Ford Maverick hybrid pickup starts at $20,000

[Hersbird]

I just saw the Honda Insight starts at $23130 before destination or MSRP. So over $3000 more. At 40 mpg and $3 gas you could drive the Maverick for free for 40,000 miles before the 40 mpg vs 55 mpg starts whittling it back the other way.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

I just saw the Honda Insight starts at $23130 before destination or MSRP. So over $3000 more. At 40 mpg and $3 gas you could drive the Maverick for free for 40,000 miles before the 40 mpg vs 55 mpg starts whittling it back the other way.

Honda bumped the 2022 Insight's price to $25,210 + destination

I calculate it takes almost 245k miles of driving to pay back that extra cost with fuel savings.

[ME_Andy]

This truck has caught my eye too. I'm dreaming of a small truck in the next few years. I don't need much but seating for 4 and room for mountain bikes or kayaks. Here's kind of my thinking along those lines. Ranked from worst to best option in my eye.

5. Hybrid Maverick- great price, cool hybrid tech. My reservations are, I'm not sure this truck will last 20 years like I want. Also, I think gas stations will be rare in 20 years
4. Cybertruck- stainless steel, should last forever. Won't have to deal with gas ever again. Made in America. But, it's bigger than I want and I might need to work another year or so to afford it. I guess that is a deal breaker.
3. Keep my Chevy Cruze til it dies- this is the cheapest option but life is short and I kinda want to drive something different. The biggest benefit is a manual transmission.
2. Used Subaru Baja- fun, cheap. Will be old at this point and probably won't last 20 years. A little on the small side. Still need to deal with gas.
1. EV Maverick- should be coming out soon. Basically ticks all the boxes for me

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

They shot themselves in the foot marketing hybrid technology as fuel saving environmental equipment rather than marketing it as performance enhancement with a side benefit of not having to refuel as much.

I guess the "environmental" approach was more detrimental to the sales potential of hybrid tech among the mainstream customer base than the fuel-saving claims. Everyone who is reasonably-minded enough takes total cost of ownership in consideration while looking for a daily-driver, in contrast to those stereotypes about hybrid car owners willing to pose as "morally superior" to everybody else.

[redpoint5]

I just think building a vehicle and marketing it as something that can out accelerate most other vehicles while spending less at the pump appeals to most consumers. Save the planet and drive slowly appeals to far fewer.

It's relatively trivial to build a fast hybrid, but we started with the Honda Insight and Toyota Prius; and that began the image of tree hugging cars that don't go very fast. Had Toyota started with a wicked fast Tundra 4x4 that gets 30 MPG, consumers would have a different perception of what it means to drive a hybrid.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I just think building a vehicle and marketing it as something that can out accelerate most other vehicles while spending less at the pump appeals to most consumers. Save the planet and drive slowly appeals to far fewer.

Just like the good old "win on Sunday, sell on Monday" did.

Had Toyota started with a wicked fast Tundra 4x4 that gets 30 MPG, consumers would have a different perception of what it means to drive a hybrid.

Not sure if only speed would be a good sales argument. Let's consider auxiliary power for accessories enhancing the convenience of a camping rig, while also eventually serving as a backup power source at home during shortages just like Ford highlighted the hybrid F-150 recently.

[ksa8907]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I just think building a vehicle and marketing it as something that can out accelerate most other vehicles while spending less at the pump appeals to most consumers. Save the planet and drive slowly appeals to far fewer.

It's relatively trivial to build a fast hybrid, but we started with the Honda Insight and Toyota Prius; and that began the image of tree hugging cars that don't go very fast. Had Toyota started with a wicked fast Tundra 4x4 that gets 30 MPG, consumers would have a different perception of what it means to drive a hybrid.

I agree, the only reason someone buys a brand new vehicle that is nore fuel efficient is because that extra money is important to them. So, if an equally fuel efficient vehicle is cheaper and available, they would purchase that.

And finally, people who purchase new vehicles do not find the slowest, least stylish, and most uncomfortable vehicle as their #1 choice. They want cool, fast, and comfort which is usually mutually exclusive with fuel efficient as well as inexpensive.

Premium vehicles don't need to be inefficient for people to want to buy one.

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

It's relatively trivial to build a fast hybrid, but we started with the Honda Insight and Toyota Prius; and that began the image of tree hugging cars that don't go very fast. consumers would have a different perception of what it means to drive a hybrid.

Honda had wanted the Insight to be blistering fast and their original concepts had played with supercaps
Sadly the batteries they chose were found to wear out extremely fast at very high discharge rates.

Had Honda stuck with getting the Insight to 6’s I’m not sure if it would have made any difference or not

[Hersbird]

I stopped caring about 0-60 times at some point in the 90s. Now an average minivan is on par with some exotics of that time. In the 90s I started drag racing and realized 2 things, there will always be something faster and really fast on the street is a worthless quality. As for the track really fast can be built for much less than what the factory wants.

Thar said TFL truck just did a towing test up and down the Ike Gauntlet with a Hemi Ram vs the new 3.5 EcoBoost hybrid F150 and the Ram beat it 8 mpg to the hybrid's 6 mpg. They both accelerated similar, held the speed limit up the hill with over 7000 pounds in tow, but the old tech just got better mpg not that is where the hybrid was supposed to shine. You would think at the minimum the turbos would improve efficiency overall but seems again there is something to be said for no replacement for displacement.

[redpoint5]

My understanding was that turbos aren't for improving top end fuel economy, but instead allow a smaller engine to be used so that under normal cruising operation it operates more efficiently. The turbo is just there to make enough power those rare times it's needed. When an engine is into the boost, it's not in economy mode anymore.