Maverick SUV (rendering)?

[MattIngram]

With Maverick being it’s own label/Icon within the Ford Brand, we may get to see Maverick SUV’s at some point in the not too distant future. Not sure it would be as nice as this rendering, and the proportions seem a bit larger than a potential Maverick SUV’s footprint. It feels like Ford is redefining entry-level. And so far they learned no sedans (focus), hatchbacks (fiesta), or tiny crossovers (ecosport).

Maverick seems to be the answer budget friendly, practical, utilitarian but also fun and a truck to boot. It’s the smartest thing I’ve seen from Ford in the last 15 years. I thought bringing back the Bronco was incredible and making the Bronco Sport affordable/accessible, wow but making economical (Maverick) exciting again that was impressive.

Sponsored

 

[kmish203]

Thats actually not a bad point. I don't think a compact 3 row SUV exists. If the back seat folded flat you would basically have a truck with a cap. The other benefit is if you could fold both rows of seats flat, you could actually get longer stuff in your vehicle than in the Maverick. You might even end up with an 8 foot bed in a compact pickup with a cap essentially... ok I would buy that.

I would want them to keep the normal tailgate though with something like that and have the glass pop up, or if they could get it to retract into the tailgate that would be even better.

Honda Pilot has 3 rows and is 3" shorter in length than the Maverick. Maverick is only considered compact because it is a truck, it's actually not small compared to modern SUV's. a compact SUV with a 3rd row would be nearly impossible to pull off.

 

[Platinum2]

This could work because it would be a bigger Escape for those who don't want to jump all the way to an Explorer. This is assuming the Edge would be retired.

As for the Bronco comparisons, Ford would be wise to build and market those for "active, off-road" lifestyles or whatever terms Marketing comes up with.

 

[Platinum2]

This could work because it would be a bigger Escape for those who don't want to jump all the way to an Explorer. This is assuming the Edge would be retired.

As for the Bronco comparisons, Ford would be wise to build and market those for "active, off-road" lifestyles or whatever terms Marketing comes up with.

 

[Turtle]

Ford has never been good at managing sub-brands and related vehicles to start - mercury, Mazda, jaguar. Leave the Mav as part of the Ford tough truck family and dont screw it up,. If you want a cheap SUV make one out of the Escape just as they did for the Mav and the BS. Leave my little truck alone.

 

[Turtle]

With Maverick being it’s own label/Icon within the Ford Brand, we may get to see Maverick SUV’s at some point in the not too distant future. Not sure it would be as nice as this rendering, and the proportions seem a bit larger than a potential Maverick SUV’s footprint. It feels like Ford is redefining entry-level. And so far they learned no sedans (focus), hatchbacks (fiesta), or tiny crossovers (ecosport).

Maverick seems to be the answer budget friendly, practical, utilitarian but also fun and a truck to boot. It’s the smartest thing I’ve seen from Ford in the last 15 years. I thought bringing back the Bronco was incredible and making the Bronco Sport affordable/accessible, wow but making economical (Maverick) exciting again that was impressive.

Gets a grip the Maverick is a cheap Escape.

 

[brnpttmn]

Honda Pilot has 3 rows and is 3" shorter in length than the Maverick. Maverick is only considered compact because it is a truck, it's actually not small compared to modern SUV's. a compact SUV with a 3rd row would be nearly impossible to pull off.

It's also 6" wider, which makes the whole package noticeably bigger. It's also $36K starting MSRP. I think the point of a Maverick SUV would be a economical starting price (I'm assuming they could offer it starting at $25-28K) and MPGs. If they could offer that it would undercut a lot of minivans and Pilots.

 

[Turtle]

Before Ford creates another brand or derivative they need to get production in line to meet todays requirements and future sales. We dont need any more fiascos like the Maverick, Bronco and soon Lightening. They can’t meet current Mav demand and next rear they intend to sell the Maverick in South America built out of the same plant. They need to focus (no pun intended) on current customer demand and expectations for existing product.

 

[brnpttmn]

Before Ford creates another brand or derivative they need to get production in line to meet todays requirements and future sales. We dont need any more fiascos like the Maverick, Bronco and soon Lightening. They can’t meet current Mav demand and next rear they intend to sell the Maverick in South America built out of the same plant. They need to focus (no pun intended) on current customer demand and expectations for existing product.

Not thinking about/planning for the future is the best possible way for a company to ensure there will be no future demand. Product development and production are two different departments. Ford is in no way impacting current production by planning future product strategies.

 

[Turtle]

Not thinking about/planning for the future is the best possible way for a company to ensure there will be no future demand. Product development and production are two different departments. Ford is in no way impacting current production by planning future product strategies.

Let me say that another way Ford does a poor job at planning and therefore limited success during execution.

 

[MattIngram]

Gets a grip the Maverick is a cheap Escape.

Yeah, sounds like you need a bit of cheese with your whine.

 

[MattIngram]

Let me say that another way Ford does a poor job at planning and therefore limited success during execution.

More cheese, more whine over here table of one!

 

[Turtle]

More cheese, more whine over here table of one!

You got to be kidding. It is all over this and many other forums and news articles about Fords inability to produce and manage customer communications / expectations related to Bronco and Maverick. This may be a new term for you “piss poor planning leads to piss poor production” and “customer communications is an integral part of customer satisfaction” I suspect that Jim Farley understands the issues that have been created.

 

[MattIngram]

You got to be kidding. It is all over this and many other forums and news articles about Fords inability to produce and manage customer communications / expectations related to Bronco and Maverick. This may be a new term for you “piss poor planning leads to piss poor production” and “customer communications is an integral part of customer satisfaction” I suspect that Jim Farley understands the issues that have been created.

Why not just cancel your order then? Not everybody feeds off negativity and some choose to try and see the positive.

 

[UpNorthBuckeye]

Except the Flex was expensive, inefficient, and looked pretty weird.


Yep. Being able to haul 2 adults and 4 kids or 35 bags of 40 pound mulch--while fitting in a small garage and saving $100/mo on gas versus a larger SUV-- would be desirable to a lot of people.

For the back. You do what early suburbans did. Offer two options. A tailgate+glass or a more traditional SUV back swing up door (although the suburbans offer two swing out doors).

You are right. IIRC when the Flex was first in concept stage, they called it "the fairlane", and it was going to be a practical, economical station wagon. It turned into another SUV, 16 mpg in the city, $45,000 price tag. Not what I wanted anyway. If you're going that big, make it a real truck (like my Expedition), give it a lot of towing cpacity, etc.
I think it also clogged up Ford's SUV offerings: Flex, Edge, Explorer, Escape, Expedition?? in my mind, it was a lot of overlapping features.
For me, it really comes down to the fact that we don't have STATION WAGONS any more. Those of us who grew up in larger families in the 60s and 70s saw how practical and flexible the station wagon was. THAT'S what I miss.

Sponsored