Always happy to see a new upload from you. I don't own a Maverick yet, but I am planning on buying one within a year. Thanks for taking the time to film/upload! Appreciate it. 👍🏼🇺🇸
Hope to see them available. Looks like every single manufacturer has a waiting list for anywhere between 2 and 9 months on their vehicles here in México. I really want that little Maverick with the AWD, but a tremor edition would be perfect, with that locking rear dif, BFG trail terrains or KO2's, special wheels, etc. And that little thing with a tunning that takes it to 270-300hp and 320-350 torque... that would be a very fast and capable little pickup!
not gonna lie, i was expecting like 7-10lbs. 15-22 is crazy to me for a stock motor. im picking one of these up in the spring so this is good content, keep it up!
@@flyjum I was looking to order and they said people that pre ordered are still just now getting theirs, if I ordered today I would be looking at late summer so I'm waiting until the 2023 announcement, might have some revisions and a possible awd hybrid by then available.
The pre-military ad (dependant who saw it) seems the rest of the forces caught up w/ the Marine Corps Poolee Program... 1 year prior to boot, we needed to fulfill pretty strenuous PFT's to be eligible, and I'm glad this is getting adopted by a larger body. Now, back to your regularly scheduled programing...
@@MrBoom50 yes, but sometimes my foot doesn't remember it's supposed to be in eco mode. No matter how efficient you burn the fuel it doesn't stop me from accelerating way more than practical for a few seconds every minute. Also tuning can be related to transmission shift points. Eco mode could change shift points to keep you in higher gears vs sport mode could do its best to keep you in the power band for max acceleration, and a tow mode could focus on max torque. I'd be really interested to find out if you see any change in mpg after getting this tune either way.
@@MrBoom50 that’s what a detune is. the concept of detuning engines is usually for work trims and commercial use, to increase MPG and reduce wear on an engine that sees heavy Loads and long hours thus making it more efficient (ex:fleet use) A 350 small block paired with a 4L80e in the ChevyExpress made less power than the 350 with the same trans in the Tahoe despite being in a heavy duty chassis compared to the tahoes 1/2ton chassis. The Van was more efficient than the Tahoe when factoring constantly higher payloads. It was also more efficient while towing even with more curb weight and the aero of a lunch box, “but the Tahoe could tow more overall to be fair” The 3.5 Ecoboost In the Transit makes 310hp and averages 16 mpg with shit panel van aero and fast connecting rods, while the ecoboost F150 makes 375hp and averages 18mpg, even with forged parts, better cooling, and weighing a whole 1000lbs less than the panel van! the raptor makes like 470hp and is averaging 15 mpg in the real world,. the only BIG difference mechanically for the 3 trucks is in the raptor, the rest is all tune.
225whp stock is really good considering its an AWD truck which has a decent amount of driveline loss. Turboback exhaust and a nice intake with a good tune it might make 275whp or so on 93 octane. It would probably outrun a stock 5.0L F150 they run mid 14s or so if I remember right.
@@MrBoom50 that's nuts! I don't think I've seen a short box F-150 with the 5.0 up here in Vancouver, Canada. But I've always thought that would be the ultimate sleeper. Kind of the true (although discreet) successor to the lightning. Do you have any videos of that truck?
I'd be surprised if the computer was putting any power to the rear wheels in 4th gear. This is a part time AWD system, putting power to the back when its slipping only.
Yeah, the stock maverick hybrid and Ecoboost both ran 15s, which is very impressive, especially for that hybrid. As someone who's ordering the hybrid, I'm happy to see it has a fair amount of kick to it.
To be honest, I not big on Fords besides Thunderbirds, Rangers, and Broncos. I have to say, I would totally own a Maverick if I could get the ecoboost AWD
Would appear to be making more than advertised. Nice! That, or your Maverick is extremely healthy and happy. I know our 2016 Escape Ecoboost gained power and fuel efficiency after 8k miles.
Advertised is flywheel numbers, if you take parasitic drag/loss into acount from the numbers mine made at the tire stock. Fords numbers are pretty spot on 🤙🤙
Hey Mr boom that's a great video that you show about putting in the extra lights and stuff I mean top notch and professional I just have a few quick questions for you when you put on the blinker control the lights go yellow yellow and then when they hit the turn signal do they switch them to White or do they go still keep yellow and the other thing question I had for you is are you going to do anything with the fog lights down on the truck today some but the other guys are on the channel you without saying their names they posted that they put them on they look pretty good but I want to see what you can come up with it do you have any plans and one last question how much would the the small one the light bar be if I wanted to put the buy that for me and put that have that shipped up and I put that on my truck so one more time thank you very much and keep those videos coming buddy great
Nah. Comments like the one you posted are stupid though. When 90% of the views on videos are from folks not subscribed.. a little "reminder" goes a long way.
What was used to "tune" the truck? Also its right on the screen that he is using "estimating dynojet numbers" which means he is most likely lowering the roller weight to "adjust" the numbers to be more like a dynojet. MD dyno's are the easist to manipulate.
So how do they know how to set the correct road load for the test? Did they do a coast down test first to develop the equation? Many don’t realize how important that is.
Especially important for a torque based ECU strategy that dictates desired boost in relation to demanded torque model. This is often times why you may see LESS power and less boost on the dyno, and then take it out on the street and be boosting above the levels you thought you had set on the dyno.
