Ford Mustang Mach E

[NeilBlanchard]

Ford is totally serious about electric vehicles. Their Mustang Mach E looks to be very impressive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4WrBeHjO9A

75kWh and 99kWh battery packs, RWD or AWD, up to 300 miles range, a frunk, spacious interior, starting price of about $35K after incentives.

https://www.greencarreports.com/news...300-mile-range

[Hersbird]

Really better than a Tesla, massive service infrastructure, and a $7500 tax incentive still in place. Now if they would get a super fast charging infrastructure.
Either way competition makes everything better.

My mom used to have a 1971 Mach 1 when we were kids, I wish while using the Mustang brand they could have done a little better retro look although some think those years are a bit homely. That front shape could have worked in a little 1970 style and the rear could have had a bit of 1971. Maybe retro is dead, but it sure helped the 2005 Mustang sales.

[oil pan 4]

And imagine that. No hub motors.

[ME_Andy]

Props Ford for not making a lot of noise, but just quietly developing a bad-ass ev

[Tahoe_Hybrid]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

Ford is totally serious about electric vehicles. Their Mustang Mach E looks to be very impressive.

honestly they soiled the mustang name with this garbage


if you want this garbage fake SUV in the gas version it's sold as the Mazda CX-3

[redpoint5]

If the top range is 300 miles consuming 99 kWh, that works out to 3 miles per kWh, which is not good.

That means the 75 kWh version has an expected range of 227 miles, or less than Chevy Bolt's 259 mile range on 60 kWh.

Originally Posted by Tahoe_Hybrid

honestly they soiled the mustang name with this garbage


if you want this garbage fake SUV in the gas version it's sold as the Mazda CX-3

Can you elaborate?

I've been in a new CX-3, and it kinda sucks. I've got a CX-5, and it's fine, but I wouldn't buy one with my money.

Mustang has had plenty of poor products in the past, so what is particularly ruinous by offering this?

The thing about brands is that they have to evolve or die. Just think about Buick and how it's only old people that seek out that brand. They are just now releasing commercials with kids feigning interest in them, but it might be too little, too late.

Branding is a balancing act of not offending the existing customers while attracting new ones.

I've got very little opinion on this until I read more about actual delivered examples, or test drive one myself. The basic specs sound good though, especially if they can deliver a base version for ~$35k.

[Hersbird]

I can't buy a Mustang unless I win the lottery and have money to burn. I can buy this, AWD, 4 doors, room in the back seat. Doesn't really fit under the Mustang name agreed, but Mach E is a great name for it.

[Tahoe_Hybrid]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

If the top range is 300 miles consuming 99 kWh, that works out to 3 miles per kWh, which is not good.

That means the 75 kWh version has an expected range of 227 miles, or less than Chevy Bolt's 259 mile range on 60 kWh.



Can you elaborate?

I've been in a new CX-3, and it kinda sucks. I've got a CX-5, and it's fine, but I wouldn't buy one with my money.

Mustang has had plenty of poor products in the past, so what is particularly ruinous by offering this?

The thing about brands is that they have to evolve or die. Just think about Buick and how it's only old people that seek out that brand. They are just now releasing commercials with kids feigning interest in them, but it might be too little, too late.

Branding is a balancing act of not offending the existing customers while attracting new ones.

I've got very little opinion on this until I read more about actual delivered examples, or test drive one myself. The basic specs sound good though, especially if they can deliver a base version for ~$35k.

it's based off the CX3 mazda quick edit in ms paint
it's obviously a slightly face lifted version of it

[oil pan 4]

Even 3 miles per kwh is st least close to reality.
The way ford driving soccer mom's drive on thr higheay better figure closer 2 to 2.5 miles per kwh.
Especially in the winter.

[redpoint5]

I'm curious what the efficiency of upcoming trucks will be. My WAG was 2 miles per kWh. I'm sure we could just take the horsepower requirements of a standard truck at 60 MPH and extrapolate out the kW required to maintain that speed.