7 ms·

Review of the Mustang Mach E

23 points by cs702 6y ago

cmiller1 6y ago
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.
- bozzcl 6y ago
  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.
  - myself248 6y ago
    You say that, but have you driven one?
    - banana_giraffe 6y ago
      I have. It was fun to drive, but it most certainly didn't feel like driving my Mustang. I'm no car expert, but it didn't feel as "connected" to the road as the Mustang is, the ride was effortless, and I'm sure very appealing to the average consumer. Not helping was being 10 inches or whatever higher. It felt like what it is, a very sporty SUV. Even then, I'd probably have bought one if it wasn't for the name, and the friggin screen. It bugs me calling that thing a Mustang. Though, I'm sure it'll sell well, and people like me will just grumble when we see one on the street. And no doubt that stupid screen will start showing up in more cars too.
      - zippergz 6y ago
        Tell me more about the screen. One of the things I've disliked about teslas is the massive touch screen in the middle, and I'm disappointed to see that this has it too, but in most other ways I find this pretty interesting.
        banana_giraffe 6y ago
        The screen was, uh, ok, I guess. It did things, the UI was spartan, but not confusing. Compared to the Tesla Model 3 I've test driven, the experience there seemed the same to me. Maybe a little better since the control wheel meant some things can be done without touch, and having a secondary driver display in front of me meant less looking to the side. I can't comment on it for long term use, of course. The sales person was confused why I'd want to turn it off, and didn't know if it was possible, though that means, well, nothing. I didn't explore it much, since my gut feel by this point was "no buy", and I didn't feel compelled to talk myself out of that. I immediately see something like that and have a built in hatred of it. I picked my daily driver partially because I confirmed I could turn off (not just dim) the infotainment screen, and dim most everything else. When I drive, I want to drive, not have a screen blaring at me. Clearly, based off car design trends, I'm in the minority here.
        zippergz 6y ago
        Yeah, I'm with you, but I agree that we are in the minority. Thanks for the added detail!
    - bozzcl 6y ago
      No. What does that have to do with my comment? As far as justifying my "it's not really a Mustang" comment, you just have to... you know... look at it. It's a crossover SUV. SUVs don't drive like sports cars. Higher center of gravity, more suspension travel distance and heavier body which means more body roll. In that sense, the reviews I've read match my expectations because it couldn't have been another way. Instantaneous torque, which is fun, but bland steering and some body roll. So an electric SUV that vaguely resembles a Mustang.
      - myself248 6y ago
        > So an electric SUV that vaguely resembles a Mustang. I think I have to agree with you here, that's a more accurate description. I wonder if it'll be like the Toyota Corolla Matrix, as it was known for its first year, subsequently just the Toyota Matrix. (Different story there; it actually was a Corolla body so I could get all sorts of aftermarket suspension parts even for a just-released car...) Come to think of it, all sorts of brands have launched with a bridge year, haven't they? I won't be surprised if future years of this car are simply known as the Ford Mach-E, but for now they're trading on the cachet of the Mustang brand.
- mikestew 6y ago
  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.
  - kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
