[Primrose]

Which engine is everyone going with for their Maverick order? Is it going to be the more fuel efficient 2.4L hybrid engine or the more powerful 2.0L EcoBoost engine.

Add you selection in the poll below and let's see which one is more popular.

 

[Primrose]

6 for hybrid and 5 for EcoBoost so far. It's much closer than I thought so far.

 

[JASmith]

Its a 2.5L hybrid though.

 

[clifford]

Looks like the Hybrid is pulling ahead!

 

[Fishinmagician]

Can't say until they release the mpg figures, but leaving towards hybrid

 

[JoeBoumps]

Xlt premium package cactus grey 2.5 hybrid. Counting the days!

 

[Barefootdan]

Surprised how popular the hybrid is! I guess especially at this price point thought that many are buying strictly for the gas savings. I went 2.0t ecoboost to make it fun to drive around town and because I mod every car I buy

 

[JASmith]

Surprised how popular the hybrid is! I guess especially at this price point thought that many are buying strictly for the gas savings. I went 2.0t ecoboost to make it fun to drive around town and because I mod every car I buy

Way better fuel economy, 87 vs 91 octane recommended, electric torque off the line with a smooth transmission that makes the most of the available horsepower (see below), better stop/start performance, quite a bit of savings up front, and long term the hybrid uses a naturally aspirated port injected engine that is tuned to never even go all the way up to redline so should last forever whereas the 2.0T ecoboost is not only going to have more frequent oil and spark plug changes and the like but being direct injection turbo is bound to eventually have the unavoidable carbon buildup on the valves requiring a tedious walnut blasting if you end up keeping the vehicle 100K+ miles.

So while the 2.0T will be more capable and certainly more fun, from a pure practicality standpoint the hybrid is a no-brainer.

 

[Twistedcarguy]

I admit there was a temptation to go ecoboost, But since I have a big truck for big truck duty, I wanted this light duty truck for general run around use and fuel economy while doing so. The ability to use regular gasoline instead of premium, sometimes 60 to 80 cents more per gallon, was also a strong factor that kept me leaning in the hybrid direction.

 

[Barefootdan]

Way better fuel economy, 87 vs 91 octane recommended, electric torque off the line with a smooth transmission that makes the most of the available horsepower (see below), better stop/start performance, quite a bit of savings up front, and long term the hybrid uses a naturally aspirated port injected engine that is tuned to never even go all the way up to redline so should last forever whereas the 2.0T ecoboost is not only going to have more frequent oil and spark plug changes and the like but being direct injection turbo is bound to eventually have the unavoidable carbon buildup on the valves requiring a tedious walnut blasting if you end up keeping the vehicle 100K+ miles.

So while the 2.0T will be more capable and certainly more fun, from a pure practicality standpoint the hybrid is a no-brainer.

I'm not sure I see the increased tq off the line with the hybrid motor in this graph. The ecoboost is always ahead. Although, I am curious as to the figures Ford gave for the electric motor. It added HP to the total but no torque? I've had a prius before and while slow, the initial get up and go was surprising. I cant imaging the tq figures staying at 150lbs

 

[Primrose]

Surprised how popular the hybrid is! I guess especially at this price point thought that many are buying strictly for the gas savings. I went 2.0t ecoboost to make it fun to drive around town and because I mod every car I buy

The fact that it's the cheapest hybrid and it's a truck to boot is really appealing. Especailly when the nearest hybrids for that price are the Honda Insight, Hyundai Elantra Hybrid, and Toyota Corolla Hybrid.

 

[Shark]

I'm not sure I see the increased tq off the line with the hybrid motor in this graph. The ecoboost is always ahead. Although, I am curious as to the figures Ford gave for the electric motor. It added HP to the total but no torque? I've had a prius before and while slow, the initial get up and go was surprising. I cant imaging the tq figures staying at 150lbs

I am also very curious about this question, anyone have any insight?

As it stands I'm leaning to the 2.0. For the more power, and that I'm familiar with gas engines. Oh, and the 1k price premium for the 2.0 is incredibly reasonable.

I currently drive a 08 Canyon 4 cylinder, regular cab. So it's my basis for compare. it has 191 ft lb torque. It does feel pretty peppy, but I'm always wanting more! It weighs 3300 lb. The Mav will be heavier at from 3500-3700 lb (though apparently VERY light for a current truck). If it's only 151 ft lb of torque (listed with the Hybrid), then more weight and less torque than my current ride doesnt sound super peppy.

