3 ms·

A Maverick is hardly a working truck. It's got the same towing capacity of an older Kia Sportage. It's got front wheel drive (or awd). It's a car with a bed, no

A Maverick is hardly a working truck. It's got the same towing capacity of an older Kia Sportage. It's got front wheel drive (or awd). It's a car with a bed, not a truck.

b40d-48b2-979e 9mo ago
It's a car with a bed, not a truck. Also called a Ute, which is fine! It avoids the weight and height that makes trucks dangerous vehicles to operate in a society.
ErroneousBosh 9mo ago
> It's got the same towing capacity of an older Kia Sportage. How often do you need to pull 2000kg?
- cindyllm 9mo ago
  [dead]
- zdragnar 9mo ago
  Several times a year at a minimum, and not always with good notice. Towing weight is also a good proxy for frame strength. I do some light forestry work moving and bucking logs, freeing stuck cars, plowing snow in addition to towing trailers and equipment.
  - ErroneousBosh 9mo ago
    Okay, so a Kia Sportage ought to do then, I guess?
    - zdragnar 9mo ago
      I didn't really trust it for some of the logs I was moving, as the trailer hitch was added on after and the frame isn't really designed for shocks like what I was putting it through. On top of that, hauling messy stuff in the back was a pain with having to lay down tarp and hoping it caught everything and didn't rip. Plus, you can't really put a winch or snow plow on a Sportage.
      - ErroneousBosh 9mo ago
        If it's able to have a trailer hitch fitted, it's designed to have a trailer hitch fitted. You can't just stick it on with a couple of random holes drilled and a bolt through. I always find it kind of surprising how large a vehicle people in the US think they need to pull trailers, especially when you compare with the size of trailers people pull in the UK. My own elderly Range Rover (1990s P38A) has a plated towing weight of 3500kg which means you can pull another one on a trailer with it easily. With the back full of tools and spares and a couple of passengers, you've got an all-up weight well over six tonnes!
Marsymars 9mo ago
A BMW i3 is a body-on-frame rear-wheel-drive vehicle, but I don't think anyone would call it a "truck without a bed, not a car".
rjrjrjrj 9mo ago
Ford calls it a truck. Ask a random person on the street, and they'll say it is a small truck. I've seen plenty of people in working clothes driving them, carrying working tools and such.
cameldrv 9mo ago
I don't get this attitude. Everyone criticizes auto companies for not making a small truck anymore, and then Ford comes out with the Maverick and then you say it doesn't have enough towing capacity. It can tow 4000 lbs. That covers a whole lot of use cases. It also has a payload capacity of 1500 lbs which is quite respectable for a small truck. As for FWD vs. RWD, who cares? How does that affect your ability to move things around? Really the only thing I think you can ding it for is the small bed. It used to be that trucks this size would have a regular cab or an extended cab with the two tiny side facing seats, and they would have a longer bed. With the tailgate down you can still move sheet goods with a Maverick though.
- zdragnar 9mo ago
  People want smaller, not weaker, trucks. The 1985 Ford ranger compact truck could tow over 3000 lbs base, and over 5000 with upgrades. The Maverick only tows 2000 base, the 4000 is an upgrade package and only for trailers with their own brakes. RWD is pretty functionally important for a vehicle to maintain control while towing significant weight, as all the weight sits on the back of the frame, and that's where you want the engine power to go. The Maverick is not a working truck, which was my original point. In terms of what matters, it is worse in every way than a 40 year old design.
  - cameldrv 9mo ago
    You need to have AWD for the Maverick to have the 4000 lbs rating. It's going to be sending power to the rear wheels when you're towing. You can't really compare the tow ratings with a 1985 Ranger. Back then the ratings were not standardized and were generally inflated for marketing purposes. Today tow ratings are standardized by SAE J2807. The Maverick has way more power than the old Ranger and weighs about 600 lbs more, plus it has trailer sway control. You're going to have a much easier time towing 4000 lbs in the Maverick than the Ranger. Edit: The Maverick also has 300 lbs more payload capacity than the 1984 Ranger. The fact is, not everyone needs a giant heavy truck. I see loads of tradesmen driving Mavericks.
  - k12sosse 9mo ago
    The '22 ranger tows up to 7500, payload 1500. Sure, bed is only 5-6 feet, but is 4x4, and interior feels good, and is about as bougie as the big F gets. Had it down to 12L/100km, a full tank gave me a 700km range at that point. Fits my family of 5 when it needs to. I would buy one again e-z. Grabbed it in '25 with factory warranty still on it for about the price of a new maverick.

