How far we haven't come...

[Barksdale123]

My Mav ECO got 34+ mpg from Fort Pierce to Daytona. Fl. Wife had a long bed S 10 w 5 speed. 2nd trim level. Nice little truck. The long bed kinds got in the way of backing up. The mav seats 5 and has a 3/4 ton capacity. My 70 C 10 was a 1/2 ton. I think there is a limit to how much energy you can squeeze out of a gallon of gas. Wish I had them both still.

Sponsored

 

[Timothyd]

Look at just how far we HAVEN'T come:

A 1977 Pickup Truck at 33 MPG.
Just saw one still on the road.
And it had a towing ball.
1200lb payload.

I had the Ford version. Very practical but a rust bucket. Time will tell for my Mav, I plan on an undercoating

 

[Timothyd]

Actually what caught my eye was "Hey, a truck smaller than the Maverick!"

I parked next to an old Ranger the other day. Smaller but with a longer bed that I liked

 

[GPSMan]

There is a limit (actually a well known value) to how much energy there is in a gallon of gasoline. Which is why vehicles, all vehicles not used for heavy hauling need to be smaller and lighter and lower horsepower.

0-60 time is irrelevant if you are not in a race. It's irrelevant on your daily commute and it's irrelevant on your cross country trip.

I'm a proponent of purposeful vehicles that do what they do well vs. all purpose vehicles that do everything mediocre.

Maverick is pretty close to all purpose though with reasonable economy, both purchase price and fuel economy which is making it popular. Which is what people want. All purpose.

Prior to this I had a tiny commuter car (Honda Insight 70 MPG) and used it 12,000 miles a year and a Silverado 2500HD (10 MPG) for hauling heavy stuff 2,000 or 3,000 miles a year. While I haul some trailers 3 or 4 times a year, I never approached the limits if the 2500HD. It was too much truck, so I downsized. Also it was expensive to register and insure that extra large vehicle for "maybe" 3,000 miles a year.

 

[NJBob]

Look at just how far we HAVEN'T come:

A 1977 Pickup Truck at 33 MPG.
Just saw one still on the road.
And it had a towing ball.
1200lb payload.

My first new car I ever bought was a 1980 Chevy Luv, Mikado package. Had it a week before I was rear ended my head went throgh the back window. Lucky I have a hard head. Would tow a pop up camper. All in all it was a great truck.

 

[GPSMan]

This one recently sold at a Mecum auction:

 

[GPSMan]

Nice little truck. Key word little.
See also Maverick is not the smallest truck out there on the roads.

 

[boe757]

Look at just how far we HAVEN'T come:

A 1977 Pickup Truck at 33 MPG.
Just saw one still on the road.
And it had a towing ball.
1200lb payload.

ISUZU - one tough truck, downside was replacing points about every 3 months, but it never quit - once it was running you were going

 

[Sleeper 7]

They didnt have 250hp.

 

[Maverick Life]

Tech and creature comforts aside, the MPG has not improved much at all.

Hope you find this encouraging ...

Recall the EPA has changed their methodology at least twice since the release of the Luv. Today, their database doesn't allow checking vehicles from 1977 (which means they also don't have the Luv), but here's a close relative: the Chevy S-10 from 1984 (earliest available online). It has the same "old method" MPG estimate as the Luv in the ad:

Here's the link.

If I'm reading it correctly, the Luv/S-10 would have been rated at 18/24 city/hwy MPG using today's methods. That means the Maverick gets 9 more miles out of each gallon on the highway while carrying considerably more weight. While that's good, driving city miles in the Maverick more than doubles the distance you can cover on the same amount of fuel - a full 22 miles more than the Luv would travel per gallon.

To me it seems like progress to celebrate. That said however, perhaps it didn't have to take 45 years to get here. Hopefully some bright team somewhere can develop or discover a breakthrough technology that means the next doubling of fuel efficiency comes much sooner.

 

[Hardening2753]

Tech and creature comforts aside, the MPG has not improved much at all.

* Tin foil hat intensifies*

 

[GPSMan]

* Tin foil hat intensifies*

More accurately stated: advancements in MPG have not been commensurate with advances in other technologies over the past 5 decades. Mostly due to consumer wants.

Sure; a 2 liter engine does more with less today than 5 decades ago.

But we have larger heavier (& more expensive) vehicles burning more gas than need be.

Someone pointed out the Maverick is 1000 pounds heavier than a similar truck 50 years ago. Really, to call it real progress, it should be 1000 pounds lighter.

 

[GPSMan]

The ever popular van conversion:

 

[mdwebby]

The ever popular van conversion:

Haha, he literally chopped the backend off the van and welded it behind the front seats. Brilliant!!

 

[JimParker256]

We're 29 comments into this thread and no one has commented on those lovely plaid cloth seats? And that was the upgraded interior? OMG...

Sponsored