Maverick is shorter than posted specs?

[jtpc2021]

They do the same when giving measurements on "the tallest building". If it has a antenna at the top they include that into the height.

True; however Buick didn’t do this on the Buick Encore we have. The height is to the roof rather than the antennae on top of the roof. If they had gone with antennae height, the encore would be taller than an F350 on paper!

Sponsored

 

[Rivers90]

Using the highest point is the safest number. If you drive under a low bridge or low garage and the antennae were to hit and break that would be bad and lead to more complaints and real damage.
No matter what place they pick to find the height someone will wine about it, so they may as well pick the safest number in terms of hitting things.
The length of the new bronco is to the back of the spare tire not the back of the bumper.

 

[710-oil-614]

The Mav is a wee little trucklet. I love it.

 

[jtpc2021]

Using the highest point is the safest number. If you drive under a low bridge or low garage and the antennae were to hit and break that would be bad and lead to more complaints and real damage.
No matter what place they pick to find the height someone will wine about it, so they may as well pick the safest number in terms of hitting things.
The length of the new bronco is to the back of the spare tire not the back of the bumper.

Granted, the antennae probably can flex if impacted, which is why others don’t go off of height of roof antennae.

Either way, I ordered the truck based off of specs supplied (i even measured and compared with our suv to get a feel for its size at the time), so I was disappointed when I saw a maverick in person.

 

[lynnebern]

Santa Cruz is speced at 66.7" and Mav is 68.7". What isn't said is if these are measurements to top of cab or include antenna/roof rails.

Differences in that height also depend on additional roof rails and wheel sizes

Yep. I saw a chart showing all Ford trucks measured to the roof line. The Maverick in the chart does indeed say 68.7". I ran a level over the top of my FX4 cap and measured the height at about 65". Almost 4" short. I'd suspect that someof that tranlates into ground clearance in places. I'm normally not one to complain, in fact so far the truck has been great. However, the antenna is not included in the chart and honestly, that a bit of a fraud on Fords part. If the antenna were included, that's kinda BS. Anyway, I filed a case number with Ford hoping against hope they address it. BTW, I got 32mpg on the freeway which, so better than it's rated

 

[MrCigar]

Gentleman....can everyone put the measuring tapes away LOL.

 

[Fcnrwy]

Gentleman....can everyone put the measuring tapes away LOL.

Last Word...
Using my "Regulation, Company-issued" Stanley 25 foot tape...
"MY" stock Mav (only Option = 2.0L ecoboost engine).
Measures = 66.25 inches in Height.
Highest point of the "Shark fin" adds (+) 2.625 inches
= 68.875 inches. in total.
Meaning it is 6.375 inches taller than my last (2008) Ranger...

Jerry G.

 

[CG - All the way]

Turns out after all this discussion that the most interesting fact is that the OP is wearing Dr. Martens with Horween vegetable tanned leather.... I wonder which vegetable is used???

I will go with Jerry G's Stanley tape measurement!!

 

[billbillw]

Seriously, who cares how tall it is? I'd rather it be lower for garage clearance, washing the top, etc. As long as the ground clearance is as expected and the roominess is as expected, then what does it matter? Lower height also means less frontal area which translates to better fuel efficiency.

My concern is for how accurate the length is. I want this to fit in my garage comfortably!

 

[Sykotyk]

No one asked if it was cold out when you measured the maverick.

 

[Traegorn]

I always just assumed Ford lists the height to the antenna because most of the time folks are just looking for the vertical clearance required for the truck.

 

[JimParker256]

Granted, the antennae probably can flex if impacted, which is why others don’t go off of height of roof antennae.

Either way, I ordered the truck based off of specs supplied (i even measured and compared with our suv to get a feel for its size at the time), so I was disappointed when I saw a maverick in person.

Well, I can assure you that the shark-fin antenna itself will NOT "flex if impacted"... Those things are completely rigid, and if one were to drive into a partially-opened garage door (perhaps, for instance, because your kid closed the garage door while your were half-way into the garage), it will dent the hell out of said garage door, but will also pry up the front edge of said shark-fin antenna.

Or so I've been told...

 

[GPSMan]

In another thread Interested in wind resistance I went out to measure.

It was indeed shorter than advertised, in my opinion.

I think in mine, the 68.7 inches included the shark fin but NOT the stubby antenna.

 

[WellKnownHermit]

Also depends which brand of measuring tape you use... I came across this picture in a thread where some contractors were building a house and kept having small mistakes. Look carefully... It's not just the end that is different. At one inch it is off by 3/16. At two inches it is off by 1/4. The graduated scale is different.

 

[Paulyz]

From the specs I’ve seen, the Maverick is 2” taller than the Santa Cruz; however, upon seeing an FX4 in person, it seemed really short. On paper it should be the same height as my wife’s SUV, but I could easily see over the roof, which I cannot do with her SUV.

Today I saw a Santa Cruz, which in person was taller overall in height.
I could not see the roof when flat-footed.

So why does motortrend and google show the Maverick as taller than Santa Cruz when it clearly isn’t?

I am 5’7” and note the photos:

Sure that Maverick isn't lowered? My eyes go to the top of door & I'm a bit taller than you.

Sponsored