Ford Maverick

[Rich and Rei]

Originally Posted by John in Santa Cruz

did a little more reading on this new Maverick. Its based on the same "C2" platform as the current Escape and Bronco Sport. FWD predominant even in the AWD version, the rear wheels engage when the front wheels slip. this means your transverse motor mounts are going to be pulling the load most of the time, so I'd definitely proactively watch those and plan on early replacement if using it for more than very occasional light towing. Unibody with an IRS rear end, probably not suitable for use with a WDH (although that is not definitive).

Ford towing guide 2022, says with option 53Q max 4000 lb towing. 1500 lb payload BEFORE ANY OPTIONS. Max 40 sq ft frontal area (so a Casita probably pushes that some, as 40 sq ft is 6.2 x 6.2 feet, an Escape 17 is probably too big)

GCWR for the Maverick with 53Q is 8145 lbs... You have to keep the trucks net weight below 8145 - weight of trailer, 3500 lbs gross for a number of the common smaller FG trailers, so 4645 lbs when towing a Casita or Scamp at its capacity (and in my experience, most trailers *are* at or near their GWR when packed for travel). Ford says a Maverick XLT AWD has a curb weight of 3,731, so that means with that 3500 lb trailer, you can carry 914 total lbs in the vehicle, that includes EVERYTHING you've added other than gasoline and coolant, including the hitch bar, and if you have any options above base XLT, then that's got to be adjusted.

Thanks for info-something to consider when camping.
We seem to pack way too much stuff-trying to
change that habit.
Maybe pack what I think we need-then take half of it back in to the house!

[floyd]

Originally Posted by John in Santa Cruz

did a little more reading on this new Maverick. Its based on the same "C2" platform as the current Escape and Bronco Sport. FWD predominant even in the AWD version, the rear wheels engage when the front wheels slip. this means your transverse motor mounts are going to be pulling the load most of the time, so I'd definitely proactively watch those and plan on early replacement if using it for more than very occasional light towing. Unibody with an IRS rear end, probably not suitable for use with a WDH (although that is not definitive).

Ford towing guide 2022, says with option 53Q max 4000 lb towing. 1500 lb payload BEFORE ANY OPTIONS. Max 40 sq ft frontal area (so a Casita probably pushes that some, as 40 sq ft is 6.2 x 6.2 feet, an Escape 17 is probably too big)

GCWR for the Maverick with 53Q is 8145 lbs... You have to keep the trucks net weight below 8145 - weight of trailer, 3500 lbs gross for a number of the common smaller FG trailers, so 4645 lbs when towing a Casita or Scamp at its capacity (and in my experience, most trailers *are* at or near their GWR when packed for travel). Ford says a Maverick XLT AWD has a curb weight of 3,731, so that means with that 3500 lb trailer, you can carry 914 total lbs in the vehicle, that includes EVERYTHING you've added other than gasoline and coolant, including the hitch bar, and if you have any options above base XLT, then that's got to be adjusted.

Well our 2006 Escape shared towing duties with our 2001 2WD Ranger, pulling our Scamp for two years without an issue.
It got totaled by a lumber truck and was replaced by our 2008 Escape 4CYL 2WD which towed our Scamp about 40000 miles. had 80000 total miles when I passed it along to my son who is still driving it daily (now has 180000 miles... he doesn't tow)
The 2nd Escape was replaced by our 2016 2.5L Transit Connect which has done well for years. It now shares the towing duties with our 2019 4CYL Ranger.
As for wear (tire and otherwise) the FWD performs at least as well as the RWD on these small fiberglass trailers, even somewhat better if the RWD doesn't have LS.

Either is better on pavement than any comparable 4WD and as good as AWD.


My conclusion is that to tow a small Fiberglass trailer is too often over analyzed and that they were designed and built to be towed by moderate sized family vehicles and small trucks of all drive types.


The Maverick should be AWESOME for this task when properly equipped.

