They should have given it a different name. It's fine if Ford is making a lumbering behemoth of an electric SUV but why name it after their two door sports car? It's just confusing and dilutes the branding.
I agree calling this a Mustang is a little much, but I understand Ford wanting to get some juice behind the launch for their first real go at a BEV. Plus, I think people would have roasted them just as hard if they just called it Mach E (which is a good name) and skipped the Mustang Mach 1 connection.
Ford has so many great nameplates to use for future electric models: Galaxie, Lighting (high spec F-150e perhaps?), Fusion, Orion, Probe, Skyliner, Sunliner, and Starliner. I hope to see many of them on upcoming cars
It's not the first time that Ford has sullied the name. I'm sure wikipedia has an article on the Mustang II ("let's make a Mustang out of a Pinto!"). Ford isn't the only guilty one. I remember driving a relatively new Chevy Camaro in the 80s, and I wondered why it was such a dog. That was because Chevy took the 2.5L four-banger out of the Vega and Citation and dropped it into the Camaro.
I think they tried to leverage the popularity of Mustangs to prop up the new car. Personally, I was very disappointed when I learned it was not, in fact, an electric muscle car.
Mmm, you do realize they’re roughly the same size, though, right? Calling one a “lumbering behemoth” and the other two door sports car (technically true, but you’re saying this for effect, I suspect) is a bit much.
The Mach E is as long and wide as the current Mustang, but the wheelbase of the Mach E is 10" longer (which is a lot), 9" taller (which is a lot), and between 400-1000 lbs heavier (which is a whole lot).
For perspective, dropping the wheelbase, height, and weight of current Mustang by that much puts you in a car roughly the size of a BRZ, but as tall as a first generation Miata.
> If the debate over “Is this a Mustang?” came down to speed, this might be too fast to call a Mustang. Maybe the Ford GT is a better comparison?
> But to get that fast, you are downshifting, red-lining, and hitting gears jerky and hard in most fast gas-powered cars. It feels and sounds like you are doing real damage to the struggling engine that was not designed to do this often.
As a car enthusiast (and multi-Mustang owner) I feel like this statement really hurts the credibility of the review. The current Mustang GT is brutally fast for a street car and certainly does NOT feel like the engine is struggling or is going to explode at 7600 RPMs. In fact, it feels buttery smooth at all RPMs. With the Performance Package, you can drive these on a racetrack in the desert and you'll run out of gas before the engine breaks a sweat. It's a car designed to handle the idiots who buy them (too bad the idiots who buy them can't handle the car).
That being said, most of the enthusiast reviews of the Mach E have been positive. The major complaints seem to be around the height of the driving position, and the relatively underwhelming handling (0.86g on the skidpad vs 0.95g for the Model 3 Performance, or the 1.0+g of the performance package ICE Mustangs).
This is on my radar due to curiosity, but I think I'll probably end up with a Model 3 Performance due wanting something with handling chops.
Yep, I once saw a souped-up Mustang trounce a Tesla at the drag strip. Granted, very little about the Mustang was stock, but it got me thinking at the time.
I've been eyeballing the Model Y since they started shipping a RWD version (dropping the base price $8000). This is right eye-to-eye with Model Y in terms of features and pricing.
First thing, the range sucks. The range on the Model Y already is borderline for me, dropping another 15 miles off the top is rough.
Next, no option for a tow hitch? I know there are likely after market options, but a factory hitch is usually just a little nicer. The Tesla even has a tow mode where it changes the way the backing cameras and autopilot works to account for the trailer. Not a total deal breaker but I tend to have a bike rack on my hitch all the time.
I can't see why anyone would get the AWD version of this. It's $3000 more and has 20 miles less range.
The only reason the Mustang is interesting at all is because it still qualifies for the $10k government rebates.
It'll be interest to see how it compares to Tesla wrt repairability and availability of OEM parts. At least with the pricing of the body and paint shops by me, that could save you more than $3k over the life of the car
The Mustang brand will carry this car through your complaints. So what if the range sucks? It's a "sports" "car"; even with an ICE they had crappy range.
Having a bike rack affixed to your car destroys your aerodynamics, so it's kinda funny that you're complaining about 15 miles when a bike rack probably strips that much from the Model Y.
AWD is great for racing, perfectly inline with the mustang brand. And again, who cares about range for a sports car.
I was looking at it as a crossover SUV, not as a sports car.
If you want to look at it as a performance vehicle, it's a pretty sad offering for a EV. The Model Y Long Range completely crushes it in terms of performance and Range.
But since you don't care about utility, you'd probably go for the Model 3 where the performance differences are even greater.
The Mustang's performance numbers might look interesting for an ICE vehicle, but they are purely middle of the pack for an EV. Calling the Mustang EV a sports car is like calling a 70s Pinto with a 6 banger a performance car.
