Santa Cruz, really???

[Traegorn]

The warning said right above it. "Including occupants and cargo."

That's the first warning, not the 661 lbs warning. They are separate warnings on rhe same page.

You really could not believe that a Maverick with towing capacity of 4,000 pounds and payload capacity of 1,500 lbs. would be so much more than Hyundai with 5,000 tow capacity and a payload of only "660lbs". No one is spreading misinformation on the Maverick. I too was shopping trucks. I was never able to see a Maverick on dealers lots when i was shopping ( because of covid 19 and the chip shortage ). That is what brought me to the Maverick forum, to see what I missed. And I live right here in Ford country, just out side of Detroit.

Hyundai spread the misinformation themselves. You dug up an old post that referenced that.

You came to a Ford Maverick forum to troll because you wanted some attention. Congratulations, you got it. Now bounce on off.

Sponsored

 

[SLINGSHOT]

You might want to check out that 10 YEAR WARRANTY on line. You have to jump through many hoops. And, in the end, they will find a way to squirm out of it and deny coverage.
Did you buy it here? Nope? Denied.
Did you use Shell gas? Nope? Denied.
Did you use Shell gas? Yes? Denied.
Did we do every service on the vehicle? Nope? Denied.
Did we do every service on the vehicle? Yes? Well then, YOU screwed it up somehow. Denied.
Did you drive it? Yes? DENIED

 

[Traegorn]

Wanted nor needed any attention. I will bounce off, nowhere. And quit lying.

I'm genuinely trying to figure out what you think posting that screenshot proves. That's an article that cited the payload numbers being inconsistent between Hyundai's materials and the manual.

Jalopnik references the 661 lb number later in the piece. Did you not read it?

 

[Traegorn]

Hyundai never post a payload capacity of only 661 lbs! Occupants and 661 lbs of cargo! Yes. I just took my vehicle in for it's free oil change and tire rotations for 3 yrs and 36,000 miles. Under warranty, a free, no hassle, no argument cosmetic part fix is coming.

Hyundai said you could only put 661 lbs in the bed.

That's what folks have been talking about.

Whether it's correct or not, stop pretending that came from anyone other than Hyundai

 

[Azmkat]

It looks like Hyundai did update the 2023 manual and it does have the word "bed" in the warning. (Page 6-67) Pretty much clarifies it. So if you ever want to haul anything heavy in your bed, Santa Cruz probably isn't a good choice. Payload capacity is 1411, but I don't think putting cement bags (eg) on your seat is a good idea because you can't put them in the bed. I think "Santa CLAUS" has a higher bed payload. Sounds like someone isn't feeling "cool" about buying a "cruz" .



Maximum Load For Your Vehicle
The maximum load for your vehicle
type is:
• 2WD : 1,411 lbs. (640 kg)
• AWD : 1,411 lbs. (640 kg)

WARNING
The bed cargo should never exceed 661
lbs. (300 kg)

 

[BuddyS]

I didn't even consider the Ridgeline (too big and expensive) or the Santa Cruz (not really a Hyundai fan, and it wasn't want I wanted anyway. What I did want was killer MPGs and enough truckiness to do some moderate work and tow a little trailer. And I didn't want to spend a ton -- we already have a nicer car for when we need to drive "dressed up".

 

[Traegorn]

Since I have time before the snow melts on the streets. Hyundai never said, The payload capacity is 661 lbs. He knew that when he posted it. Now you can go on and on with misinformed ( like him ) tangled wording. But I am not staying around for it. And no contribution to your podcast.

I weigh 300 lbs.

My Maverick as configured has a payload of 1480 lbs.

With just me in the cab, I can load approximately 1180 lbs of stuff in the bed.

A Santa Cruz has a payload of 1411 lbs.

With just me in the cab, I can only load 661 lbs of stuff in the bed meaning that it's really effectively a 961 lbs payload in those circumstances.