One other thing is I guess he's generally considered a jackass, but that Scotty Kilmer car guy on YT mentioned about the mav: It's under 20k. For both a hybrid motor and a 4 cylinder in the same vehicle. He was skeptical how that can be done under 20k. He mentioned Mexico production as one way it's cheap, but says that the quality there is questionable. Then he said this will be an all new Hybrid motor by ford. Their only previous one was "copied from the Rav 4". So this will be their first true hybrid design. so again he's kinda pessimistic on reliability. He said something like he'd wait a few years and see.

Again the guy may be a jackass but they seem to be points one may consider about the hybrid. But I'm mainly concerned about power/torque. On my commute every day I merge onto the interstate on a incline, it's deceptively hard to accelerate on that on ramp. Sure is nice to have power there! Granted, it can easily be worked around. And certainly isn't something to base a car purchase around, just an area I regularly notice how more power would be nice.

Worth noting I only own one vehicle though, so it has to be my do everything! A lot of Mav purchasers seem to already have a F-150 etc for towing, hence they want the hybrid for the gas mileage. I actually never tow and rarely haul much, but if I already had a more capable truck certainly the Hybrid would be more convincing.

 

[Twistedcarguy]

Shark, I'm not totally convinced of the truth to this being a new 2.5 hybrid drive train, Lincoln was building the MKZ hybrid out of that same plant in Mexico since approx 2011 with a 2.5 hybrid. I don't know enough about them to say whether it's the same but it seems odd that you come out with a new 2.5L hybrid to replace your old 2.5L hybrid. It seems a lot more likely to me that Ford is putting a drive train that's been used in Lincoln since 2011. If it has worked well for Lincoln for the last 10 years, I'm not seeing why it would be a problem in Maverick.

 

[JASmith]

I'm not sure I see the increased tq off the line with the hybrid motor in this graph. The ecoboost is always ahead. Although, I am curious as to the figures Ford gave for the electric motor. It added HP to the total but no torque? I've had a prius before and while slow, the initial get up and go was surprising. I cant imaging the tq figures staying at 150lbs

True, I guess I should elaborate when I say "electric torque off the line", I'm not really referring to peak torque but how it behaves instantly and effortlessly. So using stop/start for example, when you see a break in traffic sitting at a stop sign with through traffic on your left, with a hybrid that has a 125hp electric motor that should be plenty of pep to instantly start rolling and get going. With a small turbocharged engine, there's usually an instant to fire up the ICE and if you aren't in sport mode or flooring it so the vehicle knows to give it the beans, there can be a bit of hesitation before it produces full boost and the experience can be less than ideal.

Regarding peak numbers, I have a feeling that this is heavily ECU limited on the hybrid. BMW learned the hard way back in the day that too much torque from the electric motors literally sheered bolts over time and causes a lot of fatigue. Being FWD with likely a pretty soft suspension, there are probably traction issues too, but it should feel very smooth and linear.

Here's the Escape w/ the 2.5L hybrid engine to show how it does in that scenario (should be very similar, as in this trim its 3700lbs same as the Maverick):

 

[Darnon]

I believe the major change with the hybrid drivetrain that's "new" is they changed the construction of the rotor assembly. Otherwise I suspect the HF45 isn't much different from the HF35 Ford has been building in-house for a few years evolved from their Aisin produced hybrid transaxles before that.

 

[Barefootdan]

True, I guess I should elaborate when I say "electric torque off the line", I'm not really referring to peak torque but how it behaves instantly and effortlessly. So using stop/start for example, when you see a break in traffic sitting at a stop sign with through traffic on your left, with a hybrid that has a 125hp electric motor that should be plenty of pep to instantly start rolling and get going. With a small turbocharged engine, there's usually an instant to fire up the ICE and if you aren't in sport mode or flooring it so the vehicle knows to give it the beans, there can be a bit of hesitation before it produces full boost and the experience can be less than ideal.

Regarding peak numbers, I have a feeling that this is heavily ECU limited on the hybrid. BMW learned the hard way back in the day that too much torque from the electric motors literally sheered bolts over time and causes a lot of fatigue. Being FWD with likely a pretty soft suspension, there are probably traction issues too, but it should feel very smooth and linear.

Here's the Escape w/ the 2.5L hybrid engine to show how it does in that scenario (should be very similar, as in this trim its 3700lbs same as the Maverick):

Ah that makes sense, thank you! Yea I am very curious to see how they implement it.

 

[JASmith]

I believe the major change with the hybrid drivetrain that's "new" is they changed the construction of the rotor assembly. Otherwise I suspect the HF45 isn't much different from the HF35 Ford has been building in-house for a few years evolved from their Aisin produced hybrid transaxles before that.

