Ford Maverick 2L EcoBoost Real World FUEL ECONOMY Test (MPGs)

[@FrankD71864]

I have owned my 2.0L Maverick XLT FWD for 8 months (since January 2024) and have averaged 21 mpg city. Last month, I drove to Columbus, GA, with my mom and sister. I averaged 33mpg. 4,788 miles driven so far with 526 of that coming from my trip to Columbus. This little truck is everything I imagined it would be for my needs.

[@jmart3605]

I don't drive the gasser but the hybrid Maverick ('24). With an ARE cap and a DECKED 70% pullout bed get 44-45 mpg after 8,000+ miles. Towing ~1,500 lbs over variety of roads for 600 miles then 12-18mpg. So far so good except I almost forget to fill up at times😂. Perfect daily commuter and swing by DIY vehicle. 2WD with winter tires is perfectly adequate. Thank you Ford!

[@billquattlebaum1577]

I have a 2024 Maverick Ecoboost that is front wheel drive. Over the first 3,000 miles it has averaged 28.2 miles per gallon in mixed driving. I don't trust the computer since it tells me the miles per gallon has been 30.2. I haven't taken any long highway trips yet. I am happy with the truck after 4 months of ownership. It drives and handles much better than my old Ford Ranger did.

[@FrankD71864]

The computer is pretty close to what I calculated. Do you drive in engine start/stop mode? I can't stand it. I turn it off.

[@scottdaytonhunn]

I love my little Maverick. I have a Shadow Black 2024 XLT BAP AWD 2.0 4K-Tow (basically all black little truck). She gets over 30 on the highway especially if I draft behind a larger vehicle.

[@champinsoccer9]

Nice. If it's anything like my 2.3l 2020 ranger, I'd watch out for the carbon build up. I'm sure they sell a catch can for your maverick. And of course change the oil religiously 3-5k max since turbos like clean fresh oil. Just saying. Im still in love with my 2020 ranger and I know turbo engines are sensitive to maintenance

[@302Mustang13]

​@@champinsoccer9I have an Escape with the 2.0 Ecoboost and I change it every 8,000 miles. I use AMSOIL and even did an analysis that showed 7,000-8,000 miles is perfectly fine. One thing I've learned about oil is use the best oil and just change it before it's used up. I've done 5,000 mile changes since the mid 90's and even with a turbo you can definitely go beyond 5,000 miles if you do it right.

[@champinsoccer9]

@@302Mustang13 interesting. I've heard great things about amsoil. How many miles do you have on your escape and what year?

[@302Mustang13]

@@champinsoccer9 It's a '20 and I just passed 48k. I also use Lucas or AMSOIL upper cylinder lubricant at least every other tank. Hoping that'll help with carbon.

[@Johnsmith46392]

@@champinsoccer9these aren’t dual injection?

[@Johnsmith46392]

Thank you for testing these trucks and not just full size pickups.

[@TheGettyAdventures]

I'm excited to get into more midsize trucks!

[@Bob-xc2us]

It is actually an "automatic" all wheel drive system. The all wheel drive function is only engaged when the vehicle detects conditions that require it. It works very well in snow from my experience last winter. My 2019 F150 weighed 5300lbs. I've had 7.4liters/100km driving 55 to 60mph (rated at 8.4liters/100km highway). Mixed driving returns about 9liters/100km in summer driving. It does not do as well in the winter but it blows by the EPA rating most of the time. I'm very happy with the mileage but then again my 3.5l 2019 F150 got pretty good gas mileage for a full size truck. I loved my F150 but it was way too big for my typical use.

[@agerardomp]

Greetings Alex. Incredible the yield in the maverick! 😮 I think it is more recommended for light and occasional jobs. But perfect for recreational life and daily use. EXCELLENT work Alex; THANK YOU and I send you a HUG 🤗

[@jonwalsh1505]

Thanks Alex, great information as always. I thoroughly enjoyed the road test, especially when I recognized Hanwell Rd and the TransCanada Hwy #2! 😂 I’m looking to replace my 2011 Ford Ranger XL and the Maverick 2.0 is a top contender!

