Ford Mustang Mach E Leak: Mustang goes Electric

Snowdog said:
His post wasn't replying to, nor directed at you. Though I will say, being a old fogie is partially a state of mind. Some people come to it early.
Click to expand...
Thanks for point that out, im calling him out for that ridiculous statement. Not sure what you guys are saying.....Like i've said before the gneration before yours is 38 to 53. They say that the millennial generation buys the least.
https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/ex/...nials-prefer-car-access-over-ownership/32723/

Why market to a generation that won't buy cars?
 
Gideon said:
Your not getting it, the second one is for performance models including the roadster. Drawing max power from the cells gets them far hotter then the cooling system can cope with just like overclocking a cpu, it needs a few minutes after intense use to cool them back down. I dont think you understand just how much amperage and voltage is being drawn and how hot Lithium cells get delivering that power and the last thing you want is thermal runaway in a Lithium battery. Seen plenty of Tesla Roadsters on the track and none choose to run in Insane or Ludicrous modes as the cars cant take it for the several laps were out there. It's fun for drag racing but thats about it.
Click to expand...

Just because a Model S has the "Performance Mode" does NOT make it a Sportscar EV. It's put in so you can have some limited fun and floor it, but yes the battery temp is watched to avoid damage (duh).

I never said the Model S consumer Tesla EV was a Sportscar worthy to compete with gas muscle cars (though the model 3 is a lot closer), but that the Tesla Roadster was, among other examples. And a new Roadster 2020 coming that will likely not disappoint.
 
SomeoneElse said:
Thanks for point that out, im calling him out for that ridiculous statement. Not sure what you guys are saying.....Like i've said before the gneration before yours is 38 to 53. They say that the millennial generation buys the least.
https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/ex/...nials-prefer-car-access-over-ownership/32723/

Why market to a generation that won't buy cars?
Click to expand...

You have it backwards, it wasn't the generation before, it was the generations after. He was responding to someone who said this: "Any older generations will have the same opinion I do".

And as I said, there young "old fogies". It's a state of mind thing. There are also lots of actual older people who are quite excited by Electric Cars.

As far as that study goes. It was 18-34 year olds, many at the younger end are single, and living in crowded cities. Owning a car makes no sense in that situation. Wait till they get married,have kids, and move to the suburbs and see their answer change a lot.
 
Snowdog said:
There are also lots of actual older people who are quite excited by Electric Cars."
Click to expand...
Exactly, so why cut them out of marketing all together? The reason they call this thing a mustang is to focus on the "older generations".


As far as that study goes. It was 18-34 year olds, many at the younger end are single.
This includes much of the millennial age range, 18-22 are actually post-millennial. It doesn't change the fact they would rather share cars than own it. If marketing wanted to make a ton of money they would target the group with the most. You still target as many people as possible but focus on the ones who are willing to pay.
I get what you are saying but my point was It bad business to not market to everyone.
 
Snowdog said:
You have it backwards, it wasn't the generation before, it was the generations after. He was responding to someone who said this: "Any older generations will have the same opinion I do".

And as I said, there young "old fogies". It's a state of mind thing. There are also lots of actual older people who are quite excited by Electric Cars.

As far as that study goes. It was 18-34 year olds, many at the younger end are single, and living in crowded cities. Owning a car makes no sense in that situation. Wait till they get married,have kids, and move to the suburbs and see their answer change a lot.
Click to expand...
That's why we have the electoral college ;).
SomeoneElse said:
Exactly, so why cut them out of marketing all together? The reason they call this thing a mustang is to focus on the "older generations".


As far as that study goes. It was 18-34 year olds, many at the younger end are single.
This includes much of the millennial age range, 18-22 are actually post-millennial. It doesn't change the fact they would rather share cars than own it. If marketing wanted to make a ton of money they would target the group with the most. You still target as many people as possible but focus on the ones who are willing to pay.
I get what you are saying but my point was It bad business to not market to everyone.
Click to expand...
This is why I have an issue with marketing and research always trying so hard to group everyone into a defined age group.
 
That's essentially what the problem with this car is. Most buyers who just want a SUV/CUV EV will be looking at the Model X, or some other more adult looking choices. Buyers who just want the most economical EV won't be looking at this thing at all. They'll be sticking with Leaf, Volt/Bolt, etc.

When we move to the other type of buyer who enjoy something like the Mustang (The only vehicle left made by Ford that an enthusiast is looking at), we are turned off from this car. It's not that it's an EV. I'm 33 years old. I have nothing against EV's. The problem with this car is that it's not an actual EV Mustang. It's a Ford edge. I, nor anyone else who would want to buy a sports car, wants a Ford Edge.