[Tracks59]

The Mrs & I took our 6 Cyl Maverick on a 7,000 mile trip around the US pulling a small trailer & the best Milage we managed was 14 MPG over the Smokey Mts into Gatlenburg, TN. The remainder of the trip took us from coast to coast and 12 -13 was the best we could muster. The main problem that came to the forefront was the front suspension, it required four frontend alignments before the trip was completed. We had an airlight shocks on the rearend to keep everything level and though we may have been towing 1,500 pounds or less. The alignment issue continued after the trip was complete with just daily driving. Our Maverick was not an adequate tow vehicle for our needs.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Tracks59

The Mrs & I took our 6 Cyl Maverick on a 7,000 mile trip around the US pulling a small trailer & the best Milage we managed was 14 MPG over the Smokey Mts into Gatlenburg, TN. The remainder of the trip took us from coast to coast and 12 -13 was the best we could muster. The main problem that came to the forefront was the front suspension, it required four frontend alignments before the trip was completed. We had an airlight shocks on the rearend to keep everything level and though we may have been towing 1,500 pounds or less. The alignment issue continued after the trip was complete with just daily driving. Our Maverick was not an adequate tow vehicle for our needs.

I know what ya mean, My Ford came factory fully equipped with Radio, Heater, AND Whitewalls.
No automatic, no power steering, no power brakes, no A/C, heck not even seat belts.
And the dash!!! mechanical analog with no screen, no internet, no apple play...NUTHIN'
And they had the NERVE to call it a CUSTOM DELUXE!
Of course Truman was President at the time.

[Ervin in Portland]

Originally Posted by floyd

Your "leary" is certainly unfounded. Ford still makes the most reliable vehicles in the industry.
For towing, buy the 2.0L/8spd, even with AWD it is a good choice.
The Hybrid does not offer the actual tow package and it comes with a gear type CVT in 2WD only.
Of course many folks prefer "imitations" to the genuine article!

Just have to confront disinformation. In Consumer Reports annual auto issue rankings, which takes feedback from over a half million people, and their own comprehensive testing of several vehicles of each manufacturer, Ford ranked 22nd, up three spots from the year before. Subaru was #1. They did extensive testing of 12 models in Ford’s lineup. However, owner’s satisfaction was ranked above average, and overall reliability was seen as average. So reading the tea leaves, Ford owners are fiercely loyal to an average brand. There is a reason why the F150 has been the best selling truck line for 50 plus years.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Ervin in Portland

Just have to confront disinformation. In Consumer Reports annual auto issue rankings, which takes feedback from over a half million people, and their own comprehensive testing of several vehicles of each manufacturer, Ford ranked 22nd, up three spots from the year before. Subaru was #1. They did extensive testing of 12 models in Ford’s lineup. However, owner’s satisfaction was ranked above average, and overall reliability was seen as average. So reading the tea leaves, Ford owners are fiercely loyal to an average brand. There is a reason why the F150 has been the best selling truck line for 50 plus years.

Consumer reports has always been a reliable source for disinformation, thank you for providing some of it here. Some "Consumer Reports" readers are "fiercely loyal" to magazine dedicated to confirmation bias.


I have owned at least 84 vehicles of a very wide variety of makes,including Subaru, plus maintained fleet service for a major oil company.
If I have developed any brand loyalty it is due to the fact that my Fords have always provided unparalleled reliability.
I have seen Consumer Reports bias demonstrated over 50 years, it is no better than JD Powers or RVIA.
As to whatever you are "fiercely loyal", it can not have delivered better service than any Ford which I have owned.


Of course, any car can be kept running with enough effort, including our Subarus, the Toyotas or even our Corvairs My advice is to buy that in which you have the most confidence or simply like the appearance or features.

I will do the same .

[ShelbyM]

Most brands these days are reasonably reliable. I've never seen any evidence that Ford makes the most reliable vehicles but they are certainly at least average. I've enjoyed a string of them going back to 1991. Were they as reliable as my Toyotas? Nope, but better than the VWs. Anyway, the reliability shouldn't discourage someone from buying a Ford if there is a model that suits them. The problems I've had mostly showed up as they were approaching 100,000 miles and the vehicle doesn't owe you much at that point. I probably won't buy another because I'm not happy with the service dept of either of the two nearest dealers. That could happen with any brand, though.

[Ervin in Portland]

Originally Posted by floyd

Consumer reports has always been a reliable source for disinformation, thank you for providing some of it here. Some "Consumer Reports" readers are "fiercely loyal" to magazine dedicated to confirmation bias.


I have owned at least 84 vehicles of a very wide variety of makes,including Subaru, plus maintained fleet service for a major oil company.
If I have developed any brand loyalty it is due to the fact that my Fords have always provided unparalleled reliability.
I have seen Consumer Reports bias demonstrated over 50 years, it is no better than JD Powers or RVIA.
As to whatever you are "fiercely loyal", it can not have delivered better service than any Ford which I have owned.


Of course, any car can be kept running with enough effort, including our Subarus, the Toyotas or even our Corvairs My advice is to buy that in which you have the most confidence or simply like the appearance or features.