[@1966johnnywayne]

I get GREAT average fuel economy ...90% of my trips are done on my 300cc Honda Scooter, that regularly takes me from London to Kitchener, and periodically to Toronto via the #401, and averages 3.5L/100kms and the remainder of my trips require the use of my 2010 F150 with the 4.6L averaging 13L/100kms, for a combined average of 4.45L/100kms (63.5 mpg). At this point it simply doesn't make financial sense to purchase a high priced hybrid to replace my vehicles ...and the scooter is hella' fun to get around on.

[@jaredmfinch3397]

Regarding the awd system, it actually engages power to the rear wheels quite frequently with out any wheel spin present; especially under heavy acceleration.

[@mordeth1964]

Those things are awesome. I'd buy one in a heartbeat if you could get them in Australia 👍

[@joseeduardo4327]

Surprised they never brought them there. Seems like a great market for the size and sales they do for the ranger and that rebadged VW one

[@teddymullins3706]

I drive my in laws ford maverick Quite a bit And we get 26 miles to the gallon in the Appalachian mountains!

[@stephanematis]

Very useful data point. Now of course you need the new Ranger with 2.3 and later, the 2.7 in the mid-size -vs- 2.7 in the F150. I honestly wish that this Maverick and the Ranger both would have aluminum paneling, for even more weight and frankly, salt belt survival. Bed size challenges is the only bit that makes me uncertain. I've never like anything with less then 6'5" setup, though modern full size crew cabs are mostly 5.5 and these smaller are mostly 5. I'm torn on the utility of a 5' bed.

[@302Mustang13]

An aluminum Ranger would be close to 4,000 lbs. That would get insanely good fuel economy and even the little 2.3 would be a rocket.

[@laddy3916]

I know even though you hate the ecodiesel engine. You should also do reviews on the 2nd and 3rd gen

[@smiller225]

Thats incredible mpgs. I had a 2003 s10 4.3 with 180hp real world mpg was 19 city 23 hwy on its best day.

[@TheGettyAdventures]

Ya it was pretty impressive.

[@Chris-ut6eq]

A neighbor with a mav-hybrid has ~1500lbs payload....more than some F-150s. But he has a tiny 4.5ft bed so it's not as manly as an F-150 with a 5.5-8.0bed. Size matters, but payload goes a long way as well.

[@c.a.r.s.carsandrelevantspecs]

Great video! Thanks for sharing! In ECO Mode, with lots of hills and high-speed highways, my 2.0L EcoBoost Maverick AWD with 4K Tow Package registered 32.1 combined MPG (31.2 MPG calculated) after a 388-mile trip in hot weather with some usage of the air conditioner. :)

[@302Mustang13]

I tried Eco mode with my 2.0 Ecoboost on the highway and found it annoying. Really dulls the turbo response and makes me use more throttle than I normally do when I need power. I find that mode useful though in heavy traffic cause it just wants to go like mad in normal.

[@c.a.r.s.carsandrelevantspecs]

@@302Mustang13 I can definitely relate to what you described. 👍 After using ECO Mode for eight days I became more accustomed to it than I had realized. Even though I plan to use Normal Mode most of the time, I can certainly appreciate the smoothness of the throttle in ECO Mode around town.

[@TheGettyAdventures]

I can believe it, very impressed with the fuel economy!

[@302Mustang13]

@@TheGettyAdventures I can verify it is indeed real world duplicable. I have an Escape with the same engine and transmission and I got 30 mpg average on a trip from Chicago area to the Smoky Mountains. 75% of the highway driving was 80 mph and that average overall included driving around in the Smokies and up to 6,300 feet to trailhead for the highest peak in Tennessee. Return trip was all 80 mph and still got 31 mpg hand calculated.

[@c.a.r.s.carsandrelevantspecs]

@@TheGettyAdventures 👍

[@specialperson170]

the awd version does hurt fuel economy not by alot but some so also keep that in mind

[@austinkeen4577]

As a Ford Maverick owner, I have to admit, it's easily a truck of all time

[@rceric1]

Would you not recommend?

