Posted on 03/18/2022 5:29:28 AM PDT by Red Badger
The Ford Maverick Is A Great Truck — It's Also Part Of The Problem. Image: Ford
Nobody can build vehicles quickly enough, but Ford’s especially feeling the pinch with the Maverick. The manufacturer paused new orders on its hot compact pickup until the summer because it needs to prioritize fulfilling reservations already placed. And listen — in spite of the headline up there that I’m well aware some of you are sharpening your axes over as you read this, let me just say that I get it. As a technical achievement, the Maverick deserves praise. A small truck that starts at $20,000 and returns 40 miles per gallon is something the world could use more of, especially given the present fuel catastrophe. I’m happy Ford made it.
The Maverick is special because it offers the low starting price and efficiency of a compact sedan, hatch or crossover in a pickup configuration. That’s very exciting for the folks who need a vehicle that satisfies those conflicting demands.
But how many Maverick buyers actually do? A thread on the Maverick subreddit asking prospective owners what vehicles they’ll be replacing with the entry-level truck comprises an assortment of interesting answers, with Civics, Fiestas, BMW 3 Series and Elantras chief among them. There are also full and midsize truck owners expressing a willingness to downsize and save at the pump, alongside folks with small crossovers that are looking for a little more utility.
Pickups are a funny thing, because they’re irreplaceable for the people that actually need them yet actively impractical for those that don’t. The vast majority of car buyers need a covered cargo area, not open-air beds that leave whatever they’re schlepping vulnerable to the elements and necessitate tie-downs so contents don’t slide about or fly away. The vast majority of people also prefer to save money.
Of course, there are cheap vehicles out there that excel at sipping fuel — even more so than the Maverick — are also inexpensive to buy and run and offer all the cargo space the average American requires. They’re called cars, and I have to imagine many Maverick buyers would find their needs met by them. Unfortunately, Ford stopped making them years ago.
Ford won’t admit that the Maverick is designed to fill the gap in its lineup vacated by the Focus or Fusion, but reading between the lines of comments made by Ford’s chief product platform and operations officer Hau Thai-Tang to Muscle Cars & Trucks, it’s hard to arrive at any other conclusion:
“No! It’s not (replacing the Ford Fusion),” said Hau Thai-Tang in an interview with MC&T. “We looked at it as passenger vehicles are getting very commoditized, it’s difficult for us to make money, how else can we use that capital and engineering capacity? We decided let’s play to our strengths.
“What are we good at? Trucks. What do we need? An affordable, entry vehicle to bring first time buyers into the showroom,” he said.
For almost the entire history of the automobile up until about 10 years ago, passenger cars were “affordable entry vehicles” that were great at bringing first-time buyers into showrooms. The most depressing thing about Thai-Tang’s comment here is that Ford was actually competent at building them, when it wanted to be. I leased the last Focus we got here in the States, and have dailied a Fiesta ST for four years. They’re delightful cars. Imperfect, sure, but what reasonably priced transportation isn’t? They were also both products of Ford’s European arm, which is why they were leagues better than the gloomy, tragically faced penalty box that was the 2008-11 Focus sold in North America.
Ford never figured out how to market those cars within their brand the way Japanese and Korean makes have, so it gave up trying. So too did GM and Chrysler, to an extent. It’s depressing yet completely understandable from a business perspective. The Maverick is an especially shrewd play by Ford, because while it’s hard to imagine the margins are any thicker on the low-end trims than they were on the typical Fiesta or Focus, the company stocks only the optional EcoBoost-equipped models on dealer lots. In this country it’s awfully hard to upsell an economy car, but you can upsell a truck without even trying.
And therein lies the undercurrent that I think partially explains the Maverick’s success and everyone’s adoration for it: shame. Specifically, small car shame. Shame that’s driving some buyers to purchase a pickup when they’d be fine with a car or reasonably sized crossover; shame that’s driving Ford to sell a pickup as a replacement for a car. Again, if you need a truck for work or actively use it for pleasure, if you tow (not that the Mav’s even great for that, mind) or you envision dumping dirt or coolers full of fish or a quad in the bed, then more power to you. I hope you love the little guy. He seems wonderful.
But if you don’t need a vehicle for such activities, I know you know that all of the qualities that make the Maverick special among pickups have been available in other, more sensible body styles forever — body styles that we have collectively deemed unworthy as a society. Maybe the optimistic way to read the hype is that at least it’s persuading people who desire pickups to reconsider the size of the pickup they actually need. The silver lining is that the Maverick is getting folks into relatively more economical vehicles all the same, and that’s a good thing. It’d just be better if it didn’t reinforce our deep-seated car-buying complexes while doing it.
> Full-sized pickups have grown so monstrous that the market is hungry for a smaller version.
yeah the writer is missing that point. My wife can’t find the corners of a modern pickup, but the interior of her Fiat looks like a hay wagon. She would really enjoy a small pickup with a cap on the back so as to the keep the messy stuff segregated from the passenger compartment.
