25 MPG for Maverick EcoBoost 2.0L AWD, 1 MPG Less Than FWD

[Down]

LMAO! You did all that math instead of just clicking on the link, that's why you're so oblivious to the point made. Oof...

The link shows the "true cost of ownership calculation" and the reason the number is so high is because it included the cost of depreciation, financing, taxes, insurance, repairs, and maintenance, NOT just the MSRP.

So the point I was trying to make that is completely lost on you if you didn't even click the link is that the difference in fuel cost becomes quite low in comparison to that actual true costs of owning the vehicle. For example, it was well known that a Honda Civic Type R had a virtually identical true cost of ownership to a cheaper Veloster N, despite the fact that the MSRP of the Civic was so much higher. Why? You have to add up all the costs, and depreciation is usually the highest cost you'll pay in owning a vehicle, not fuel usage. The best example of that would be a BMW i3 that uses no fuel, and yet had a really high cost of ownership because it was the highest 5-year depreciation vehicle that BMW sold at 69% depreciation. In the same period of time, a Jeep Wrangler depreciated only 30.9%, meaning that its total cost of ownership despite using so much more fuel than the BMW electric car was much lower.

That is a well informed and pragmatic take on this subject but in case you haven't noticed? Most people are just looking to confirm their decisions, not consider alternative points.

Sponsored

 

[fishinmagician]

Another cost that you aren't factoring in is the cost to replace the batteries when they start to or actually fail - which can go easily into five figures. It's all a matter of when - not if.

You could say the same about replacing the turbo when it fails. Around $3000

 

[stoptothink]

Another cost that you aren't factoring in is the cost to replace the batteries when they start to or actually fail - which can go easily into five figures. It's all a matter of when - not if.

There is an 8yr 100k mile warranty on the hybrid system and even if you go to the dealership to have the battery replaced, it's <$5k. It can be significantly cheaper if you go 3rd party and/or with a refurbished battery (~$2k if you do it yourself, which a friend just did on his prius). Then there is the fact that most hybrids are done with their usable life before ever needing a battery replacement.

There are pros and cons, but it is the cheaper option: period.

 

[Unlikely_Username]

Is it dumb to expect a nice smooth drive experience from the hybrid as a benefit? I mostly drive like a grandpa, I try to keep things smooth, so I’ve been looking forward to eCVT style.

Gotta be honest the math linked here about total ownership cost of mpg difference over the life of the vehicle is compelling. However, since I’m not towing and I’m 80% slow city miles, I guess I’m still in the best use case zone for hybrid.

I'm also looking forward to the eCVT. The 6 speed in my 2012 Fusion gets on my nerves sometimes.

 

[fbov]

The EcoBoost Engine only has an EPA 25 MPG overall rating, 29 MPG Highway and an abysmal 22 MPG for city driving.

Someone should tell the EPA. I'll believe it when I see it here.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/Ford2022.shtml

Anyone worried about HVB replacement is living in 2012. We now have a decade's worth of data on Li-ion batteries that says they are life-of-car parts. Plan on replacing it when you replace the front subframe.

 

[MDRN]

For reference I had a 2019 Escape AWD and it did far worse. The best I could get was 21 mpg combined and 19 city. The best Highway I got out of it was 26 mpg. So for similar size and class this is an improvement. Granted the combined was due to a lot more city driving.

 

[es7129]

What are you getting on about?
Compared to other awd vehicles with a similar MSRP and HP/TQ the Ecoboost efficiency is good.
Heck compare the power to efficiency the Ecoboost is the better motor. Ecoboost gets 25mpg combine with 277TQ compared to 35mpg combined with 155TQ.
If my driving wasn’t 90% city the Ecoboost would’ve been a no brainer.

 

[spyderman01]

this is actually pretty good as it includes the 4k tow with the different gearing and the FX4 with the different wheels and added weight of the skid plates.

 

[clippedwings]

The ugly truth is that your actual mileage depends heavily on how you drive - and where you drive. Another factor, that can’t be altered, is the configuration of your vehicle. That factor has a MAJOR influence on how you drive. If driving a hybrid - unless you’re an idiot, you quickly realize that mashing the pedal to introduce gobs of power is rather pointless. You may then ACCEPT the idea behind what you bought: hot-ridding ain’t gonna cut it. Planning ahead might be a better strategy. If you’re sitting behind 250 HP and a couple of turbos, you will quickly realize the thrill of pressing on that pedal, followed by the ugly reality that it’s costly to do so. Still, it’s nice to have it if you need it. Bottom line: Energy has a cost, and the amount of that cost is directly related to what you ask of the vehicle that is delivering it. A surprising amount of economy is possible IF YOU JUST USE YOUR HEAD INSTEAD OF YOUR FOOT.

 

[bgn]

I get 24-25 combined on a 2002 Honda Accord with a 2.3 liter engine with what was once 150 HP...so it's all relative.