So there-in lies the problem. Who wants to buy this vehicle? It's not going to attract the Mustang/two-door sports car crowd. It's not going to attract the average CUV buyer crowd. It's not going to attract the economical focus EV crowd like a Leaf.

I really don't get who Ford thinks will buy this thing. No younger kids I work with (18 year olds) think a bloated electric vehicle with a Mustang badge slapped on it is cool. If they are the type of kids who want 'cooler' cars they all want the Mustang, Camaro, Challenger, BMW two door, etc. Most of them can only afford to get the base 4 banger model of the first three mentioned, and they are fine with that because they just want something that looks cool and is at least more engaging to drive compared to the million other CUV's in the parking lot.

Anyone who could even afford this 'Mustang' Mach-E doesn't want it. We either want the most tarted up car out there (400HP+ two doors) or pure luxury.

And again, you'd attract a lot of potential Mustang GT to GT350 price point buyers had this thing been an actual EV Mustang. They could have marketed this as a more drag oriented Mustang due to being EV, and I think a lot of folks would have picked it up.
 
Last edited:
SomeoneElse said:
Wow. Really? Someone 2 years older than 36 is considered an older generation.......who grew up with the Mustang as one of the top sports cars to buy. So 38 yr olds will be dead soon and should be ignored by marketing? Do you realize that this age group makes more money and can afford to buy this thing more than the millennial generation?

BTW i'm 36. They would lump me into the millennials. Even though before it was a thing I was considered generation X.......i don't get where you draw the line but that off topic.
Click to expand...


My comment was very tongue in cheek. I get to rock a 4.6L 2V in my 20 year old CV LX. Still waiting on an EV CV :p
 
The real question for me here isn't whether people will buy it, because they will. Some because it's cheaper than the model X, some because it's a slightly higher raised seating position vs a sedan model 3, some because you will likely not have to wait 2 months for a fender bender repair. The question is whether they will push enough volume out there to make it more than a niche product that isn't marked up to hell at the stealership.
 
Mchart said:
That's essentially what the problem with this car is. Most buyers who just want a SUV/CUV EV will be looking at the Model X, or some other more adult looking choices. Buyers who just want the most economical EV won't be looking at this thing at all. They'll be sticking with Leaf, Volt/Bolt, etc.

When we move to the other type of buyer who enjoy something like the Mustang (The only vehicle left made by Ford that an enthusiast is looking at), we are turned off from this car. It's not that it's an EV. I'm 33 years old. I have nothing against EV's. The problem with this car is that it's not an actual EV Mustang. It's a Ford edge. I, nor anyone else who would want to buy a sports car, wants a Ford Edge.

So there-in lies the problem. Who wants to buy this vehicle? It's not going to attract the Mustang/two-door sports car crowd. It's not going to attract the average CUV buyer crowd. It's not going to attract the economical focus EV crowd like a Leaf.

I really don't get who Ford thinks will buy this thing. No younger kids I work with (18 year olds) think a bloated electric vehicle with a Mustang badge slapped on it is cool. If they are the type of kids who want 'cooler' cars they all want the Mustang, Camaro, Challenger, BMW two door, etc. Most of them can only afford to get the base 4 banger model of the first three mentioned, and they are fine with that because they just want something that looks cool and is at least more engaging to drive compared to the million other CUV's in the parking lot.

Anyone who could even afford this 'Mustang' Mach-E doesn't want it. We either want the most tarted up car out there (400HP+ two doors) or pure luxury.

And again, you'd attract a lot of potential Mustang GT to GT350 price point buyers had this thing been an actual EV Mustang. They could have marketed this as a more drag oriented Mustang due to being EV, and I think a lot of folks would have picked it up.
Click to expand...


These kinds of arguments can be, and were made about sport Porsche SUVs, and they turned out to be dead wrong.

The fact is that the Market has spoken and the vast majority of people want Trucks/SUV/CUVs.

If they had put this drivetrain in a 2+2 Mustang body that would have made it less practical and it would have sold less. Ford is simply giving the market what they want. Another CUV/SUV.

So much so, that FCA/GM/Ford have practically abandoned regular cars. It's all Trucks/SUV/CUVs, and a couple of token sports cars.

As far as who wants this, its a Model 3/Y competitor (Not Model X), in fact it's practically a Model Y, feature, trim, drivelline, performance and Pricing. Right down to internet reservation and online purchase.

Who is this for? The same market that is buying up Teslas. This is by far the strongest competing EV released by a company not named Tesla.

