All-Electric Ford Mustang Mach-E SUV | Hacker News Reader

All-Electric Ford Mustang Mach-E SUV

thedrive.com

61 pointsclouddrover82 comments

I'm mystified with the Mustang branding. There's 55 years of inertia behind that meaning a 2 door sports car.

My take was that this allowed people with conventional Mustangs to be able to go to a single family car without giving up too many of their sporting pretensions.

As a Mustang enthusiast, this branding is terrible. It muddies the waters of all that they've built with the Mustang brand.

I guess Maverick was too sullied for them :). LTD might have fit though.

I agree but this was the sort of thing that I recall them doing in the 70s, which albeit were not the best years of the Mustang (Mustang II - I can't believe they mentioned that one in their livestream early on.) I have to say the car appealed to me a lot and I watched their whole livestream because I was excited by the car; haven't plopped down the deposit yet but the night is young :) .

Muddying the water is not a bad thing here. They’re streamlining the Mustang brand — something they should do to stay afloat. As most people think, Mustang is a sport car but the population is aging rapidly and Ford has to accommodate. Now, instead of a Mustang enthusiast walking in and having to bypass the new model because they have a growing family, they’ll be able to purchase the family-friendly Mustang Mach-E.

The 459 hp/612 lb-ft GT Performance Edition is now the dream combo for the older, family diehard Mustang enthusiasts.

We are in a golden era of muscle cars with Dodge, Ford and Chevrolet producing the most powerful and poised cars in the category ever, and Ford comes out with this Tesla lookalike branded as a 'Mustang'? Incredible. why not call it the Ford Electro or some new name - why on earth mess around with the Mustang brand?

I can't help but feel like they are selling out here.

It seems like they wanted to combine the excellent brand recognition of "Mustang" with the staggering sales figures of SUVs.

Although they might get a semi-pass here, because the nature of electric cars really lends itself to SUV's, allowing bigger battery packs while also keeping weight way down low along with the motor(s). An electric SUV will handle much much better than it's gas counterpart because of this.

So I would give this a fair shot of actually being a good car, with many more mustang like qualities than would be expected. However part of me really does still feel like Ford should have just called this something else, and released an electric pure sports car mustang later on. I would imagine that Ford went back and forth with the "Mustang" branding a lot before settling on it.

It's a sports car brand that's got 1-2 generations (really, barely 1) from being completely obsolete. There's very little margin, and gas isn't getting any cheaper. They're in some sense rescuing the brand by separating it from the vehicle.

Remember that Ford killed off all other sedans for North America.

> There's very little margin, and gas isn't getting any cheaper.

* Barrel of Oil in 2009: $53.48 (Not yet adjusted for inflation)

* Barrel of Oil in 2019: $46.25

I think you're underestimating how much oil we discovered through the fracking process. There's a reason why SUVs went out-of-favor in the 2007 era (~$90+ per barrels of oil), but SUVs + Trucks became popular again come 2015+. Gasoline got way, way cheaper.

> Remember that Ford killed off all other sedans for North America.

Because gasoline has gotten so cheap, people have stopped caring about MPG-efficiency. SUVs are selling out while cheap econo-boxes are losing money.

The current trend is big, boxy SUVs with lots of room. Very few people seem to care about efficiency these days.

> I think you're underestimating how much oil we discovered through the fracking process.

I thought the primary output of fracking in the US is natural gas, not oil.

They are probably getting mixed up with shale oil, which isn't price competitive at the moment. Geopolitics has more of an influence on the current oil price.

Fracking Oil Wells are estimated to become profitable again at $60 / barrel (depending on the well of course, but roughly around there).

Which means that for the foreseeable future... ie: as long as Fracking Oil wells remain in a state of "DUC and cover" (drilled but uncompleted)... oil will likely remain under $60 a barrel.

Only if global oil consumption grows enough such that all the DUC-and-covered wells become operational will the market be in a position where the price of oil can grow significantly above $60/barrel. Either way, the $90+/barrel prices of the 2007-era probably won't return anytime soon.

BTW - Fracking has NEVER been profitable. It is just the losers are the debt holding in companies. And for the same reasons, VCs keep subsidising lost making companies (WeWork / Lyft etc). "We lose money on every sale but we make it up on volume" Bondholders have lost about a hundred Billion. It is crazy but frackers keep get capital effectively for free.