 

[es7129]

The ugly truth is that your actual mileage depends heavily on how you drive - and where you drive. Another factor, that can’t be altered, is the configuration of your vehicle. That factor has a MAJOR influence on how you drive. If driving a hybrid - unless you’re an idiot, you quickly realize that mashing the pedal to introduce gobs of power is rather pointless. You may then ACCEPT the idea behind what you bought: hot-ridding ain’t gonna cut it. Planning ahead might be a better strategy. If you’re sitting behind 250 HP and a couple of turbos, you will quickly realize the thrill of pressing on that pedal, followed by the ugly reality that it’s costly to do so. Still, it’s nice to have it if you need it. Bottom line: Energy has a cost, and the amount of that cost is directly related to what you ask of the vehicle that is delivering it. A surprising amount of economy is possible IF YOU JUST USE YOUR HEAD INSTEAD OF YOUR FOOT.

Depends on the car.
Both my TDI and the wife’s Tuscon hybrid got/get better fuel efficiency if I stop light warrior them, get them up to speed and then cruise.

 

[Ken Cunningham]

Many of us are choosing the Ecoboost 2.0 for reasons other than mpg:

1) Towing - I plan to tow a trailer that is close to 2,000 lbs. (the Hybrid Maverick cannot safely or sensibly do that)

2) AWD - I live in CO and desire the benefit of an AWD vehicle in the winter (the Hybrid Maverick of at least this first model year cannot do that)

In a perfect world it would be nice to ALSO have the approaching 40 mpg highway that the Hybrid gets, but for me the other 2 considerations are MUCH more important. Of course, others' requirements are different, making the decision of which model truck to get come out differently than what I have decided to get.

In my case I will be getting rid of a Crosstrek that has been a wonderful vehicle for me and that gets ~34 mpg highway mileage, but I now need something that can tow, so the ECO 2.0 liter AWD Maverick is a solution. Personally, getting 4,000 towing AND almost 30 mpg is a real win - I have seen nothing else out there at any price point that can tow that much and match that mpg.

ML

Me too. I have a Gasoline 2016 GMC Canyon. I use it as a daily driver, I’m a visiting nurse so I do a lot of miles. I also frequently drive to the Jersey shore from Philly with my family and I’m a Soccer/Field Hockey/Lacrosse Dad so those miles add up quickly. I 4x4 drive on the beach, and we have have paddle boards along with kayaks so a truck bed is nice to have. If I can get close to 30 miles highway and not have to pay a premium for a Diesel engine. I’m all in.
I was considering the hybrid, but Philly gets it share of snowstorms, and recently flooding.

 

[zeketolliver]

In my lay-person opinion, depreciation is less of a concern for a buyer who views a vehicle as a long-term purchase and/or does not typically trade for a new model every 3-5 years.

The cost of ownership for long term buyers is the vehicle cost plus fuel and maintenance costs (oil, tires, tune-ups, cleaning, etc).

If the hybrid Maverick were not an option, I would be ecstatic to own a pick-up that gets a combined 25mpg. As it is, having to pay a minimum of $3k extra on top of getting 12 combined fewer MPG, makes getting anything other than the hybrid a "desperation" move for me.

That said...if I still lived in hilly, rural southern Ohio, an AWD truck that gets 29mpg highway is a no brainer.

Also, my partner and I were talking about the Maverick the other day, and she asked me what my back-up plan is if something happens to my hybrid Maverick order. I replied that an AWD Maverick, but XLT vice Lariat, would be what I buy.

 

[nelsont]

So my Camaro with the 6.2L V8 gets 25 mpg on combined driving. would think the 2.o can do better?? It better or my first Ford will be my last!

 

[brnpttmn]

What are you getting on about?
Compared to other awd vehicles with a similar MSRP and HP/TQ the Ecoboost efficiency is good.
Heck compare the power to efficiency the Ecoboost is the better motor. Ecoboost gets 25mpg combine with 277TQ compared to 35mpg combined with 155TQ.
If my driving wasn’t 90% city the Ecoboost would’ve been a no brainer.

Even if your city/hwy proportions were reversed (10/90) you'd still see real benefit from the hybrid. I threw this together when everyone was hyping the hwy mileage of the EB. I was surprised at even at 70-80% hwy you're still getting 25-30% more efficiency from the hybrid.

City %	Hwy %	Ecoboost	Hybrid	% diff	MPG diff	$/yr (@15K $3.50)
100​	0​	22​	40​	82%​	18​	$ 1,073.86
90​	10​	22.7​	39.3​	73%​	16.6​	$ 976.90
80​	20​	23.4​	38.6​	65%​	15.2​	$ 883.49
70​	30​	24.1​	37.9​	57%​	13.8​	$ 793.20
60​	40​	24.8​	37.2​	50%​	12.4​	$ 705.65
50​	50​	25.5​	36.5​	43%​	11​	$ 620.47
40​	60​	26.2​	35.8​	37%​	9.6​	$ 537.34
30​	70​	26.9​	35.1​	30%​	8.2​	$ 455.95
20​	80​	27.6​	34.4​	25%​	6.8​	$ 376.01
10​	90​	28.3​	33.7​	19%​	5.4​	$ 297.26
0​	100​	29​	33​	14%​	4​	$ 219.44

Sponsored