Jump to content





silvrsvt

Ford Maverick tailgate leaked

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, bzcat said:

 

American Ranger tailgate is also straight where the letters are stamped. Rest of the world Ranger tailgate has a concave curve where the stickers are applied.  

 

2019-ford-ranger-tailgate-bed.jpg

 

ranger_082-xl.jpg?itok=QHLc-FdH

There's also that lip at the top above the latch. I never noticed there was such a difference between the two. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the North America better. The rest of world tailgate looks kind of cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do wish since they had gone through the trouble of redesigning the tailgate for NA that they had made it more like the F-150 (and by extension the Maverick).  The styling by the R A N G E R lettering could be better ( ala F-150 ).  It would have made it more in line with the "Ford truck family"

 

H8208f0dfefec407fbc3cc879b6652d2eC.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now THAT looks like a Flex!

 

And it looks way too big to be a Maverick even if there is extra camo on the rear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The Transit Connect that the engineering modules are based on is roughly 72" wide

with hip and shoulder room close to the current Ranger. Make no mistake, Maverick

Pickup will definitely be a strong point of differentiation in a sea of vanilla utilities.

 

I like what Ford is doing with the Maverick, it's filling an obvious gap left by the older Ranger

while giving the new Ranger some licence to fill out it's proportions more and improve its

interior roominess. I can see Ford starting to  outflank GM and FCA / Stellantis here and

adding to Bronco Sport without needing to use the Bronco brand ...very clever. 

 

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, akirby said:

Now THAT looks like a Flex!

 

And it looks way too big to be a Maverick even if there is extra camo on the rear.

 

Look at where the rear exhaust is... there is about 8 or 9" of extra camo after that to throw you off.

 

I'm sure someone more handy with photoshop can superimpose Transit Connect LWB over this truck. I think the wheelbase looks about the same and I think Maverick will end up not much longer.

 

Ford-Maverick-Pickup-Prototype-July-2020

 

2014-Ford-Transit-Connect-Taxi-Exterior-

Edited by bzcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rmc523 said:

Ford-Maverick-Pickup-Prototype-July-2020-001-758x505.jpg

Ford-Maverick-Pickup-Prototype-July-2020-002-1024x683.jpg

Ford-Maverick-Pickup-Prototype-July-2020-003-1024x683.jpg

 

 

 

It's bigger looking than I expected it to be.

If you look closely, you can see the left tail light behind the white.  It's forward more than the camo.  Hiding the true length.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, 92merc said:

If you look closely, you can see the left tail light behind the white.  It's forward more than the camo.  Hiding the true length.


I think you are right. I’d guess the end of the truck is probably right where the white mesh for the taillights starts.

 

it looks pretty good from what we can see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it had extended camo - I was looking at the wheelbase which seemed a lot longer than I expected.  But it does seem to match the TC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Looks like it’s the 120” TC wheelbase, the back is obviously

padded out to look longer but the real proportions should

look pretty good.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, ausrutherford said:

Has a longer front overhang than the Sport. 

 

Does it?
b2b02a78-fbe0-4993-b821-439d8710c04a_poster.thumb.jpg.8379220abe8d72cfb08c0332ab24e082.jpg

Ford-Maverick-Pickup-Prototype-July-2020-002-1024x683.jpg

 

Think the camo is throwing it off a bit

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, T-dubz said:

it looks pretty good from what we can see.

 

Yeah it does...looking forward to the end result

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m just not seeing where this fits with such a tiny bed and 4 doors,  I get that it’s unibody and cheaper than Ranger.  I keep thinking a single cab with a 5.5‘-6’ bed like the old rangers would fit better.   Or maybe that just old school thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, akirby said:

I’m just not seeing where this fits with such a tiny bed and 4 doors,  I get that it’s unibody and cheaper than Ranger.  I keep thinking a single cab with a 5.5‘-6’ bed like the old rangers would fit better.   Or maybe that just old school thinking.