And buyers won't be put off because it's called Mustang. It certainly wouldn't dissuade me, or anyone I know.
 
Last edited:
Mchart said:
That's essentially what the problem with this car is. Most buyers who just want a SUV/CUV EV will be looking at the Model X, or some other more adult looking choices. Buyers who just want the most economical EV won't be looking at this thing at all. They'll be sticking with Leaf, Volt/Bolt, etc.

When we move to the other type of buyer who enjoy something like the Mustang (The only vehicle left made by Ford that an enthusiast is looking at), we are turned off from this car. It's not that it's an EV. I'm 33 years old. I have nothing against EV's. The problem with this car is that it's not an actual EV Mustang. It's a Ford edge. I, nor anyone else who would want to buy a sports car, wants a Ford Edge.

So there-in lies the problem. Who wants to buy this vehicle? It's not going to attract the Mustang/two-door sports car crowd. It's not going to attract the average CUV buyer crowd. It's not going to attract the economical focus EV crowd like a Leaf.

I really don't get who Ford thinks will buy this thing. No younger kids I work with (18 year olds) think a bloated electric vehicle with a Mustang badge slapped on it is cool. If they are the type of kids who want 'cooler' cars they all want the Mustang, Camaro, Challenger, BMW two door, etc. Most of them can only afford to get the base 4 banger model of the first three mentioned, and they are fine with that because they just want something that looks cool and is at least more engaging to drive compared to the million other CUV's in the parking lot.

Anyone who could even afford this 'Mustang' Mach-E doesn't want it. We either want the most tarted up car out there (400HP+ two doors) or pure luxury.

And again, you'd attract a lot of potential Mustang GT to GT350 price point buyers had this thing been an actual EV Mustang. They could have marketed this as a more drag oriented Mustang due to being EV, and I think a lot of folks would have picked it up.
Click to expand...
Good point. The way this thing is priced you can buy a GT350. If they managed to pack in the kind of performance of a P90D into an actual Mustang that looked not far off the GT350 there would probably be a good number of Mustang buyers it would attract.
 
Armenius said:
Good point. The way this thing is priced you can buy a GT350. If they managed to pack in the kind of performance of a P90D into an actual Mustang that looked not far off the GT350 there would probably be a good number of Mustang buyers it would attract.
Click to expand...
Not even P90D level. Just Model 3 level as a base trim, and maybe offer a 'Shelby' electric version with Model S level performance down the road. It would have been a home run IMO, being the first true mass-market electric pony car.
 
I don't understand how they can call this an SUV. There is no utility that I can see. It's just a 4 door car...
 
KarsusTG said:
I don't understand how they can call this an SUV. There is no utility that I can see. It's just a 4 door car...
Click to expand...

This has been a common auto industry marketing trend just to get more units sold since your average buyer doesn't really understand a real SUV from a CUV. The average consumer just wants a SUV. So the manufacturers in order to raise profit margins have been selling bloated up car based platforms which are CUV's, but marketing them as SUV's.

Of course, the average idiot consumer doesn't actually need a SUV anyways, so a CUV is fine. Never mind the fact that most CUV's are actually worse in almost every objective way over the equivalent sedan (if there even is one available). Many times this even includes the cargo room! The Focus for instance has more room in every measure compared to the ecosport, but idiot buyers will buy the ecosport because it 'looks' bigger and is higher off the ground.
 
Last edited:
Snowdog said:
20 minute Ford Mustang, Mustang E video:
Click to expand...

I admire the passion of those involved, but I was just rolling my eyes at some of the explanation given along the way, especially all the "Gen-Z" language.

"For people who love Mustangs but want a family car."

Sorry, but I'll buy a Charger if I want a family car. You can get one with a 707 HP V8 for how much a Mach E GT costs. You can get a Scat Pack with the 6.4L Hemi for less than the base model GT.
 
Armenius said:
I admire the passion of those involved, but I was just rolling my eyes at some of the explanation given along the way, especially all the "Gen-Z" language.

"For people who love Mustangs but want a family car."

Sorry, but I'll buy a Charger if I want a family car. You can get one with a 707 HP V8 for how much a Mach E GT costs. You can get a Scat Pack with the 6.4L Hemi for less than the base model GT.
Click to expand...

Yep. It's literally why I bought my Hellcat Charger. It's the only remaining full size sedan that isn't either some FWD garbage, or isn't $100K+ like a E63 AMG.

No person who 'loves a mustang but wants a family car' (Which is basically me) wants this crap. (Now, if it would have been an electric sedan/wagon; That's a different story, but not a CUV) The only car ford offered that would have met this market before was the Taurus SHO, but they killed off the Taurus..
 
