Maverick vs Ranger - Which is the Better Small Ford Pickup? [Truck King Review]

[Mike]

The bed sits on a frame. They are discontinued and lifted on 31”s would get you laughed out of any body on frame lifting discussions.

I think we can agree the Ranger and Mav are purpose built and comparing the interiors and ride and step in height is somewhat idiotic as their purpose is different.

Sponsored

 

[dalola]

Again. It’s a stupid comparison. The Ranger is body on frame and designed to carry much heavier loads and tow larger weights and also is adept at off roading.

the Mav is unitized and is basically a grocery getter truck. Which is fine. That’s what I’d prefer as a dd

No one is saying they are the same. Just because subjects are different doesn't mean they aren't comparable. in fact, comparing is actually what brings the differences to light. You can also compare a Mav to an F150, or a Mav to a Mustang.

Seems like a simple concept, no?

 

[Mike]

Sure but they’re mostly comparing superficial things like step in height and interior etc. and not capabilities

complaining about the ride and height of a body on frame is just kinda silly. That’s the price of admission.

 

[dalola]

Sure but they’re mostly comparing superficial things like step in height and interior etc. and not capabilities

complaining about the ride and height of a body on frame is just kinda silly. That’s the price of admission.

Fair enough, but it's important to separate the opinions of the author from the facts of the comparison. What's important to one may not be to another, and so on. It's up to each to prioritize what is important to them. And there is subjective comparison as well, such as styling....some like this, some like that, but the fact remains they are different, and each individual can choose their preference.

 

[dbmurray]

Yeah great business model. Offer a discount on something you don't have. They probably hope they can switch you over to an ecosport or something.

Vic Bailey Ford in Spartanburg, SC has a long row of F150s on their lot. I didn't count them, but there must have been at least 30. I saw them with my own eyes last week, but they only show 12 on their website include 4-5 marked "not yet in stock."

I don't get it, honestly...

Why is Ford inventory always out of date both through Ford.com and dealer websites, or why stock is under-reported, etc.

The Maverick I was finally able to look at on a Friday back in January before placing my order was being picked up by a day or two later by a customer who had already bought it. It was nearly two weeks later before that vehicle showed up on Ford.com as being "in stock" at that dealer.

It's baffling that a company the size of Ford is incapable of accurately show available inventory on items that cost 10s of thousands of dollars, yet I can get a notification on my smartphone within minutes after USPS delivers a $15 box of Cheez-its from Amazon....

It makes. no. sense.

 

[cavemold]

Not fan of the current ranger the 2023 ranger looks better , obviously fuel economy
is going be on maverick side. If you need higher truck when driving then the ranger is better choice at higher price of course. The payload isnt huge difference surprisingly The ranger better comparison would be Tacoma or Colorado. With the gas economy right now i feel like the maverick is better choice for small truck. If your looking 5th wheel hauler i would look at f150 over a ranger as well.

 

[cavemold]

comparing 2022 vs 2023 if you wanted ranger id wait for 2023 ranger. Just not fan of front end of the 2022 ranger

 

[Maverickman74]

The bed sits on a frame. They are discontinued and lifted on 31”s would get you laughed out of any body on frame lifting discussions.

I think we can agree the Ranger and Mav are purpose built and comparing the interiors and ride and step in height is somewhat idiotic as their purpose is different.

So are you saying a comanche isnt a truck , or are you ignoring the fact that a unibody(a bunch of stamped sheet metal and spot welds) has a much higher payload than a ranger(2200lb vs 1860max)? Much like the Maverick you have to lift it 3 inches to fit 31s on it without fender trimming. Its also far more capable offroad than a modern ranger or f150 with 31s because its light and small like the Maverick, well that and great flex and solid axles. Im just saying a truck is a truck is a truck and that comparing them especially when they have such similar interior dimension and a open cargo box is totally valid. Honestly Im going from shopping a 4 door bronco, but realized that the Maverick had more cargo capacity. I didnt shop a ranger because I didnt want to pay near bronco money for only 1 improved category, its towing capacity.

This pile of coconuts and sugar cane is now as high as the top of my windshield. I still drive over it every day at work, often in 2wd. Today I had put it in 4 to climb down it after I unloaded.

 

[Mike]

I’m saying it’s not a true unitized vehicle. The bed sits on the frame. And if that design worked so well there would be others copying it or revisiting it. Gladiator anyone ?

nope. True unitized these days can’t match overall capabilities of body on frame. And body on frame can’t match the road manners of unitized. Their built for different purposes.

 

[jmav]

Why would they do an AWD Ranger? As far as I know the Sierra Denali is only body on frame truck to ever offer AWD and it was discontinued for lack of sales.

There were AWD S10 Blazers, Olds Bravadas, Escalades, Jimmys just off the top of my head.

 

[FESTUS]

I dont think the Mav looks like a car with a bed . IMO it looks like a truck no matter what platform its on. Ford hit it out of the park with the Maverick IMO

 

[Mike]

There were AWD S10 Blazers, Olds Bravadas, Escalades, Jimmys just off the top of my head.

SUV’s

Sierra Denali is the only body on frame pickup I can recall trying to market AWD in place of 4WD and that was because GM figured Denali owners were street drivers.

Discontinued for lack of interest

 

[Connect]

To be fair, I have not yet sat inside a Maverick, however based on my time sitting in the ranger I was really disappointed in it. aside from being a little wider in the cab, it seems as if the Maverick cab is roomier for legroom, headroom and to me that is more important that better towing numbers.

 

[Connect]

Again. It’s a stupid comparison. The Ranger is body on frame and designed to carry much heavier loads and tow larger weights and also is adept at off roading.

the Mav is unitized and is basically a grocery getter truck. Which is fine. That’s what I’d prefer as a dd

Maybe you should watch this video and educate yourself about the carrying heavier loads. But you are right it can tow more.

 

[Connect]

I’m saying it’s not a true unitized vehicle. The bed sits on the frame. And if that design worked so well there would be others copying it or revisiting it. Gladiator anyone ?

nope. True unitized these days can’t match overall capabilities of body on frame. And body on frame can’t match the road manners of unitized. Their built for different purposes.

True and that's why the Ranger will likely continue to sell in small numbers. I hate to break it to you but 90% of people don't use their trucks to haul heavy loads or tow things. So for 90% of the people who want a truck but don't really 'need' a truck these comparisons are helpful. It doesn't matter if you think they are stupid or not, your welcome to it, but continuing to dig in on something you don't understand just proves the point.

Sponsored