If you are using a truck for work or if you carry stuff often, a larger bed makes sense. But most people use trucks as daily drivers these days and rarely use the bed to its full potential. I’ve had several f150s and rangers over the years and most of the time the bed was either empty, or at the most half full, so for the majority of the time, a smaller bed would have been just fine. Also a 4ft bed still allows you to carry objects that won’t fit inside of an suv. Or carry things that you wouldn’t want inside your car, like mulch. It also makes the vehicle more likely to fit into a garage. If there is an off-road version, the shorter bed allows better departure angles.

 

I really liked the last gen of the sport trac. This would be an ideal vehicle for me now.
2008-ford-sport-trac-adre-2.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Does it?
b2b02a78-fbe0-4993-b821-439d8710c04a_poster.thumb.jpg.8379220abe8d72cfb08c0332ab24e082.jpg

Ford-Maverick-Pickup-Prototype-July-2020-002-1024x683.jpg

 

Think the camo is throwing it off a bit

 

It's not really that it's longer, it's that it's a different shape. The valence on the sport is angled towards the tires and the truck is more traditionally flat shaped. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, akirby said:

I’m just not seeing where this fits with such a tiny bed and 4 doors,  I get that it’s unibody and cheaper than Ranger.  I keep thinking a single cab with a 5.5‘-6’ bed like the old rangers would fit better.   Or maybe that just old school thinking.

 

My thinking is that the market these days at that price point is looking more for overall utility and is more likely to use it as a DD/family vehicle with a handy occasional bed than mostly a truck as someone else pointed out above.  Which makes having 4 doors basically a necessity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, akirby said:

I’m just not seeing where this fits with such a tiny bed and 4 doors,  I get that it’s unibody and cheaper than Ranger.  I keep thinking a single cab with a 5.5‘-6’ bed like the old rangers would fit better.   Or maybe that just old school thinking.

 

I agree, I believe that there's a market for a lower-cost basic transportation vehicle like the old Ranger, but that doesn't fit with the position that many have that higher ATP's are the best approach for a healthy company.

 

Consider this, selling 200K lower-cost vehicles that need oil changes, tires and maintenance over years of use may provide greater revenue than 50K vehicles with a higher 1-time profit.  More vehicles mean more plants (assembly & suppliers) as well as more employee's, like Fuzzy.

 

HRG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Consider this, selling 200K lower-cost vehicles that need oil changes, tires and maintenance over years of use may provide greater revenue than 50K vehicles with a higher 1-time profit. 


Ford doesn’t make a nickel on any of those maintenance items.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

 

My thinking is that the market these days at that price point is looking more for overall utility and is more likely to use it as a DD/family vehicle with a handy occasional bed than mostly a truck as someone else pointed out above.  Which makes having 4 doors basically a necessity.


I think a utility with a closed back is more appealing than the open bed for the vast majority of those buyers though.

 

Maybe I’m overthinking it.  I’m sure there is a bigger ROW market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i´m really waiting for this truck,  my ecosport is small, escape (kuga)is expensive here, and the ranger is big.

the territory is interesting, but unfortunately it´s not a Ford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, akirby said:


I think a utility with a closed back is more appealing than the open bed for the vast majority of those buyers though.

 

Maybe I’m overthinking it.  I’m sure there is a bigger ROW market.

 

I don't know, I'm just guessing - I'm assuming Ford has done a ton of market research that says there's a market for this vehicle.  Either that or they're deathly afraid of missing out/being late to a new segment (like how they were late with Ranger).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, akirby said:


Ford doesn’t make a nickel on any of those maintenance items.

 

Corporate doesn't, but the dealers... wait... they make very little too.  

 

Fwiw, Akirby talking about it not making sense, during the school year (if we have one again) , I daily my Focus to drop kids off. Summer time, it is my 2WD regular cab shorty Ranger. If I had to get something to replace one, or both, I might consider this, if it is offered with the right powertrain.   

Edited by YT90SC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×