The original Maverick was Ford’s least expensive car until the Pinto came out.
The truck version is the least expensive truck in their stable.
They have more orders than they can fulfill in a timely manner, and have stopped taking new orders because they have at least a 6 month backlog.............
This guy seems to think that people buy trucks because they are ashamed to be seen in small cars? If this is true it is not Ford’s problem, the problem is people who care what other people think about their vehicle.
Also, I cannot stand “you don’t need” arguments. I don’t need a lot of things. Actually, the things I really need to survive is a subset of what they give you in prison. Is that really all we have a right to?
Stupid article.
Toyota quality is hard to beat IMO.
My taco had 100k miles on it when I sold it and I had yet to change the front brake pads.
Never had a minutes problem out of it in 11 years.
Biggest reason I sold it is I wanted a 4x4 so I could go surf fishing on the beach.
When I mentioned to my supervisor I was selling it she basically called dibs and said name your price and that was way before any of the current insanity.
If I were you I’d hang on to it....but it’s your business.
How about if people buy what they want and pay no attention to what someone else thinks they “need”.
‘Lastly, the author is too consumed with what people really need versus what they want. In a free country, we do not restrain people to only what they need as decided by an outside group.’
Exactly. Leave Ford and customers alone. The writer is free to give an opinion, but really wants to control what one wants or needs.
“Daihatsu HiJet”
When I go out of the country, one of the first things I notice is the huge variety of cool vehicles we cannot have. It drives home just how oppressive our government can be.
“in their stable”
ISWYDT
Pretty creative....I think ford could use a guy like you in the marketing dept!
That's the problem. Small vehicles like that no longer meet the Side and Front Impact Standards of today. That's why the new Ford Ranger is the size of an F-150 from 30 years ago.............
They should bring back the Galaxy nameplate.
They were beautiful cars..................
I can drive and afford whatever I want. Still driving my 2008 Frontier 4WD, long bed crew cab. Sturdy, dependable, decent power, 21-23mpg. 5 passenger, plus a 6 foot bed, fits in garage. Somebody tell the writer locking bed covers and shells can be used for bed storage. I don’t care what gas costs with a truck this cheap to own and maintain.
Wife has Honda SUV, gets 23-28mpg, we’re set.
Sounds like a nice practical vehicle. It sounds like many here have a need for a pickup truck type vehicle to haul cargo and other big items sometimes.
I’m confused reading the article. It sounds as if this writer is critical of this Maverick vehicle. And I’m not sure why. If this vehicle is selling and works for people, what’s the problem?
Yes. SUV’s have become luxury cars. Family taxis and while they can carry cargo, you want that cargo to be ‘soft’ cargo, not lumber, cinder blocks or bags of concrete. But middle-income families that are do-it-yourselfers and frequent Lowes on the weekends have a frequent need to haul materials. Do you want to
A) overload a small commuter car?
B) tear up your nice SUV that your wife primarily drives to shop or pick up the kids, thereby destroying it’s resale value? or
C) use a pickup for a pickup job? Problem: Have you looked at the prices used, high-mileage pickups are bringing?
In my neighborhood most families have a daily commuter (which can be a very nice sedan, or pretty basic), a loaded SUV or CUV, and an older pickup for weekend jobs (that pretty much sits all week long, but is also available for snowy weather when the sedan is helpless).
Hey!!!!!!
I resemble that remark
Marking.
All part of the process. By layering regulation on top of union BS on top of labor/finance/corporate rules and taxes, they’ve made ‘car’ unviable for American manufacturers — there’s no way to make a buck unless it’s large, expensive, and skips the CAFE rules by being a truck/SUV.
Having killed cars, they now argue for rules to kill trucks and SUVs, presumably leaving of course the leftists’ intended option (as always, they only get their way if theirs is the only option) — an electric short-range chipped vehicle that authorities can trace, manage, and shut down at any time for any reason (and will, if you plebes don’t quit with your ‘free will’ and ‘individual’ talk and start parroting what your betters tell you to think!)
Why did they name it as ‘Maverick’? Many of us are old enough to remember the small sedan of the same name Ford produced decades ago.
A very forgettable model so the name connotation is burned in the memory banks.
...But if you don’t need a [pickup]... more sensible body styles [have been available] forever — body styles that we have collectively deemed unworthy as a society...
... the Maverick is getting folks into relatively more economical vehicles all the same, and that’s a good thing. It’d just be better if it didn’t reinforce our deep-seated car-buying complexes while doing it.
Thank you, AdamKaren Ismail - I sure am glad somebody's available to decide what each new car buyer in America really needs... \sarc
My parents had a yellow one with black vinyl top. We use to call it the bumblebee.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.