Last edited:
Mchart said:
This has been a common auto industry marketing trend just to get more units sold since your average buyer doesn't really understand a real SUV from a CUV. The average consumer just wants a SUV. So the manufacturers in order to raise profit margins have been selling bloated up car based platforms which are CUV's, but marketing them as SUV's.

Of course, the average idiot consumer doesn't actually need a SUV anyways, so a CUV is fine. Never mind the fact that most CUV's are actually worse in almost every objective way over the equivalent sedan (if there even is one available). Many times this even includes the cargo room! The Focus for instance has more room in every measure compared to the ecosport, but idiot buyers will buy the ecosport because it 'looks' bigger and is higher off the ground.
Click to expand...
My wife wouldn't believe me when we were last test driving cars that the Focus actually had more interior space than our BMW 2-series Active Tourer. She was convinced the BMW was bigger since it was an "MPV" -- so that's what we ended up getting. If she wanted space amd mini-MPV, and something that wouldn't break the bank to fix, I told her we should have just gotten a C4 Picasso, but no, the Citroen or Ford don't have "cachet".
 
Krenum said:
What an abomination!

That's one of the worst car designs I've ever seen.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, it's the future. It's why i've given up on modern cars and have been building my classic collection.
 
Necro bump.

Yup, keeping my 2011. Will be a collector car, someday. It's effectively the same car as the 2014 models with a better looking hood - the last year Ford built real Mustangs. In 2015 the size got SMALLER, MPG got WORSE, horsepower became LESS and the power to weight ratio got WORSE. They tried to shrink it, probably for foreign markets, but the EPA forced them to add hundreds of pounds of safety upgrades, negating any advantage. Now, the first and last major American auto manufacturer, who has never been bailed out, went full on retard, trying to follow Tesla.
 
Last edited:
sleepeeg3 said:
Necro bump.

Yup, keeping my 2011. Will be a collector car, someday. It's effectively the same car as the 2014 models with a better looking hood - the last year Ford built real Mustangs. In 2015 the size got SMALLER, MPG got WORSE, horsepower became LESS and the power to weight ratio got WORSE. They tried to shrink it, probably for foreign markets, but the EPA forced them to add hundreds of pounds of safety upgrades, negating any advantage. Now, the first and last major American auto manufacturer, who has never been bailed out, went full on retard, trying to follow Tesla.
Click to expand...
I swear, if I'm behind a newer mustang nowadays I can't tell it apart from a BMW based on shape alone. Went full Euro coupe.
 
Most new cars seem extremely dated and undesirable within 2-3 years of their release. I don't know what is going on, if I had to choose a new car from any manufacturer on design alone I'd have a really hard time finding one that is even remotely attractive. The best is "that'll do" nothing that I'd want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hmz
like this
HockeyJon said:
Getting your EV charge from a gas or coal fired power plant is significantly more efficient than an IC engine. You still come out ahead environmentally.
Click to expand...
If you were environmentally friendly, you'd buy a used car with decent MPG and just keep it running for years. Sure, power from a plant is more efficient, but it's laughable to think buying a brand new car is environmentally friendly.

I liked that movie Gattaca, because they took a bunch of classic cars and modified them to be EV's. I'm not a fan of how disposable these EV's are. There is no keeping them long term, and they've intentionally made it impossible to fix on your own. They're like cell phones.
 
Mchart said:
If you were environmentally friendly, you'd buy a used car with decent MPG and just keep it running for years. Sure, power from a plant is more efficient, but it's laughable to think buying a brand new car is environmentally friendly.

I liked that movie Gattaca, because they took a bunch of classic cars and modified them to be EV's. I'm not a fan of how disposable these EV's are. There is no keeping them long term, and they've intentionally made it impossible to fix on your own. They're like cell phones.
Click to expand...
On a positive note, there's already a few startups here in the UK converting classic cars to EV that have major backing e.g. https://www.retroelectrics.co.uk

I'd sell a lung for a '70 EV E-Type like the one in Gattaca.

The right to repair struggle is real, but the market will eventually solve this through workarounds. I completely agree if people are beholden to the manufacturer for repair, they're just creating another waste issue.
 
Mchart said:
If you were environmentally friendly, you'd buy a used car with decent MPG and just keep it running for years. Sure, power from a plant is more efficient, but it's laughable to think buying a brand new car is environmentally friendly.

I liked that movie Gattaca, because they took a bunch of classic cars and modified them to be EV's. I'm not a fan of how disposable these EV's are. There is no keeping them long term, and they've intentionally made it impossible to fix on your own. They're like cell phones.
Click to expand...