> gas isn't getting any cheaper.

On the contrary, cheap gas is here to stay.

At $60/bbl or so, fracking and tar sands/shale oil become profitable and those huge reserves come into play keeping a cap on the price. Technological change and/or pipelines can and likely will reduce that $60 cap.

Also, wind energy is becoming insanely cheap. That can't replace much oil usage, but it does replace it at the margins, and it's the margins that affect the price.

The only thing that will raise the price of gas is a carbon tax or equivalent, and we're not going to get that without a change of administration.

In respect to the car, I would argue about a clean car with low maintenance, and not about gas prices.

That said, gas will probably be 3x the price as electric for this car.

----

I got curious and did the math:

electric 270 miles range from 93 kw @ 12c/kwh = $11.16

ford edge 21mpg @ 3.00/gal = $38.57 for 270 miles

ford edge 25mpg @ 3.00/gal = $32.40 for 270 miles

It's no worse than a Porsche SUV.

Or a 4 door Porsche for that matter.

At least they didn't call that a 911. Porsche does have a niche make, but this is reusing a model name.

Other manufacturers have done it, look at MINI.

That started off as a Morris Mini-Minor, turned into a Morris Mini/Austin Mini, then just a Mini, then Rover Mini, then BMW turned it into it's own brand, MINI.

Ford are presumably just taking the brand awareness of the Mustang to create a sub-brand of performance cars. Which makes sense as people all over the world are aware of the Mustang.

And yet we're having an eerily identical discussion to the one that happened 10 - 12 years ago. Among the Porsche faithful, it was patently absurd, if not offensive. The press treated it as a marketing stunt. One is a make and one is a model, but in a world where tech companies routinely treat product lines as mini-brands, that just looks like savvy modern marketing.

Same thing could be said about Lambo, but the Urus is selling like hot cakes.

Not really, since Urus wasn't a pre-existing model of Lambos, like Mustang was of Ford. Yes, Lambo "sold out" by making an SUV, but they didn't repurpose the name of a vehicle that had decades of goodwill built up (and a completely different body style).

Wasn't that Porsche before the Cayenne too?

The Mustang sells in very low numbers relative to their other models.

The Mustang branding is a signal that Ford is going "all-in" on electric. They're putting one of their most valuable assets on the table. It's a really strong sign that this isn't a compliance car.

The electric isn't the issue here; an electric motor in a tight little RWD coupe would be amazing. It's the gargantuan SUV thing going on here that is the issue

A tight little RWD coupe with 1500 pounds of battery weight is not going to perform significantly differently.

The model 3 ranges from about 3650 lb to 4100 lb. A Mustang GT weights about 3700 lb. Noone would call these cars lightweight, but I do expect them to perform significantly better than the Y which will probably weight hundreds more.

Also, the Mach E has a massive battery and might actually weight close to 1k lb more.

I'm not really convinced that this (or the Tesla X or Y) are SUVs, despite the manufacture claiming otherwise. To me these are really just hatchbacks, with a bit higher roof line.

Yeah, but the SUV letters increase sales.

SUV != rock crawler. Even off-road rally cars run 5-7" ground clearance which is right around where the Y is estimated to be. The X has a clearance of 8.5" / 22cm. I would classify both of them as a sport utility vehicle. These cars just look a little different because they need to be more aerodynamic.

What the SUV has going for it are: high sales volume and the weight and performance don't have to be tops.

Meanwhile porsche is in the unenviable position of competing head to head with the model S which tesla started off in 2008.

Obviously a coupe would be more exciting, but it would be a smaller riskier market and ford could use the time to add lightness and remove slowness while keeping the price in the mustang range.

It makes perfect sense to me. Electric cars from traditional manufacturers have a reputation as substandard vehicles for green activists, largely owing to the compliance car.

Ford want to emphasise that this car has a focus on performance and is for enthusiasts. It needs to gain that perception to sell well in the market segment it's aimed at. Ford's generic branding doesn't come with that perception, but Mustang does.

Jim Hackett badly needs a win more than he needs to preserve the reputation of a loved brand. Since they've run just about every other brand name into the ground, Mustang is the last one left that will attract eyeballs. If they called it the E-Taurus no one would care after the initial announcement.

