Yeah I’m not going to bother trying to decipher the front.    I think you can see roughly where the glass actually goes down to due to the bumps and corners here:   I think you can also determine there is no significant buttress. It just appears absent here.   They seem to have slapped on cardboard to obscure the shape of the bed, but I think its sort of tapered upwards.

Isn't coyote ugly part of the charm? people don't buy G-Wagens because they are beautiful (well maybe in an english Bulldog sort of way), they buy them to make a statement. "I have Snap On tools in my kitchen junk drawer and I'm more offroader-er than you."

Yeah, this was definitely a setup, especially after Ford themselves said we'd see them on the road soon.       That said, let's look at some observations:       it has frameless doors/windows, similar to Bronco's setup.  Perhaps this saves on weight?   Part of me is wondering if those door handles are fake, and if it'll get something like the Mach E setup....if you look closely in all the images, the handles don't seem to line upwith each other (rotated different angles, and not in a way that they'd line up with a character line, because the front one angles down toward the rear of the vehicle, while the rear one angles up).....with how much they focused on aero with this thing, IMO, it'd be surprising to see it have normal handles like that, given how handles have been an aero focus from all companies of late.   The way the rear upper corner of the 2nd row windows tapers down is different (vs. squared off like most truck products), but it turns down to vertical from that (we can see the white sports camo behind the black camo:     I'd agree that the beltline is covered up slightly, but I can't imagine it it would go any lower than the mirror arm.   It actually has pretty flush side glass, which ironically is usually an attribute of expensive vehicles like Range Rovers.   Also, the backup camera is at the top of the tailgate, so the camo isn't bumped up that much from production on the tailgate.  The bed sides obviously have extra camo on the hips.  The taillights (what we can see) remind me of the '98-07 Super Duty taillights, or perhaps even blackwood:   The taillights (what we can see) remind me of the '98-07 Super Duty taillights, or perhaps even blackwood, with the reverse light on the bottom:       We can also see that there is definitely a spoiler of some sort, similar to the EV silverado.....what remains to be seen is whether it has buttresses or not...       Here's a bed comparison to Maverick:     It's hard to determine much on the front end.  I do believe it'll have a faux grille insert.  While it's possible it's mis-matched parts, we know the truck is white from the bed photo and what looks like white door jams to the right of the driver, however, the area surrounding the front camera is black, indicating some sort of faux grille.  The only other thing we can really determine is that the front camera is likely close to the actual top of the leading edge of the hood, which would match the more aero design, as shown in the airflow graphic, vs. the bulky more upright camo).      

I casts me a jaundiced eye at IIHS testing. Their carrot & stick approach to safety standards has caused repair costs to escalate dramatically. How long before we have 50mph partial overlap tests? How much more engineering and development would need to go into a vehicle to get there? How much more would it cost to repair such a vehicle if the damage was only minor?    A certain amount of the premiums they collect are for profit, hence the proliferation of advertising they are doing.   Most crashes are minor, and one or all parties are usually unhurt or incur minor recoverable injuries, but the vehicle can sustain an unbelievable amount of damage, may even be still drivable. However, owing to the way vehicles are made with parts that have a low threshold of integrity before they deform or break in order to absorb the energy of the impact,  more time and materials are required to repair minor damage.  Arbitrary Example: a vehicle cost $40,000 to buy with the current 40mph standard, and the cost to repair front end damage in a 10mph crash is $10,000, and the insurance premium is $1,000/yr, with the profit on that premium of 5%, or $50. Now build the car to a 50mph standard and, because of the more complex design, materials, parts, and labor to repair a 10mph crash is now 10% higher (probably more) than it was at a 40mph standard, and the premium and profit also will go up incrementally.   Keep in mind IIHS ratings are optional. The purchase the vehicles they test, and a 50mph standard likely wouldn't come about unless the NHTSA mandates it. but many auto manufacturers don't hesitate to advertise their IIHS rating, or the number of stars they get in NHTSA testing.

Outside of the Ranger that came back, what light duty truck market did they exit? The one thing Ford has going for it is that they generally have a good reputation for Trucks and the Maverick hopefully isn't saddled with high costs that cut into profitability, which drove Ford's exit from sedans and some CUVs. 

I'd agree, I don't see it necessary to offer a removable roof for the Lincoln model.  A large opening roof would be enough.     Nah, that thing isn't pretty to look at, IMO.   They can do better....

I wonder what'll happen when Toyota finally enters the segment as hinted at.   Will Ford actually continue trying, or will it retreat and call it a "boring" segment and leave it as they have with other products/segments?

At least Mercury was part of the same company lol.       I have to ask - at what point is it worth staying in business if your product lineup becomes a rebadge of another company's products?

Yeah isn’t that Alan Clarke driving

They’ll just run it down the other line.   At some point Ford needs to shut or get off the pot. If just one part of the line restricts the type of vehicle an entire plant can produce how can that not be a priority to address?