Ford Mustang Mach E Leak: Mustang goes Electric

SomeoneElse said:
Only Mustang by name, design is not even close to the car. Its their attempt "EV SUV" ( I still think its more crossover than SUV).
Click to expand...

Ultimately, using the Mustang name is nothing but positive for Ford. It's a lot of extra discussion happening, and ultimately no one interested in such an EV will be put off by the Mustang name.

You just get internet whining about how "That's not a "real" Mustang".
 
Snowdog said:
Ultimately, using the Mustang name is nothing but positive for Ford. It's a lot of extra discussion happening, and ultimately no one interested in such an EV will be put off by the Mustang name.

You just get internet whining about how "That's not a "real" Mustang".
Click to expand...
I have nothing against an electric Mustang. I'm more excited about the rumored hybrid, myself. But this CUV is not a Mustang. As you say, using the Mustang brand and plastering the design cues on it that ultimately don't work is just purely a marketing stunt.
 
Armenius said:
As you say, using the Mustang brand and plastering the design cues on it that ultimately don't work is just purely a marketing stunt.
Click to expand...

That's kind of opposite to what I said. "Nothing but positive" is what I said.
 
Snowdog said:
Ultimately, using the Mustang name is nothing but positive for Ford. It's a lot of extra discussion happening, and ultimately no one interested in such an EV will be put off by the Mustang name.

You just get internet whining about how "That's not a "real" Mustang".
Click to expand...
No matter what your opinion is......The Mustang that everyone knows is a old muscle car / new sports car, not an SUV. I don't know why they didn't just design a EV mustang or an EV Explorer. They already announced the EV F-150......Besides that I don't like the design so I wouldn't buy it.
 
SomeoneElse said:
No matter what your opinion is......The Mustang that everyone knows is a old muscle car / new sports car, not an SUV. I don't know why they didn't just design a EV mustang or an EV Explorer. They already announced the EV F-150......Besides that I don't like the design so I wouldn't buy it.
Click to expand...

And a Porsche SUV was unthinkable, when they did that, and look how that harmed Porsche. Oh, wait...

The Name doesn't harm the car and will likely bring it more attention, so it's a Win for Ford.
 
Snowdog said:
And a Porsche SUV was unthinkable, when they did that, and look how that harmed Porsche. Oh, wait...

The Name doesn't harm the car and will likely bring it more attention, so it's a Win for Ford.
Click to expand...
That's a bad example because Porsche is a brand not a model.....I get it they can call the thing whatever they want. With the true car enthusiasts they won't see it the same way. Marketing is marketing that is all this is. You can call an apple a grape but its still a apple. That's all my point was. As for a win for Ford that will be known when they have the sales figures can't call it a win before they have the thing in production.
 
Slapping the Mustang badge on this thing is nothing more then a marketing stunt to try to catch the attention of Millennials and Gen Z. Any older generations will have the same opinion I do, that the Mustang badge should not be on that vehicle. But that is because we know the badge and know what to expect when you see it, plus we like driving. This new generation just see vehicles as a way of transport and care more about how supposedly green it is.
 
Gideon said:
Slapping the Mustang badge on this thing is nothing more then a marketing stunt to try to catch the attention of Millennials and Gen Z. Any older generations will have the same opinion I do, that the Mustang badge should not be on that vehicle. But that is because we know the badge and know what to expect when you see it, plus we like driving. This new generation just see vehicles as a way of transport and care more about how supposedly green it is.
Click to expand...

Old dinosaurs that wouldn't buy it regardless of the name, so irrelevant.
 
Snowdog said:
Old dinosaurs that wouldn't buy it regardless of the name, so irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I'm only 33, thanks.

I'd have very likely bought an actual electric Mustang as my first dip into electric vehicles. Unfortunately, they made this ugly piece of shit CUV.

This is fundamentally the issue that you refuse to acknowledge because you seem to have an agenda pushing electric vehicles.

No reasonable person would have been upset at an electric Mustang.

The problem is that this is not an electric Mustang. It's an electric Ford Edge that they are calling a Mustang.
 
Fixed?
upload_2019-11-19_8-55-39.png


Back end still needs work, for sure.
 
Gideon said:
Slapping the Mustang badge on this thing is nothing more then a marketing stunt to try to catch the attention of Millennials and Gen Z everyone. Any older generations will have the same opinion I do, that the Mustang badge should not be on that vehicle. But that is because we know the badge and know what to expect when you see it, plus we like driving. This new generation just see vehicles as a way of transport and care more about how supposedly green it is.
Click to expand...

FTFY

While I'm technically a millennial (33 y/o) I agree with this sentiment, as I'm sure many 80s and 90s kids would. I've owned 2 Mustangs, looking for a 3rd, and this thing has no business wearing that badge.