I personally think they should have started with electrifying Lincoln. They already don't sell a lot them, so it gives them room to create something new and revitalize a brand rather than dilute the meaning of Mustang.

Maybe I'm an old fogey, but this car looks much more like "a traditional compact crossover SUV", and much less like a "traditional Mustang".

I was reminded of a 'shooting brake' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting-brake), which added to the appeal for me personally.

I'm torn. On one hand, I'd love reasonable competition to Tesla in this space, but I guess I assumed it would be at a much better price.

The other thing is, I don't think the average Ford buyer will purchase this. Simply put, if you're interested in an electric SUV, and have 45-60k you can part with, you'll buy the Tesla Y or maybe the Audi. Who wants to drop 60k on a crossover Ford SUV?

Explorer buyers put up the kind of money easily. Look at their higher trim level prices.

The reason they went with the Mustang brand here is to "macho" up the vehicle. Which most Ford buyers wouldn't otherwise touch.

Electric Crossover = hippie weak bullshit.

Electric Mustang Mach = Manly strong fast.

You think I'm joking.

The Explorer is quite a bit larger and seats 7 passengers.

This is like the size of an Escape, maybe the Edge.

Kinda agree on your other points though even if I don’t love the Mustang branding.

Do people really pay that much for explorers? I kind of always assumed that was the sticker and a mixture of incentives and family discounts factored heavily. It's kind of like when people buy a Dodge or Chrysler, I just assume they get some sort of crazy deal because otherwise what's the point?

Have you ever heard of the Dodge Hellcats? They have a following and old muscle car fans would be swayed by a Mustang badge. They make a $100k Grand Cherokee Trackhawk that’s double the price of my Trailhawk.

German cars are nice but there’s no way I’m paying that much for parts and labor on top of the sticker. Not to mention they are making them much harder to work on. Remove the intake manifold to change the plugs or coil, why?

Leaving it at "Explorer buyers" understates it. It's almost impossible to buy an Expedition, which sells well, under $50,000. F-series trucks are the most widely owned vehicles by millionaires and cost in the range of a well-optioned Tesla.

F-series trucks are also the best selling vehicle in America.

Has the pricing for the model Y been announced yet? Are they the same size?

I'm not sure, but I've read in the past that Tesla expects the Y to be more expensive than the 3 and less than the X, so the range would have to overlap a bit.

Here's a specs and price comparison between the Mach-E and Model Y:

https://insideevs.com/reviews/382537/tesla-model-y-versus-fo...

Yes you can spec out and pre order one today: https://www.tesla.com/modely/design#battery

Base price before incentives is $48,000

> I guess I assumed it would be at a much better price.

It's about the same price as the Model Y is expected to be. In the US the Mach-E will also have the advantage of the $7,500 federal tax credit which the Model Y will not have.

> The other thing is, I don't think the average Ford buyer will purchase this. Simply put, if you're interested in an electric SUV, and have 45-60k you can part with, you'll buy the Tesla Y or maybe the Audi. Who wants to drop 60k on a crossover Ford SUV?

I welcome any and all competitors. If its a good electric car, then I'm happy for it. If its bad, then at least it will issue downward price pressure on the other auto-makers.

You're forgetting the $7,500 Fed credit and state credits which is $2,500 in CA I last checked.

That's a total of $10,000 difference, for similar specs if the pricing is same, as Tesla has almost run out of tax credits.

Maybe they're looking to change the the definition of "the average Ford buyer"? This looks like a well designed car, certainly worthy of consideration vs the Tesla Y.

I wish they kept it called a Mach-E, and maybe slipped in a pony somewhere as homage (on top of the obvious styling queues)

That being said, calling it a Mustang Mach-E is going to get the industry, and community, more abuzz than simply calling it a mustang inspired EV called the Mach-E.

I like it well enough, and I hope the electronics end up in a future Mustang coupe, like this bad boy: https://www.autoblog.com/2019/11/06/ford-webasto-lithium-mus...

This Top Gear short-take on the car was interesting for the details it covered: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA-qgSB076c . I watched the livestream - it was no Apple event but had some nice moments. I noticed the resemblance to the Tesla giant screen but I think they got some elements of the Mercedes with the assistant plus the physical dial on the screen seems like a big usability improvement.