Depends on how good the gas mileage is and how many miles you drive, how long you're going to keep the vehicle, etc, but you can actually calculate it out.

This guy actually did all the calculations.

For typical usage it takes 4 years for an EV to become a better choice for the environment.
 
Mchart said:
Unfortunately, it's the future. It's why i've given up on modern cars and have been building my classic collection.
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem with it being electric, the problem I have is that it's an SUV. Americans have had an obsession with driving SUV for a couple of decades now and I can't understand why. They're heavy, fuel inefficient, and don't handle well compared to cars. They can't carry large objects like a pickup truck or a station wagon. At some point the SUV obsession is going to end, probably with higher gas prices or electric cost. The weight of new vehicles, especially SUV's is much more so than the land yachts of the 60's and 70's. A 1970 Cadillac Couple Deville was 4648 lbs while a 2022 Dodge Charge is 4,586 lbs. What is going on here?

 
HockeyJon said:
Getting your EV charge from a gas or coal fired power plant is significantly more efficient than an IC engine. You still come out ahead environmentally.
Click to expand...
You dont know that you dont know. the energy in ~8 lb container of gasoline is equivelent to about 800lbs of batteries. The routinely ignored inconvenient truth of E is that the economic/tech stack ups are massive compared to chemical energy for given amount of work output. the physics of battery weight and energy density all by itself negates any efficiency gains you can dream up. Keep dreaming till the subsidies dry up and the true costs crush your wallet. The E-suckers will be "SHOCKED".
 
sharknice said:
Depends on how good the gas mileage is and how many miles you drive, how long you're going to keep the vehicle, etc, but you can actually calculate it out.

This guy actually did all the calculations.

For typical usage it takes 4 years for an EV to become a better choice for the environment.
Click to expand...

I like the data in the video. However, what about the economic tradeoff? The money wasted on EVs could go toward building cleaner, lower cost power plants like nuclear. I also bet the real numbers are at least twice as bad, since he primarily pulled them from Tesla as well as how much deception there seems to be with reporting on green technologies like solar/wind (no one ever takes into account the efficiency or replacement costs).

Here is the math on the capital cost between my 2011 Mustang vs a new 2021 Mustang E.
*2021 Mustang-E - $43.5K
*2011 Mustang - $19k
Difference = $24.5k
Miles per year (12k) / 22 MPG Avg. * $3/gallon = $1636 / year
Years to payoff Mustang-E = 14.67

This does not take into account:
A. I currently drive my car 0 miles/year, because of pandemic/WFH.
B. I only drove my car ~8k per year, pre-pandemic.
C. Electrical costs
D. Repair costs?

So realistically, if I were still commuting to work, I would be looking at having to drive the Mustang-E 25-30 years to make up the difference. The car might fail before then. Also, on average people get in an accident every 11 years. I am not the norm, however the amount of driving people do nationally has certainly dropped, due to changes in WFH policies. Some reductions in commuting will likely become permanent.

Seems to me the math still favors gas or possibly hybrids.
 
Last edited:
GreenLaser said:
You dont know that you dont know. the energy in ~8 lb container of gasoline is equivelent to about 800lbs of batteries. The routinely ignored inconvenient truth of E is that the economic/tech stack ups are massive compared to chemical energy for given amount of work output. the physics of battery weight and energy density all by itself negates any efficiency gains you can dream up. Keep dreaming till the subsidies dry up and the true costs crush your wallet. The E-suckers will be "SHOCKED".
Click to expand...
It's closer to a factor of 10 not 100 (I see 12 for gas and similar for diesel). Do your googles next time.
 
Mchart said:
If you were environmentally friendly, you'd buy a used car with decent MPG and just keep it running for years. Sure, power from a plant is more efficient, but it's laughable to think buying a brand new car is environmentally friendly.

I liked that movie Gattaca, because they took a bunch of classic cars and modified them to be EV's. I'm not a fan of how disposable these EV's are. There is no keeping them long term, and they've intentionally made it impossible to fix on your own. They're like cell phones.
Click to expand...

There are a lot less things you need to fix on an EV than on an ICE car. Even so, ICE cars are increasingly being designed to be more difficult to fix on your own as well. This is affecting everything, not just EVs, only with EVs you have a lot less you need to maintain.

As for me personally, I only buy used cars, I run those cars until they fall apart, and currently don't own an EV. My next car will be an EV though. It's a better design.

Further, my initial comment was in response to this BS notion that there is no net environmental benefit to EVs since fossil fuels are used in power generation. That's categorically false.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top