That said, it's not an awful looking E-SUV, and I wouldn't mind having it in the stable... except for that damn Mustang branding.
 
I'm not crazy about the lack fo a grill... just don't care for how it looks.

If they are going to call it a Mustang, it should look "sporty" and in that I think it falls short. Not the first time Ford has let us down.. look at Mustangs of the 80's... with 4-bangers and the ugly roundy body styles...
 
SPARTAN VI said:
FTFY

While I'm technically a millennial (33 y/o) I agree with this sentiment, as I'm sure many 80s and 90s kids would. I've owned 2 Mustangs, looking for a 3rd, and this thing has no business wearing that badge.

That said, it's not an awful looking E-SUV, and I wouldn't mind having it in the stable... except for that damn Mustang branding.
Click to expand...
36 here, would be defined as a "Millennial." I am on my fourth Mustang and I agree with this sentiment. In the marketing material it seems Ford is actually trying hard to sell it as a companion to the coupe, for those moms and dads that want a "toy" and a family car.
GoodBoy said:
I'm not crazy about the lack fo a grill... just don't care for how it looks.

If they are going to call it a Mustang, it should look "sporty" and in that I think it falls short. Not the first time Ford has let us down.. look at Mustangs of the 80's... with 4-bangers and the ugly roundy body styles...
Click to expand...
The GT model has a "grille."
upload_2019-11-19_10-39-9.png


The SVO wasn't bad looking, and it made more power than the 5.0 at the time with a 2.3L turbo.
upload_2019-11-19_10-50-9.png
 
Last edited:
Gideon said:
Slapping the Mustang badge on this thing is nothing more then a marketing stunt to try to catch the attention of Millennials and Gen Z. Any older generations will have the same opinion I do, that the Mustang badge should not be on that vehicle. But that is because we know the badge and know what to expect when you see it, plus we like driving. This new generation just see vehicles as a way of transport and care more about how supposedly green it is.
Click to expand...

Ok boomer.
 
Gideon said:
Slapping the Mustang badge on this thing is nothing more then a marketing stunt to try to catch the attention of Millennials and Gen Z. Any older generations will have the same opinion I do, that the Mustang badge should not be on that vehicle. But that is because we know the badge and know what to expect when you see it, plus we like driving. This new generation just see vehicles as a way of transport and care more about how supposedly green it is.
Click to expand...

I think it matches Ford's original intent:

"The first car Ford specifically marketed to women. As the post-World War II economy stretched, women became a market sector to be reckoned with. Working women gained direct purchasing power and growing families suddenly had money for a second or third car. Stay-at-home moms and teenagers suddenly had a voice in the car buying decision. That could explain why ads of the time declared Mustang “The sweetheart of the supermarket set.”
 
Gideon said:
Sucks for them, my Hellcat has been on the track at Sonoma Raceway many times. As for the rest the car is way to underbuilt yet costs as much if not more then the cars that are built for running hard. Also dont forget it can take up to a hour to get the batteries to the correct state to even run them hard for max performance. Far to many limitations and I dont get to hear the roar of the motor on top of it.
Click to expand...

You say battery packs degrade.... but you act like those pistons and cylinders and water pumps and fuel injectors and air filters and oil and oil filters and etc.. dont wear out.

I'm not defending Tesla but your hellcat will NOT last as long as a Tesla if you keep taking it to the track or lead foot driving on your local freeway. Lord knows you cant take it on twisty roads lmao.

But to keep thread on topic, I'd take your Dodge any minute of the day over that Ford EV lmao
 
  • Like
Reactions: Auer
like this
Gideon said:
Slapping the Mustang badge on this thing is nothing more then a marketing stunt to try to catch the attention of Millennials and Gen Z. Any older generations will have the same opinion I do, that the Mustang badge should not be on that vehicle. But that is because we know the badge and know what to expect when you see it, plus we like driving. This new generation just see vehicles as a way of transport and care more about how supposedly green it is.
Click to expand...

But the older generation's will be dead soon, so why market to them? Besides they're only interested in Camrys and Avalons anyways
 
Armenius said:
Sport SUVs are not replacements for sport coupes. Not all of us are constantly hauling groceries for a large family, luggage, kids and their friends, or anything that would necessitate such a large vehicle.
Click to expand...

Are you using the old outdated definition of coupe, or the modern inclusive definition that means 4 doors?

BMW M4 Gran Coupe

Words mean nothing these days.

