So I Spent 2 Weeks with a Mach-E...

[9secondko]

The Mach e is a fine electric suv. Nobody says otherwise.
it’s just not a Mustang.

Sponsored

 

[Zig]

I used it about 3x as much to be honest. It was too easy not to. I think if I had used it as much as I daily drive my GT it probably would have lasted at least three weeks.

No sure but i think i comprehend. You initially indicated you drove it for two weeks and charged it when it got to 20% (just under quarter tank/charge remaining). mach-e approx range 310. 310 minus 62 is 248. Right around the city range for the ice gt. 15 (city) mpgx16 (gallon tank).

 

[Zengineer]

The Mach e is a fine electric suv. Nobody says otherwise.
it’s just not a Mustang.

The RWD , IC Engine Mustang is very likely going away at some point. So if that is the only thing you will accept as a Mustang, then the brand will disappear completely in a few years. Is that what you think Ford should do?
Whatever comes after S650 will have more in common with the Mach E than the S650.

 

[Zig]

The RWD , IC Engine Mustang is very likely going away at some point. So if that is the only thing you will accept as a Mustang, then the brand will disappear completely in a few years. Is that what you think Ford should do?
Whatever comes after S650 will have more in common with the Mach E than the S650.

That would be a pretty dramatic change. Especially considering the ice mustang already is battery restricted. Powerplant and shape change or just powerplant revision? Increased battery capacity and reduced combustion capability or combustion eliminated (which by the way can be clean) and no more power on-demand?

 

[Mustang406]

ive said it before and ill say it again, the only thing wrong with the Mach-e is the fact they called it a Mustang

The Mach-e being a "Mustang" allows Ford to continue V8 models with the EPA rules since they have a full EV version. GM is doing the same with Corvette.

 

[9secondko]

The RWD , IC Engine Mustang is very likely going away at some point. So if that is the only thing you will accept as a Mustang, then the brand will disappear completely in a few years. Is that what you think Ford should do?
Whatever comes after S650 will have more in common with the Mach E than the S650.

As I’ve posted before, it doesn’t matter what the engine is. I’ve also advocated for AWD, so calm down, de-stress, and return to earth.

the Mustang is a sports caresque “pony car” that goes fast, handles well, is highly customizable, and looks great.

What it is not: a truck, motorcycle, suv, RV, van, quad runner, skate board, etc.

pretty simple math.

It’s a sports car/pony car. Whether it’s ICE, EV, hybrid, hydrogen, nuclear, whatever, it’s still the sports car formula

also as I’ve posted before, whatever comes after s650 should have ZERO to do with Mach e or s650.

Mach e was a regular grocery getter ev suv until hacker decided to slap a mustang sticker, taillights, and fenders on it toward the end of development. Not a great foundation to be underpinning any future mustang.

Likewise the 650 represents 20 years of ford doing as little as possible with the d2c platform (s197), tacking stuff on and renaming it multiple times. It’s old, heavy (would be far worse as an ev) and due for the pasture.

it’s time for Ford to invest in a new platform that provides the basis for the mustang to stretch its legs over the next 20. They’ve saved enough money on reusing the old one for multiple generations. Time for something modern with legs for the future.

 

[Zengineer]

As I’ve posted before, it doesn’t matter what the engine is. I’ve also advocated for AWD, so calm down, de-stress, and return to earth.

the Mustang is a sports caresque “pony car” that goes fast, handles well, is highly customizable, and looks great.

What it is not: a truck, motorcycle, suv, RV, van, quad runner, skate board, etc.

pretty simple math.

It’s a sports car/pony car. Whether it’s ICE, EV, hybrid, hydrogen, nuclear, whatever, it’s still the sports car formula

also as I’ve posted before, whatever comes after s650 should have ZERO to do with Mach e or s650.

Mach e was a regular grocery getter ev suv until hacker decided to slap a mustang sticker, taillights, and fenders on it toward the end of development. Not a great foundation to be underpinning any future mustang.

Likewise the 650 represents 20 years of ford doing as little as possible with the d2c platform (s197), tacking stuff on and renaming it multiple times. It’s old, heavy (would be far worse as an ev) and due for the pasture.

it’s time for Ford to invest in a new platform that provides the basis for the mustang to stretch its legs over the next 20. They’ve saved enough money on reusing the old one for multiple generations. Time for something modern with legs for the future.

WTF? Did you read what you quoted me on
?

 

[9secondko]

WTF? Did you read what you quoted me on
?

Of course. You must not have understood what you wrote.

You acted as if RWD and ice are what makes the mustang. I argued otherwise.

next, you argued that the next mustang would be more like the Mach e. I pointed out the flaw in that idea.

have a nice day.

 

[Zengineer]

Of course. You must not have understood what you wrote.

You acted as if RWD and ice are what makes the mustang. I argued otherwise.

next, you argued that the next mustang would be more like the Mach e. I pointed out the flaw in that idea.

have a nice day.

No, I said IF someone thinks that...

 

[9secondko]

No, I said IF someone thinks that...

no you didn’t. Go read what I quoted you on.
I didn’t alter any of your words. You made emphatic statements that RWD and ice are likely going away. You also stated that the next mustang will be more like the Mach e.

those are your ideas.

your statement “if that’s the only thing you’ll accept as a mustang…” indicating it will disappear as a result, then followEd question “is that what you want ford to do? Is put forth in a rhetorical way as to state your belief that I’m somehow on the ice only, RWD only position.