I will do the same .

Dang, struck a nerve. Consumer Reports just released their testing (biased in your humble opinion) on the Ford Maverick. They tested both the turbo and hybrid models. They really liked them, called them both impressive.
They also noted Ford’s most recent recall of 3 million cars and SUVs, including 2013-19 Escapes, 2013-18 C-Max hybrids, 2013-16 Fusion sedans, 2013-21 Transit Connect vans, 2015-18 Edge SUVs because they may roll away even if they appear to be in Park due to a faulty bushing.

And how is the info I provided “disinformation?” It is based on feedback from actual owners, their “real world” ownership experience and of CR’s own testing. Just because it is information YOU don’t like means it is disinformation.

BTW, I, like you, have brand loyalty. I have owned dozens of Toyotas, own two now, my DD first generation 1998 RAV-4 with 224k miles on the clock and runs perfect, and my TV, a first generation 2003 Tundra 4x4 with 170k that runs like the day I bought it. I am searching mightily for a Toyota RAV-4 Prime at MSRP to tow my Scamp 13 due next July. And I own a Subaru that experienced the “Subaru Stain”, (look it up for interesting reading) that has made me leery of buying another one no matter what CR states, even though it is amazing in the rain and snow we get in the PNW.

Have safe travels!

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Ervin in Portland

Dang, struck a nerve. Consumer Reports just released their testing (biased in your humble opinion) on the Ford Maverick. They tested both the turbo and hybrid models. They really liked them, called them both impressive.
They also noted Ford’s most recent recall of 3 million cars and SUVs, including 2013-19 Escapes, 2013-18 C-Max hybrids, 2013-16 Fusion sedans, 2013-21 Transit Connect vans, 2015-18 Edge SUVs because they may roll away even if they appear to be in Park due to a faulty bushing.

And how is the info I provided “disinformation?” It is based on feedback from actual owners, their “real world” ownership experience and of CR’s own testing. Just because it is information YOU don’t like means it is disinformation.

BTW, I, like you, have brand loyalty. I have owned dozens of Toyotas, own two now, my DD first generation 1998 RAV-4 with 224k miles on the clock and runs perfect, and my TV, a first generation 2003 Tundra 4x4 with 170k that runs like the day I bought it. I am searching mightily for a Toyota RAV-4 Prime at MSRP to tow my Scamp 13 due next July. And I own a Subaru that experienced the “Subaru Stain”, (look it up for interesting reading) that has made me leery of buying another one no matter what CR states, even though it is amazing in the rain and snow we get in the PNW.

Have safe travels!

No doubt it is I who has "struck the proverbial nerve.... besides, who says I was being "humble"?
Not saying Toyotas aren't at least average, we always referred to them as the "Japanese General Motors" and a lot of folks LOVE their Chevys.
The disinformation is the fault of Consumer Reports not necessarily those who believe them on faith.
I have found them to be wrong and biased on nearly everything... not just cars. often it is verifiable factual errors (Like claiming a vehicle is front drive when is rear drive), often it is just silly ( like panning one vehicle and praising an identical vehicle with another brand label off the same assembly line.
For Many years All Pacific Rim Cars were Superior, All American cars were
Average, and all European cars were Inferior. Across the board... That just ain't so and never has been.

I once had a conversation with the builder of OLIVER trailers. He PROUDLY pointed to the RVIA badge next to the door. My response was...
" If you think that badge is what determines the quality of your product, come with me. There is an RV junk yard right up the road from here where we can get all the RVIA badges we can carry."
Now Oliver is a fine product but my Scamp is still excellent after 19 years,

Imagine how much better it would be if I would just get me one of those badges for an extra $1500.


Misinformation implies error, disinformation implies intentional deception.
While I do accuse Consumer Reports of the latter, I would not make that same accusation of you...

[AlanKilian]

Originally Posted by floyd

Misinformation implies error, disinformation implies intentional deception.
While I do accuse Consumer Reports of the latter, I would not make that same accusation of you...

Unfortunately, your Consumer Reports data-driven disinformation machine rates the vehicle manufacturer you like tops in the hybrid truck category.

Is that misinformation from Consumer Reports or is just the information you disagree with misinformation? :-)

[floyd]

Originally Posted by AlanKilian

Unfortunately, your Consumer Reports data-driven disinformation machine rates the vehicle manufacturer you like tops in the hybrid truck category.

