Any other 2.0 orders hoping the power is enough?

[Wire4money]

Don't be roping me into this, but I say Gen Z. Haha!

I would take a factory ST or RS trim level, but wouldn't go out and create one, but to each their own.

Some of us Millennial's aren't broke nor in debt nor had anything handed to us. Lol.

There might be one in the works. See the owners manual

Sponsored

 

[bgn]

Nope, not worried. It should be more than enough for what it is, especially with a tune that'll push it above 300 HP.

 

[Platinum2]

Yeah, I know the old stuff is slow by comparison. But it’s still slow by today’s standards.

Those trucks, especially the Chevy with the 5.7L 2WD w/G80 was 250 HP/335 TQ in '96. I know...I had one. Mine had a 3.42 too! You had to go 4WD to get the 3.73 IIRC. Very quick truck and would lay rubber for a long way down the road. I sold it with 335K miles.

 

[Mav]

Those trucks, especially the Chevy with the 5.7L 2WD w/G80 was 250 HP/335 TQ in '96. I know...I had one. Mine had a 3.42 too! You had to go 4WD to get the 3.73 IIRC. Very quick truck and would lay rubber for a long way down the road. I sold it with 335K miles.

I love an old school Lightning or 454SS. Would daily either one of those if I could find one today in great shape.

 

[starquestbd22]

My Ranger has the 2.3L turbo and is a heavier truck. It will leave most other V6 mid size trucks for dead from a stop light. I expect a little drop off in acceleration, but I think it will still be a quick truck.

I may be fooled but I think the EB Mav will be quicker than the Ranger. Better power to weight ratio and lower final drive ratio (on the 4k tow model). Only thing the Ranger really has is two extra gears.

 

[JASmith]

Sorry to those who have read this before.
my wife has a 2017 Buick Envision premium 2 AWD with a 2.0T 250hp
and it’s a rocket, very fast....and it weights as much as the Maverick
dont worry

Its all relative though to what people are used to. Someone in the Santa Cruz forum for exactly was just reporting how disappointed he was with the performance of the SC, felt slow to him, and at 281hp that has a slightly superior power to weight ratio than a AWD Ecoboost along with a faster shifting DCT. Problem is, he was daily driving a twin-turbo Stinger, and those are pretty quick little cars. Same with Mustang guys complaining how slow the Ecoboost models are, when that's only relative to the V8 as a Ecoboost Mustang has a way better power to weight ratio than a Ecoboost Maverick.

The best thing to do is to just head over to a Ford dealership and go drive a Bronco Sport around. Its within 50lbs or so of a Maverick Ecoboost AWD with the same powertrain.

If I wanted to build a sport truck, I'd probably start with the XL 2.0T FWD, as that will be the lightest option, and that way you can replace the wheel-tire package with something nice and light and sticky.

 

[Rkbrumbelow]

I’m 45. Far from a millennial. Building a street performance oriented truck used to be cool. Or maybe people used to be cool

I had a step side pickup, edlebrock high rise manifold with a predictor variable Venturi carb and balanced hooker super comp headers connected to a pair of cherrybombs. That was back when we ran a wax crayon down the exhaust to figure out where the hotspots were and custom welded the crossover. Power went out a th350 (don’t remember the stall speed on the torque converter) to a Jaguar independent rear end disk brakes all around. The predator could do 930 CFM, fully blueprinted engine with full port and polish.

I get the performance truck thing

my comment about millennials was to their attitudes compared to our generation (I’m not that much older than you, started college in ‘85, but young)

 

[pxpaulx]

I may be fooled but I think the EB Mav will be quicker than the Ranger. Better power to weight ratio and lower final drive ratio (on the 4k tow model). Only thing the Ranger really has is two extra gears.

I agree that is my expectation as well, and I love driving my ranger! I will miss it, but my wife wont Also, the maverick is just a better fit overall.

 

[Jasperw229]

Can't wait to find out!
I know it will be quicker than my 150hp subaru impreza.

 

[WesM]

I'm more hoping the Hybrid powertrain does not feel sluggish. The 2.0 should be pretty peppy

 

[Rkbrumbelow]

I'm more hoping the Hybrid powertrain does not feel sluggish. The 2.0 should be pretty peppy

Electric motors have much more torque at low rpms

 

[A Dodge that drives Fords]

I'm going from a 2001 4x4 Ranger Edge with a V6 4.0L that puts out 207 Hp. 238 Ft. it fly's! The Escape EcoBoost AWD 2.0L putting out around 250 Hp. 270 Ft. Does around 6 second 0-60 so should be pretty quick. I'm hoping as fast as my Ranger.

 

[ArizonaLouie]

"Hope its will be enough? Yes.
Worried if it will be enough? No

For the intended market and intended use at this price point, if your are needing more power, you' are clearly in the wrong place.

 

[OTACORB]

Not hoping, I know it will be just fine power wise.

 

[Prevok]

Currently driving a Wrangler JL with the 2.0 engine. It produces slightly more HP than the Maverick (270 vs. 250), but weights about a thousand pound more. It’s very responsive and has plenty of power. Considering it has the aerodynamics of a brick, the Maverick can only be great.

The only thing I’ll miss from the Wrangler is the mild-hybrid setup. It makes the start-stop and turbo lag super smooth. Not looking forward a traditional start-stop using starters. Had that on my Escape 2017 with the 1.5 engine and it was meh.

Sponsored