I corrected your misconception for you and reiterated the position I’ve been putting forth for a while already. We must not have “met” before, so I explained my position further.

the whole idea of someone recognizing the Mach e is a “Mustang” in boardroom contrived name only versus true to the actual nature of the car being somehow a Luddite stuck on old tech is a failed attempt at a straw man argument. Heck, I’m not even a manual fan. Performance auto or DCT all the way (though I do believe a manual should always be an option).

That was your position. You took my Mach e is a fine suv but it’s not a mustang” statement and presupposes lame talking points that had no basis in reality.

so I gave you a dose of reality. That really was the end of it.

your question of whether I read what you wrote when I answered specifically according to your postulation could only be answered with “are you even aware what you wrote?”

it’s possible that what you had in your head was different than what you typed out. But one can only go by your communications, not your thoughts (if indeed they are not equal).

———

to recap. I stated the Mach e isn’t a mustang. That’s it.

You followed up with fake, made up reasons out of thin air as to why I was against it as such, then doubled down with questions about me wanting the mustang to die as a result of ideas that were not even mine. your words. Not mine.

then when I responded giving my actual reasoning and ignoring your disingenuous projections, you seem to have confused yourself into thinking I needed to follow this false narrative and tried to hide it by pretending I was the confused one. Again, that’s if you truly didn’t know what you wrote and possibly didn’t word it right. Giving the benefit of the doubt. But your statement and double-down follow up, combined with the conclusion that the next mustang will be more like the Mach e doesn’t support that. It’s rather emphatic.

Your defense that it was just an “if” doesn’t hold water because if that were the case, I proved your “if” wrong in my first reply. That really should have been the end of it - if your “if” was the crux. But it’s not. Let’s lose the pretense. You presupposes something that was way off. It’s ok to admit that and move on. We’ve all done it.

 

[Zengineer]

no you didn’t. Go read what I quoted you on.
I didn’t alter any of your words. You made emphatic statements that RWD and ice are likely going away. You also stated that the next mustang will be more like the Mach e.

those are your ideas.

your statement “if that’s the only thing you’ll accept as a mustang…” indicating it will disappear as a result, then followEd question “is that what you want ford to do? Is put forth in a rhetorical way as to state your belief that I’m somehow on the ice only, RWD only position.

I corrected your misconception for you and reiterated the position I’ve been putting forth for a while already. We must not have “met” before, so I explained my position further.

the whole idea of someone recognizing the Mach e is a “Mustang” in boardroom contrived name only versus true to the actual nature of the car being somehow a Luddite stuck on old tech is a failed attempt at a straw man argument. Heck, I’m not even a manual fan. Performance auto or DCT all the way (though I do believe a manual should always be an option).

That was your position. You took my Mach e is a fine suv but it’s not a mustang” statement and presupposes lame talking points that had no basis in reality.

so I gave you a dose of reality. That really was the end of it.

your question of whether I read what you wrote when I answered specifically according to your postulation could only be answered with “are you even aware what you wrote?”

it’s possible that what you had in your head was different than what you typed out. But one can only go by your communications, not your thoughts (if indeed they are not equal).

———

to recap. I stated the Mach e isn’t a mustang. That’s it.

You followed up with fake, made up reasons out of thin air as to why I was against it as such, then doubled down with questions about me wanting the mustang to die as a result of ideas that were not even mine. your words. Not mine.

then when I responded giving my actual reasoning and ignoring your disingenuous projections, you seem to have confused yourself into thinking I needed to follow this false narrative and tried to hide it by pretending I was the confused one. Again, that’s if you truly didn’t know what you wrote and possibly didn’t word it right. Giving the benefit of the doubt. But your statement and double-down follow up, combined with the conclusion that the next mustang will be more like the Mach e doesn’t support that. It’s rather emphatic.

Your defense that it was just an “if” doesn’t hold water because if that were the case, I proved your “if” wrong in my first reply. That really should have been the end of it - if your “if” was the crux. But it’s not. Let’s lose the pretense. You presupposes something that was way off. It’s ok to admit that and move on. We’ve all done it.

Yes, you know more about what I think and what I was saying than I do. Got it.

 

[BoostRabbitGT]

...meanwhile I'm here wondering "Is there really a Mach-E coupe coming in 2026?" (from earlier in this discussion)

 

[9secondko]

Yes, you know more about what I think and what I was saying than I do. Got it.

It’s all there in your post. Good luck with the playing dumb act.

 

[9secondko]

...meanwhile I'm here wondering "Is there really a Mach-E coupe coming in 2026?" (from earlier in this discussion)

the Mach e had a decent start, then sales dropped off a rather steep cliff. Not sure they want to to put more eggs in that basket. Likely the same “Mustang” marketing that gave it an initial boost is what caused the dropping as well. Not to mention confusing the market and hurting the actual mustang as well - sales have not been good since launch - as predicted.

beyond that, the coupe already exists. It’s ICE now, but will likely switch to electric/hybrid soon enough. Won’t be Mach e, but rather the actual Mustang, yet will have at least a partial Ev drivetrain.

 

[Q6543]

This thread made me start looking at new/used Es for sale… you can get the GT used for 30-35K (with 65k msrp)

maybe a sick ass around the town daily

Sponsored