Ford Maverick Pickup?

[paulsharvey]

Probably, but when they are both in the same price ballpark, many people opt for the F-150 over the Ranger.

While ago, I watched a YouTube video on the demise of the Dodge Dakota. Now,last two body styles, wasn't a huge fan of, but i had a 95 Dakota and wife had a 03 Dakota. One of the main points of the videos; last 2 or 3 years of Dakota production/sales; a V6 Ram in similar bed/cab config; Ram was cheaper by a good bit, roomier, and got the same gas milage.

Very very few people are going to buy a more expensive, smaller, lesser spec vehicle. I do understand there is a Small group that small size is a key benefit; but price and ability sell.

Edit; Also, something people don't want to admit; RT Dakota even existing sold SLT 3.9Ls; SS Cobalts sold plain Cobalts; Hellcats sell the V6; Duramax 2500s sell Silverados; ect. Heck, Raptor F150 probably (i can't back this up) likely loose money on every unit sold, but greatly improve sales of generic F150s

 

[Oaktree]

While ago, I watched a YouTube video on the demise of the Dodge Dakota. Now,last two body styles, wasn't a huge fan of, but i had a 95 Dakota and wife had a 03 Dakota. One of the main points of the videos; last 2 or 3 years of Dakota production/sales; a V6 Ram in similar bed/cab config; Ram was cheaper by a good bit, roomier, and got the same gas milage.

Daimler really screwed up the Dakota. Both the 1st gen (1987-95) and 2nd (1996-04) were great trucks, IMHO the best of the less-than-fullsize trucks during those years. I still see quite a few 2nd gen ones on the road. 3rd gen (2005-the end), not so much and as you posted the sales figures reflected that. Not sure what they were thinking, but the styling was wimpy looking, and rusted even worse than an 80s-90s vintage Japanese truck. No wonder sales tanked.

 

[WinterDeere]

Daimler really screwed up the Dakota. Both the 1st gen (1987-95) and 2nd (1996-04) were great trucks, IMHO the best of the less-than-fullsize trucks during those years. I still see quite a few 2nd gen ones on the road. 3rd gen (2005-the end), not so much and as you posted the sales figures reflected that. Not sure what they were thinking, but the styling was wimpy looking, and rusted even worse than an 80s-90s vintage Japanese truck. No wonder sales tanked.

Agreed. Also, the gen.2 Dakota was a great looking truck, but the gen.3 was just terribly ugly.

What's interesting is that the reliability of the Ram's went way up with the Daimler takeover right around that time. All my buddies owned mid-90's Rams, with all their rear diff and transmission problems, but my 2005 Daimler Ram was as reliable as concrete. Not a single repair item in 12 years of ownership.

So, how'd they simultaneously make the Ram so much better, but the Dakota both worse and more expensive? No wonder the Dakota went away!

 

[KennyG]

I had a 2004 Dakota and really liked it. My son still has it. My only complaint was that the gas mileage wasn't great for a 6 cylinder. My current F-150 is better on gas.

Back on topic, I'm sure you've seen that Toyota seems to have decided to bring a new small truck to the US. They also seem to be including a regular cab and not force everyone to buy a 4 door. It will be interesting to see how that impacts the Maverick, which I think would be a great truck if it was a regular cab.

 

[dstig1]

Ford is just selling what the market wants, overall. I'm just not in that market myself, but apparently a minority. C'est la vie

 

[paulsharvey]

I had a 2004 Dakota and really liked it. My son still has it. My only complaint was that the gas mileage wasn't great for a 6 cylinder. My current F-150 is better on gas.

Back on topic, I'm sure you've seen that Toyota seems to have decided to bring a new small truck to the US. They also seem to be including a regular cab and not force everyone to buy a 4 door. It will be interesting to see how that impacts the Maverick, which I think would be a great truck if it was a regular cab.

My 5.7L 4x4 Crew, long bed (not long, full sized) 2019 Ram beats the old 2004 3.9L Dakota, 2wd, extended in milage. Honestly, the Ram probably bets my 1995 2.5L, stick, reg cab, reg bed, 2wd Dakota.