2016_bmw_4-series-gran-coupe_sedan_428i-sulev_fq_oem_9_1280.jpg
 
N4CR said:
The glory days of the KB 'stang. That's when I started watching street racing on YT and streetfire.. Only one of them still exists.
Click to expand...
One of my best street races on my old setup was against a bolt on, pulley, tune 03 Cobra.
 
tangoseal said:
You say battery packs degrade.... but you act like those pistons and cylinders and water pumps and fuel injectors and air filters and oil and oil filters and etc.. dont wear out.

I'm not defending Tesla but your hellcat will NOT last as long as a Tesla if you keep taking it to the track or lead foot driving on your local freeway. Lord knows you cant take it on twisty roads lmao.

But to keep thread on topic, I'd take your Dodge any minute of the day over that Ford EV lmao
Click to expand...

I never said they don't, but far to many pretend that all electric cars wont have issues and costs as well. Also I have all the skills needed to rebuild that engine should I need to and racing anything comes at a price, I just dont have to pay someone else to fix it. Tesla has not been around long enough to really know how well they hold up and based on what I have seen in the city fleet they will have their share of issues as well. The Hellcat takes twisty roads just fine, you just have to know how to drive it without all the driving aids assisting you.

That Ford should just not have the Mustang logo on it and it would be less of a issue.
 
5150Joker said:
I haven't looked at those studies yet so since you have, were they done by a completely neutral source? There's a lot of special interest pushing for EV that has nothing to do with the environment.
Click to expand...

I've looked at them, and I'm neither pro nor anti EV. Doing some interpretation of the methodologies, and while it is very hard to make them complete and uniform, EVs in general are cleaner than ICE for the full lifecycle. The margin goes from negligible to significant depending on the battery chemistry and where and how you operate your vehicle.

A tesla model S doing ludicrous speed brunouts for the entirety of a charge on a drag strip in an area powered by coal is NOT clean.

Lithium batteries are currently a waste item, but they also have great room for improvement in terms of recycling. We don't not because we can't but because the current lithium supply chain is still subsisting at the REALLY easy to get to lithium. On the bonus side, they aren't as big a waste source as we thought because in general they are providing a longer useful life than was first thought. So we will likely wind up with less of them hitting EOL in that window before we have more robust recycling infrastructure. Additionally, the worst part is the cathode. There are lots of options of what to make that out of, but most of the "it's horribly dirty" claims are based on cadmium cathodes being the big thing. Within the realm of lithium cells, cathode technology is the big thing, so it is the place composition is most likely to differ between brands and change in general.

The biggest problem for EVs at a mass scale isn't that it will be the pollution form of pushing the peas around your plate to make it look like you ate something, it's that there simply will not be enough raw materials to go around. Which is why you see the big auto makers buying heavily into various battery chemistry technologies. They don't want to run out or be in bidding wars with each other.
 
tangoseal said:
Want my opinion as an actual Biologist? Co2 generation is green! We are releasing carbon that is essential to life.
Click to expand...
As a biologist you should know that introducing species to a place that didn't have them can have some pretty drastic effects, now it's not living things you're introducing but it is CO2, CO2 that had long been locked away in the form of coal/oil and was not part of our ecosystem, this is not the CO2 that is part of the current cycle of death/decay/respiration.

My opinion as a physicist, CO2 absorbs infrared radiation, this makes the air warmer which intern releases IR radiation but in a random direction, effectively trapping energy in an area. Now greenhouse gases are absolutely necessary, too little you get Mars which can't trap much heat even though 95% of the atmosphere is CO2, but there are limits to this, too much and you get Venus also about 95% CO2, much like the whole "plants need it to survive" ... 'argument' there are limits, I'm sure you know as a biologist people need water to survive, it is essential, but too much water and you die.
 
sfsuphysics said:
As a biologist you should know that introducing species to a place that didn't have them can have some pretty drastic effects, now it's not living things you're introducing but it is CO2, CO2 that had long been locked away in the form of coal/oil and was not part of our ecosystem, this is not the CO2 that is part of the current cycle of death/decay/respiration.

My opinion as a physicist, CO2 absorbs infrared radiation, this makes the air warmer which intern releases IR radiation but in a random direction, effectively trapping energy in an area. Now greenhouse gases are absolutely necessary, too little you get Mars which can't trap much heat even though 95% of the atmosphere is CO2, but there are limits to this, too much and you get Venus also about 95% CO2, much like the whole "plants need it to survive" ... 'argument' there are limits, I'm sure you know as a biologist people need water to survive, it is essential, but too much water and you die.
Click to expand...
Water vapor is responsible for 70% of the atmospheric greenhouse effect in both absorbing incoming solar energy and outgoing surface thermal radiation. Water vapor can absorb radiation of a far greater range of wave lengths than carbon dioxide can.
 
Mchart said:
I'm only 33, thanks.

