Ford Maverick Forum banner

Which engine are you ordering for the Maverick?

  • 2.5L Hybrid engine

    Votes: 85 57.0%
  • 2.0L EcoBoost engine

    Votes: 64 43.0%
41 - 60 of 82 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts

·
Registered
1970 Mercury Montego, 2018 Dodge Challenger, 2017 F-150
Joined
·
210 Posts
JASmith..... I like to drive sportingly... so I doubt I doubt I would get forty. But it is a good method for people to save on gas. I applaud that. In my 63 years of age, I have owned several UNDERPOWERED cars......they can be SCAREY. The 1976 Honda Civic was the only exception. That car could smoke those tiny tires on the front! Plus fun to drive. I miss that car. My Challenger is fun to drive, but it is so heavy....so when the guy said this Escape 3700 pounds!!!! I was shocked. My Challenger weighs around 4000. It's a V-6.. the Hemi is way to much me. Scarey fast. Not for me. The Better half Drives a 2017 F-150 with a Coyote 5.0. We tow our Micro Winnie with it. It gets 12 mpg towing it! Everything loaded! That's good, and the power it has towing! The Coyote gets 20-21 per tankful empty! Couldn't be happier. But if I drove it......lol My Challenger gets 20 overall. So that why I want need something smaller, and still fits in my GARAGE. The Maverick WILL! So happy about this Maverick.
 

·
Registered
1970 Mercury Montego, 2018 Dodge Challenger, 2017 F-150
Joined
·
210 Posts
...also that CVT......
 

·
Registered
1970 Mercury Montego, 2018 Dodge Challenger, 2017 F-150
Joined
·
210 Posts
I'm hoping the Hybrid is under rated as my 2020 escape hybrid is. I'm averaging 44 plus over 6k miles. Often on my trip to gym loal driving only I see high 50s.
50 mpg?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
I have a Ford CMax which is basically a lowered Escape. I don't have the updated 2.5L engine of the Escape but the mileage is rated (42 mpg in city) similar. In around town driving, I regularly get 50 or even 60 mpg on trips. It averages out with lower mpg trips but it is not out of the question on a good tank to get 47 mpg. It all depends on how you drive but I can imagine people in the Maverick hybrid getting 43+ on a tank of gas around town - especially if they have the bed cover.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
Not uncommon if the route is overall slightly downhill, no A/C or heat on, and the battery was well-charged at the start. My commute home I've had occasional 55-58mpg on my Fusion, although to work usually only gets 41 mpg since much of the suburb driving has the engine running to warm up. RainX anti-fog is also helps in the mornings so you don't need to run the defrost as the A/C pulls a fair bit of power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
It physically cant be more simple than a gas only engine, since it also has a gas engine itself, and only adds hybrid things to that. I understand hybrid works by transferring brake energy to a battery motor system. Obviously now you've got a lot of things that can go wrong there mechanically, what if the system to take power from the brakes breaks down? Can you tell me how many parts the system to take power from the brakes and transfer to the battery has alone? How many computer chips govern that system? how many feet of wires are involved in that? Obviously electrical gremlins are one of the most unreliable things about any car as is and almost impossible to track down in many cases. In addition last I checked batteries hardly last forever, in fact phones degrade in battery life after a couple of years.

scotty kilmer said it's a new ford design, not copied from toyota, in fact it would be ford's first so there are bound to be problems. if you have proof otherwise post it!

my dad's non hyprid tacoma easily clocked over 300k miles and still going strong when he sold it. i dont know anyone who's hybrid has run anywhere near that long. i'm not talking about one exception in a million on the internet here proving the rule, but real experience.

atkinson cycles are generally widely degraded as are cvt's as well. both quite unpopular with bad reps for different reasons. quite a few people seem to be not interested in the hybrid maverick because of the bad rep of cvt's.
I doubt it is simpler but I also question how much more complicated it really is. There is only one extra part in the hybrid system for braking and that is the "generator" motor that spins backwards for brake regeneration. The hybrid also doesn't have all the parts associated with the turbo or the variable valve timing (I believe). Lastly, the gas engine in the hybrid system is bigger and less relied upon (read less stressed).

As far as Ford's design, I believe the 2016 Ford Fusion hybrid was the first hybrid transmission that they designed. Even then, I believe they licensed the basic design from Aisin and made modifications to suit their needs, based on schematics I have seen. From there, they took a 2.5L engine that they have been using for years and tuned it for the Atkinson cycle. They are using a newly Ford designed electric motor and, to your point, who knows what they have done with the electrical, such as the inverter.

I would venture to say that you don't know many people who have driven hybrids for long though if you don't know anybody who has reached 300K. 2005 Ford Escape Hybrid taxi drivers regularly reported more than that and we are on our fourth generation system since then. There are many, many Ford Fusion, Cmax and Toyota Prius drivers who have reached that as well.

Lastly, as far as technology goes, this is pretty mature technology. Many Aisin, Ford and Toyota (and probably other) patents have gone towards the design of this system. There is nothing wrong with Atkinson cycle engines - they are just tuned for efficiency - and this isn't a run-of-the-mill Nissan CVT. Ford was also a pioneer of lithium ion batteries in hybrids and has optimized the dis/charge cycle to prolong the life of the batteries.