    Chevy has a history of doing this. They continue to use the name of a roadster for the Stingray.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    To be fair, the original creation was "let's make a Mustang out of a Falcon."
- tomatotomato37 6y ago
  My question is what on earth will they call their sport coupe now? The Ford Super Mustang? The Ford Mustang Falcon? The Ford Mustang Mustang???
  - cnasc 6y ago
    Ford has no plans to make anything except SUVs in the future, so there will be no sport coupe.
    - theluketaylor 6y ago
      Mustang was specifically excluded from Ford's announcement of abandoning sedans and other more traditional car-shaped cars. Ford has no plans to stop making Mustang, and they would be crazy to do so.
    - Mvhsz 6y ago
      That announcement excluded the mustang (and one trim of the focus). They will continue building the mustang as a gas-powered sport coupe, but will stop producing Fusion/Taurus/Fiesta. https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/25/17282562/ford-focus-mustang-cars-bronco-hybrid-earnings-q1 https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/25/17282562/ford-focus-musta...
  - magicnubs 6y ago
    Thunder-cougar-falcon-bird?
    - theluketaylor 6y ago
      How much were you thinking of spending on this thunder-cougar-falcon-bird?
- boardwaalk 6y ago
  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.
  - mywittyname 6y ago
    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.
    - boardwaalk 6y ago
      That all seems correct. In my mind, it still roughly the same form factor; e.g. it’d fit in all the same parking garages and spaces. That’s why I’m calling out the “lumbering behemoth” thing. This isn’t an Expedition or something. Since you’re making references to the agility of the thing (wheelbase and weight), I’d be curious how the Mach E does in the real world, though. (Do people even buy Mustangs with this in mind?)
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  It's closer to an E-Probe, isn't it?
  - elipsey 6y ago
    Probe GT turbo was baller. How dare you? :) Also, it weighed about 1000 pounds less the current ICE Mustang.
- theluketaylor 6y ago
  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
- canada_dry 6y ago
  > dilutes the branding 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-ugly-horse.jpg https://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2012/10/02-ug...
nsriv 6y ago
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.
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  Yes, Bronco would have fit better. It's really a crossover.
mikestew 6y ago
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?"
- eddyg 6y ago
  A lot of thought went in to the decision. You can learn more by watching this Webex with the design team: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UABOgZR1txY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UABOgZR1txY
  - mixmastamyk 6y ago
    Perhaps, but my first negative reaction after the name was exactly that bug ugly white screen substituting for instrument console.
fernandotakai 6y ago
doug demuro, a great car reviewer, has a thorough review of the mach-e https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4n5iPqxpaw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4n5iPqxpaw tl;dw: he likes it a lot.
- xnx 6y ago
  I probably watch one of his videos a month and find them still totally understandable at 1.5x speed.
mywittyname 6y ago
> 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.
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  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.
ogre_codes 6y ago
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.
- jbob2000 6y ago
  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.
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    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.
    - jbob2000 6y ago

