Ford Maverick unmasked

[Crazy Dazz]

Is this the one that's based on the Focus platform? Or is that something else?

[Top_Ghia]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Is this the one that's based on the Focus platform? Or is that something else?

It’s on the Escape platform.

[Raptor]

They didn't make me a Falcon R5 ute so I'd happily accept the Maverick as a substitute. It's certainly more attractive to me than putting another bloody Ranger on the roads.

I see they've also used the timber divider idea in the bed that the Falcon ute has had for over 20yrs (introduced with the AU)

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Is this the one that's based on the Focus platform? Or is that something else?

Originally Posted by Top_Ghia

It’s on the Escape platform.

It's the Focus C2 platform, that has also spawned the Escape and Bronco Sport. Bronco Sport is probably it's closest relative.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Top_Ghia

I think Ford Aus has forgotten who their core customers are. They are trying to position themselves as a premium brand. Unlike Ford USA who are willing to chase the fleet market and are very aggressive with pricing.
Bring a base model in under $30,000 and nobody could argue it’s too expensive.

It’s not Ford Australia, the previous CEO was possessed by the idea of
profit being a predetermined percentage of revenue, even if that meant
killing a whole bunch of affordable sales, hopefully the new guy sees things
differently……..

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

It's the Focus C2 platform, that has also spawned the Escape and Bronco Sport. Bronco Sport is probably it's closest relative.

That particular C2 branch is related to Transit Connect van, Ford has already told
Hermosillo suppliers to gear up for future TC production (not VW Caddy version)

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by jpd80

It’s not Ford Australia, the previous CEO was possessed by the idea of
profit being a predetermined percentage of revenue, even if that meant
killing a whole bunch of affordable sales, hopefully the new guy sees things
differently……..

10% EBIT is the target. As a global target. Getting close to that too. Makes the company very, very profitable.

It's not just coming from here, that's a global target. The whole idea of the Maverick is a sub 20k starter vehicle though, which is still profitable, but affordable. At least in the USA.

Hopefully the affordable starter vehicle get's a look in here at some point. The Puma base price is too high for a starter vehicle. Need something to come in that's affordable for first car buyers imo.

[Nikked]

Ford would be mad not to offer this in RHD, hard work is done since it rides on RHD capable architecture.

[DFB FGXR6]

The Maverick would be perfect for people like my father.

He currently has a Ranger and loves the flexibility of having a tub/tray. But he certainly does not need a full ladder frame chassis or a heavy duty 4x4 system, or even a diesel engine for that matter. I'm positive there are more like him.

Ford are so short sited. Maverick, Bronco and Bronco Sport should all have been on the drawing board for global consumption. They are all highly recognised nameplates and would need very little brand building. I don't get it!

[jpd80]

Ford really plays to its strength with utes and pickups, Maverick reminds me of the earlier Courier utes
from the ‘80s and ‘90s. It would be perfect for people like me that don’t need a full chassis Ute,
the lower ride height is perfect for what I need and that usable open back looks great.

We can only hope that Ford takes a step back and realises that America only product
is exactly what a lot of global customers like, rugged SUVs and a choice of pickups
would serve them well in Australia.

[CyberWasp]

***

*** Countries outside of the USA can get nicked.
Buy a Toyota or some other car from a company who cares.
We don't care about being #1 in your insignificant little markets.

[DFB FGXR6]

This graphic details the size difference between Ford pick-ups.



Note how little difference there is in size between Maverick and Ranger.

My guess is next-gen Ranger will swell in size.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Nikked

Ford would be mad not to offer this in RHD, hard work is done since it rides on RHD capable architecture.

If only it was that simple. Just forget about the part where the RHD versions need to undergo the same testing/development/durability cycling as the LHD versions do.

They need to twin them from the start like they do Ranger. Then you can piggyback the work.

Making a RHD version after the LHD version is already done is just ****ing money away.

I think a lot of the problem with avoiding RHD versions is the US being too inwardly focused though. And for the Mav, it's possibly the UK market not being that bothered with utes. Ranger is already no 1 ute in Europe, and probably don't want to step on it's toes.



The fuel economy of the hybrid version is pretty remarkable. 40 mile per gallon in the city vs 19 mile per gallon in the city for the Hyundai Santa Cruz. Uses half the fuel of it's only rival around town.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

This graphic details the size difference between Ford pick-ups.

image

Note how little difference there is in size between Maverick and Ranger.