That's the point. That's the problem with the Santa Cruz. That's what people are complaining about. I actually like the Santa Cruz too. I'm usually one of the folks on this forum defending it.

But you're just determined to show your whole ass.

 

[Old Hickory Trojan]

junior, i really can not understand your misinformed logic here. A warranty is stated in writing and enforceable by law.

What was posted about Hyundai finding reasons to not cover their warranty was BS. Just the other day a guy that had to wait for a part more than is allowed by government regulations had his SC bought back by Hyundai at his MSRP. His only complaint was he had to wait for the final payment from corporate. On the SC Turbo Hyundai is recalling and correcting the DCT transmissions that have had issues and are replacing any that have failed at no cost under warranty no questions asked including a person that had over 20k miles on his vehicle. Had another guy report that he had a Hyundai where they replaced his engine at 97k miles. The reported chipping paint on the driver side door handle on some SC's has been replaced with a whole new door panel no questions asked. Seems like those examples contradict the posting about rejecting warranty repairs. Has Ford repaired the paint issues on the Maverick yet or even corrected it? Not saying all Mavericks have that issues but there appears to be quite a few complaints on this Forum since joined it when I ordered a Hybrid ( still waiting) in October 2021

 

[NoVaJimmy]

What was posted about Hyundai finding reasons to not cover their warranty was BS. Just the other day a guy that had to wait for a part more than is allowed by government regulations had his SC bought back by Hyundai at his MSRP. His only complaint was he had to wait for the final payment from corporate. On the SC Turbo Hyundai is recalling and correcting the DCT transmissions that have had issues and are replacing any that have failed at no cost under warranty no questions asked including a person that had over 20k miles on his vehicle. Had another guy report that he had a Hyundai where they replaced his engine at 97k miles. The reported chipping paint on the driver side door handle on some SC's has been replaced with a whole new door panel no questions asked. Seems like those examples contradict the posting about rejecting warranty repairs. Has Ford repaired the paint issues on the Maverick yet or even corrected it? Not saying all Mavericks have that issues but there appears to be quite a few complaints on this Forum since joined it when I ordered a Hybrid ( still waiting) in October 2021

Ha, I can't even get Ford to replace my faulty airbags!

 

[Old Hickory Trojan]

The Maverick is a much better choice over the Santa Cruz for the following reasons:
1) price
2) payload and 4K towing package
3) the only pickup brand for me is Ford
4) the Santa Cruz looks like an SUV that had an accident that lost part of its top (LOL)

You are misinformed on items 1, 2. Payload is over 1700 pounds empty. Put four passengers and gear and it drops just like the Maverick. Big difference is the SC has road leveling rear end to level the SC when there is heavy weight in the rear. Towing on the SC is 5000 pounds compared to the Mavericks 4000 on trucks that have those upgrades and standard is 3500 on the SC versus 2000 on the Maverick.

 

[OrangeBlue]

I'd consider a Santa Cruz if they had a hybrid.

The base models have a strange combination of really low horsepower and bad fuel economy.

 

[Traegorn]

Someone could do the same with the Ford Maverick. Straight from the Ford Maverick manual.

Your first image does not appear to be in the actual owner's manual. You can tell because it tells you to check the manual.

Your second image is explicitly about the Anchor Points in the pickup bed. You can tell because it explicitly says it's talking about the anchor points.

 

[22RolloverClub]

LOL Jesus Christ you're still here rambling on about the Cruz's cargo capacity? This is just a troll thread at this point.

 

[Traegorn]

Both from the online Ford Maverick manual.

Both straight from the online Ford Maverick Manual. Here is a third.

Give me the direct link for the page for that first image then. Because searching the manual in both the online and the PDF copy I have doesn't find it, and the online manual can directly link any page.

And again, with this new image, the thing you seem to be trying to take out of context is the sentence about the Bed Rails? Do you see how it directly says in that line that it's about the Bed Rails?

That's how you write a manual. Your "gotchas" are nonsensical.

Sponsored