23 points by cs702 6y ago

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.

bozzcl 6y ago
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.
- myself248 6y ago
  You say that, but have you driven one?
  - banana_giraffe 6y ago
    I have. It was fun to drive, but it most certainly didn't feel like driving my Mustang. I'm no car expert, but it didn't feel as "connected" to the road as the Mustang is, the ride was effortless, and I'm sure very appealing to the average consumer. Not helping was being 10 inches or whatever higher. It felt like what it is, a very sporty SUV. Even then, I'd probably have bought one if it wasn't for the name, and the friggin screen. It bugs me calling that thing a Mustang. Though, I'm sure it'll sell well, and people like me will just grumble when we see one on the street. And no doubt that stupid screen will start showing up in more cars too.
    - zippergz 6y ago
      Tell me more about the screen. One of the things I've disliked about teslas is the massive touch screen in the middle, and I'm disappointed to see that this has it too, but in most other ways I find this pretty interesting.
      - banana_giraffe 6y ago
        The screen was, uh, ok, I guess. It did things, the UI was spartan, but not confusing. Compared to the Tesla Model 3 I've test driven, the experience there seemed the same to me. Maybe a little better since the control wheel meant some things can be done without touch, and having a secondary driver display in front of me meant less looking to the side. I can't comment on it for long term use, of course. The sales person was confused why I'd want to turn it off, and didn't know if it was possible, though that means, well, nothing. I didn't explore it much, since my gut feel by this point was "no buy", and I didn't feel compelled to talk myself out of that. I immediately see something like that and have a built in hatred of it. I picked my daily driver partially because I confirmed I could turn off (not just dim) the infotainment screen, and dim most everything else. When I drive, I want to drive, not have a screen blaring at me. Clearly, based off car design trends, I'm in the minority here.
        zippergz 6y ago
        Yeah, I'm with you, but I agree that we are in the minority. Thanks for the added detail!
  - bozzcl 6y ago
    No. What does that have to do with my comment? As far as justifying my "it's not really a Mustang" comment, you just have to... you know... look at it. It's a crossover SUV. SUVs don't drive like sports cars. Higher center of gravity, more suspension travel distance and heavier body which means more body roll. In that sense, the reviews I've read match my expectations because it couldn't have been another way. Instantaneous torque, which is fun, but bland steering and some body roll. So an electric SUV that vaguely resembles a Mustang.
    - myself248 6y ago
      > So an electric SUV that vaguely resembles a Mustang. I think I have to agree with you here, that's a more accurate description. I wonder if it'll be like the Toyota Corolla Matrix, as it was known for its first year, subsequently just the Toyota Matrix. (Different story there; it actually was a Corolla body so I could get all sorts of aftermarket suspension parts even for a just-released car...) Come to think of it, all sorts of brands have launched with a bridge year, haven't they? I won't be surprised if future years of this car are simply known as the Ford Mach-E, but for now they're trading on the cachet of the Mustang brand.
mikestew 6y ago
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.
- kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
  Chevy has a history of doing this. They continue to use the name of a roadster for the Stingray.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  To be fair, the original creation was "let's make a Mustang out of a Falcon."
tomatotomato37 6y ago
My question is what on earth will they call their sport coupe now? The Ford Super Mustang? The Ford Mustang Falcon? The Ford Mustang Mustang???
- cnasc 6y ago
  Ford has no plans to make anything except SUVs in the future, so there will be no sport coupe.
  - theluketaylor 6y ago
    Mustang was specifically excluded from Ford's announcement of abandoning sedans and other more traditional car-shaped cars. Ford has no plans to stop making Mustang, and they would be crazy to do so.
  - Mvhsz 6y ago
    That announcement excluded the mustang (and one trim of the focus). They will continue building the mustang as a gas-powered sport coupe, but will stop producing Fusion/Taurus/Fiesta. https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/25/17282562/ford-focus-mustang-cars-bronco-hybrid-earnings-q1 https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/25/17282562/ford-focus-musta...
- magicnubs 6y ago
  Thunder-cougar-falcon-bird?
  - theluketaylor 6y ago
    How much were you thinking of spending on this thunder-cougar-falcon-bird?
boardwaalk 6y ago
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.
- mywittyname 6y ago
  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.
  - boardwaalk 6y ago
    That all seems correct. In my mind, it still roughly the same form factor; e.g. it’d fit in all the same parking garages and spaces. That’s why I’m calling out the “lumbering behemoth” thing. This isn’t an Expedition or something. Since you’re making references to the agility of the thing (wheelbase and weight), I’d be curious how the Mach E does in the real world, though. (Do people even buy Mustangs with this in mind?)
mixmastamyk 6y ago
It's closer to an E-Probe, isn't it?
- elipsey 6y ago
  Probe GT turbo was baller. How dare you? :) Also, it weighed about 1000 pounds less the current ICE Mustang.
theluketaylor 6y ago
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
canada_dry 6y ago
> dilutes the branding 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-ugly-horse.jpg https://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2012/10/02-ug...

nsriv 6y ago

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.

mixmastamyk 6y ago
Yes, Bronco would have fit better. It's really a crossover.

mikestew 6y ago

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?"

eddyg 6y ago
A lot of thought went in to the decision. You can learn more by watching this Webex with the design team: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UABOgZR1txY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UABOgZR1txY
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  Perhaps, but my first negative reaction after the name was exactly that bug ugly white screen substituting for instrument console.

fernandotakai 6y ago

doug demuro, a great car reviewer, has a thorough review of the mach-e https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4n5iPqxpaw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4n5iPqxpaw tl;dw: he likes it a lot.

xnx 6y ago
I probably watch one of his videos a month and find them still totally understandable at 1.5x speed.

mywittyname 6y ago

> 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.

mixmastamyk 6y ago
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.

ogre_codes 6y ago

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.

jbob2000 6y ago
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.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  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.
  - jbob2000 6y ago