ranger fell then was for a few thousand dollars more you an get a more powerful V6 or a V8 with sometimes better gas mileage than offered on Ranger. The two biggest complaints from me and others was the engine had terrible gas mileage versus Toyota and no power. By the time Ford updated the engine four years later everyone was buying base 2 door F150 trucks. Because it was almost the same cost or a few thousand dollars more. I keep hearing other factors but when I talk to people it usually falls back to issues like power, mileage etc they wanted then now it’s I want a affordable two door Ranger back because I miss the flexibility of a standard truck that I don’t have to worry about scratching or denting. We don’t have that and the Maverick will not be that truck. I’m sure the Maverick will be $24,000 and above and being unibody that doesn’t fit the criteria needed of a truck that takes a beating and not upset of denting it.
I’m guessing you’d be very frustrated if you happened to own a 6.5 or 8’ bed PU and had to drive it around in the city or any congested areas (packed parking lots)
@@AJourneyOfYourSoul you are mostly correct when you compare the original compact single cab pickups from the 70’s thru the 90’s. But besides the pickups growing exponentially since those original minis, the super cab/king cab configuration became quite popular which also added more length…..and soon after these models truck brands did tons of additional focus groups which showed building 4 door trucks is what the majority of truck buyers wanted. I looked at the smallest current pickups with just the super cab configuration (the Ford Ranger and GMC Canyon)….both these trucks are 11” and 13” longer than the Maverick. Not much longer to some but those extra inches mean a big difference to millions who live, work, and play in more congested areas and may not have a big garage or driveway area to park a bigger truck.
Wow no wondering no one buys the ridgeline. The truck market needs to return to some sane prices, and people need to stop taking out 10yr loans to afford these $50k trucks to drive the prices back to reality
@@gothops154 I see ridgelines all over the place. and they arent all 40k. but yes, they are $$ , all the midsize pickups are though. better off buying a used full sized
As a 2nd time subaru baja owner I agree. You have never owned it or a honda odyssey. I'm proud to say my mom's 2014 odyssey would probably skull drag your truck, and my wives mom's 2008 would probably also. Throw that in a truck and I'd call it good. Gm is shit. Dodge is shit. Gm can't even find the time to bolt it's ac condenser to the truck frame ffs. And the Maverick is a compact. Like an s10. Or taco. You know before they got big as hell. If you don't want a small truck don't buy it. Don't bitch about variety.
I'd love to buy one if they made an ext cab version. Funny how they can make it in Mexico and bring it over but yet we can't get the Chevy Tornado, VW Saveiro or baby ram pickups.
The reason is those (as well as the Fiat Toro / Ram 1K the Maverick may compete against) have been made with 3rd World countries in mind (not up to snuff crash test and anti pollution standards) but this Maverick and the Hyundai Santa Cruz are being made with US standards in mind. Also there's the 25% "Chicken Tax" on Imported Trucks the GM, VW and Stellantis units (all coming from Brazil and none built in MX*) would have to pay if imported. Only MX manufacture can circumvent that tax. * AFAIK the only one made in MX is the even smaller Ram 700 / Fiat Strada and that has an "even higher hill" to climb for US acceptance, as the market may deem it TOO SMALL
@@syxepop I know about the chicken tax. Just trying to figure out why Nissan, Dodge, Chevy and Ford can make those cute little cargo vans but not a small pickup. They can use the same frame, engine and chassis. It's not like people who buy the mini trucks are going to haul a boat. If the Mavrick is going to be a 4 door, then it's will just be like the Explorer Sport Trac. I think it didn't sell well because the bed wasn't big enough. Maybe 1 bail of hay and a saddle.
@@shawnn6926 - actually the SporTrac demise was much more about the size (pretty much the same as the Honda Ridgeline, but RWD) and the TIMING. Today there's a SMALL BUT QUANTIFYABLE DEMAND for ('90's size) small pickup trucks. Besides, Ford didn't offer in the '90s in USDM (they did overseas) a 4-door Ranger as is the case today, so the demand was for SMALLER instead of larger pickups. Also, there's the SECRET-RECIPE CAFE to consider. Since FOOTPRINT is the consideration it incentivizes building LARGER CARS AND TRUCKS as long as they get the fuel millage. Pickups are now A BIG CONTRIBUTOR ON CAFE, as it wasn't in the '90s.