I'd have very likely bought an actual electric Mustang as my first dip into electric vehicles. Unfortunately, they made this ugly piece of shit CUV.

This is fundamentally the issue that you refuse to acknowledge because you seem to have an agenda pushing electric vehicles.

No reasonable person would have been upset at an electric Mustang.

The problem is that this is not an electric Mustang. It's an electric Ford Edge that they are calling a Mustang.
Click to expand...

You act like a vehicle you would never buy, is somehow injuring you just because of it's name.

It's irrelevant to you, as you are to Ford Marketing.
 
Snowdog said:
You act like a vehicle you would never buy, is somehow injuring you just because of it's name.

It's irrelevant to you, as you are to Ford Marketing.
Click to expand...

No shit Sherlock. That's why Ford has lost me as a long-time customer. They've already lost substantial business turning off the Taurus/Focus production for the NA market. Making an electric Ford Edge that they call the Mustang is a POOR marketing decision. It turns one base away, and the typical CUV buyer won't want a 'Mustang'.
 
Gideon said:
Limitations of the Tesla for performance driving
All Tesla vehicles have intelligent battery management systems in place to not only heat but also cool the individual battery cells to ensure the longevity of the battery pack. For normal day to day fast driving on roads, you will rarely see any limitations but if you have a cold or hot battery the car will limit performance, you can tell this by a dotted yellow line on the energy graph.

After roughly 10-15 minutes of heavy driving, the battery will be at a high temperature and will require 1-15 minutes of cooling before the car will give full performance again.

Max battery mode (Performance Models only)
Turn on Insane or Ludicrous modes, below this you will see the words ‘Max Battery’ press this and a pop up window will appear, switch Max battery mode on. The car will heat up the battery to increase performance. This will increase battery use. It will take 5-60 minutes to heat the battery. After 10 – 15 minutes of hard performance you the car will showing ‘Cooling’ as the car cools the battery pack down.
Click to expand...

Again, you are talking about standard Tesla EV's. Sportscar EV's are pretty badass. The Tesla Roadster has watercooled batteries... sounds pretty [H]ard to me...

The pack is designed to prevent catastrophic cell failures from propagating to adjacent cells (thermal runaway), even when the cooling system is off.[120] Coolant is pumped continuously through the ESS both when the car is running and when the car is turned off if the pack retains more than a 90% charge. The coolant pump draws 146 watts.[56][121][122][123] The cooling and battery management system keeps the temperatures and voltages within specific limits.[124]
Click to expand...
 
GoodBoy said:
Again, you are talking about standard Tesla EV's. Sportscar EV's are pretty badass. The Tesla Roadster has watercooled batteries... sounds pretty [H]ard to me...
Click to expand...

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.
 
Armenius said:
Water vapor is responsible for 70% of the atmospheric greenhouse effect in both absorbing incoming solar energy and outgoing surface thermal radiation. Water vapor can absorb radiation of a far greater range of wave lengths than carbon dioxide can.
Click to expand...
There's a big difference though, water vapor does not control the Earth's temperature, the amount of vapor is controlled by the temperature. Water vapor has a special limiting factor in that too much of it, and it condenses, where as things like CO2 doesn't condense under standard atmospheric pressure, so they can build up.
 
5150Joker said:
Just like every other American car company except maybe Tesla. Obama isn't around to bail them out again and I doubt Trump would (yes I know Ford didn't need the bailout like GM).
Click to expand...

People always bring up the GM/Chrysler bailout, but those were a drop in the bucket compared to the criminal half Trillion dollar bailout of the banks.
 
Mchart said:
No shit Sherlock. That's why Ford has lost me as a long-time customer. They've already lost substantial business turning off the Taurus/Focus production for the NA market. Making an electric Ford Edge that they call the Mustang is a POOR marketing decision. It turns one base away, and the typical CUV buyer won't want a 'Mustang'.
Click to expand...

Wait. You are saying because you dislike the what they named one car, you would never buy anyway, you will boycott all the their products.

That's just ridiculous in the extreme.
 
Randall Stephens said:
But the older generation's will be dead soon, so why market to them? Besides they're only interested in Camrys and Avalons anyways
Click to expand...
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.
 
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...

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.
 
Snowdog said:
Wait. You are saying because you dislike the what they named one car, you would never buy anyway, you will boycott all the their products.

That's just ridiculous in the extreme.
Click to expand...

Not really. They lost me when they stopped producing sedans for the US market, and stuff like this isn't drawing me in.

You can call it a boycott all you want, and i'm sure the marketing idiots at Ford will blame it on 'boycotts' as well. When a company isn't making something that a certain market segment wants you can't blame the lack of sales on your CUV's on 'boycotts'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top