Consumer Reports Reliability Prediction Score for Ford Maverick (Jan 2023 issue)

[icegradner]

so that’s why you report it as fact?

Let's ask a better question, rather than beating a dead horse. What do they have to gain from lying and spreading rumors if it's not true? It's not likely they are making alternative parts to sell and gaining an advantage from pointing out what they have seen. I'm not talking about people with DYI garages at home. I'm talking about dealer techs, and people working for reputable repair shops.

I have nothing to gain from pointing it out either, so I won't be wasting time after this.

Sponsored

 

[TonyS]

I've been a subscriber to Consumer Reports for 40+ years. My degree is also in Poly Sci, which has a heavy emphasis on polling and statistics.

I could write a wall of text on it, but the short version is that CR's car reliability (as well as other products, since their annual survey to members asks about many products, not just cars) is statically valid. Both from the likelihood that another survey would get similar results and that the survey meets the test of surveying what it says it does.

There are two potential problems that stand out. First is sample size. CR says they don't report data on models they don't get enough responses on OR they combine that data with brand history. A typical low end sample size for a vehicle might only be a few hundred vehicles. The Maverick is new so they probably were on the low end as there were not a lot of Mav's on the road. Considering that Ford is not a top 10 brand on reliability CR must have gotten what they felt were a sufficient number of responses.

Next is the fact that this is always data a year or two old. So in the past, CR's automotive surveys have been a bit slow to record brand improvements or brand slippage. it took the surveys a couple of years to realize Hyundai greatly improved their quality in 1999 and it took a couple of years for surveys to reflect some Subaru models were having substantial engine and transmission problems.

Since the Maverick is new it might be a few years to see if CR's predicted reliability is accurate. But as a member of this forum I do take comfort in CR;s predictions and reviews. Reading here it's easy to worry that nearly every Maverick is at some moment going to be dead when you go out to start it. The reality appears to be people that have had a problem look for a forum to post up their problems. Which makes the level of problems - here on the forum - look greater than the reality.

 

[palmtreefrb]

The reality appears to be people that have had a problem look for a forum to post up their problems. Which makes the level of problems - here on the forum - look greater than the reality.

+1

 

[shadowthrone]

Let's ask a better question, rather than beating a dead horse. What do they have to gain from lying and spreading rumors if it's not true? It's not likely they are making alternative parts to sell and gaining an advantage from pointing out what they have seen. I'm not talking about people with DYI garages at home. I'm talking about dealer techs, and people working for reputable repair shops.

I have nothing to gain from pointing it out either, so I won't be wasting time after this.

Actually anyone "reporting" stuff on 'tubes of any kind does have something to gain - drama sells and makes for better clickbait.

No one will watch a video that says "X car is perfectly average", but if the video says "It's the best car you can't get!" or "This hidden defect in your car could be deadly!" - now you are talking millions of views. Millions of views are thousands of dollars for the channel.

So not saying all those 'Tube mechanics are all full of it, just saying that they are definitely incentivized.

That said, it's mentally comforting to hear that the Maverick is perfectly average! Also confirms my bias that picking an engine + transmission option (Ecoboost) that has a decade of use has most kinks worked out and should prove to be pretty reliable.

 

[cavemold]

Thanks for showing . Good see my 2.0 get nice average score

 

[Raymundo76]

I've been a subscriber to Consumer Reports for 40+ years. My degree is also in Poly Sci, which has a heavy emphasis on polling and statistics.

I could write a wall of text on it, but the short version is that CR's car reliability (as well as other products, since their annual survey to members asks about many products, not just cars) is statically valid. Both from the likelihood that another survey would get similar results and that the survey meets the test of surveying what it says it does.

There are two potential problems that stand out. First is sample size. CR says they don't report data on models they don't get enough responses on OR they combine that data with brand history. A typical low end sample size for a vehicle might only be a few hundred vehicles. The Maverick is new so they probably were on the low end as there were not a lot of Mav's on the road. Considering that Ford is not a top 10 brand on reliability CR must have gotten what they felt were a sufficient number of responses.

Next is the fact that this is always data a year or two old. So in the past, CR's automotive surveys have been a bit slow to record brand improvements or brand slippage. it took the surveys a couple of years to realize Hyundai greatly improved their quality in 1999 and it took a couple of years for surveys to reflect some Subaru models were having substantial engine and transmission problems.

Since the Maverick is new it might be a few years to see if CR's predicted reliability is accurate. But as a member of this forum I do take comfort in CR;s predictions and reviews. Reading here it's easy to worry that nearly every Maverick is at some moment going to be dead when you go out to start it. The reality appears to be people that have had a problem look for a forum to post up their problems. Which makes the level of problems - here on the forum - look greater than the reality.

