Ford Maverick debut

In reply to ProDarwin :

Both are calculations- one is based on two tests, the other based on 5.  And the two tests are included in the 5.  OEM's prefer to run the 2, as you can get a slightly higher number, and it's generally cheaper to run the cert.  (in reality, while they are the same tests, they are run separately)

We've been sued over the high estimate, too- although the real culprit for the rules happens to be Toyota when an EPA official didn't come close to the sticker number on their Prius.  It's pretty common for OEM's to get sued for a high estimate.

IMHO, I'm don't understand why the 5 cycle rule isn't just run for everyone, all the time.   If I were in charge at the site on the north side of town, I would stop allowing the 2 cycle calculation and just use the 5.

Have we talked about Ford embracing 3d printing as a way of customizing the Maverick? 

I think this is really a smart idea, especially with a trucklet at this price point. It kinda reminds me of the Honda Element, which has really hit its stride even after being discontinued through support of Makers, who developed microcamper furniture units for it, and a rooftop e-Camper. I could definitely see a similar community around the Maverick, given its size and economy. 

In reply to Erich :

So I first scanned over your post, seeing 3d printing and microcamper furniture and rooftop campers- and thought- how big have home 3d printers gotten???  LOL.

Erich said:

Have we talked about Ford embracing 3d printing as a way of customizing the Maverick? 

I think this is really a smart idea, especially with a trucklet at this price point. It kinda reminds me of the Honda Element, which has really hit its stride even after being discontinued through support of Makers, who developed microcamper furniture units for it, and a rooftop e-Camper. I could definitely see a similar community around the Maverick, given its size and economy. 

I like this, but its a bit on the 'not enough' side from what I can tell.  Like why is the back of the center console the highlighted area?  Seems like a missed opportunity to not put several of these in reach of the driver for GPS, phone, etc.  Good step in the right direction though.

I'm more impressed with the flexibility they built into the bed.  That is not something I would have expected on such a small truck early on, but it is exactly what is needed.

I used to work for an upfitter.  I hope that what comes with the Maverick is eventually a package similar to what upfitters have access to.  Detailed dimensions of all critical points, etc.

alfadriver said:

In reply to ProDarwin :

Both are calculations- one is based on two tests, the other based on 5.  And the two tests are included in the 5.  OEM's prefer to run the 2, as you can get a slightly higher number, and it's generally cheaper to run the cert.  (in reality, while they are the same tests, they are run separately)

We've been sued over the high estimate, too- although the real culprit for the rules happens to be Toyota when an EPA official didn't come close to the sticker number on their Prius.  It's pretty common for OEM's to get sued for a high estimate.

IMHO, I'm don't understand why the 5 cycle rule isn't just run for everyone, all the time.   If I were in charge at the site on the north side of town, I would stop allowing the 2 cycle calculation and just use the 5.

I'm with you on the 5 vs 2 cycle.

What I don't get is the published window #.  I know you are saying Ford caclulates that.  But what I was trying to say is, that isn't how all manufacturers arrive at that number, correct?  They aren't required to use the exact test results, they can come up with a more conservative number if they think the test results #s will get them sued.

IMO those cases should have been thrown out, unless the manufacturer did something extra nutty to game the system for just those tests, VW style.  The test numbers should be published in their raw form and manufacturers shouldn't have to deal with any blowback from them.

In reply to ProDarwin :

The problem with the raw numbers is that they are largely meaningless.  For two of the 5 cycles (at least), the driving in incredibly unrealistic- the FTP part is pretty light, and the US06 part is way to aggressive.  And that's why there's an adjustment calculation between the test and the sticker.

Both are used for regulatory reasons because we have many years of correlation between changing targets vs. air quality- and there are also enough road tests to check robustness.

That being said, I don't think an OEM will EVER be conservative on the sticker- too much easy advertising.  

And do OEM's game the test?  Sure- but it's more legal than not, especially since there's a good mechanism to penalize OEM's who over game the system.  What VW did was really odd to me, and given how close some Ford people were to FBI prosecution for doing less, people should have gone to jail.  In the end, they really forced the EU to tighten the thumb screws on the rules there.

Anyway, as far as I know, the calculations are all the same for everyone.  But OEM's run their own tests, and submit the data for approval.  Having seen the EPA test facilities, I'm pretty confident that OEM's mostly have better systems, and AFAIK, the EPA recognizes that.