I don't have time to find all the research I have done on this, at the moment. I would expect the hybrid model to be at least as reliable as the ecoboost engines, given their history, and probably more. The only question I have is about the transmission for frequent towers/haulers. I did have a transmission in my CMax replaced under warranty. I have also noticed I have to replace coolant on my hybrid often - I think it gets pretty hot on long trips and the water evaporates out.

All of this is not to endorse the hybrid - I just don't think people should be scared away from it. I certainly prefer the drive characteristics of the transmission, the lower regular maintenance costs and the great gas mileage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
105 Posts
Powertrains should be nearly identical. The Maverick uses a new electric motor, but output I believe is about the same and Escape hybrid should be very close so if you are content with that you should like the Maverick too.

The sportiest trim of the Maverick is going to be the 2.0T though with the towing package which will give it lower gearing for quicker acceleration. If that's not enough, then you'd probably want to check out the Hyundai Santa Cruz with the 2.5T. It has 275hp and a 8-speed DCT (wet clutch) that should be a bit higher performance than the Maverick. Best comparison to that would probably be the Santa Fe Limited w/ has the same powertrain, and then expect the Santa Cruz to feel a bit peppier since it should be a tick lighter.
unless I’m missing something the Hyundai has a very weird gear set

583

584
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
@FirstOnRaceDay @JASmith @MaverickMax

My update on trying the similar engines for those who are interested.

Today I drove both the 2.0L Ecoboost Escape and the 2.5L Hybrid Escape at my local dealer.

The Hybrid without a doubt gets great efficiency and the dealer SUV had roughly 38 MPG. Its quickness was sufficient, but not as "fun" as the Ecoboost alternative.
The Ecoboost alternative felt great. It honestly felt comparable to my 2006 Mustang GT.

I plan on using the Maverick for the long haul. Aim is at least 10 yrs at 100k miles.
Ecoboost should run me around $4k more in fuel over that timeline averaging about 10k miles per year.

While that is a decent chunk for some, it might be a small price to pay for the AWD and sportier handling. It is 4k worth swallowing in my eyes.

I think I will be leaning the Ecoboost version of the Maverick as it was more fun, and the AWD is definitely a pro.
Now I just want to see how well the Maverick's AWD really is. Will it be able to easily handle Boston snowy weather or sandy beach runs? I guess that is yet to be found out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I mean for a few hundred bucks you would just get walnut blasting if carbon buildup ever became a thing (And I think Ford is swearing that's not an issue on their ecoboosts because they've solved it, YMMV)

I'd throw it back and say TWO complicated engine systems would overall make me question the reliability of the Hybrid. There's got to be lots of timing things and parts that can wrong on the hybrid electric side, and you're just adding that to gas engine anyway. So you've kinda got 2X the exposure to engine problems there, in theory. Of course I'd suggest most any modern car is likely to be reliable, but if we are comparing them, and betting which will be MORE reliable, I know where my bet would go, over say 200k miles.
VERY valid points on keeping things simple for reliability!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
It physically cant be more simple than a gas only engine, since it also has a gas engine itself, and only adds hybrid things to that. I understand hybrid works by transferring brake energy to a battery motor system. Obviously now you've got a lot of things that can go wrong there mechanically, what if the system to take power from the brakes breaks down? Can you tell me how many parts the system to take power from the brakes and transfer to the battery has alone? How many computer chips govern that system? how many feet of wires are involved in that? Obviously electrical gremlins are one of the most unreliable things about any car as is and almost impossible to track down in many cases. In addition last I checked batteries hardly last forever, in fact phones degrade in battery life after a couple of years.

scotty kilmer said it's a new ford design, not copied from toyota, in fact it would be ford's first so there are bound to be problems. if you have proof otherwise post it!

my dad's non hyprid tacoma easily clocked over 300k miles and still going strong when he sold it. i dont know anyone who's hybrid has run anywhere near that long. i'm not talking about one exception in a million on the internet here proving the rule, but real experience.

atkinson cycles are generally widely degraded as are cvt's as well. both quite unpopular with bad reps for different reasons. quite a few people seem to be not interested in the hybrid maverick because of the bad rep of cvt's.
If you research the Prius at all, especially the second gen, it's widely regarded as the most reliable vehicle ever produced. I have a 2008 with just over 200k miles and it still has 55% of its battery life left. I have never had an issue with it. There are thousands of people just like me, so it's not an anomaly as you suggest.

Regarding CVTs, there are several different types. The ones with a bad rep are the ones that utilize bands, like a big go kart torque converter. The CVT in this truck, as in the Prius, uses a planetary gear, which is a proven and reliable transmission type.

Scotty Kilmer also mentions Chevrolet HHRs are terribly unreliable due to faulty transmissions. Due some research there and aside from some timing chain guides failing here and there, it's really a bulletproof (ugly) vehicle. Scotty doesn't like what he doesn't understand, which seems to be everything except Toyota Celicas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
Thanks for the response. Would there be any noticeable difference in the quickness of the AWD Escape and FWD version? My local dealership only has an AWD version and that is a little different when comparing to a FWD Maverick running a similar electric motor. Obviously a different vehicle, but I want to try and closely gauge what the acceleration will feel like in the Maverick.