You said it so much better than I could have done. Let's all take a very deep breath and try to relax while we wait for our Mavs to be built and delivered.

 

[TCPTX65]

FYI; I know that some members have no faith in these numbers; but to argue one would have to believe that CR members that provided info were statically different from the population of car owners in general. Here are the interesting numbers: (lower numbers are predicted less reliable)

2.0 Maverick 73
2.5 Maverick 69
Santa Cruz: 37
Ranger 47
Ridgeline 50
Tacoma 71

My CX-5 was rated 71 (3rd in class)

Glad I ordered the 2.5 Maverick, because as everyone knows, 69 is divine!

 

[Renho17]

Glad I ordered the 2.5 Maverick, because as everyone knows, 69 is divine!

69 or die!

 

[Ponchsox]

Good luck using that warranty. You would be better of with one of the TV scam warranty companies.

Car Shield Does That!

 

[SLINGSHOT]

Take that TV warranty money and the dealer extended warranty money and put it in a shoe box each month. When your car breaks, you'll have money to fix it. If it doesn't break, you'll have money to celebrate with when you replace the car.

 

[LSchicago]

Glad I ordered the 2.5 Maverick, because as everyone knows, 69 is divine!

69 is divine, or to dine?

 

[TCPTX65]

69 is divine, or to dine?

 

[TonyS]

Actually anyone "reporting" stuff on 'tubes of any kind does have something to gain - drama sells and makes for better clickbait.

No one will watch a video that says "X car is perfectly average", but if the video says "It's the best car you can't get!" or "This hidden defect in your car could be deadly!" - now you are talking millions of views. Millions of views are thousands of dollars for the channel.

So not saying all those 'Tube mechanics are all full of it, just saying that they are definitely incentivized.

That said, it's mentally comforting to hear that the Maverick is perfectly average! Also confirms my bias that picking an engine + transmission option (Ecoboost) that has a decade of use has most kinks worked out and should prove to be pretty reliable.

The 2.0 ecoboost motor has certainly proved to be far more reliable than the 1.6 and 1.5 four cylinder motors that Ford has used the past decade (the 3 cylinder 1.5 is new so we will see) But the 2.5 Duratec motor has a pretty good history as well and goes back to 2001 in North America. Jointly designed by Mazda, It's proven to be a good platform that has had additional tech added on over the years - like the Atkinson cycle for hybrid vehicles.

Likewise - as has been often covered here on boards, the eCVT that Ford uses also has an excellent reliability history. I believe people have said it's a Toyota design?

CR's review in the magazine rated the Hybrid even a little better than the ecoboost. They tested and they really, really liked both. The membership survey must have identified a thing or two that ended up the Hybrid slightly lower . Whatever it is, most of the reported problems with the Hybrid on this forum have not been broken engines or transmissions. It's been mostly battery/wiring harness issues, overheated catalytic converters.

So I'm not worried about the 2.5 engine or the eCVT. I own a 2011 Escape that my son now drives that has the 2.5L motor and it's closing in on 300,000 trouble free miles.. It's still got the original spark plugs! The transmission is new to me but I'm hopeful all the reports are accurate AND I have to say I rather like the CVT. I thought I'd miss the shift points but I do not at all.

 

[bwiese]

FYI; I know that s0ome members have no faith in these numbers; but to argue one would have to believe that CR members that provided info were statically different from the population of car owners in general. Here are the interesting numbers: (lower numbers are predicted less reliable)

One issue is that many of these surveys count ALL problems as of equal severity.

I don't care that I had a minor recall (20 min fix) or even the airbag recall.

I care about 'Big Things' that won't last beyond warranty (i.e, engine/powertrain faults) or things that will require significant labor down the line. If a doorknob falls off in my hand, I can deal with it. If Bluetooth pairing for Brand X phone has a minor hitch in it, no biggie.

Bill W
San Jose

 

[Griswaldo906]

Likewise - as has been often covered here on boards, the eCVT that Ford uses also has an excellent reliability history. I believe people have said it's a Toyota design?

It has been a few years since I have researched this (so I can't provide any links at the moment) but Ford's eCVT is extremely similar to Toyota's eCVT. Ford and Toyota each have hundreds of patents on the system and cross-license to each other so, really, the system is neither a Toyota or a Ford system.

There are many, many reports of early-generation Priuses and Escapes doing over 500,000 with this setup. There have been many upgrades and tweaks made over the years. Furthermore, the gas engine itself is typically not overly stressed because of how the system works.

While I would say that 69 is a relatively low score based on what I know about this hybrid system, I think the score will shoot-up in future years, as the wiring harness and catalytic converter issues are resolved.

Sponsored