Ford has been killing it this past year with the new vehicle launches. The F-150 kicked off the onslaught last June, and now we have the Maverick, a new compact pickup truck. But after seeing some spy shots of the Maverick vs Ranger, we have to wonder how different these two trucks really are.
So, we decided to cut and paste the specs from both vehicles below to do a comparison. And, while we do see that the Maverick is smaller than the Ranger – it’s not by much. And there are a couple surprises buried in there.
This has to be the biggest surprise. Ranger is bigger, so you’d expect it to be all-around more. But it isn’t – especially when you look at interior spaces. The passenger volume for the Maverick is more than the Ranger. Plus, headroom and legroom in a couple of places is also better for Maverick.
While truck customer segmentation is typically marketing speak, the specs for the Maverick vs Ranger tell a story of their own. With a unibody construction, hybrid powertrain and smaller truck bed, you can easily see that Ford is targeting someone who likes the look of a truck but may not need all the capability.
Plus, with the smaller footprint, it will more easily fit into a city garage or parallel parking space, which tells me Ford might be seeking a buyer in a more urban environment.
Frankly, there is no real comparison here. The MAX tow rating for the Maverick with the 4K Tow Package is 4,000 pounds, which Ford says is enough for a 21-foot boat. But this truck must be configured with all-wheel drive and the up-level 2.0-liter EcoBoost. Max towing with the hybrid is just 2,000 pounds.
The Ranger, however, tows significantly more, with a max tow rating of 7,500 pounds.
The Maverick vs Ranger relationship is going to be similar to the Bronco Sport vs Bronco relationship – especially since Maverick and Bronco Sport are built on the same platform as are Ranger and Bronco.
Sure, the Maverick and the Ranger are different trucks and different sizes. But are they different enough? The unibody construction alone might be a big enough differentiator for the “truck guys.” But time alone will tell if the Maverick will sell.
|2022 Ford Maverick||2021 Ford Ranger|
|Body type||Unibody, SuperCrew||Body-on-frame, SuperCrew, SuperCab|
|Trim levels||XL, XLT, LARIAT||XL, XLT, LARIAT|
|Final Assembly Location||Hermosillo Assembly Plant, Sonora, Mexico||Michigan Assembly Plant, Wayne, Michigan|
|Drivetrain||FWD (std); AWD (opt)||RWD with open differential (std); RWD with electronic locking differential (opt); 4x4 front open differential, rear drive with open differential (opt); 4x4 front open differential, rear drive with electronic locking differential (opt)|
|Engines||2.5-liter FHEV (std): 2.0L EcoBoost (opt)||2.3-liter EcoBoost I-4 with Auto Start-Stop|
|Horsepower||191 (HEV); 250||270|
|Torque||155 lb-ft (HEV); 277 lb-ft||310 lb-ft|
|Transmission||eCVT (HEV); 8-speed AT||10-speed SelectShift automatic|
|Front suspension||Independent MacPherson strut-type suspension with coil springs, twin-tube hydraulic gas-pressurized shocks, stabilizer bars, aluminum lower control arm, steel sub-frame and cast knuckle||Short- and long-arm independent and tubular stabilizer bar|
|Rear suspension||Independent twistbeam rear suspension with integrated|
stabilizer bar, Ford patented “force vectoring springs,’ twintube hydraulic gas-pressurized dampers (FWD); Independent multi-link trailing arm suspension with twin-tube hydraulic gas-pressurized dampers, coil springs, stabilizer bar, steel sub-frame and cast knuckle (AWD); Independent multi-link trailing arm suspension with mono-tube hydraulic gas-pressurized dampers with hydraulic rebound stop, coil springs, stabilizer bar, steel sub-frame and cast knuckle (AWD FX4)
|Hotchkiss-type nonindependent live, leaf springs and outboard shock absorbers|
|Turning circle (curb to curb)||40 ft||42.5 ft|
|Brakes||4-wheel disc brakes with ABS and regenerative braking system (HEV); 4-wheel disc brakes with ABS||4-wheel power disc brakes with four-sensor, four-channel antilock braking system and
AdvanceTrac electronic stability control
|Vehicle Length (in)||199.7||210.8|
|Vehicle Height - Maximum (in)||68.7||71.5|
|Vehicle Width (in)||72.6||73.3|
|Vehicle Width - Including Outside Mirrors (in)||83.5||85.8|
|Vehicle Width - with Mirrors Folded (in)||77.9||77.8|
|Vehicle Track Front Curb (in)||63.4||61.4|
|Vehicle Track Rear Curb (in)||62.8||61.4|
|Front Overhang (in)||34.1||35.8|
|Rear Overhang (in)||44.5||48.2|
|Approach Angle||20.6˚ (HEV); 21.6˚||27.9˚ (4X2); 28.7˚ (4X4)|
|Departure Angle||21.9˚ (HEV); 21.2˚||25.2˚ (4X2); 25.4˚ (4X4)|
|Ramp Breakover Angle - Curb||16.6˚ (HEV); 18.1˚||22.7˚ (4X2); 21.5˚ (4X4)|
|Minimum Running Ground Clearance (in)||8.3 (HEV); 8.6||8.4 (4X2); 8.9 (4X4)|
|Effective Head Room - Front (in)||40.3||39.8|
|Effective Head Room - Front (with moonroof) (in)||38||n/a|
|Effective Head Room - Second (in)||39.6||38.3|
|Effective Head Room - Second (with moonroof) (in)||39.5||n/a|
|Maximum Leg Room - Accelerator (in)||42.8||43.1|
|Effective Leg Room - Second (in)||35.9 (2.5L HEV)/36.9 (2.0L)||34.5|
|Hip Room - Front (in)||55.4||55.8|
|Hip Room - Second (in)||54.1||53.5|
|Shoulder Room - Front (in)||57.3||56.7|
|Shoulder Room Beltline - Second (in)||55.6||56.3|
|Passenger Volume||100.3 cu. ft.||97.6 cu. ft.|
|Pickup Body Length at Floor (in)||54.4||61|
|Cargo Width - Wheel House (in)||42.6||44.8|
|Cargo Volume||33.3 cu. ft.||43.3 cu. ft.|
|Base Curb Weights (lbs)||3,674 (HEV); 3,563 (FWD) / 3,731 (AWD)||4,232 (4X2); 4,441 (4X4)|
|Maximum Payload (lbs)||1,500 (HEV); 1,500||1,770 (4X2); 1,560 (4X4)|
|Maximum Towing (lbs)||2,000 (HEV); 2,000 (std); 4,000 with 4K Tow Package||7,500|
The Maverick made me understand why the Ranger needs to be bigger than what it was back in 2011.
The big question is,can Jill lay down in the bed of the Maverick diagonally?