[@LindsayPeters987]

She's small and mighty!

[@baileymoyer9777]

I know your videos are mostly all about trucks but I think it’d be fun to get your input on the car diesels from Mercedes/VW/BMW if you’re ever looking for content. I’d love to hear what you have to say about how those diesels are built and feel, but I understand that they probably wouldn’t perform the best viewership wise

[@302Mustang13]

I have an Escape with the same engine and transmission. I easily get 32-34 mpg on the highway and the computer is accurate. I would have bought a Maverick though if it was available when I bought my vehicle.

[@thugnificent4627]

They need to update the 2.0 ecoboost like they did with the escape, all those coolant problems and leaks are still present.

[@ALMX5DP]

Really there is still an issue with them? It was such a simple fix, and our 2015 Focus ST even back then did not have that issue due to its head and head gasket design so very strange Ford didn’t just use that one.

[@alextran8188]

Wrong

[@302Mustang13]

This is basically the Escape engine from 2020.

[@Tropicalfrooploops]

Max out payload and try again. I’d like to see how it performs. I’m contractor and basically weight maxed out all the time in my truck

[@moisesl1087]

Can you do a review of the 2.3 ecoboost on the Ranger?

[@linnjensen7469]

I wouldn't even consider one without AWD for my use

[@snowfreak207]

If it was rear drive and real awd might be worth buying

[@imabebebebe2496]

day 2 of asking for getty ridgeline content.

[@Retadin]

Time for towing test.

[@NunyaBusiness...]

The weight savings = fuel savings you talk about starting around 2:28 is slightly flawed. If all other factors are equal then it's a sound premise, but when you have two different powertrains, gearing, and aerodynamics, it's hard to say for sure that lighter will always equal better economy. Hypothetically, because I'm just playing devil's advocate for discussion's sake: How much fuel does the Maverick 2.0 engine need to get 3500 lbs moving vs how much fuel the F150 3.5 engine needs to get the same 3500 lbs moving? If the larger motor can create power more efficiently it could possibly overcome the added weight of the larger vehicle. Now, whether it does do this or not is a different matter. It's just not quite as simple as lighter = better MPGs, though.

[@PKDesigns2011]

Ty for making the vid ... over all, I drove one for a day and it's neat but not enough benefits jumping down from a fullsize ...

[@TheGettyAdventures]

Very much agree, I think for the right person it would be great but if you need to tow anything its really not a great option.

[@DrDill88]

What’re your thoughts on the Ranger 2.3?

[@mr.steve1357]

Towing test?

[@avioncamper]

Hi Alex. Great fuel economy. Looks like a H. Ridgeline But is it a real truck with fwd? What can it tow? My old Cavalier still gets 32mpg at 190k miles.

[@302Mustang13]

I have an Escape with the same powertrain. I get about 32-34 mpg on the highway. I've towed over 3,000 lbs all day in the summer heat and it pulled like nothing was there. It can tow up to 3,500 lbs and Mavericks can tow between 1,500 lbs and 4,000 lbs. Hybrid is the lower figure.

[@CDL62]

Is that USA gallon or imperial gallon?

[@DavidHernandez-hc6xm]

I had one and I’m a very conservative driver and my best was 24.5 mpg and the truck was telling me 32 mpg.

[@302Mustang13]

That's odd. I have the same engine and transmission in my Escape and I average over 28 mpg on most tanks. On trips I easily get 32-34 mpg. Maverick should only be 1-2 mpg off what I get so something is not right with yours.

[@danthompson1467]

I have the 2.0 my best has been 36 mpg

[@TheGettyAdventures]

That is wild lol

[@davidlefranc6240]

Same size as the old Ranger from 2010 the new one is closer from a f-150 2002 !

[@TheGettyAdventures]

It does seem like that. Biggest difference is that the maverick is not a body on frame design. I wish it was.

