I would LOVE heated seats. Never had the before, but after test driving with them...yeah...I can't go without anymore. And I like power mirrors so if any einstein shines his lights in my eyes...back at 'cha! Also, the stereo sucks. lol.
Well considering this post isn't about seats, but Brooks are awful to me. Feels like concrete when you walk.
I DO!
My car does not lean. Not a hippo like Lizzo. And technically, as it isn't "parked" by law standards, it's not "illegally parked"
Id dare say that this was one of lamest reviews of the Maverick I've seen. Of course it's based on his opinion. So it's hard to say he's wrong. But he seems to have a different view of the driving experience than most others. The maverick is no sports car. But most people describe it's power at least as adequate. Few call it slow. He seems to be holding it to a standard that it's not even trying to attain and forgetting that its a small truck, not a sports sedan. And I have no idea of what kind of water bottle he has that won't fit in the generously sized cupholders.
I've watched several of his reviews. They're all pretty annoying. He seems to whine about the dumbest things and be impressed about the most irrelevant things. But I think that's his angle.That Youtuber talks about annoying things.....he should watch one of his own videos.....About 2 minutes was all I could take
It amazes me that the only basis for the "it's a $20,000 vehicle" and other being overcharged for a $20,000 vehicle comments are the fact that Ford initially charged $20,000. But at the time of it's introduction people were saying that they were amazed that Ford was able to sell it so cheaply. The Maverick has ONE semi direct competitor; the Santa Cruz which is SLIGHTLY better equipped and costs slightly more. The Maverick surpasses it in some areas. And it surpasses the Maverick in some areas. But it seems as if few complain about the Santa Cruz being "a 20,000 vehicle" being sold for 30,000. I think Ford simply charged $20,000 as an introductory low price. Now it's selling it at the market value. How do we know it's market value? Many dealerships were taking a huge markup and selling the Maverick for what Ford currently charges.
My cousin has a sonata. She had to have her engine replaced under warranty for excessive oil consumption. But otherwise it's been a decent vehicle. Not great, but decent. That's most people's experience. Just decent. But Hyundai's attention is that they give a lot of features for a lower price than the competition. But reliability is spotty. It seems as if it's either pretty decent or totally awful. Very little in between. My sister has a Genesis (hyundai's Lincoln equivalent) SUV with all the bells and whistles. I think her husband bought the extended warranty. So she should be ok. If it's too troublesome, her husband will dump it in a minute. As for the Santa Cruz, when I look at it, I see a little "cute" vehicle with a little bed . The extra 6 inches on the MAVERICK makes a significant difference. When I see a Maverick, I think small truck. When I see the Santa Cruz I think "bless your heart"
As the upcoming Toyota Stout will probably priced at. I've always heard that Amazon sold its tablet devices at a loss to simply gain market share from Apple. It seems to be a common practice.
The Scout isn’t coming before 2027 - if ever.
The perception of speed fascinates me. The new hybrid does 0-60 in 6.7 seconds & 1/4 mile a bit over 15 seconds (per Motorweek & Car & Driver), and that's seems barely adequate these days. That would be quick for your average sedan not that long ago, and while getting nearly 40 mpg to boot! My Maverick replaced a Prius v. At the time, I had shopped for other used hatchbacks that included the HR-V & CH-R ... you want to talk slow, all three of those were nearly 10 seconds or over 10 seconds to 60! As for the hybrid system, not surprisingly it operates exactly like my Prius v did, so the reviewer frankly just won't like any hybrid system setup like Toyota's or Ford's as it's just not his thing.
some folks need to watch some classic Motorweek reviews of the 80s and 90s muscle cars that a Maverick would beat 0-60……The perception of speed fascinates me. The new hybrid does 0-60 in 6.7 seconds & 1/4 mile a bit over 15 seconds (per Motorweek & Car & Driver), and that's seems barely adequate these days. That would be quick for your average sedan not that long ago, and while getting nearly 40 mpg to boot! My Maverick replaced a Prius v. At the time, I had shopped for other used hatchbacks that included the HR-V & CH-R ... you want to talk slow, all three of those were nearly 10 seconds or over 10 seconds to 60! As for the hybrid system, not surprisingly it operates exactly like my Prius v did, so the reviewer frankly just won't like any hybrid system setup like Toyota's or Ford's as it's just not his thing.
But, after almost a year I'm still really enjoying my Maverick. As noted, it's way faster than the Prius v was (almost 4 seconds faster!) while getting nearly the same fuel economy but with much added utility, 4k towing capability, a bit more interior room, and awd ... truly amazing in my opinion!
Does it ride rougher than the Prius v or Sienna? Yes, but neither of those can handle the payloads or towing ability. You have to have one or the other (plush ride or payload), or a more expensive air suspension or something similar setup. More plastic the Prius v? Yeah, it has some more ... but, in the 6.5 years I had the Prius, I never once fondled or snuggled up with my dashboard, so I don't care.
I hope my Maverick remains problem free for another 7 or 8 years. I enjoy driving it and feel it was a nice upgrade from the Prius v overall. It certainly has some quirks that I don't like, but that's been true of every car I've owned.
Just my $.02, which isn't worth much
