People who had a Ranger before the Maverick

[Flub]

How does the Maverick compare in terms of driving comfort and cab space from the front row perspective? I was surprised to learn it's only 15cm wider, so am wondering if that even translates to anything. It looks way bigger in videos.

Sponsored

 

[SDMavTremorXLT]

I test drove the Mav and then bought the Ranger. The interior space is quite comparable. Look at the specs between the two and they aren’t much different at all. I’m a big 6’ tall guy and both were quite comfortable.

 

[Phinney Ridge Dave]

I drove my '99 Ranger XLT extended cab, 4-cylinder, RWD manual for 22 years, (longest held of many vehicles & a couple of bikes) before replacing it with the Maverick Hybrid. Despite a few of the youth oriented sales pitches I've seen, I think Ford knew they had a buyer in me ... and not much selling was needed for me to order this small city truck in July of '21, without test drive or seeing it in person ... exactly because it promised to do everything and more than my trusted, long lived Ranger.
So, it may sound odd to now say that though I believe the Ranger of my past bears most heavily on the design concept of the Maverick ... there is just no comparison to be made!
Yeah ... orders of magnitude difference ... handling, safety, ergonomics, convenience, roominess, etc, all very much improved, (as one would naturally expect). But, with respect to the Utility, Economy, and Practicality of the old Ranger ? ...well yeah, that's comparable.

 

[Ron Neal]

I had a 2020 Ranger XLT and now a 22 Mav XLT (4k). Both have their pros and cons but my number one concern was towing and since I don't tow a lot these days and the Maverick will do 95% of what need to tow I bought it. All the the comparisons don't really matter to me.

 

[Caper]

....drove Rangers for ~30 years. They were simple reliable vehicles that matched my needs. Mostly just me in the vehicle and occasionally using the truck bed for light duties. I will be using the Maverick for similar. Nicest part of the Maverick is that with AWD there is no worries about getting stuck in snow, however the rest of it was designed for fairer climates. Clearing the wiper well of ice and snow is worst ever (to do a proper job you have to lift the engine hood), have to remove gloves to operate almost everything (I miss the big knobs and handles). Make sure you clear the bumper shelf of snow and ice because when dropping the tail gate you are going to crush the bottom the tail gate. Can you tell I am tired of winter...

The Maverick is truly a much nicer vehicle but all the electronic gadgets that are mostly nice when new may be a big concern in a few years... we'll see. I bought mine off the lot so no choice in accessories but I would trade my moon roof, power windows, locks, seats and video screen for heated wiper well, mirrors and seat...and a few large knobs to operate the climate control.

 

[Fitzovich]

I drove my '99 Ranger XLT extended cab, 4-cylinder, RWD manual for 22 years, (longest held of many vehicles & a couple of bikes) before replacing it with the Maverick Hybrid. Despite a few of the youth oriented sales pitches I've seen, I think Ford knew they had a buyer in me ... and not much selling was needed for me to order this small city truck in July of '21, without test drive or seeing it in person ... exactly because it promised to do everything and more than my trusted, long lived Ranger.
So, it may sound odd to now say that though I believe the Ranger of my past bears most heavily on the design concept of the Maverick ... there is just no comparison to be made!
Yeah ... orders of magnitude difference ... handling, safety, ergonomics, convenience, roominess, etc, all very much improved, (as one would naturally expect). But, with respect to the Utility, Economy, and Practicality of the old Ranger ? ...well yeah, that's comparable.

Completely agree with your assessment. I had a 98 Splash Ranger XLT extended cab 6 cylinder and a 08 Yaris as my commuter car. The Maverick XL Hybrid combines both for me with lots of extras. I’m very happy with this vehicle it is comfortable enough, with enough utility for me and has great mileage.

 

[Edogg1]

I drove my '99 Ranger XLT extended cab, 4-cylinder, RWD manual for 22 years, (longest held of many vehicles & a couple of bikes) before replacing it with the Maverick Hybrid. Despite a few of the youth oriented sales pitches I've seen, I think Ford knew they had a buyer in me ... and not much selling was needed for me to order this small city truck in July of '21, without test drive or seeing it in person ... exactly because it promised to do everything and more than my trusted, long lived Ranger.
So, it may sound odd to now say that though I believe the Ranger of my past bears most heavily on the design concept of the Maverick ... there is just no comparison to be made!
Yeah ... orders of magnitude difference ... handling, safety, ergonomics, convenience, roominess, etc, all very much improved, (as one would naturally expect). But, with respect to the Utility, Economy, and Practicality of the old Ranger ? ...well yeah, that's comparable.

Spot on, I had 2 rangers, ‘95 and ‘03. Both drove to over 200k. Aside from seemingly thinner metal and wonky infotainment, the maverick is the true ranger (original) successor.
the space inside the front feels similar. Really nice to have the rear seat space.
the height of the truck is where this win in my opinion. All the other “small” trucks out there are so much taller now, I love that I can reach over the bed and reach anything.

 

[matmondro]

Agree with @Edogg1 and @Phinney Ridge Dave . I had a 1996 Ranger with the 2.3 and 5-speed, then a 2005 FX4. Great trucks. The Maverick really is the TRUE successor to the original Ranger! To the OP, you'll find the Ranger and Mav are very comparable in size. Honestly can't go wrong with either.

