Ford Maverick and the small overlanding pickup truck

[ThundahBeagle]

The axles may indeed be tiny, but the optional turbo engine bumps towing to 5k. Pretty big Jon boat.

The only potential problem I see is it having a single speed transfer case. No low range. (This probably comes right back to the CV axles)


Ford is going to sell these as fast as they can build them though. 40 mpg pickup starting at 20k, hard to argue with for the average weekend Home Depot hero.

Right. The average person in the city, going to get supplies at home depot, or going camping at state parks, big grocery shopping, kayaking, mountain biking.Things most guys with more capable pickups do, which dont need all the extra weight of a body on frame and dont tow, and want to be able to park in the city.

And with it being hybrid, it will likely develop it's own niche of buters

 

[ThundahBeagle]

Yup chopped up mini van is what I've taken from it

The Honda Ridgeline does not have much market share, but has enough that they funded and produced a second generation. This is currently unique as the only hybrid "pickup" offering, so maybe they are onto something.

Not for me, though. I'd prefer the Ranger.

 

[ThundahBeagle]

I agree. Sorry, but I will always associate the name Maverick with a smaller, cheaper, less powerful version of the Mustang. Which honestly, wouldn't be a bad thing right now.

View attachment 201328

My neighbor had a Maverick when I was a kid in the 1970's. A nice darker blue. Cool little car.

I have to say, I'm a little put off by car manufacturers lately taking iconic nameplates and turning them into something totally different:

- Chevy Blazers now a crossover
- original Jeep Gladiator was a big pickup truck. new Jeep Gladiator is really a 4 door Scrambler
- Ford Mustang Mach E. Ok with it being electric, but an SUV mustang?!

 

[Shakes355]

Can someone here tell me why FWD is worse than RWD?

 

[LostWoods]

Can someone here tell me why FWD is worse than RWD?

For carrying payload, you want weight over the drive axle. Know how your steering can feel lighter when weight in the bed unloads the front suspension a bit? Same thing can happen in a FWD truck only it's potentially a loss of traction too.

 

[ThundahBeagle]

For carrying payload, you want weight over the drive axle. Know how your steering can feel lighter when weight in the bed unloads the front suspension a bit? Same thing can happen in a FWD truck only it's potentially a loss of traction too.

This is true, of course. However, this truck is not meant for any serious payload, and that's ok.

Front wheel drive will have better traction when empty and not using 4 wheel drive, than a regular pickup will have because regular rwd/4wd pickups have more tendency to fishtail in wet weather if they are not in 4x4 mode. This truck wont have such a pronounced tendency

This Maverick is not not for the guy who carries cordwood or landscape blocks every day. Or even every 3rd day. This truck is meant to have the bed empty 80% of the time, and the remaining time it is for a weekend warrior to carry kayaks or bicycles, or 10 bags of mulch so the interior doesn't get dirty.

The city or suburban person doing house chores (not construction or big home improvement) on the weekend, like picking up shrubs and small trees for the yard, or tiles for the kitchen, or a person doing grocery delivery or meals on wheels or something - they will like this thing.

Look at the old Honda Element. If I recall correctly, that was used for florist and fast food delivery in Japan, but was marketed as a family mover here in the US. Theres a niche for this and its growing. It's not my niche but its there.

 

[Shakes355]

Sorry for the open ended question, but I wanted to give a space for differing opinions. Without stepping on anyone's toes here, the bottom line is that unibody trucks are not popular in the states (yet). But they have been sold for years in world markets to great reception (the fiat strada comes to mind.) Front wheel drive has proven to be: more stable, more efficient, cheaper to produce, and just as capable for everything except heavy loading than traditional rwd.

Body-on-frame construction and rear wheel drive live best for heavy loads (payload and towing) which the midsized and compact market are not, nor should be, playing to. For overlanding purposes, you don't necessarily need to tow 7k pounds. Nor do you absolutely need low range. Overlanding and off-roading often overlap but do not have to. Talk to the Subaru guys.

But AWD, 25+mpg, and 1500# of payload for $25k? Yeah, you can definitely overland with that. Buy what fits your style.

[For reference: Honda has the Ridgeline. Fiat/Chrysler has the Strada, Ram 700 and the Toro. And Chevy has the Tornado. Heck even Renault has the Oroch.]

 

[LostWoods]

This is true, of course. However, this truck is not meant for any serious payload, and that's ok.