If I had to guess Ford screwed the intercoolers up on these and you'll need better intercooler for any really power stability. Every 2.0ltr I helped build all had extremely small intercoolers.
E30, intake, intercooler, and downpipe should get you max of the stock engine/turbo combination. Im following! On gen1 on the ST with above mods we were able to get 280-290hp on average and 375-400ftlbs of torque.
Let's hope so, can you imagine a Maverick st with 300-350 horsepower? I could see them using either the 2.3, or 2.7 ebs. Would be awesome, I'll stick with the hybrid, but I hope Ford makes a more performance oriented maverick to appeal to consumers such as yourself.
Great looking truck the new Goliath Chevy is a 800hp good ground clearance but nice trucks just a Chevy person like the old gm engines being all are interchangeable easy and simple to work on
@@bradkaberline5828 This video is about the Ford Maverick. Your comment rambles about a GM engine that nobody is going to own, then into ground clearance, then some jibberish about old GM engines. Try talking about one thing at a time, using punctuation, and staying on point.
I mean. We've done minimal tuning and swapped to e30 and made a solid increase and broken into the 13s in the 1/4. If we can hit the 300whp mark I'd be thrilled.
Dealers look at how many times the car has been started after being flashed back to stock. So if a car has 5 starts, obviously it was just flashed back to stock. If it has 300+ starts, that tells them it probably hasn’t been tuned. That’s how they saw my Ford was tuned.
I like how you are showing maverick info which is seriously lacking on RU-vid. BUT MY GUY…. You have to up you game on video production. You videos are so hard to watch sometimes. It’s like my 16 year old son is making a RU-vid video.
Nice video! My only interest in tuning the Maverick is to up the torque which should translate into higher tow capacity. Based on your #’s, any idea how much that would be?
I'm not an expert but I think what's limiting the tow capacity on the Maverick isn't the power available but the unibody construction and probably braking capacity.
@@pob122 it's the tongue weight that's limiting it. If it was sold in Europe, under European legislation it would be able to tow much more (in Europe) because of different tongue weight demands. (Trailer weight is more on center in Europe, in America it's closer to the rear of the vehicle)
@@jensfos Tow ratings are also higher in europe because almost any trailer has surge braking, so vehicles have a standard tow rating for trailers w/o brakes and a much higher one for trailers with brakes. Tongue weight isn't that important as you are supposed to balance your cargo so you won't exceed it. Also a lot of trailers allow to move the axle to different positions.
@@DanielDar13 Yes, but in general, the wheels on American trailers are further backwards, because it is much more stable at higher speeds. In Europe, you can't drive more than 80km/h towing, mostly because of the axle positions, but it's a compromise. Higher speeds and less weight, or more weight and lower speeds.
@@MrBoom50 ...one more...where'd u get that nice blue fitting that goes across the grill ? me ? 'sposed to take delivery on my HPR Lariat somewhere btwn 12/22-12/28. thnx again !
@@MrBoom50 I retract my statement, I thought 220hp was the rated power for the maverick, turns out it's 250. I recently tuned my golf TDI 4motion 150hp and it made 154 eng hp and 101 wheel hp stock. (182,4 eng hp and 125.5 wheel hp tuned, with 421nm or 310.5 ib ft) Ca 50hp is lost from the flywheel to the wheels on mine, with a similar four wheel drive system, so the fact that you only lost about 30 is impressive, if that Dyno is accurate.
@MrBoom_5.0 what are the specs on your 20" wheels? Are you running the same width and offset all the way around? Appreciate the content and the pioneering that you are doing on this new model...especially for those like me who are waiting for their maverick to arrive.
Stop with the Dynojet Vs Mustang Dyno shit. I have customers bring me tuned vehicles with a Mustang Dyno sheet in hand. Always saying the same thing." It would be higher on a DynoJet". BS, the first I did was three pulls on a DynoJet to compare. Always with in a few either way. It would depend on the temp's, humidity and atmosphere at the time of testing. Also what correction factor was used. Both are good a Dyno to use for testing and tuning. Any good tuner will be able to work with either one. Nice truck you have. I think they will be a big sales hit for Ford. Good luck with it.
Yes a tuner can work with either one. Dynos ultimately are just a tuning tool. The numbers provided by then should be taken as such. Its not news the mustang dyno loads differently then a dynojet, or even eddy current and superflow dynos
@@MrBoom50 yes sir understood, but they have a good history with the 2.3 ecoboost on the mustang.i don't think the cpu perimeters wouldn't be much different.btw thanks for the vid
It's dirt cheap vehicle.... the more shit ford adds the more the price goes up. If it was a horrible decision ford wouldn't be selling this exponentially faster than they can produce them. 99/100 people aren't gunna give two shits if it had manual mode or not
Ummmmm, Ford made this truck for me and a bunch of other people who aren’t trying to read line it at every stop light. Why would I want to pay for paddle shift?
There is no point to tune the hybrid as it wont result in much if any power gains. Modern cars that are not turbo dont gain much power from tunes unless they have additional mods like full exhaust intake manifolds cams ect. Plus its a hybrid which only runs the gas engine like half the time.
@@flyjum Even with standard aftermarket parts, the gains are extremely small on naturally aspirated. If you get any at all. You'd be talking engine teardown and overhaul. Parts may or may not exist. A hybrid tune might be possible for the electric motor. Finding a shop that is capable of fudging the motors numbers and not create a fire hazard is a different story. I've never heard of one.