There were many intentional references to Tesla during the unveiling event: https://electrek.co/2019/11/17/exclusive-bill-ford-at-the-mu...

So the motor controller in an electric vehicle is basically spitting out sine waves at 200+ kW. It'd be cool if they could tune that to 120/240V 60Hz, bypass the motor, and add a connector that powers your house.

Nissan Leaf supports that.[0] Not sure if other cars do too.

[0] https://www.nissan-global.com/EN/TECHNOLOGY/OVERVIEW/vehicle...

It looks like Nissan is using the CHAdeMO port's DC pins in reverse, to power an external inverter. That's less fun than generating AC from a motor controller, but I guess it's sensible to keep the car's job as simple as possible.

It’s amazing how long it has taken car companies to copy the signature features of the Tesla: styling that doesn’t scream “ev vehicle”, over the air updates, long range and large touchscreens.

I am happy to see some real Tesla competition.

Huge touchscreens are a cheap way to avoid the expense of designing an ergonomic dashboard. Manufacturers don't care that they're a UX nightmare, ruin night vision, or take the driver's attention away from the road. They just care that they're cheap, and give salespeople a "feature" to point out.

Bingo. I think a flat touchscreen is something of a cop-out. If I'm driving at 80kph or higher I don't want to have to look at a screen, I want to feel for a knob.

With all the regulation around cars and driving already, I'd love to see regulation around controls. It makes 0 sense to me to ban cell phones because they are distracting, but then allow giant touch screens in the car with no analog dials/switches for common features.

Tesla still has some advantages afaict: on the Mach-E pre-order page, it seems that once you pick a trim, it's final; on a Tesla, it seems that things such as 'Autopilot' are available for purchase later on at a higher cost whereas someone ordering a basic Mach-E today will not ever have the option to get enhanced driving features.

It’s amazing how long it has taken car companies to copy the signature features of the Tesla

It's been covered a bit on HN but Tesla rather famously uses displays that are not suited for automotive use. I imagine part of the lag time is that Ford actually went with a display that's designed for the kind of heat cycles a center console display will experience.

I would pay extra not to have any updates or touchscreens.

Updates have to be opted into.

This is great news. If we are going to save the climate, it is absolutely essential that people move to ev's. The problem so far has been that the legacy car companies have not been producing ev's in a big way, much less working hard at selling them. And because of that, the public thinks that ev's are not good enough to buy.

Having one of the main American car companies producing and selling an ev will do a lot to help educate the public and help get the ev revolution off the ground.

If you're going to use the Mustang brand, start the lineup with a $100K no holds barred sports roadster. Retro styled, if possible. Sure, you won't sell many, but you will establish yourself as not a joke in this space at least. Then go aggressively after the lower end of the market using the lower end "generic Ford" brand. Tesla did the right thing with their go to market strategy IMO. Ford could play a better version of it, because they have multiple entrenched brands. This is just baffling. 6 second 0-60 EV is like a fucking Soviet Lada when compared to other EVs, numbers like this should not be associated with the Mustang brand, especially at the price point they plan to sell this at.

They built this for SEMA. I don't doubt that they could sell a small production run of these for 100-200k range

https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2019...

The interiors resemblance to Tesla is amazing (big layout oriented center screen). I wonder why the exterior has such a long hood when it is not needed to cover up an internal ICE engine.

A long hood is arguably one of the marks of a mustang, though I don't know if that played a role in their design process.

It certainly adds more crumple zone and frunk capacity though.

Yes, in the presentation they specifically mentioned that the hood was lengthened when the Mustang branding was decided on.

internal internal combustion engine engine

It has been a long time since I've had feelings this difficult to sort out.

Can't wait for ATP to cover this in their aftershow.

Ford's big chance to 'get it right' and join Tesla at the top of the aspirational ranks.

It better be reliable.

Now this looks awesome coming from a stodgy US car maker .. some serious competition for Tesla.

That giant screen... I'd love that.

Ford has started making Teslas.

WTF. Main feature of my mustang is all the analog controls and it not having a media system to hack into.

Not in recent years at all.

Only 9 years after the Model S and not as good.

Still, happy to see big players invest more in electric.

How can you possibly know? It's not out yet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com