Front wheel drive will have better traction when empty and not using 4 wheel drive, than a regular pickup will have because regular rwd/4wd pickups have more tendency to fishtail in wet weather if they are not in 4x4 mode. This truck wont have such a pronounced tendency

This Maverick is not not for the guy who carries cordwood or landscape blocks every day. Or even every 3rd day. This truck is meant to have the bed empty 80% of the time, and the remaining time it is for a weekend warrior to carry kayaks or bicycles, or 10 bags of mulch so the interior doesn't get dirty.

The city or suburban person doing house chores (not construction or big home improvement) on the weekend, like picking up shrubs and small trees for the yard, or tiles for the kitchen, or a person doing grocery delivery or meals on wheels or something - they will like this thing.

Look at the old Honda Element. If I recall correctly, that was used for florist and fast food delivery in Japan, but was marketed as a family mover here in the US. Theres a niche for this and its growing. It's not my niche but its there.

Yeah I pretty much said the same thing above. It's a trade off either way because what makes towing and and hauling better sacrifices daily driving and of course the inverse as well. AWD makes the best of both worlds provided there's some sort of traction control that will cut power to slipping wheels.

 

[M Rose]

So the inevitable question: what are some thoughts on new small pickups coming back to the US/NA market? I feel like it would be a great weekend overlanding rig. Haven’t seen anything about departure, approach, or break over angles. I do know it’s being offered with Ford’s FX4 off road package. So what do y’all think?

I started Overlanding with a 1979 Ford Courier. It went almost everywhere I ever wanted it to go. I made it further than all my friends driving souped up mud trucks, and was only bested by a 1972 VW Beetle… so I think it should do fine.

 

[Boostpowered]

I started Overlanding with a 1979 Ford Courier. It went almost everywhere I ever wanted it to go. I made it further than all my friends driving souped up mud trucks, and was only bested by a 1972 VW Beetle… so I think it should do fine.

OK I'll bite, I don't believe for a minute that one of these or this
Was able to go where this cant.

 

[Cypress]

Nice to see someone thinking about the small truck market. I'll have to look into these when it comes time to replace my service trucks. I was thinking about the Ford Lightning but one of these may work as well or better. The fuel savings alone would pay for the trucks.

My daily is a Ridgeline. It is an awesome trucklet. Tows my 20' boat without issue. Hauls everything I need it to. And as a bonus, it burns a lot less gas and spends a lot less time in the shop than the Silverado it replaced. It is also surprisingly capable off-road if you are careful. It has a lot of unprotected bits underneath to be careful of. It won't be the perfect overland rig, but it's much better than not going anywhere. Mine just rolled over 230k and still runs and drives perfectly. It is hilarious how much hate these things generate from the "truck" crowd. I'm sure Ford's version will too.

 

[M Rose]

OK I'll bite, I don't believe for a minute that one of these View attachment 201582 or this View attachment 201583
Was able to go where this cant.
View attachment 201584

Actually that Chevy was exactly what the other trucks looked like … and yes they didn’t make it to my truck… they were too heavy, and had to much HP to make it back into the frozen soup… a big 4wd osculating tractor had to pull us all out… minus the bug… it floated on top of the freezing mud… actually the story is quite famous around here still told at my old high school to this day.

 

[Downs]

I was intrigued enough to go "build" one on Ford's website. There's not enough meat in the FX4 package to make me upgrade to the XLT package, no LSD, no Locker, just skids and drive modes it looks like. I built out a base model with Ecoboost (this deletes the Hybrid portion of the drivetrain as well), and all the options I wanted and it came out to 26,400. Not bad for a brand new off the lot truck considering todays prices. Hell that might be the single lowest cost Ford model, I'd have to do more research.

IMO this covers what the vast majority of pickup truck owners today really need. Most people use their pickups as big sedans anyway. The unibody part doesn't scare me. I'm driving around in a 26 year old Unibody SUV as my daily driver now. Still solid.

For it's uses and capacity, towing it'll be plenty strong enough. I doubt they'll be blowing out CV axles on a regular basis like someone suggested since that doesn't seem to be an issue with the current Escape platform.





And then a shot of the FX4 package contents.

 

[LostWoods]

IMO this covers what the vast majority of pickup truck owners today really need. Most people use their pickups as big sedans anyway. The unibody part doesn't scare me. I'm driving around in a 26 year old Unibody SUV as my daily driver now. Still solid.

We all damn well know that a pickup is rarely about need or the Ridgeline would be the #1 selling truck in America.

 

[ThundahBeagle]

Nice to see someone thinking about the small truck market. I'll have to look into these when it comes time to replace my service trucks. I was thinking about the Ford Lightning but one of these may work as well or better. The fuel savings alone would pay for the trucks.