That's what I read as well, and the changes are more about futureproofing than really making a difference in this particular implementation.

Speaking of the Escape though, for the life of me I can't find any professional video reviewers that have pitted a Escape Hybrid vs Escape 2.0, which is a shame as its the same basic chassis as the Maverick so would remove a lot of the guesswork.

But I did find is this article:

2020 Ford Escape Engine Options: Hybrid vs. 3-Cylinder EcoBoost vs. 4-Cylinder EcoBoost

The new 2020 Ford Escape is here, with three engines to choose from. Between them there’s one that’s best for you—but which?

www.motortrend.com

2.0-Liter 4-Cylinder EcoBoost: Pros
That extra grunt is immediately evident (compared to the three cylinder turbo). It simply makes the Escape feel quicker; less effort is needed to get the car up to speed. The numbers prove it, too, with a 6.9-second 0-60 mph run. An eight-speed automatic is the only transmission. However, all-wheel drive is standard, so traction is improved in slippery and loose conditions. It also enables some legitimate towing capability: up to 3,500 pounds.
2.0-Liter 4-Cylinder EcoBoost: Cons
The engine itself doesn't have much turbo lag, but the transmission needs time to think. It always shifts to the highest gear possible to save fuel, so when pressing the gas pedal, there's a delay as it decides which ratio is best for the situation. Reactions, then, aren't the best; the 2.0-liter EcoBoost might feel quicker but no sportier.

2.5-Liter Hybrid: Pros
It now features a compact, liquid-cooled 1.1-kW-hr battery pack to assist a 2.5-liter Atkinson-cycle I-4 engine linked to a CVT. Ford says the switch from air cooling allows the battery to be smaller yet more effectively implemented into the drive cycle. If you drive gently, the Escape Hybrid can operate on electric-only power and in the right circumstances will sustain speeds of up to 85 mph without the engine. But how does it drive? About as well as its EcoBoost counterparts—in fact, it's probably the Escape to get. The CVT might actually provide slightly better reactions than the oft-confused eight-speed. Brake pedal feel, a common gripe on hybrid vehicles, seems well sorted here; there's no awkward transition point between regenerative and friction brakes.
2.5-Liter Hybrid: Cons
Any smoothness the electric motor and CVT provide is undone by the Atkinson-cycle 2.5-liter engine. Of the three on offer, it seems the roughest and noisiest, slightly oxymoronic given the application. There's no denying performance is less than its turbocharged counterparts. With a combined output of 200 hp and 170 lb-ft of torque, it's down on power compared to the 2.0-liter turbo, and its 8.7-second 0-60 mph run is a blink behind the triple.

 

[Philpug]

IMHO, Poll is flawed. Shoudl be if going FWD Hybrid or 2.0 because of you are going AWD, you must get the 2.0.

 

[tngreg]

Way better fuel economy, 87 vs 91 octane recommended, electric torque off the line with a smooth transmission that makes the most of the available horsepower (see below), better stop/start performance, quite a bit of savings up front, and long term the hybrid uses a naturally aspirated port injected engine that is tuned to never even go all the way up to redline so should last forever whereas the 2.0T ecoboost is not only going to have more frequent oil and spark plug changes and the like but being direct injection turbo is bound to eventually have the unavoidable carbon buildup on the valves requiring a tedious walnut blasting if you end up keeping the vehicle 100K+ miles.

So while the 2.0T will be more capable and certainly more fun, from a pure practicality standpoint the hybrid is a no-brainer.

Such an excellent post here !!! I'm very interested in placing an order for this truck and this was the EXACT thing I was debating while researching these 2 engine choices separately online. The carbon build up is a concern. I'm in for a reliable lost maintenance cost power plant for the long haul!
Ridgeline was in my future, but that price is high and I have had some great Fords, inline 6 Torino, v6 Mustang and 4 & 6 ranger. Good service with proper basic maintenance!
@ JASmith - THANK YOU THANK YOU for the clear to the point post here!!!

 

[Eric G]

EcoBoost for me. Only way to get AWD and the towing package. I'd just keep my EcoSport if I didn't want to tow more than 2000 pounds. And it's ground clearance is less than an inch less than the Maverick. Interior space and seating is almost identical. It's closer to the Escape, but from videos I've seen of men around 6' tall, the leg room and backs of the front seats are the same as my EcoSport. If I was not going to be spending most of my time in the country after this year, I might reconsider the hybrid option, but there's still the matter of towing capacity.