Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive > Brand-specific forums > Ford and Lincoln
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-03-2023, 10:57 AM
 
Location: The Disputed Lands
843 posts, read 562,522 times
Reputation: 1649

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by highlanderfil View Post
Well, to be fair, the Taco isn't really comparable with the Maverick. It's Ranger-sized.

I also wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in data collected by Consumer Reports, but that comes from having worked in the industry (ironically, for Ford) for over a decade and knowing a bit about their cherrypicking practices. New vehicle surveys sent out by independent data gathering shops, which are totally brand-agnostic and do not sell their findings to the public, are a much better gauge of customer sentiment. So are warranty claims, assuming you can get your hands on that data.
I totally agree, but he was the one who mentioned the Tacoma. That's the whole point of this thread is his question about why it's so popular, and he cannot get past his anti Ford bias to see the Maverick for what it is and is not. It's not a sedan with a box. It's not a truck with a body on frame. It's really an Escape with a box, making it a different kind of truck that can do some cool things that people obviously want, hence the popularity. The only direct comparitors so far are the Ridgeline and Santa Fe.

Furthermore, I already put in enough time on writing the post, so purposely I only spent about 20 min on Google trying to find the most applicable articles. The CR articles were there so I used them. And it was still more than he ever provided for his argument. I do know that Ford does look at the CR ratings internally, or at least did a while ago.

PS: I also worked at Ford for a long time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-03-2023, 11:21 AM
 
5,681 posts, read 5,149,140 times
Reputation: 5154
Quote:
Originally Posted by KO Stradivarius View Post
It's really an Escape with a box, making it a different kind of truck that can do some cool things that people obviously want, hence the popularity.
I'd say, at least given its looks, it's closer to the BSport than the Escape, but yeah, same idea.
Quote:
The only direct comparitors so far are the Ridgeline and Santa Fe.
I wouldn't even put Ridgeline in the same category. Too big.
Quote:
I do know that Ford does look at the CR ratings internally, or at least did a while ago.
Not only that, Ford also...how do I put this...builds to CR spec? Basically, CR ratings used to be (don't know if they still are) a target to which a new model was built.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2023, 11:41 AM
 
Location: The Disputed Lands
843 posts, read 562,522 times
Reputation: 1649
Quote:
Originally Posted by highlanderfil View Post
I'd say, at least given its looks, it's closer to the BSport than the Escape, but yeah, same idea. I wouldn't even put Ridgeline in the same category. Too big.Not only that, Ford also...how do I put this...builds to CR spec? Basically, CR ratings used to be (don't know if they still are) a target to which a new model was built.
Yeah, they're all on the same platform.

The Ridgeline set the standard. It's been the benchmark for unitized body trucks for some time. Ford decided to downsize from it. You're correct that the Santa Fe is closer.

They definitely use CR ratings and methods as a way to evaluate attributes during development.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2023, 03:33 PM
 
5,681 posts, read 5,149,140 times
Reputation: 5154
Quote:
Originally Posted by KO Stradivarius View Post
They definitely use CR ratings and methods as a way to evaluate attributes during development.
Building to a bought-and-paid-for rag's spec. And then Farley wonders why quality continues to struggle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2023, 06:04 PM
 
Location: The Disputed Lands
843 posts, read 562,522 times
Reputation: 1649
Quote:
Originally Posted by highlanderfil View Post
Building to a bought-and-paid-for rag's spec. And then Farley wonders why quality continues to struggle.
Well, to be fair, that's not the only metric that is used for product development. In my experience using CR is limited
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2023, 08:33 PM
 
5,681 posts, read 5,149,140 times
Reputation: 5154
Quote:
Originally Posted by KO Stradivarius View Post
Well, to be fair, that's not the only metric that is used for product development. In my experience using CR is limited
It's not, but it carries way more weight than it should.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2023, 07:02 AM
sub
 
Location: ^##
4,963 posts, read 3,747,345 times
Reputation: 7831
Quote:
Originally Posted by KO Stradivarius View Post
https://www.consumerreports.org/cars...2/reliability/

THAT'S IT!! That seals the deal! Go buy your Tacoma, it's your money, spend thousands more, and suck more fuel. Knock yourself out. Savvy Maverick owners will be enjoying their fine vehicles without any further thought of your snarky crap.
I want to like the Maverick but it's still a Ford.
2 years of reliability ratings hardly puts it on the same level as decades-tested Tacoma's.
Get back to me in a few years and we'll see how many Mavericks hold up for 250-300k+ miles without any major overhauls of the engines or transmissions.
Hopefully they'll be great, but I'll be shocked and pleasantly surprised if they are.

Another thing: Mavericks are currently being listed in the upper $30k's to lower $40k's.
That's a far cry from the $19k-27k we were told in the beginning.
They lost me more on that than they even did on reliability.
At $40k, I can get into a more-capable-but-still-not-too-big Ridgeline. And I'd trust it more to boot, in the long run.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2023, 07:23 AM
Status: "Nothin' to lose" (set 4 days ago)
 
Location: Concord, CA
7,179 posts, read 9,304,358 times
Reputation: 25602
I suggest you review this video and decide for yourself if Ford made the best trade offs to achieve its price and reliability goals.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYUZ...nnel=MunroLive
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2023, 08:43 AM
 
Location: Coastal Mid-Atlantic
6,734 posts, read 4,412,768 times
Reputation: 8360
[quote=Vision67;65371488]I suggest you review this video and decide for yourself if Ford made the best trade offs to achieve its price and reliability goals.

Whether it turns out they hit the ball out of the park or its a dud. People STILL want to buy a small pickup truck. Built by CR ratings or any ratings. More manufacturers will follow. Lets see how they do. I also suspect the price gouging is happening on the Mavericks to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive > Brand-specific forums > Ford and Lincoln

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top