 

[FriscoTXJoe]

Night and day.

And about 30 years of updated design technology.

97' Ranger stripped vs Lariat Hybrid.

Vehicles are 10 times better now.

 

[Bill Quattlebaum]

I have owned many Rangers over the years. The old Rangers from 2011 and before were good, solid trucks. I don't like the new Rangers which are much bigger than the old ones. My current Ranger is a 2010 XLT shortbed in toredor red. Haven't received my 2023 Maverick yet, but it will get better gas mileage than my current truck. I also will enjoy having a back seat.

 

[Flub]

Haha yeah guys I was talking about the "real" og Ranger not the midsize they're making now. I thought the Maverick would be bigger honestly but not upset to learn it'll require no hassling in the garage

 

[mr mojo risen]

Haha yeah guys I was talking about the "real" og Ranger not the midsize they're making now. I thought the Maverick would be bigger honestly but not upset to learn it'll require no hassling in the garage

I had a 94 Ranger with 353,750 miles at trade in for my Maverick, crew cab, 5-speed 2.3L. The Ranger had a split bench seat with a pivoting console that could fold back or serve as an arm rest.

When my two sons were much younger I would occasionally take them to school and other places in my Ranger. Probably wasn’t safe for my younger son who only had a lap belt.

The Maverick obviously has the two bucket seats instead of a bench seat in the front so it’s hard to make a direct comparison, but I definitely feel very comfortable in the driver seat. Agree with the other posters that Maverick bears a close resemblance to the original Ranger, which was a big factor for me to get one.

By the way, love your avatar.

 

[deej]

How does the Maverick compare in terms of driving comfort and cab space from the front row perspective? I was surprised to learn it's only 15cm wider, so am wondering if that even translates to anything. It looks way bigger in videos.

My last three vehicles have all been 1999-2011 Rangers, covering about 15 years. I really like the older Ranger and wanted something comparable in size. Absolutely no interest in the huge beast they call a Ranger today.

I just transitioned from a 2011 Ranger XLT extended cab 4x4 with the 4.0 engine to a 2023 Maverick Lariat 2.0 Ecoboost. The Mav drives and handles a lot better than the Ranger, with faster acceleration The front cab is very comfortable, and is comparable to the Ranger. The visibility out the back window is not nearly as good as the Ranger, and I feel there is a bit more of a blind spot on both sides, which is somewhat made up for by the electronic warnings flashing in the side mirrors. I'm still getting used to that.

The comments above about snow removal are spot on - it is a PITA to clear out the area under the front window. Extremely poor design for anyplace that gets snow. However, since the truck isn't that tall the rest of it is very easy to clear off.

On the plus side now the dog (80 lbs) has the entire back seat which gives him a lot more room than just sitting in the passenger seat of the Ranger, but I think he liked the Ranger better because he was in the front!

Overall exterior dimensions are pretty close. 2011 Ranger extended cab 4x4 has a wheelbase of 125.9 inches whereas the Mav is 121.1 inches. Ranger width 71.3 inches vs Mav 72.6 inches. Ranger length 203.6 inches vs Mav 199.7 inches.

So basically the Mav is slightly wider by 1.3 inches, and shorter by 3.9 inches.

Overall, I really like it! All the electrowhizzies and automation will take some time to get used to compared to almost manual everything in the Ranger. It only took me a week to stop reaching for the column shifter!

Especially love the improved gas mileage! The Ranger got 18-19 mpg on the highway, and I averaged 15 overall. So far I am averaging 25 mpg with the Mav, mostly around town driving and still on the first tank of fuel.

 

[Scott Asheville]

I read all the posts above and generally agree with all of them. I had two single-cab, manual transmission, 4 cylinder, previous generation Rangers before my Maverick. I miss them and don't miss them at the same time. They were really crude and honestly horribly riding vehicles with dangerous axle hop if pushed in a corner. But I loved them for what they were - cheap and highly functional basic trucks. I greatly miss the turning radius and bed size of the single cab Ranger, but otherwise the Maverick slaughters the previous generation Ranger as a vehicle.

I do feel nostalgia for my first 2000 XLT, with roll up windows, manual locks, 5 speed standard shifter, and a truly anemic 4 cylinder. There was something authentic about it I don't feel in the Maverick. The Maverick is just too nice to be a cheap entry level truck. I think they need to rip out all the nice bits and sell the Maverick Legacy trim for all us traditionalists who want to be proud of our cheap truck suffering.

 

[Comet]

I had a '98 single cab Ranger in 4WD. It had the 6cyl engine which had way less power than my new 4cyl Hybrid Maverick. The Ranger struggled going up steep hills and hauling a load of firewood uphill was little better than walking speed. The new Mav has way more oomph! The gas mileage difference is significant.

Still liked the old Ranger and would still have it but the frame rusted out here in Western PA. Using Surface Shield on the new Mav to hopefully keep it longer than 24 years (not likely as the metal seems to be thinner).

I thought I would miss the 4WD, but I put snow tires on the front wheel drive Mav and it does great on slippery wet grass on the farm hills getting firewood. The weight of the engine over the drive wheels does great (snow tires make all the difference in the world).

Sponsored