Search results

If it is profitable for the manufacturer....then by their definition...it is successful.

I'm gonna have to put my ass in the seat before I commit.

110,000 annual units is considered a successful and profitable platform.

Wow that 2.0 has an impressive torque curve - lots of area under the curve.

If the Maverick follows the Escape, the plug-in hybrid will be FWD only. A regular hybrid isn't worth the complexity to me. Being able to drive 30-40 miles on battery only is of interest. I'd consider a PHEV over an "plain" hybrid, but no AWD is a no-go for me.

Yep, just saw it on autoblog: https://www.autoblog.com/2021/06/03/ford-maverick-pickup-confirmed/

I'm always surprised by the hate for electric vehicles. I am no "new green deal" guy...not by any stretch (I currently own vehicles totaling 32 cylinders) but it is obvious that the future of transportation will be electric. I look forward to never going to a gas station again, to instant...

The Colorado/Canyon are already in-market competitors to the Ranger.

The Lightning Pro is a crew cab model with a 5-1/2 foot bed.

I'm fortunate enough that my pickup will be my second vehicle. If an electric vehicle wouldn't provide me with the range I would need for a trip, then I’d take my ICE vehicle. If I needed the utility of the electric truck for a trip that exceeded its range, then I’d have to plan for a stop. It’s...

A few times in my life I've purchased cars where I followed the progression from concept car->spy photos->early drive->production release; the Eclipse and BRZ are two I can think of off-hand. It was a long wait for both (especially for the pre-internet '89 release of the '90 Eclipse), but I...

The Lightning appears to be an outstanding vehicle. From a cost stand-point there is little "penalty" in choosing the electric version over the ICE; a well equipped XLT will cost about $55k, vs. $45k for a similar ICE version. I could live with 230 miles of range for 95% of my driving...in fact...

I like Chevy products, but that truck is 1) ugly (the poor souls that have to sit in that back seat) and 2) way under powered for the US market (133hp, come on man).

You know, I was half joking when I said this was a two-door version, but I'm convinced that it is. We have the rear windows that are clearly sagging inwards, but we also have some very clever camo on the front and rear doors to make their proportions appear to be that of front and rear doors...

Good photos. I’ve been looking at Escapes and Bronco Sports trying to get a feel for the proportions of the Maverick. I was hoping that the green house would have a different shape and in fact it does. The rear window looks proper on the Maverick. This trucklet is a nice size.

Ford would not invest in a production line, only to kill it months later without any revenue to show for it. That would be a scandal that would result in the entire upper management being fired. The Ranger is already a world platform. I can't see Ford setting up a production line in Mexico...

...could be hiding the fact that these are 2-door models. Those rear "windows" are sunk in way too deep. ...just throwing some raw meat out there....

You have no idea how embedded software works.

Keep in mind that the Maverick has begun limited production. That means that there is a production line, tooling and trained workers. Ford will want/need to recuperate the sunk expense as soon as possible. Make no mistake, as soon the supply chain can commit to a delivery schedule, there will be...

Ford will not announce the Maverick until they have line of sight to a production schedule. With the current chip shortage, it is unlikely that we will get any official data until that issue is resolved and Ford planning can schedule parts for delivery and labor.