Reason why Hybrid Maverick interest so high? [WARNING: NO POLITICS]

[projectvortex]

shoot, 3 dollars a day is 3 dollars a day. A lot of people that say that they don't care about MPG fuss and moan every time gas price fluctuates up.

$3 a day will be over $1000 a year and pay for a nice set of tires or go towards new wheels.

Sponsored

 

[Hdang1980]

at least they keep making new gas and it is getting easier to get to so we won't have to worry about wasting it or anything.

The sarcasm is strong with this one.

 

[DryHeat]

Running 80 mpgs?? What's that? And who is Mr. Truck anyway?

Mr. Truck's identity is a state secret. You should not have asked.

Agents in a black van are already on their way to your house.

 

[IPunchCholla]

As a response to your lead question, It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it, so GO EcoBoost! As for mileage, anybody that has more highway driving than local would be much better off with the turbo. At higher speeds, which is more common these days, it will do better than the hybrid.

The hybrid gets 33 highway. The eco boost is rated 28 or 29. So even worst performing against best performing mpg the hybrid is 15% more efficient. All things being equal, you are right. Better to have it than not. But they’re not equal. There is an upfront cost and an ongoing cost to eco boost, towing capacity, off road capability. If those costs are worth it to you, great. If not, great. But making up shit is dumb. Personally, I’m happy to not pay 8k over 5 years for something I’m likely never to need. I’d rather rent the capability if I do.

 

[IPunchCholla]

I, for one, have had enough of trying to do short highway merges with an underpowered car. Almost got me killed a couple of times. I want enough power to leap off the line and merge going faster than traffic.

If they made a hybrid AWD with more torque and a better 0-60 time than the ecoboost I'd get that.

Man, you must drive somewhere very different than me. I don’t think I have ever had a hard time merging in any car in any place I’ve lived. Not in my 15 year old 1977 Corolla in Seattle, my 12 year old Toyota Echo in New York, Indianapolis, Phoenix, or anywhere else. I can outpace people trying to deliberately cut me off in my 7 year old Leaf when I’m getting on the shortest on-ramp here in Albuquerque, and the hybrid is 2 seconds faster to 60.

 

[pndwind]

Yes I need 250hp. I tow. Last truck was 200hp Colorado and I hated driving it. Terrible highway speed and towing. MPG is not my issue. I only drive 7k a year at most. Been lucky I guess.
To be fair. My wife’s little turbo BSport is pretty impressive.

My 1992 f350 7.3 only had 185 hp. It had no problem hauling 4K… or 8 or 12. It also never got more than about 12 mpg so there was that.

 

[pndwind]

LOL, my wife gives me a hard time because I keep telling her I need my Maverick to make dump runs.

I get it. Indoor plumbing’s expensive!

 

[KenT]

The Maverick hybrid gives me the opportunity to have a dedicated City vehicle and Highway vehicle.
My other vehicle is a 2018 Honda CR-V. I am pretty confident that the CR-V with its 1.5 L turbo-charged engine will give better mileage when cruising at 75mph on the Interstate than the 2.5 L on the Maverick hybrid after the battery is exhausted.
But most of my trips are less than 10 miles. At that range the engine only has to charge the battery and the battery will provide all the energy I need to power the trip.
Moreover, the hatch on the CR-V will provide security for my luggage when I am on the road. But sometimes the hatch is too small to haul things I buy at Costco or Home Depot or BestBuy or IKEA, so I need a small truck. I don’t need an enclosed space because I will then be going directly from store to home without stopping.
Further, the CR-V comes standard with adaptive cruise control and lane centering, making it ideal for driver assistance in the interstate. So I can save over $3000 on the Maverick by not having to buy the Lariat trim with Luxury Package to get Driver Assistance. These features are useless on short runs on city streets and urban interstates.
So I get a pair of dedicated vehicles, one for the city and one for the highway. Without the hybrid feature, the Maverick would mostly just duplicate - and not COMPLEMENT - the CR-V features.

 

[FloodingdowninTX]

And whats wrong with a big huge truck?

Nothing. They're excellent.

 

[staryoshi]

I'd go hybrid if it had AWD. It's a necessity out here. I'd want to lift it a bit, though.

 

[KimoCarew]

Hybrids are fun to drive... I like the thought that I am burning less gas and at $5 a gallon, why buy more?

 

[Camlt12010]

I want to see an EB get 40-41 hwy.....My 1.5 EB got 26-30 MAX.

I don't know what to tell ya! I live in the suburbs and just checked my mileage today. In town the average mileage indicator said my average MPG was 26.1 and when I filled up I divided the gallons into the miles and it was 27.4 so it seems the mileage indicator is pretty close and to the good I guess. The eco boost has nothing to do with my mileage because I'm driving conservatively to see what it can get. The trainer I saw was said to be getting 31 city and about 37 HWY with about 50,000 miles. Can't speak for that only what was claimed, but I can speak for mine. Now will mine be less driving with the turbo, absolutely. I was told that both Hybrid and 2.0 are getting more than the rating.

 

[KenT]

The Maverick hybrid gives me the opportunity to have a dedicated City vehicle and Highway vehicle.
My other vehicle is a 2018 Honda CR-V. I am pretty confident that the CR-V with its 1.5 L turbo-charged engine will give better mileage when cruising at 75mph on the Interstate than the 2.5 L on the Maverick hybrid after the battery is exhausted.
But most of my trips are less than 10 miles. At that range the engine only has to charge the battery and the battery will provide all the energy I need to power the trip.
Moreover, the hatch on the CR-V will provide security for my luggage when I am on the road. But sometimes the hatch is too small to haul things I buy at Costco or Home Depot or BestBuy or IKEA, so I need a small truck. I don’t need an enclosed space because I will then be going directly from store to home without stopping.
Further, the CR-V comes standard with adaptive cruise control and lane centering, making it ideal for driver assistance in the interstate. So I can save over $3000 on the Maverick by not having to buy the Lariat trim with Luxury Package to get Driver Assistance. These features are useless on short runs on city streets and urban interstates.
So I get a pair of dedicated vehicles, one for the city and one for the highway. Without the hybrid feature, the Maverick would mostly just duplicate - and not COMPLEMENT - the CR-V features.

And the loss of horsepower is of no concern because I will only call on extra horsepower when passing on a two-lane rural road, and on such a road I will be driving the turbo-charged CR-V.

 

[FloodingdowninTX]

Man, you must drive somewhere very different than me. I don’t think I have ever had a hard time merging in any car in any place I’ve lived. Not in my 15 year old 1977 Corolla in Seattle, my 12 year old Toyota Echo in New York, Indianapolis, Phoenix, or anywhere else. I can outpace people trying to deliberately cut me off in my 7 year old Leaf when I’m getting on the shortest on-ramp here in Albuquerque, and the hybrid is 2 seconds faster to 60.

Agreed. I feel one must merge everywhere like Chevy Chase with a blindfold in Caddyshack.

 

[Camlt12010]

We should all have been frozen in the coming ice age of a few decades ago. How many gasoline shortages have there been since Laurence of Arabia. Stealing a clever movie line, "I'm too old for any of this, ALWAYS HAVE BEEN."

Why so much interest in the hybrid? Just curious. Lower hp. Is mpg difference that important to many? Or is it cost?

From my research most of the Hybrids are being sold in California,Arizona and Texas which would make sense. I'm told here on the east coast is more AWD.

Sponsored