@@XA351GT - actually Ford made a compact sedan of that name BEFORE Top Gun was even thought of. Later on Ford of Europe made a (Suzuki Vitara-sized) SMALL SUV with that name. Maybe Ford could afFORD a limited edition mid range model (paying the IP owner) after the movies...
Great review. It’s a shame this so-called small Ford pickup truck will only be sold as a 4 door quad cab. Not everyone wants a 4 door truck. An extended cab with a longer bed would be a better option for those who don’t need or want a 4 door mini pickup truck with a very short bed. You might as well call it a car. Ford should build an extended cab version of this new Maverick pickup like the old Ranger they used to build, that was a great truck.
The thing I didn't knew about the Maverick was the use of the FOCUS-based 160's hp NA-2.0L I4 (also used in the upline EcoSport mini crossover as in the Transit Connect) rather than the 180hp EB'd 1.5L 3-pot. As the engine is an OLDER TECHNOLOGY it makes it CHEAPER TO MAKE and (as a NA unit) MORE PALATABLE TO SMALL BUSINESSES for VERY LIGHT DUTY USE (just like the Transit Connect).
As somebody who daily drives a 2005 Ranger, I love seeing a true compact pickup come back. When I heard the Ranger was returning I was super excited, but it’s nothing like the compact Ranger pickup we used to know. The Maverick really caught my attention at first, but hearing that it’s potentially either FWD or AWD and not 4x4 or RWD, it’s very disappointing. Also hearing it’s potentially exclusive to the higher trims and the manual could only be the lower trim, is disappointing. I hope for the sake of sales that this is 4x4 or AWD in all trim levels and offers the manual in all trims. I guess we’ll see on Tuesday (June 8).
This isn’t a new design people. Ford has been building this design senses 2001 it was called a Ford Sport trac the first 4 door mid size truck. This new name maverick is pretty cool though and the foot longer bed is something the Ford sport trac owners have be asking Ford to do every sense they first made this design.
Historically, Ford used the Maverick name on two SUVs in the past. Specifically, for the European, badge-engineered Nissan Terrano, and the Ford Escape.
The much larger, American version of the Suzuki MightyBoy Ute! I am looking forward to getting one as my replacement daily driver/UberX vehicle this fall. Time to visit my local Ford dealer for availability info... Edit: I just visited my Ford dealer. Their response was Whut???
Odds are they are playing “dumb” because they can’t legally talk about it yet. The reveal should be ANY day now. And it will likely hit dealers this fall. (September, October) at the latest
@@devinbender8428 I hope that is the case. I remember way back when Mahindra promised to sell a diesel-powered mid-size pickup in the US, then screwed the entire dealer chain out of their investment by canceling the project Usually my Ford dealer is pretty helpful and knowing about stuff. Their response besides "Whut?" was the fact that the current ECU chip shortage is putting the ki-bash on F-series sales and deliveries. There have been sporadic line stoppage at the Claycomo F-Series assembly line near us. Even GM is running out of product to sell. One can hope that the smaller engined SUVs and the C1 platform is not having ECU chipset problems... That may be enough to bring the Maverick "Ute" forward a bit sooner...
as a new driver looking for something cheap i perked up when i heard sub-20,000. then i heard it's a unibody and drives like a car and is basically a ford ridgeline. i can't see a company using a maverick for its workers, even if it's sub-$20000 per unit, what i'm seeing is mostly 2-door f150s and ram 1500 classic tradesmen
I get it, but I think not everybody who buys an F-150 uses it at 100% of its capacity 100% of the time. But I agree about the 2-door thing, Ford should come with a regular cab version.