Is that misinformation from Consumer Reports or is just the information you disagree with misinformation? :-)

Be that as it may, it would be hypocritical to assign them credibility only when we agree. You can certainly trust them, as many do, but I remain skeptical of the whole organization and would not cite them as a source for any argument I might make.

[Dennis mn]

I have owned many cars that did not score well by Consumer Reports that refuted their findings. One that comes to mind was our 1972 AMC Gremlin. It was the most trouble free car we had owned to that point. I traded it after 7 years, because I was ready for something different.

[AlanKilian]

Originally Posted by floyd

I remain skeptical of the whole organization

Can you cite any evidence of instances where their reporting on a product was refuted by another reputable organization?

If not, it's just your opinion, and that's fine, it just makes you an outlier amongst people and organizations who check such things.

I'll cite my reference for them being reputable: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/consumer-reports/

Given your previous posts content, I wonder if it's not so much the product reviews, but rather the environmental and social positions CR holds that bother you since they are left-leaning: https://www.influencewatch.org/non-p...sumer-reports/

That's also just fine, but again it doesn't mean you have any facts at all to backup your claim.

[craigry]

I too have scored at the bottom of Consumer Reports ratings that have been Excellent and I have had friends purchase "Bullitt-proof" Toyotas and Hondas and didn't do even basic maintenance and the results were not pretty

[ShelbyM]

Apologies for the hijack but Dennis mn did you have to add air bags or other suspension mods to keep your Frontier from squatting in the rear? I'm pondering a Frontier to pull a Casita. Thanks

[floyd]

Originally Posted by AlanKilian

Can you cite any evidence of instances where their reporting on a product was refuted by another reputable organization?

If not, it's just your opinion, and that's fine, it just makes you an outlier amongst people and organizations who check such things.

I'll cite my reference for them being reputable: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/consumer-reports/

Given your previous posts content, I wonder if it's not so much the product reviews, but rather the environmental and social positions CR holds that bother you since they are left-leaning: https://www.influencewatch.org/non-p...sumer-reports/

That's also just fine, but again it doesn't mean you have any facts at all to backup your claim.

To be consistent I challenge your use of the word "Another"

I have no knowledge of their environmental or social positions and could not care less. (so no need to wonder) My opinion is based on reading and following them for decades from the late '60s on..
I will admit that I have ignored them now for some time but have heard nothing to further instill confidence.


I have a perfect right to trust those opinions which I deem credible and reject those which I don't. As do you!
However in light of your above comment it is only fair to ask whether you think their competence and honesty is based solely on their environmental and social positions.


You simply will not convince me to rely on Consumer Reports reporting as a basis for any purchase I make. You are free to do so and I will not challenge your judgement.
Thank you so much that you find my opinion important enough to show such concern.


Now in conclusion, we have all heard what you think on the subject and your substantiating evidence. You have heard mine.
I don't mind that we differ but I do mind any attempt at coercion or
ad hominem.


What say that we just keep this cordial?

I still maintain my position from my original post and you disagree. I would be pleased if we could just leave it at that.

[ShelbyM]

Hmmmm

[AlanKilian]

Originally Posted by floyd

However in light of your above comment it is only fair to ask whether you think their competence and honesty is based solely on their environmental and social positions.

Originally Posted by floyd

Misinformation implies error, disinformation implies intentional deception.
While I do accuse Consumer Reports of the latter

Interesting how I posted two references showing the unbiased nature of Consumer reports, yet you accuse them of INTENTIONAL deceptive information, yet are unable to post a reference to back up such an aggressive accusation.

Hmmm.......

[floyd]

Originally Posted by AlanKilian

Interesting how I posted two references showing the unbiased nature of Consumer reports, yet you accuse them of INTENTIONAL deceptive information, yet are unable to post a reference to back up such an aggressive accusation.

Hmmm.......

not all that interesting really....
Get some sleep.... good night.

[Mikmay]

Originally Posted by ShelbyM

Apologies for the hijack but Dennis mn did you have to add air bags or other suspension mods to keep your Frontier from squatting in the rear? I'm pondering a Frontier to pull a Casita. Thanks

Just purchased my 22 Frontier a couple months ago and I am very pleased with its towing caps but have only towed a 2000 lb HC studio . On the 22 frontier Owners forum there has been many discussions and photos of towing many much larger than mine and all of been very positive although I have already received a recall for a transmission pawl not engaging properly and and no fix until fall ,must use the emergency brake until then but no reported issues of anyone slipping out of park yet .