Let's talk reliability

John Welsh said:

tremm said:

I love the idea of the maverick. I don't love ford. Doesn't give me confidence when a manufacturer can't move cars and has to vacate the market.

We don't hear nearly as much chatter about the Santa Cruz, the Maverick competitor.  

I kind of forgot about that one. Seems like it's in a weird place. The base model isn't as cheap and the base engine sucks. The mid range options are kind of Maverick comparable, but then the higher trim options quickly get into real truck territory, with the highest trim starting at $40k. Then there's only one decent color option and the lack of options makes the Maverick look fully customizable. It's intriguing though and does have some advantages, like independent rear suspension on the fwd models and awd upgrade is half the price of the Maverick. More power from the good engine but it's also heavier so the p/w works out the same and I'd guess the fwd model struggles even more with traction than the Maverick. For me personally, the only way to get a heated steering wheel is with the $40k model, where the Maverick can get it for $27k with the xlt luxury pack.

Edit: actually I misread the specs and you're stuck with the crappy base engine until the $35k trim. No thanks.

BAMF said:

 

And if you are looking at a product roadmap strategy that includes different power train technologies, consolidating your development efforts is extremely sensible.

 

Boy, it would be great if that were true....

alfadriver said:

BAMF said:

And if you are looking at a product roadmap strategy that includes different power train technologies, consolidating your development efforts is extremely sensible.

 

Boy, it would be great if that were true....

Corporate exec logic doesn't always work as well in practice as in theory? What?

In reply to dps214 :

That also come with a Bourbon Street steak and and Oreo shake?

John Welsh said:

tremm said:

I love the idea of the maverick. I don't love ford. Doesn't give me confidence when a manufacturer can't move cars and has to vacate the market.

We don't hear nearly as much chatter about the Santa Cruz, the Maverick competitor.  

bingo - the Koreans are trying to enter the pickup world where Honda has failed (basically) because peoples till expect a big 3 small truck. the ranger isn't the ranger size anymore and battles with the colorado which is a big as a full size truck of the early 2000s honestly so this maverick and santa cruz hit a sweet spot in the market where a lot of people have been craving for their old "s10/ranger/dakota" small truck. In all honestsly most people don't need the full size of a modern mid size just to run errands and grab misc things. 

I hope this segment grows because its shows promise and echos off the platform development the industry has had globally (SUVs were exclusively body on frame/truck platforms, now they are built on compact car platforms and just called SUVs when in reality they are just wagons) 

The thing is these two, being crew cab only, really aren't that much smaller than the next size up truck. An extended cab/short bed (which is still 1.5ft longer than the maverick bed) ranger/colorado is only a foot longer than a maverick/santa cruz and not too different in the other dimensions. The maverick makes sense because it's significantly cheaper and has the hybrid option and even the ecoboost gets noticeably better mileage than the next size up truck. But the santa cruz isn't significantly cheaper than the bigger trucks and doesn't get noticeably better fuel economy either. But it is way slower and way less capable. So even if the maverick didn't exist the santa cruz feels like kind of a dud to me. But I do agree that I hope that this market segment grows.

BAMF said:

alfadriver said:

BAMF said:

And if you are looking at a product roadmap strategy that includes different power train technologies, consolidating your development efforts is extremely sensible.

 

Boy, it would be great if that were true....

Corporate exec logic doesn't always work as well in practice as in theory? What?

One of my biggest pet peeves is the very regular "policy" that we will reduce powertrains.  And all that's really happened is an expansion of them.  And that doesn't even include the old engines that are way out of date, but are still being made when there's an update that is light years better.  

If you asked me to name every gas motor we make, I'm pretty sure I would miss some.