@@kdrapertrucker the f-series is also 30,000 +, a company is going to want something cheaper and making a very cheap small truck that can be used for work as so many advantages, they should have tried something like this but they shouldn't have made it a unibody
I once drove a Ford Ranger ever since I first got my driver's license, and I've always wanted to drive the 4th-gen Ranger ever since it was released. Now, I'm stumped whether I should test drive either the Ranger or the Maverick.
You can test drive the Ranger now, but the Maverick isn't out yet. So go drive the Ranger, and when the Maverick comes out, you can make up your mind. Just my 2 cents.
I have a 2020 Ranger and I LOVE IT I travel around my city for work and the gas mileage is pretty amazing, it handles great in the elements and had a sport feel would highly reccomend
It depends on if you want to park in the garage. The new Ranger (almost the same size as an 80's F150) will be a tight fit. The Mavrick should be the same size as an Escort, maybe. If they make an ext cab, AWD I'll sell my Tacoma.
Agree but the Ridgeline is priced in the high $30Ks so I like that Ford is looking at a sub $20k unibody truck. Still it’s hard to see Ford outdoing Honda in features and comfort, plus the Ridgeline has that awesome trunk under the truck bed.
If you know anything about the former US Maverick compact sedan from the 1970's, its' topline model was called the GRABBER.. I think this name can be better applied here since it doesn't require FULL-SPEC OFFROAD BITS like the Raptor name would. That one would be a top-spec AWD* model with a 250hp EB'd 2.0L I4, which already the Escape and the soon-to-be-sold Bronco Sport offer. This engine (either made in US or ES) has already been used by several larger apps, such as the Taurus sedan and last gen Explorer FWD-based crossover, so its' R&D cost may have been already paid over and be CHEAPER TO MAKE. * the AWD system would have to be LESS SOPHISTICATED than the one the Bronco Sport would offer and the BSp can be later upspecd with a FWD-based version of the EB'd 2.7L V6, like the Fusion ST had.
hopefully they'll have 2 door options. I personally prefer 4 doors, but they shouldn't limit it to only 4 doors. Some people want a single cab truck. But we'll have to wait and see. Glad to see Ford finally not only make a smaller truck, but have an affordable option as well.
@@realtalk4real243 exactly. Not everyone needs or want the extra row of seats. Some are perfectly content with having only 2 doors & using that extra space for the bed
I bought a base S-10 for $6000 back in 1986. It didn't come with AC or radio but I loved the truck. I would definitely look at buying one of these if it they could keep it below $20,000.
I had a 2003 S10 ext cab 4WD. Man I miss that little truck. I drive a '17 Tacoma now and it feels too big in the lanes. I don't know how these guys with full size 4 door trucks park and drive in the city.
I had one and ran it for 18 hard years. treated it right but used it as a truck and loaded it up to the limit a lot. It finally rotted out too much to keep fixing, so got a dodge dakota. WOW what a POS, not half the truck that S-10 was. I Miss that S-10 :(.
@@motorheadscom My parents both had a Maverick in the mid 70s, they were both about a 1970 or 71. They were both garbage. Ford has some great designs but always fall short in quality. I've owned several Fords over the years and every one of them was garbage. However, Chevy and Dodge are also known for making garbage.
It was a car, true. But it was also a rebadged Nissan Terrano and Ford Escape in Europe, so there is some kind of logic behind the name. The Mustang is now also an electric SUV, and people seem to be mostly over it.
Would be cool to start seeing more compact diesel trucks na v6’s and straight 6’s. I know that here in california small pickups are frequently used in the trades
Take the ranger out now....drop the turbo..still have 200 hp. And be 3000. Dollars cheaper...manual trans. NoT JUST A 10 SPEED 4000.00 MORE OFF THE PRICE....THERE YOU GO ... A RANGER BODY ON FRAME.[ THE WAY A TRUCK SHOULD BE] 20.K.....OR LESS! IT COULD BE DONE.... ID BUY ONE NOW ! TO REPLACE MY 91 RANGER.....🙂 the BEST TRUCK I'VE EVER OWNED. DO .DO.JUST DO. YOU'RE WELCOME.
