Why did you choose the hybrid?

[rclee]

When they announced that the Hybrid was going to be the "Base" engine, I about fell off my chair. I always wanted to try a hybrid anything but the upcharge didn't make sense. I saw the 19995 price and fell off my chair again. This thing was so inexpensive I went XLT instead of XL and added Lux also. Once gas prices went through the roof, that made it a much smarter choice.

Oh and it was cheaper than a Honda Civic.

Oh and it has a bed so you can do truck stuff.

Sponsored

 

[pac87]

Would you all still opt for the hybrid if it was the same price as the ecoboost?

 

[bighap]

Would you all still opt for the hybrid if it was the same price as the ecoboost?

Yes. For 23 the hybrid and FWD Ecoboost were the same price.

 

[JimParker256]

I agree with mamboman777 about the Hybrid highway mileage... I was expecting around 33 mpg, but got 36.8 (calculated at the pump) on my recent 800-mile trip (95%+ highway, causing at the speed limit: 70-75 mph). That's substantially better than most EB owners are reporting for "real world" highway miles at that speed.

In-town, I'm seeing a computer-estimated 38-49 mpg, depending largely on length of drive. Short trips in cold weather aren't as efficient, as the ICE has to run for a while to warm up the high-voltage battery and other hybrid components.

I have a hard time believing the few who gripe that the Hybrid's 191 HP is not enough... The Mav Hybrid is PLENTY quick both around town and merging/passing on the highway. Heavy towing a "max load" trailer up the Rockies might be the only place you really "need" the extra power of the EB.

 

[Impetus19]

Would you all still opt for the hybrid if it was the same price as the ecoboost?

I would still opt for the hybrid if it was 1k more than a ecoboost. But to be clear i have next to no interest in a non hybrid vehicle.

Also they are the same price now, so not really a hypothetical question any longer.

 

[LSchicago]

City commute mileage. even though I have a very short commute, going from 9-10mpg v8 van in the city to 40+ in the city will be huge. We've had a 2.0 Ecoboost before, and it got 17-18 mpg in the city. Not great. It have several issues over the 4 years, 50K miles we had it too. Hybrid makes too much sense for a local commuter, and even for road trips.

 

[grod]

Southern California resident with gas prices & how the Governor adds gas taxes at his whim, enough said.

 

[Bj517]

Would you all still opt for the hybrid if it was the same price as the ecoboost?

Most likely would stick with the hybrid

 

[Suzukiridr14]

Would you all still opt for the hybrid if it was the same price as the ecoboost?

I was ready for a new vehicle, I had a 2015 Hyundai Sonata, and a 2005 GMC Canyon. The Sonata was low mileage, but out of bumper to bumper warrantee, and the roof started peeling. (sold it to Carvana for 18K) ordered my Hybrid Lariat HPR lux Package on 7/6/21, and drove the 16 year old Canyon while waiting for the Maverick. My maverick arrive on 3/9/22 a little over 8 months, and I sold the Canyon for $4500. Had a total $22500 for the Maverick which was $32,748 out the door. I was not ready for an electric car yet, but a hybrid made sense to me. No regrets, and I still have a truck with great mpg and a vehicle that seats 5.

 

[10Terp]

TL/DR

Value.

The up front cost.

Gas savings.

Maintenance costs.

Up front cost is obvious.

Some on the forum have pointed out that if you primarily do highway driving, the Ecoboost might be the way to go.... Malarkey. Yes on short highway trips, my hybrid gets about 33, but on longer trips when I'm using cruise control, the battery starts to get full and it sort of equalizes. When this happens the highway mpg goes up north of 35. I don't think there's any situation where an EB will catch a hybrid in gas mileage.

The maintenance costs are an oft overlooked part of the equation. Oil change intervals are more spaced out because the gas engine is running less. Brake change intervals should be more spaced out because of the regenerative braking. (Both of these are impacted by driving habits). Also, I believe the hybrid drivetrain has the best chance of lasting longer. When I first started looking into the Maverick was anti-hybrid because of the cvt. That was because I misunderstood what Ford's eCVT is. Simply put, there's far less moving parts. That in combination with the Atkinson cycle engines inherently cleaner intakes along with the higher pressure of the turbo makes for a powerplant that, IMHO, has less failure points. For levity, this is the point where EB owners chime in and say "what about the battery replacement costs?" From what I have read, battery failure happens far less than the fear-mongering EB faction of the forums would have you believe. A brief Google search for "Ford escape hybrid NYC taxi" will alleive many worries.

So, cheaper up front+superior MPG+cheaper upkeep=Superior value.

Now, all that said, if you need to tow more than 2,000 lbs, by all means, go for the Ecoboost. I'm not here to trash a decision anyone else has made by any means. Your money, your truck. That said, that's why I "went hybrid."

Enough truck for me.

So I have a first gen Escape Hybrid and can speak to the hybrid battery and the "NYC taxi" example (which, if you go on Escape forums, people like to hilariously argue about). They are insanely reliable cars (Mazda ICE, Aisin eCVT) but the battery is the achilles heal of their longevity on the road. The first gen Escapes have NiMH HV batteries which don't last as long as Li-Ion like the Maverick has. Ours is a 2006 and the HV battery is not healthy; it goes dead if it sits for 3+ days and we have to jump it to get the car going and generally the gas mileage is not as good as it should be (the early Escape Hybrids really weren't that fuel efficient to begin with; 30mpg was doing good). Granted, I can't really complain give its age, and I'm hoping a maverick will materialize for me to replace it.

It kind of sucks though; I really like the car and it's in really good shape and low mileage (135k) for its age, but the absolute cheapest for a 'refurbished' (i.e., made out of good old cells) HV battery is $2400; and one with new cells is $4000. I would love to put a new battery in it, but that's $4k that could go toward the maverick*. I have a hard time dumping that money into a car this old, so this perfect Escape is kind of a throw away vehicle for me once the HV battery complete goes. The Engine and eCVT would go forever.

Edit: Forgot about the point of the thread, lol.

For me it's

1) Fuel mileage. I work in DC and commute in twice a week and do a good bit of city driving.
2) Price.
3) I've always wanted something with a bed but never wanted to pay for a full size truck. Excited the Maverick fills this niche.

 

[GPSMan]

So no one got a hybrid just to pick up chicks?

Not just. But it worked for me more than once.

 

[GPSMan]

So I have a first gen Escape Hybrid and can speak to the hybrid battery and the "NYC taxi" example (which, if you go on Escape forums, people like to hilariously argue about). They are insanely reliable cars (Mazda ICE, Aisin eCVT) but the battery is the achilles heal of their longevity on the road.. Maverick fills this niche.

I had a 2005 Hybrid Escape.
2005 - 2019.
235,000 miles.

Original everything except oil and tires and pads.
Replaced the ORIGINAL brake pads at 220,000 miles. Then got rear-ended a year later.

Otherwise I'd still driving it.
However I feel the Escape was built more robustly than the Maverick.
17 yearhas told Ford where they can cut corners. The Escape was $36,000 MSRP in 2005. But was worth it.
The Mav costs less because they cut corners. While the Escape was "no compromises".

My MPG was the same in year 14.

 

[Bushpilot]

I own a Volt as well, the hybrid Maverick is my gas guzzler.

I wouldn't have bought it if I only had the Ecoboost option. MPG, better tech, lower cost, it all added up for me.

 

[BuddyS]

Easy to drive, comfortable, killer fuel economy, great value.

 

[Scupking]

Would you all still opt for the hybrid if it was the same price as the ecoboost?

Yup. I have no interest in a turbo engine.

Sponsored