The reason you see so many lawsuits is marketing is pushing the number before anyone really knows what it can do.  So they will decide that Hybrid X will be 40/40/40 (city, highway, combined) because it's a cool set of numbers.  Which may work for the car version of the powertrain, but not the slightly larger pseudo CUV.  Remember, the sticker is as much advertising as it is information of that specific car.

I expect this will change as CO2 becomes more regulated on it's own.

ProDarwin said:

Erich said:

Have we talked about Ford embracing 3d printing as a way of customizing the Maverick? 

I think this is really a smart idea, especially with a trucklet at this price point. It kinda reminds me of the Honda Element, which has really hit its stride even after being discontinued through support of Makers, who developed microcamper furniture units for it, and a rooftop e-Camper. I could definitely see a similar community around the Maverick, given its size and economy. 

I like this, but its a bit on the 'not enough' side from what I can tell.  Like why is the back of the center console the highlighted area?  Seems like a missed opportunity to not put several of these in reach of the driver for GPS, phone, etc.  Good step in the right direction though.

There's in-dash navigation, that almost certainly has phone connectivity and at least one spot intended to be a "mounting surface" in the center of the dash:

I'm sure manufacturers have to be a little careful about how much they want to encourage people to put distracting things front and center. That could be why the "mounting surface" is mentioned as a camera mount rather than "a great place to mount your phone that you might mess with while driving", and why they're focusing on rear seat stuff more than front seat stuff with the 3d printing.

Totally with you on the bed. It seems very, very well thought out to me. It's nice to see that good design doesn't always have to be flashy or expensive. Also, the tie downs double as bottle openers.

alfadriver said:

That being said, I don't think an OEM will EVER be conservative on the sticker- too much easy advertising.  

I think this is the exact situation the lawsuits have created though.  OEMs were sued for real world mileage not aligning with sticker.  Their only 2 options in the future are to strategically reduce the sticker to what they think real world mileage will be, or to deal with lawsuits.  Or are you saying they don't have this option?

I refreshed my memory on this, and this is exactly what the Honda Civic Hybrid of ~2007ish lawsuit was.  Honda was forced to payout, even though they published the numbers the EPA determined.  In a later lawsuit, a judge ruled that the EPA determines numbers, not the OEM so they won that one, but the original class action payout still happened, along with millions in lawyer fees.

Back on topic, I have "built" out a few of these this morning.  I'm trying to understand the difference between XL and XLT.  I really want the base model, but it seems XLT is the only way to get cruise.

Even the XL I only added 1 option (bed liner), then still came out well over $22k because destination fees are like $1400 

Getting very tempted to pull the trigger on one soon.

In reply to ProDarwin :

I think the XLT is pretty much the "force people to pay more to get cruise control" trim.  I mean, it does have other features (alloy wheels, storage cubbies, rear armrest), but beyond those, you need to get individual options or the XLT luxury package to get more features.  Which does make me wonder how much it'd cost to get cruise control added to an XL at the dealership, and if it would be worth it over paying for the XLT.

My F150 XL had a convenience option package that included a cloth split bench, cruise control, and maybe a radio upgrade.  Would be nice to see a convenience package on the Maverick XL, but I'd guess the profit on the XLT is higher.

eastsideTim said:

In reply to ProDarwin :

I think the XLT is pretty much the "force people to pay more to get cruise control" trim.  I mean, it does have other features (alloy wheels, storage cubbies, rear armrest), but beyond those, you need to get individual options or the XLT luxury package to get more features.  Which does make me wonder how much it'd cost to get cruise control added to an XL at the dealership, and if it would be worth it over paying for the XLT.

 

Exactly. The only thing the xl needs for me is cruise. Everything else is more than i need ot want. 

Excited to actually drive one of these when they get on lots. Seats are going to be the dealbreaker for me, but ill be waiting for a few years till the kinks get worked out. 

The act of holding cruise control hostage really bothers me.  This makes cruise control a $2,285 option.  Sure, you get other stuff too but like others say, I'm not sure I would need all the other stuff.  

There might be a nice market if someone can figure a sub $500 cruise option via reprograming.  