EDIT: FWIW, I've had a hitch rack on my car for the past 9 years, I'm quite aware of the impact it has on range.
Sure, we have winter here. I get why you would want AWD, I want AWD for exactly that reason.
I wouldn't want the Mustang's AWD version because it has even worse range than the already mediocre range the base model has. For comparison, the Model 3 Long Range (their base AWD model) has 115 miles more range and is faster.
If you like camping or going on adventures outdoors, that's a pretty big deal.
We'd consider buying one, we really would. The next vehicle will have to serve as sedan, dog-mobile, and must be BEV (we've already had a Leaf for ten years). But that hideous fucking growth in between the driver and passenger says we're not buying this version. I mean, ignore that it's a touch screen to begin with, but did they have to make it look like they went out of their way to make it look like an afterthought? Like, "oh, shit, we forgot to put an interface on it. Can't we just stick an iPad on a stalk or something?"
I think it's likely that there is a play here to create a slightly extended line of Mustang branded vehicles that have a focus on performance. Bronco, Mustang, and F-Series are tentpoles for the Company, and hold huge name recognition. "Mach E" is a qualifier, so future "electric muscle cars" haven't been precluded from production, aside from Ford saying they're all in on crossovers.
Readit News
Ford has so many great nameplates to use for future electric models: Galaxie, Lighting (high spec F-150e perhaps?), Fusion, Orion, Probe, Skyliner, Sunliner, and Starliner. I hope to see many of them on upcoming cars
As a former Mustang owner I'm not a huge fan of this branding, but that said... it sure as hell can't get worse than this!
https://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2012/10/02-ug...
Also, it weighed about 1000 pounds less the current ICE Mustang.
For perspective, dropping the wheelbase, height, and weight of current Mustang by that much puts you in a car roughly the size of a BRZ, but as tall as a first generation Miata.
> But to get that fast, you are downshifting, red-lining, and hitting gears jerky and hard in most fast gas-powered cars. It feels and sounds like you are doing real damage to the struggling engine that was not designed to do this often.
As a car enthusiast (and multi-Mustang owner) I feel like this statement really hurts the credibility of the review. The current Mustang GT is brutally fast for a street car and certainly does NOT feel like the engine is struggling or is going to explode at 7600 RPMs. In fact, it feels buttery smooth at all RPMs. With the Performance Package, you can drive these on a racetrack in the desert and you'll run out of gas before the engine breaks a sweat. It's a car designed to handle the idiots who buy them (too bad the idiots who buy them can't handle the car).
That being said, most of the enthusiast reviews of the Mach E have been positive. The major complaints seem to be around the height of the driving position, and the relatively underwhelming handling (0.86g on the skidpad vs 0.95g for the Model 3 Performance, or the 1.0+g of the performance package ICE Mustangs).
This is on my radar due to curiosity, but I think I'll probably end up with a Model 3 Performance due wanting something with handling chops.
tl;dw: he likes it a lot.
First thing, the range sucks. The range on the Model Y already is borderline for me, dropping another 15 miles off the top is rough.
Next, no option for a tow hitch? I know there are likely after market options, but a factory hitch is usually just a little nicer. The Tesla even has a tow mode where it changes the way the backing cameras and autopilot works to account for the trailer. Not a total deal breaker but I tend to have a bike rack on my hitch all the time.
I can't see why anyone would get the AWD version of this. It's $3000 more and has 20 miles less range.
The only reason the Mustang is interesting at all is because it still qualifies for the $10k government rebates.
Having a bike rack affixed to your car destroys your aerodynamics, so it's kinda funny that you're complaining about 15 miles when a bike rack probably strips that much from the Model Y.
AWD is great for racing, perfectly inline with the mustang brand. And again, who cares about range for a sports car.
If you want to look at it as a performance vehicle, it's a pretty sad offering for a EV. The Model Y Long Range completely crushes it in terms of performance and Range.
But since you don't care about utility, you'd probably go for the Model 3 where the performance differences are even greater.
The Mustang's performance numbers might look interesting for an ICE vehicle, but they are purely middle of the pack for an EV. Calling the Mustang EV a sports car is like calling a 70s Pinto with a 6 banger a performance car.
EDIT: FWIW, I've had a hitch rack on my car for the past 9 years, I'm quite aware of the impact it has on range.
I wouldn't want the Mustang's AWD version because it has even worse range than the already mediocre range the base model has. For comparison, the Model 3 Long Range (their base AWD model) has 115 miles more range and is faster.
If you like camping or going on adventures outdoors, that's a pretty big deal.
You can learn more by watching this Webex with the design team: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UABOgZR1txY