The 3.9L, only complaints; transmission wasn't always up for the task, if you went to something like 33s or pulled trailers. Back seat, it was fine when the kids were small; but the extended wasn't for people over about 4 ft tall

Edit: my 19 Ram also beats my old 02 Toyota Highland, 3.3? v6 in milage.

 

[dmccarty]

Ford is just selling what the market wants, overall. I'm just not in that market myself, but apparently a minority. C'est la vie

I don't think the market wants what Ford, GM, Dodge, Toyota, etc., is producing, otherwise they would not have Employee Pricing.

The car companies have gotten very greedy after shafting people with high prices since the lock down. People had no choice but to pay, and the executives figured we can make money on these over priced, unreliable vehicles, AND they were loosing money on EVs, so the customers had to subsidize the EV losses. Ford was loosing something around $50,000 per EV.... Even with the today's price discounts, the high interest rates means people are going to have $600-1,000+ payments. That is nuts but the executives think people can afford those payments. They can't. Which is why some of the CEOs are getting axed. Finally.

Part of this is government regulation which creates more complicated, and thus, more unreliable vehicles, to meet impossible goals. Toyota has to recall 100K vehicles with engines that blow up, GM has 900K 6.2L engines cratering, bad transmissions, electronic issue, etc. I don't need, nor want, a twin turbo engine. That used to be, and should be, only for exotic cars. The market is to blame for the inane need for more and more HP. I don't need a SUV or full size truck to to 0-60 as fast a sports car from 30-40 years ago. I just need a vehicle that gets me around and does not have an engine what will blow up randomly.

I don't want a big, heavy pickup if I had to replace my F350. A F150 is really all I need. BUT, looking at what Ford has done to the engines, if I had to buy a new truck today, I would get a F350 with a 6.8L gas engine. That engine appears to have less problems than others. Oddly, my 25 year old truck model is a Lariat. If I got the same features today, it would be an SXT or whatever is one of the lower tier models. A Lariat is really out there feature wise for what I want and need.

The car executives have really messed up and produced what THEY want, not what the market wants or can afford.

 

[Jstpssng]

The car executives have really messed up and produced what THEY want, not what the market wants or can afford

To be more accurate; they make more money on higher end models. If the lower end, reasonably priced vehicles were more available they wouldn't be able to sell as many of the pimpmobiles they do now.

 

[deserteagle71]

My 5.7L 4x4 Crew, long bed (not long, full sized) 2019 Ram beats the old 2004 3.9L Dakota, 2wd, extended in milage. Honestly, the Ram probably bets my 1995 2.5L, stick, reg cab, reg bed, 2wd Dakota.

The 3.9L, only complaints; transmission wasn't always up for the task, if you went to something like 33s or pulled trailers. Back seat, it was fine when the kids were small; but the extended wasn't for people over about 4 ft tall

Edit: my 19 Ram also beats my old 02 Toyota Highland, 3.3? v6 in milage.

Yup. A few years ago when I decided I needed a general purpose vehicle that got good fuel mileage I was looking at Dakotas and Ford Rangers and whatever GM was producing as a mid-size back then. But after doing my research comparing vehicle capabilities versus fuel mileage I ended up with an F150. Couldn't be happier - 9 years now, 80,000 miles and not one single problem to report. Overall fuel mileage since new is 20.5 mpg hand calculated, and that includes a lot of miles pulling a trailer. On trips not pulling a trailer the mileage was pretty darn good - 275 miles since I filled it with gas and still 600 miles to empty (36 gallon tank).

I can't disparage the new trucks they make these days - I've owned a lot of them in my lifetime and most were doing good to get 12 mpg and were considered to be worn out at 100,000 miles. Now,100,000 miles is considered finally broken in and the truck is good for 3X that.

 

[paulsharvey]

Honestly, I dont like it, but my 2005 Chevy 2500, 6.0, 4x4, extended wasn't $35,000 in 05. With inflation, you would say your money is about half value since then, so, you Can still get a similar equipment truck for $70,000. Nobody wants to hear that, but its the truth.

I saw an ad, I think 1996, old newspaper, and new 1996 F150, extended cab, 2wd, was $16k. Your money is roughly between 1/3 and 1/4 of the value now, 29 years later, and you can still get a F150 for $55-60.