I'm strangely attracted to one of these but spec'd out like, Gov't Mule Jr.  I'd want to add the amber/yellow roof lights and generic logo to the side door.  Update the lights to modern LEDs and maybe add some wig-wag LEDs to the corners too.  Put an orange cone in the bed and park where ever I want.  

Add a ladder rack and this looks like a great vehicle for a city building inspector, etc.  

John Welsh said:

The act of holding cruise control hostage really bothers me.  This makes cruise control a $2,285 option.  Sure, you get other stuff too but like others say, I'm not sure I would need all the other stuff. 

Unfortunately, its also a very common tactic.    When it's available as a standalone option (or inexpensive option package), that's one thing, but nowadays, on lower priced cars, you're forced to go up a trim level to get it.

Back in the day, adding cruise control was as easy as just grabbing the controller, switches and cables from the junkyard.

I'm guessing it's unrealistic to think that will be the case here.

I'll admit, I have built one a few times to see if I'd be interested in one. 

I'm in the same boat, need to test drive one to see how it feels on the road before I make any decisions, also would need to reduce the size of the overall fleet before I look at getting anything.  

The steelies are a verrrrrry nice touch!

Can you order the top of the line trim with the steelies? That would be really cool.

I await news of lowering kits, especially for the 2.0 awd. Hopefully it wouldn't muck up the towing.

The fact that it has an integrated trailer brake controller (with Max tow package) is compelling too.  I have been meaning to add brakes to my 3k lb trailer after a few panic stops I've had.

CyberEric said:

The steelies are a verrrrrry nice touch!

Can you order the top of the line trim with the steelies? That would be really cool.

Steelies only come on the XL trim, unfortunately.

Vroom came and picked the Ram up today. They are overnighting the check to me. This might actually happen!

The Ford dealership I chose my reservation at finally got back to me. No ADM on customer ordered vehicles and they accept X-plan. As soon as the money from the Ram hits my account, I'm ordering an XLT AWD.

Apexcarver said:

I await news of lowering kits, especially for the 2.0 awd. Hopefully it wouldn't muck up the towing.

 

The fact that it has an integrated trailer brake controller (with Max tow package) is compelling too.  I have been meaning to add brakes to my 3k lb trailer after a few panic stops I've had.

And here I was wondering when a small 1" spacer lift would be available. I think a small lift to fit a little bigger tires would look pretty good. 

Now you have me thinking about lowering the AWD one I want. It would be cool to see the lowered mini truck movement come back.

Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) said:

Back in the day, adding cruise control was as easy as just grabbing the controller, switches and cables from the junkyard.

I'm guessing it's unrealistic to think that will be the case here.

Once "they" get in the computer it might be even easier. But not cheaper.

In reply to eastsideTim :

Strangely enough my base sport Gladiator with roll up windows, no power door locks and manual mirrors came with cruise. I was so happy I could actually buy the base model.

mblommel said:

In reply to eastsideTim :

Strangely enough my base sport Gladiator with roll up windows, no power door locks and manual mirrors came with cruise. I was so happy I could actually buy the base model.

I think the Gladiator is expensive enough as a base model that they'd have a hard time justifying making cruise an option.  Glad it was standard, they are on my list as a potential used truck in the future.

In reply to John Welsh :

I'm hoping that manufacturers jump on getting ladder racks that are easy to bolt in. I could always get one custom made but it would be nice if it was easier.

A lot of my work day is like a couple buckets of tools and sone 2x4s. This would be great for the fleet

GCrites80s said:

Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) said:

Back in the day, adding cruise control was as easy as just grabbing the controller, switches and cables from the junkyard.

I'm guessing it's unrealistic to think that will be the case here.

Once "they" get in the computer it might be even easier. But not cheaper.

I wonder if they'll be like most new cars and all the wiring will already be in place so adding cruise will just require buying the parts and turning it on in the ECU?

If you think cruise is an expensive option..... My wife has decided she wants one next year when we are looking at getting a new car.  The only options she wants besides what comes standard (like pw, pl, etc) is cruise control and satellite radio.  To add satellite radio is an $8835 option because you have to get the Lariat package with the Lariat Luxury package.  

And yes, we could just add a separate unit, but having it as part of the infotainment is much more convenient.  Looking at the way the radio is setup in the Maverick, I'm afraid it'll be difficult to add an aftermarket head unit. 

-Rob