Maverick vs Frontier vs Santa Cruz comparison review: A tale of 3 trucks

[STARCOMMTREY1]

while I am waiting on my build I have been keeping track of the market and looking at trucks as they come out just to do some comparisons. Sticker for Santa Cruz at a dealership in Woodbridge VA $ 42,960 plus 5 to 7k just to negotiate. Stafford VA Nissian has a Frontier 4 Pro X sticker 47K plus 3 to 5 k just to negotiate. Out the Door price for either of these is over 50K. If pre ordered you will not spend nearly as much for the Maverick. Being patient will save you 20K for what looks like a better truck depending on your options. I have a build scheduled for mid NOV that means I will not see my truck until late December or early January. So paying myself 10k a month to wait seems like a good deal.

Being patient actually gets me a truck that can hit 50 mpgs and still give me near 200 herspers

Sponsored

 

[JKinPA]

Love the discussion but how many folks could live with seeing the Santa Cruz in their driveway every day and twice on Sunday ? Asking for a friend -

Nope

 

[Cactus_Kid]

Is that documentation fee also a scam or is that a legit charge?

It is pretty damn hard to find a dealer that doesn't charge "doc" fees. I've bought out of stat on several occasions and those dealers did the same even though I had to walk the paperwork thru the TX county tax office after I got home with the vehicle. Plus, I still had to cover the inspection cost. Is it a scam ? IMHO, yes. Ya pays to play.

 

[Cactus_Kid]

Like I considered the Santa Cruz for a minute when it was first announced, but once pricing came out it was a no-brainer to go for the Maverick.

That is so true. Dollar for dollar, the Maverick is way ahead and has better menu options.

 

[STARCOMMTREY1]

It is pretty damn hard to find a dealer that doesn't charge "doc" fees. I've bought out of stat on several occasions and those dealers did the same even though I had to walk the paperwork thru the TX county tax office after I got home with the vehicle. Plus, I still had to cover the inspection cost. Is it a scam ? IMHO, yes. Ya pays to play.

Most will discount msrp to cover the doc fees. Both mine did

 

[Fluegelmeister]

I was at my gmc dealer getting my Canyon serviced and saw this . My gmc dealer is also a Buick and Hyundai dealership. A $5000 market adjustment upcharge. Unbelievable!

I told the Ford dealer I wasn't going to play that game and he said Ford didn't do that.

 

[JASmith]

I told the Ford dealer I wasn't going to play that game and he said Ford didn't do that.

Yeah, see that with some Mavericks too, was recently posted a $12K markup.

However, Ford has true "build to order" for the customer, which Hyundai does not.

With Ford you can lock in a very specific build.

With Hyundai, you can request a "preference", your dealership issues that preference for that build and whenever Hyundai happens to make a large batch just like that they ship them out to the dealerships based on first come first serve for that preference.

This is also one of the reasons that Ford allows more customization in their builds, whereas Hyundai only has four configurations in a smaller number of colors.

 

[rcheneyjr]

Like I considered the Santa Cruz for a minute when it was first announced, but once pricing came out it was a no-brainer to go for the Maverick.

Same, I test drove a SC, and it was nice, but a 5K adjustment was crazy. I have also tested an Ecoboost Maverick at my dealer and loved it. Just hoping the dealer does not try anything funny!

 

[STARCOMMTREY1]

Like I considered the Santa Cruz for a minute when it was first announced, but once pricing came out it was a no-brainer to go for the Maverick.

When I saw the fuel sticker I said no....every maverick trim killed the sc

 

[JASmith]

When I saw the fuel sticker I said no....every maverick trim killed the sc

I punched up the numbers earlier already for those curious:

Maverick 2.5 Hybrid FWD (191HP): 42 city / 33 highway / 37 combined (87 octane recommended)
Santa Cruz 2.5 AWD (191HP): 21 city / 27 highway / 23 combined (87 octane recommended)
Maverick 2.0T AWD (250HP): 22city / 29 highway / 25 combined (91 octane recommended)
Santa Cruz 2.5T AWD (281HP): 19 city / 27 highway / 22 combined (87 octane recommended)

Based on 15K miles per year with national average fuel prices of $3.18 for regular and $3.81 for premium fuel using combined fuel economy figures:

Maverick 2.5 Hybrid = $1,288 / year or $12.8K over 10 years
Santa Cruz 2.5 = $2,073 / year or $20.7K over 10 years
Maverick 2.0T = $2,286 / year or $22.9K over 10 years
Santa Cruz 2.5T = $2,169 / year or $21.7K over 10 years

tl;dr: The Santa Cruz 2.5 and 2.5T and Maverick 2.0 cost about the same in fuel, only the Maverick hybrid is the extreme outlier. The Santa Cruz 2.5 is the only disappointing powertrain IMO, with poor efficiency for its horsepower.

 

[STARCOMMTREY1]

I punched up the numbers earlier already for those curious:

Maverick 2.5 Hybrid FWD (191HP): 42 city / 33 highway / 37 combined (87 octane recommended)
Santa Cruz 2.5 AWD (191HP): 21 city / 27 highway / 23 combined (87 octane recommended)
Maverick 2.0T AWD (250HP): 22city / 29 highway / 25 combined (91 octane recommended)
Santa Cruz 2.5T AWD (281HP): 19 city / 27 highway / 22 combined (87 octane recommended)

Based on 15K miles per year with national average fuel prices of $3.18 for regular and $3.81 for premium fuel using combined fuel economy figures:

Maverick 2.5 Hybrid = $1,288 / year or $12.8K over 10 years
Santa Cruz 2.5 = $2,073 / year or $20.7K over 10 years
Maverick 2.0T = $2,286 / year or $22.9K over 10 years
Santa Cruz 2.5T = $2,169 / year or $21.7K over 10 years

tl;dr: The Santa Cruz 2.5 and 2.5T and Maverick 2.0 cost about the same in fuel, only the Maverick hybrid is the extreme outlier. The Santa Cruz 2.5 is the only disappointing powertrain IMO, with poor efficiency for its horsepower.

Except you can use 87 in the eb with zero issues

 

[clavicus]

Except you can use 87 in the eb with zero issues

The premium was recommended for more performance with high tow loads or something?

 

[JASmith]

Except you can use 87 in the eb with zero issues

Dishonest. 93 is recommended on the ecoboost to achieve the provided peak specifications, particularly if driving hard for extended periods, under load, or in hot climates. Zero issues implies that there is zero reason to use the Ford recommended octane, and implying you wouldn't see at minimum a peak torque/horsepower loss.

 

[pxpaulx]

Dishonest. 93 is recommended on the ecoboost to achieve the provided peak specifications, particularly if driving hard for extended periods, under load, or in hot climates. Zero issues implies that there is zero reason to use the Ford recommended octane, and implying you wouldn't see at minimum a peak torque/horsepower loss.

Also dishonest? Because if you want you can run regular and beat both of the Santa Cruz numbers.

Does anyone else here care about the sc?

 

[JASmith]

Also dishonest? Because if you want you can run regular and beat both of the Santa Cruz numbers.

Does anyone else here care about the sc?

Yes, that is also dishonest. The 2.0 Ecoboost makes 250hp with 93 octane, it makes 231hp with 87 octane per Ford (Ford Fusion 2.0 Ecoboost had both octane power numbers published in the past). The Hyundai 2.5T makes 281hp with 87 octane, a 50hp delta. Fuel economy difference is probably negligible 87 vs 93 octane.

If you don't care about the SC, why would you click on a Maverick vs Santa Cruz thread? The only real purpose is to talk about competitors in this subforum.

Sponsored