[@davidlefranc6240]

@@TheGettyAdventures It wouldn't be as stiff as a monocoque driving wise and since most of the people buying these won't load heavy stuff its the perfect world i only wish it would be rear wheel drive and real time AWD

[@hbjeff36]

Engine creates power, a motor uses it

[@mblakey4736]

Comparing a "toy" pickup truck's fuel economy with 2 full sized (real) pickups is apples to oranges. 6:51

[@302Mustang13]

@@mblakey4736 It's not a comparison, just referencing it to show the difference and benefit of a Maverick. It's the right truck for at least half of full size pickup drivers who don't use them for anything close to their capabilities.

[@TheGettyAdventures]

I wasn't trying to compare directly, It was more of a reference just to show the difference.

[@steddyk]

It’s not an HD 😂. Still better than a car. I missed the payload and towing specs.

[@slocavky]

Motor is electric, engine is an air and fuel pump.

[@TheKingOfInappropriateComments]

You're looking at EPA estimates. EPA is a US federal agency so what is estimated for the US typical driving conditions (albeit fiction) is going to vary considerably from up in the Martimes. I saw on the cluser it's 26º (C) there in broad daylight in the daytime. In the States, there are quite a few places that won't even dip down to 26º (C) as an overnight low in the summertime. And when you start vehicles here in the States and the inside temp is already over 40º (C) you're going to have to blast the AC just in order to survive the trip. I'm not talking about being comfortable, I'm talking about actually surviving being inside of the truck. And dude, your highways are fricken empty. You stopped at what, one traffic light and gently feathered the throttle? That's not how we drive down here. I love your videos but I still have to strongly contest that your loop is anything like real world down here in the States, particularly in the densely populated major population centers.

[@TheGettyAdventures]

76 Miles of the 85 is complete cruise control. You can run any stretch of road and get different results to key is to test different engines/trucks on the same route to see how they separate from one another.

[@TheKingOfInappropriateComments]

@@TheGettyAdventures Hey, Im not trying to say you're doing the test wrong. What I'm trying to say that the driving conditions and environment in Canada are vastly different than typical driving conditions of the large population centers that makes up for the majority of the US population. Hence, the EPA estimates should be substantially worse that what you get in a mild climate with no traffic and using cruise control, something we can't do down here most of the time.

[@anothermike4825]

Does it have a 10 speed transmission?

[@stevesmith2770]

It's an eight speed.

[@anothermike4825]

@@stevesmith2770 thanks

[@302Mustang13]

​@@anothermike4825I have the eight speed and they might as well call it a seven speed. Mine skips 2nd gear pretty much all of the time. I can use the paddle shifters though and make it start in 2nd though.

[@anothermike4825]

@@302Mustang13 Thanks

[@harveypaxton1232]

Thanks for another great video. Sadly the Ford instrument cluster readings are 10 to 15% high according to Consumer reports and Car and driver.

[@ALMX5DP]

My F-150 was similar but thankfully in those models you can adjust the “AFE Bias” which helps bring it back in line with what the pump says.

[@harveypaxton1232]

@@ALMX5DP that’s good however what do you base it against? Ford’s full tank level is extremely temperature bias.

[@ALMX5DP]

@@harveypaxton1232 just what the pump says. After adjusting mine, my instrument cluster reads only 0.1 or 0.2mpg off at most now. There is some difference between winter and summer fillups due to the temp differences there but I’ve struck a happy medium so most of the time it’s pretty darn accurate.

[@302Mustang13]

I'm averaging at the pump about the same the computer says. The most it's been off was 0.5 mpg and that within margin of error.

[@billquattlebaum1577]

Mine has been off by about 7 percent for the first 2,900 miles of driving the truck. Actual is 28.2 versus 30.2 per the computer.

[@JoeJoe-ec9tf]

I have a hard time calling any vehicle that isn't body on frame a truck, more like a ranchero

[@TheGettyAdventures]

lol fair enough

[@blueheelerfriend8450]

Let's face it in the real world it's not a truck or a van unless it has a full frame under it. It's just a smallish-size SUV with the back top cut off and made into an open air bed. 😊 Does it look like a truck? Sort of yes. 😊

[@302Mustang13]

People say the same about the Ridgeline but it and the Maverick are trucks but would consider them light duty trucks that you can use for work occasionally. Heck, more than half of midsize and full size truck owners only occasionally to rarely do work.