A Maverick is hardly a working truck. It's got the same towing capacity of an older Kia Sportage. It's got front wheel drive (or awd). It's a car with a bed, not a truck.

b40d-48b2-979e 9mo ago

It's a car with a bed, not a truck. Also called a Ute, which is fine! It avoids the weight and height that makes trucks dangerous vehicles to operate in a society.

ErroneousBosh 9mo ago

> It's got the same towing capacity of an older Kia Sportage. How often do you need to pull 2000kg?

cindyllm 9mo ago
[dead]
zdragnar 9mo ago
Several times a year at a minimum, and not always with good notice. Towing weight is also a good proxy for frame strength. I do some light forestry work moving and bucking logs, freeing stuck cars, plowing snow in addition to towing trailers and equipment.
- ErroneousBosh 9mo ago
  Okay, so a Kia Sportage ought to do then, I guess?
  - zdragnar 9mo ago
    I didn't really trust it for some of the logs I was moving, as the trailer hitch was added on after and the frame isn't really designed for shocks like what I was putting it through. On top of that, hauling messy stuff in the back was a pain with having to lay down tarp and hoping it caught everything and didn't rip. Plus, you can't really put a winch or snow plow on a Sportage.
    - ErroneousBosh 9mo ago
      If it's able to have a trailer hitch fitted, it's designed to have a trailer hitch fitted. You can't just stick it on with a couple of random holes drilled and a bolt through. I always find it kind of surprising how large a vehicle people in the US think they need to pull trailers, especially when you compare with the size of trailers people pull in the UK. My own elderly Range Rover (1990s P38A) has a plated towing weight of 3500kg which means you can pull another one on a trailer with it easily. With the back full of tools and spares and a couple of passengers, you've got an all-up weight well over six tonnes!

Marsymars 9mo ago

A BMW i3 is a body-on-frame rear-wheel-drive vehicle, but I don't think anyone would call it a "truck without a bed, not a car".

rjrjrjrj 9mo ago

Ford calls it a truck. Ask a random person on the street, and they'll say it is a small truck. I've seen plenty of people in working clothes driving them, carrying working tools and such.

cameldrv 9mo ago

I don't get this attitude. Everyone criticizes auto companies for not making a small truck anymore, and then Ford comes out with the Maverick and then you say it doesn't have enough towing capacity. It can tow 4000 lbs. That covers a whole lot of use cases. It also has a payload capacity of 1500 lbs which is quite respectable for a small truck. As for FWD vs. RWD, who cares? How does that affect your ability to move things around? Really the only thing I think you can ding it for is the small bed. It used to be that trucks this size would have a regular cab or an extended cab with the two tiny side facing seats, and they would have a longer bed. With the tailgate down you can still move sheet goods with a Maverick though.

zdragnar 9mo ago
People want smaller, not weaker, trucks. The 1985 Ford ranger compact truck could tow over 3000 lbs base, and over 5000 with upgrades. The Maverick only tows 2000 base, the 4000 is an upgrade package and only for trailers with their own brakes. RWD is pretty functionally important for a vehicle to maintain control while towing significant weight, as all the weight sits on the back of the frame, and that's where you want the engine power to go. The Maverick is not a working truck, which was my original point. In terms of what matters, it is worse in every way than a 40 year old design.
- cameldrv 9mo ago
  You need to have AWD for the Maverick to have the 4000 lbs rating. It's going to be sending power to the rear wheels when you're towing. You can't really compare the tow ratings with a 1985 Ranger. Back then the ratings were not standardized and were generally inflated for marketing purposes. Today tow ratings are standardized by SAE J2807. The Maverick has way more power than the old Ranger and weighs about 600 lbs more, plus it has trailer sway control. You're going to have a much easier time towing 4000 lbs in the Maverick than the Ranger. Edit: The Maverick also has 300 lbs more payload capacity than the 1984 Ranger. The fact is, not everyone needs a giant heavy truck. I see loads of tradesmen driving Mavericks.
- k12sosse 9mo ago
  The '22 ranger tows up to 7500, payload 1500. Sure, bed is only 5-6 feet, but is 4x4, and interior feels good, and is about as bougie as the big F gets. Had it down to 12L/100km, a full tank gave me a 700km range at that point. Fits my family of 5 when it needs to. I would buy one again e-z. Grabbed it in '25 with factory warranty still on it for about the price of a new maverick.