Cool video. Though what is with these companies reusing models on totally different class of vehicles. That was a compact 70's car at least it's still a compact though a truck. Although apparently we now need an suv or truck to survive.
Like the Chevy Blazer made in Mexico and not truck like the Blazer, A CUV truck by Ford, bring back the good old days S10 by Chevy and Ranger by Ford as a small truck.
Right, Ford and Chevy have gone all four-door mania because of Jeep and Japan, hey guys some still want a 4 by 4 short bed big truck for offroad and two-door little truck for auto stores and off-road, and a little two-door SUV for off-roading, hey Chevy come with back the S10 and Blazer two-door Zr2 and sport based on it. And Ford a two-door Maverick.
They discontinued the old ranger because it didn’t bring in $$ They lost many young buyers and old who would have continued to buy ford. They lost me!!! Now they are trying to get something to compete with the Ridgeline! FYI my last 2 Silverado leases without employee plan were $100 cheaper than the ford with employee plan! Cyaaaa Ford!!!
$38k is NOT cheap. What happened to the under $20k numbers? They should have a stripped straight pickup for a decent price that is under $20 and quit adding all the bs for the "perfect" price point. Wrecks the whole reason for having a "cheap" alternative if it isn't cheap. Booooh!
Smaller is GOOD, 4-doors is GOOD. Open trunk flatbed and tailgate is GOOD. Towing capacity is GOOD. I don't care that it's not based on a true truck frame. I will visit a Ford dealer as soon as one is on display.
Not a fan of these small (trucks). I tow a camper and other stuff so these would be a no go for me forever. Yes, they may be more affordable, but I don't like being cramped in a small cab. I understand they may work great for some people who don't tow stuff and just mainly use it for a quick home depot trip, but even though they are more money, you get bang for your buck and way more use out of a full size. You can do so much more with them. That's just my view. I honestly will never own one of these baby trucks. Full size for life! Truck gang!
Just another SUV not a truck, especially not an off road truck. A 4' bed...laughable. The real ford ranger (not that POS remake) wa a useful truck for reasonable money. And they turned out to be reliable and economical to run. This new truck ha ha ha :( :(
2 liter 4 cylinder pick-up with less than 200 hp. Ford hasn't been listening. They pissed everyone off with the decision to go with the 6 cylinder in the Raptor and missed the mark with the new Bronco (they should be ashamed to put the bronco name on that 1.5 liter wimpmobile), so instead of listening to customers, they are going to make a new weak-up truck. There's no point in a pick-up like that. You won't be able to haul or tow anything with it. Might as well get an Eco Sport and call it a day.
Disappointed-unibody truck it won't be but a car that looks like a truck. If I wanted that I would choose a more stylish unibody front wheel drive car with a bed. Ford is all wrong for the great nameplate for the iconic Maverick nameplate. So sad.
Why is it that they can't just put the ranger that they discontinued in 2011 back into production? They sold a ton of them and i guarantee people would buy it even though its older-looking.
Ford already has a small truck, the Ranger. If you are bringing back the Maverick, make it the same as it's original namesake; a smaller, cheaper alternative to the Mustang.
So it makes sense ford willuse the older cheaper platform. This is what they do best; disappoint. They hit a homerun with Bronco and Bronco sport, but the cheap truck will get cheap transit motors and platform.
What the hell is wrong with the car companies, are all the names used up. The Mustang E is an electric SUV not a sports car, give it a new name. The Maverick truck has zero in common with the old Maverick car, give it a new name.
"Small trucks keep getting bigger... WHY! I need a small truck with 4 doors to get around the backwoods. Not some oversized wannabe that chugs the fuel. Small also means a lighter footprint so not as easy to sink in the mud. I have seen the "new Ranger" and it is too big for me. I'll keep my 25-year-old Ranger for another 100,000 more miles! Besides as my friends like to say... I'm getting a new truck... One-piece at a time!