[@Weak_juan]

Its cute. It won't pull my 6400lb 25ft TT or my dump trailer though.

[@jmart3605]

For that reason I have a 2024 Chevy Silverado 1500 3.0 diesel with the trailering package. Tows my 9,000lb 34ft camper like a charm and zero issues dragging a trailer with 120 hay bales. Meanwhile, my Maverick hybrid basks in the Chevy's shadow👍🏼. Safe travels and happy camping☘️

[@Weak_juan]

@jmart3605 you got two trucks? But that diesel silverado already gets great mileage.

[@jmart3605]

Hi there, yeah two unfortunately. My favorite Ford F250 AWD diesel had a serious breakdown last fall while towing the TT. That was also my farm truck. This new Chevy will live a long life with me. Love it at 33mpg highway with 3.73 axle! Due to long regular work commute won't 'sacrifice' it, hence the Maverick. It also serves as my tool truck as I have many spread out projects.

[@reserva120]

Neither will. Ferrari- what a stupid comment.

[@jmart3605]

@@reserva120. FYI - I think you meant to post your comment elsewhere.

[@markjacobs3956]

...until it dies on you at 75mph on the freeway and almost causes a pile up. POS. Traded at only 38k after nothing but trouble.

[@bigmountain7561]

Engine has pistons and is an air pump sucks in the front and blows out the ass. A Motor has a Rotor and Windings and doesn’t need the use of fossil fuel directly, indirectly it does because you need to pollute the atmosphere more to charge that Tesla or a Vibrator which is a cousin to the Tesla!!! Great Video Thank You Alex

[@milfordcivic6755]

The Ecoboosts get great gas mileage, especially when they're sitting in the dealer service dept.

[@302Mustang13]

How clever. Thanks for the dumb opinion.

[@DB-os7wl]

@@302Mustang13show me on the doll where you were touched by that comment

[@whispanic]

Engines motor by combustion and Motors motor by electrons :D

[@motoxdudeNV-UT]

Great it's almost 50% more efficient than a full-sized truck, but having had a unibody truck before (Jeep Comanche) I'll PASS on the fuel savings because once you load it up or it hits wind it's gonna drop dramatically. Plus the towing, hauling and overall comfort (and safety) are nowhere what I'd expect on a full-sized framed vehicle. Turbo engines are pressure cookers... they are great sprinters, but not in it for the long race. The V-6 versions of these turbos are showing promise, but I'm quite unconvinced that a small 4 cyl high revving engine is going to last for the long term given the forces the turbocharging places upon these undersized engines. A total PASS for me on the Maverick. It's truly sad that the governments we elect to represent us are absolutely working CONTRARY to our wishes in Automobiles and Trucks! We want Power, Comfort and Safety, but the Government tells us what we can get, not what we want! Seems they've forgotten who works for who, but perhaps it's WE who still live under the fantasy that Governments are here to serve us, not RULE us! The FEWER systems on a vehicle the FEWER potential Failures... modern vehicles are OBLIVIOUS to this standard of Engineering embraced for Decades, if not CENTURIES!

[@302Mustang13]

Start by actually owning one. The 2.0 and especially 2.3 Ecoboost are built to last and the fuel economy is good generally. For the record, there are not many gasoline engines that get good mpgs while towing. I actually get really good mpgs with mine while driving even loaded up or in high winds. Power is actually decent and it doesn't need to rev. Torque is almost instant just off idle and hits hard by 2,000 rpm in the upper acceleration gears. Rarely downshifts out of 8th gear on the highway and the revs are really low for a 4cyl. About 2,000 rpm at 80 mph.

[@Tea_1745]

Ew, awd on demand = suxorz!

[@ALMX5DP]

I’d say most pickups on the road operate that way now. 4 Auto is in every new GM truck and it’s standard on mid-high trim levels of both Ram and Ford. Seems to work just fine for most people.

[@Tea_1745]

@@ALMX5DP ew! LoL

[@rustydusty1111]

What an ugly vehicles. Reminds me of the Aztec or whatever it was. Just awful.