My daily is a Ridgeline. It is an awesome trucklet. Tows my 20' boat without issue. Hauls everything I need it to. And as a bonus, it burns a lot less gas and spends a lot less time in the shop than the Silverado it replaced. It is also surprisingly capable off-road if you are careful. It has a lot of unprotected bits underneath to be careful of. It won't be the perfect overland rig, but it's much better than not going anywhere. Mine just rolled over 230k and still runs and drives perfectly. It is hilarious how much hate these things generate from the "truck" crowd. I'm sure Ford's version will too.

I like this body style. Reminds me of a mini, unibody Avalanche. I like it better than the new Ridgeline, although I hear the new ridgeline is mor capable. Too bad it looks more car-like.

By the way...since when is unibody totally frowned upon in Overlanding - or even off-roading? What? Nobody ever heard of the Jeep Cherokee XJ?

It was unibody. Sure, it was springs on solid axles, too, but it was unibody. So, if you dont do serious rock crawling or serious hauling, what's wrong with a Ridgeline or new Maverick.

By the way, I agree with the person who said the new Maverick should have been called the Courier. That's its lineage and that's a good purpose for it. I see sole proprietors doing contracted Amazon delivery out of sedans. I'm sure the Mav would be even better for it if they had a tonneau cover for it

 

[LostWoods]

I like this body style. Reminds me of a mini, unibody Avalanche. I like it better than the new Ridgeline, although I hear the new ridgeline is mor capable. Too bad it looks more car-like.

By the way...since when is unibody totally frowned upon in Overlanding - or even off-roading? What? Nobody ever heard of the Jeep Cherokee XJ?

It was unibody. Sure, it was springs on solid axles, too, but it was unibody. So, if you dont do serious rock crawling or serious hauling, what's wrong with a Ridgeline or new Maverick.

By the way, I agree with the person who said the new Maverick should have been called the Courier. That's its lineage and that's a good purpose for it. I see sole proprietors doing contracted Amazon delivery out of sedans. I'm sure the Mav would be even better for it if they had a tonneau cover for it

The XJ was an exception because it was more an integrated frame than a unibody structure you'll find in most modern vehicles. I mean the rails protruded like 4-5" off the bottom of the tub so it might as well have been a frame.

I think the big problem with unibody is that you have no room under them for traditional 4x4 things. I know someone will call one out but I don't recall any unibody anything in the past 20 years that has a true part-time 4x4 like a Tacoma or Jeep... only the AWD with reduction modes like the current Jeep CUVs. They work for light and moderate stuff (which again, still enough for most people) but the ceiling is much lower than a true BOF truck or SUV when it comes to raw capability and where you can get with mods.

 

[egilbe]

truck gang

 

[Boostpowered]

A quick search of ( Ford escape cv axle) pulls up enough pages of people talking about it to tell me that there is a problem with both the cv half shafts and the transmissions so if they are indeed using those parts then there is a problem to look out for.

The unibody part of it is no problem unless you wreck it I've seen plenty of old Cherokee perform. The problem Is it has ifs on the rear like a mini van or a corvette

On the road or track this will probably be pretty good at handling, off road not so much unless they are actually gonna put some Baja and koh buggy long travel ifs on it and a transmission that will last.
Consider yourself warned.

In the end though it is your money and I don't really care get whatever you want, there won't be one in my fleet though. I don't like the mechanics of it or the looks.

 

[ThundahBeagle]

A quick search of ( Ford escape cv axle) pulls up enough pages of people talking about it to tell me that there is a problem with both the cv half shafts and the transmissions so if they are indeed using those parts then there is a problem to look out for.

The unibody part of it is no problem unless you wreck it I've seen plenty of old Cherokee perform. The problem Is it has ifs on the rear like a mini van or a corvette

On the road or track this will probably be pretty good at handling, off road not so much unless they are actually gonna put some Baja and koh buggy long travel ifs on it and a transmission that will last.
Consider yourself warned.

In the end though it is your money and I don't really care get whatever you want, there won't be one in my fleet though. I don't like the mechanics of it or the looks.

I dont imagine this is meant for offroad really at all.

Regarding an internet search of bad issues with the Escape, I dont refute that, but the Silverados and Sierra 8 speed transmission has it's own scary past as does the AFM engine, if forums are to be the high water mark. Granted they are a much tougher truck, but they are built to be. The Tahie now as an independent rear suspension, too. I'm sad about that but I bet I'd still go camping in one, if I could get past the $50,000 to $80,000 it takes to buy one

 

[roots66]

Remember when every Orkin truck was a Ranger? Well, Ford lost all that market when they dropped the Ranger in the US. I think this will be aimed at the commercial side as well to try and get that share back.