My guess is next-gen Ranger will swell in size.

Im still not sure why the Ranger and 150 need to co-exist?

[Top_Ghia]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

If only it was that simple. Just forget about the part where the RHD versions need to undergo the same testing/development/durability cycling as the LHD versions do.



They need to twin them from the start like they do Ranger. Then you can piggyback the work.



Making a RHD version after the LHD version is already done is just ****ing money away.



I think a lot of the problem with avoiding RHD versions is the US being too inwardly focused though. And for the Mav, it's possibly the UK market not being that bothered with utes. Ranger is already no 1 ute in Europe, and probably don't want to step on it's toes.







The fuel economy of the hybrid version is pretty remarkable. 40 mile per gallon in the city vs 19 mile per gallon in the city for the Hyundai Santa Cruz. Uses half the fuel of it's only rival around town.

This would go off in Asia. Countries like Thailand would sell a lot of these.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Im still not sure why the Ranger and 150 need to co-exist?

Because the F series goes all the way up to the big Super Duty's. It's a much more rugged vehicle, and one that can tow big weight.

The Ranger is a lighter duty vehicle, with a size more suited to asia and europe.


What you said is like saying why do Mercedes have an E class, when there is a C class.

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Im still not sure why the Ranger and 150 need to co-exist?

Because the F-150 sells enormously in North America and pretty much no where else and Ranger sells around the world at about a third F-series sales volume but everywhere else.

F-series (includes F-150 and others) around a million and Ranger a bit over 320,000 globally.
https://www.focus2move.com/world-best-selling-pick-up/

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

Because the F-150 sells enormously in North America and pretty much no where else and Ranger sells around the world at about a third F-series sales volume but everywhere else.

F-series (includes F-150 and others) around a million and Ranger a bit over 320,000 globally.
https://www.focus2move.com/world-best-selling-pick-up/

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Because the F series goes all the way up to the big Super Duty's. It's a much more rugged vehicle, and one that can tow big weight.

The Ranger is a lighter duty vehicle, with a size more suited to asia and europe.


What you said is like saying why do Mercedes have an E class, when there is a C class.

I get what both of you are saying, but make the next 150 in-between the 150 and Ranger, cull half your workforce and costs and actually make a global ute.

150 doesnt get a chance anywhere else because Ford NA hasnt even tried, cant compare the effort.

RAM proves bigger can work here, but not everyone wants to spend $80k on the base model with a V8.

So..economies of scale reduces your costs and your can offer better content.

RE: C / E class etc/..personally, I think the market is over saturated and the Germans are the worst at it.

Start to have a look at the four door 4 series and the 5 series, or the A5 and A6...they grow bigger and bigger and the only difference is the engines which give it 5-10years is going to mean nothing with most cars being EV or Hybrid.

I get the emotion of the Ranger in Australia, but if it suddenly grew a little and had better options (hello V8) then I dont think anyone would car.

Asia can have this Maverick POS for their "little" streets.

[jpd80]

F150 and Super Duty now share a lot of body stampings that improve the scales of efficiency
and since F Series is responsible for the bulk of Ford’s profits, there’s no way that anyone
will be allowed to mess with a winning formula.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Im still not sure why the Ranger and 150 need to co-exist?

I agree.

Merge the F150 and Ranger and call it an F100





.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Im still not sure why the Ranger and 150 need to co-exist?

F150 is 10% bigger.
Doesn't sound like much? But thats a greater size difference than between a Corolla sedan and Camry.

However the current aluminum F150 is no heavier than a Ranger...
Aluminum Ranger with a V6 ecoboost please, should be around 2t rather than the 2.3t of the current lump.

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by Polyal

I get what both of you are saying, but make the next 150 in-between the 150 and Ranger, cull half your workforce and costs and actually make a global ute.

150 doesnt get a chance anywhere else because Ford NA hasnt even tried, cant compare the effort.

RAM proves bigger can work here, but not everyone wants to spend $80k on the base model with a V8.

So..economies of scale reduces your costs and your can offer better content.

RE: C / E class etc/..personally, I think the market is over saturated and the Germans are the worst at it.

Start to have a look at the four door 4 series and the 5 series, or the A5 and A6...they grow bigger and bigger and the only difference is the engines which give it 5-10years is going to mean nothing with most cars being EV or Hybrid.