I am hoping I will be satisfied with Escape acceleration which should also hopefully translate to the Maverick.

Maybe "sporty" was the wrong term. While a 6sec 0-60 would be nice, I am mainly hoping to get a truck no bigger than an 8.5 Sec 0-60. Do you imagine the Maverick Hybrid having a sub 8.5 sec 0-60?

Appreciate the feedback
Don’t just assume that the maverick power train performance will be identical to the escape - it is an apples to oranges comparison . Vehicle weight will be different, Aerodynamics will be dufferent, and more importantly the hybrid setup will be different. Patience .
 

·
Registered
1970 Mercury Montego, 2018 Dodge Challenger, 2017 F-150
Joined
·
210 Posts
Don’t just assume that the maverick power train performance will be identical to the escape - it is an apples to oranges comparison . Vehicle weight will be different, Aerodynamics will be dufferent, and more importantly the hybrid setup will be different. Patience .
I'm just not happy about the Maverick getting the single clutch system. Not the dual like the Bronco Sport. FORD!!!! Is charging enough for AWD!!!! Good Grief! FORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
1970 Mercury Montego, 2018 Dodge Challenger, 2017 F-150
Joined
·
210 Posts
Please give us locking rear ends!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
I agree! My 2017 Niro has 20, 200 mi and I have had 6 oil chgs. ….use Mobile 1 full syn as I have used in my vehicles dating back the the 1980’s. I sold my 1993 Honda Accord in 2008 with 118 k miles. The friend who purchased for his college student daughter said when the valve cover was removed ..it looked like a new car…he said the oil was amber…clean as can be and as a auto mechanic he hadn’t seen that before on a 15 yr old car. All the time I owned it, I used only Mobile 1 and I faithfully can age the oil every 2500 to 3000 miles. I am a big fan of the Mobile 1 oil coupled with frequent oil changes …it really is a form of “insurance”.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
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.
im certainly no expert here but is it possible the Linc MKZ 2.5 hybrid was not the ‘Atkinson cycle‘ 2.5 ? If that may be the case it’s very similar but slightly altered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
I agree! My 2017 Niro has 20, 200 mi and I have had 6 oil chgs. ….use Mobile 1 full syn as I have used in my vehicles dating back the the 1980’s. I sold my 1993 Honda Accord in 2008 with 118 k miles. The friend who purchased for his college student daughter said when the valve cover was removed ..it looked like a new car…he said the oil was amber…clean as can be and as a auto mechanic he hadn’t seen that before on a 15 yr old car. All the time I owned it, I used only Mobile 1 and I faithfully can age the oil every 2500 to 3000 miles. I am a big fan of the Mobile 1 oil coupled with frequent oil changes …it really is a form of “insurance”.
I mostly agree with your thoughts on maintenance but IMO you changed oil a bit prematurely for optimum cost efficiency (isn’t Mobil1 recommend oil changes every 15-20K miles?). At your rate of Mobil1 changes your cars engines would last well over 1 million miles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
im certainly no expert here but is it possible the Linc MKZ 2.5 hybrid was not the ‘Atkinson cycle‘ 2.5 ? If that may be the case it’s very similar but slightly altered.
First of all the 'new hybrid drivetrain' statement came from Scotty Kilmer who talks authoritatively without knowing a whole lot.
It was Atkinson cycle. Then Ford went down to 2.0L displacement on the MKZ/Fusion/C-max in 2013 and back up to 2.5L for the 2020-present Escape and now Maverick. 2013 was also when Ford started producing their hybrid transaxle in-house with the HF35. Generationally that transitioned to the HF45 which the Escape uses and Maverick uses a modified version of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
@FirstOnRaceDay @JASmith @MaverickMax

My update on trying the similar engines for those who are interested.

Today I drove both the 2.0L Ecoboost Escape and the 2.5L Hybrid Escape at my local dealer.

The Hybrid without a doubt gets great efficiency and the dealer SUV had roughly 38 MPG. Its quickness was sufficient, but not as "fun" as the Ecoboost alternative.
The Ecoboost alternative felt great. It honestly felt comparable to my 2006 Mustang GT.

I plan on using the Maverick for the long haul. Aim is at least 10 yrs at 100k miles.
Ecoboost should run me around $4k more in fuel over that timeline averaging about 10k miles per year.

While that is a decent chunk for some, it might be a small price to pay for the AWD and sportier handling. It is 4k worth swallowing in my eyes.

I think I will be leaning the Ecoboost version of the Maverick as it was more fun, and the AWD is definitely a pro.
Now I just want to see how well the Maverick's AWD really is. Will it be able to easily handle Boston snowy weather or sandy beach runs? I guess that is yet to be found out.
Wanted AWD so only option is 2.0. So XLT 2.0 cactus grey for me.
 
41 - 60 of 82 Posts
Top