I get the emotion of the Ranger in Australia, but if it suddenly grew a little and had better options (hello V8) then I dont think anyone would car.

Asia can have this Maverick POS for their "little" streets.

Don't get me wrong, if the F-150 here was $10-15K above a Ranger I'd buy the F-150...

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

10% EBIT is the target. As a global target. Getting close to that too. Makes the company very, very profitable.

It's not just coming from here, that's a global target. The whole idea of the Maverick is a sub 20k starter vehicle though, which is still profitable, but affordable. At least in the USA.

Hopefully the affordable starter vehicle get's a look in here at some point. The Puma base price is too high for a starter vehicle. Need something to come in that's affordable for first car buyers imo.

I got my start in Ford in my WS Fiesta, sub $20K new car as a 17 year old kid.

There needs to be some sub $20K entry model to get new blood interested in the brand.

Loss leader.

All this talk of F150 there's a new one I've parked behind this morning at the cafe for breakfast and yesterday had a customer rock up in a new F250 at work.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Polyal

I get what both of you are saying, but make the next 150 in-between the 150 and Ranger, cull half your workforce and costs and actually make a global ute.

150 doesnt get a chance anywhere else because Ford NA hasnt even tried, cant compare the effort.

RAM proves bigger can work here, but not everyone wants to spend $80k on the base model with a V8.

So..economies of scale reduces your costs and your can offer better content.

RE: C / E class etc/..personally, I think the market is over saturated and the Germans are the worst at it.

Start to have a look at the four door 4 series and the 5 series, or the A5 and A6...they grow bigger and bigger and the only difference is the engines which give it 5-10years is going to mean nothing with most cars being EV or Hybrid.

I get the emotion of the Ranger in Australia, but if it suddenly grew a little and had better options (hello V8) then I dont think anyone would car.

Asia can have this Maverick POS for their "little" streets.

RAM doesn't prove anything at all. It sells in numbers per year about what Ranger and Hilux both sell in a fortnight. It's a niche market.

Originally Posted by Raptor

I agree.

Merge the F150 and Ranger and call it an F100





.

They seriously looked at doing a smaller F-100 about 7 or 8 years ago. I think switching to all aluminium construction for F-150 to reduce weight made it redundant. And then they ended up bringing the Ranger back to the North American market anyway.

[hayseed]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

Don't get me wrong, if the F-150 here was $10-15K above a Ranger I'd buy the F-150...

Me Too..

[chevypower]

I'm ordering 3 of them for our business. Sales reps will get them. White XL AWD 2.0 EcoBoost. We currently have a couple of Colorado V6s. We will get them at invoice, so we may be lucky enough to almost do a straight swap (might have to sell privately to do it).

[MITCHAY]

I like it but doesn't seem to be much different to a Ranger

A lot of RAMs and Silverados around here. It started out just the rural folks but the tradies are now getting in on the action. I see them everyday.

[janddbone]

I love it and hope it works out reliable.

Came see how it can be called tonsijilar to the Ranger? Monocoque vs chassis, diesel vs petrol, fwd vs rwd, AWD vs low range gearing.... Both practical, that must be how they are identical....

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by XR Martin

F150 is 10% bigger.
Doesn't sound like much? But thats a greater size difference than between a Corolla sedan and Camry.

However the current aluminum F150 is no heavier than a Ranger...
Aluminum Ranger with a V6 ecoboost please, should be around 2t rather than the 2.3t of the current lump.

Not exactly, the closest they come is Crew Cab Ranger vs Super Cab F150
but even then, the F150 is still 400 lbs (180 Kg) heavier.
That’s not much considering the comparison is to a 2.7 EBV6 but again,
the Ranger lives alongside F150 quite successfully in the USA.

The current Ranger crew cab has interior space that feels more like a Focus.
If a bigger global Ranger was ever entertained, it could be achieved by
making the body 3” (75mm) wider and increasing length by 3” (75mm)
to give more hip, shoulder and rear leg room. That would align better with
the room expected in a proper mid-sized pickup, but then impinges on F150.

Anything you do to make Ranger into a bigger global pickup then impacts
on the Ranger’s canabalising F150 sales in the US, Dearborn won’t allow it.

[Bossxr8]

With the inline 5 probably disappearing, fair chance there is more internal room in next gen.