Ford Mustang Mach-E

Originally Posted by Aero540T
Only 80,000 people buy a Mustang per year, including a heavy number of rental sales. There's just not that many people out there saying, "I'd love to have a Mustang, if only it had more interior room."


I think there's lots of people out there that want a Mustang but can't/won't because of the lack of interior space. I know it was a factor for me (actually my wife) for 18 years. No usable back seat and that killed it for us. Now that kids are out of the way and I have other vehicles to drive it was back in the picture. I know of a few others that love it but can't/won't because of the back seat. I'm sure that is fueling many sales of the inferior Charger/Challenger.

I'm a diehard Mustang guy and it's growing on me. On the upside if it has the performance and handling it will be a good thing. Everyone remembers the fast Mustangs but since 64.5 the I6/V6/I4 were there and until the EB 2.3 were not particularly fast or good handling. We had the Mustang II that didn't really look like the original and despite the hate, sold about 200k a year. The Fox bodies looked NOTHING like a Mustang and sold very well and are a great value. Both the Mustang II and Fox bodies had hatchbacks. It wasn't till the 94 that we got back to somewhat of a "Mustang" shape.

They are not discontinuing the coupe with the I4 and V8 for those of us who would prefer them.

It will be interesting to see how well it sells and what it does to sales of the coupes.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Aero540T
Originally Posted by Burt
Originally Posted by Aero540T
I love it. Tired of the people complaining about the Mustang name. It's got serious performance so why not. Sure the front end isn't the best but it looks good. A lot of people would love the performance and convenience of a fast SUV.
At the end of the day it's another option for consumers. If you don't like it, cool, don't buy it!


At the end of the day, it's not about whether you or I buy it, but whether hundreds of thousands of consumers look at it as more than an option. I'm just making a projection that they are going to confuse people and sell fewer cars than they otherwise would.

There are examples of good vehicles that failed to sell (335d, honda cross-tour) because people scratched their heads and said "what is it?"


Sorry but I don't understand what's to be confused about. It's not a regular mustang. You're not going to accidentally buy this vehicle. The people that buy this are going to know what they're buying. EVs are getting more and more popular so it'll either succeed or it won't. I don't understand the hate


Agree with everything you say here. And personally, I see nothing wrong with the name.
 
They're burning their bridge to build a small electric sports / muscle car that would rightfully be named the electric Mustang. So if you've been hoping that Ford will someday make one of those, they're not. This is what you get.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by tenderloin
If they hit their performance goals and the build quality is good they have a winner. GT model front end looks the best IMO but overall I like it. Ford still bulids the Mustang in many models including the GT350 and GT500. You can have it either way. ecoBoost,Screaming Voodo to electric. Good for Ford


+1
 
Originally Posted by dareo
Originally Posted by earlyre
Looks way too similar to the Jag I-Pace to be a coincidence....
Even though Ford and Jaguar/Land Rover parted ways LOOONG ago...


Pretty much how EVs will all look due to aerodynamics. Welcome to automotive boredom from here on out.



Given Fords partnership with VW to aid in Electric Technology I would bet this car is more similar to the Audi E-Tron than the I-Pace. In fact the battery capacity is very close.

I'm betting the cars share architecture
 
The ironic part about complaining it's a "Mustang" is it'll accelerate harder than any V8 Mustang ever made, outside the new 2020 GT500 ...‚

And if it's even a tad slippery out, it'll destroy that too.
 
Reminds me of the uproar when Porsche entered the SUV market long ago with the (gasp!) Cayenne.

At least they didn't call it a "neun eins-eins!"

Ill call big flop right out the gate.
 
Originally Posted by itguy08
I think there's lots of people out there that want a Mustang but can't/won't because of the lack of interior space.


But, uh, then it's not a Mustang.

That attitude is what led to abominations like the Ferrari 308 GT4.

This is probably going to be a pretty decent car. It's just not a Mustang, and I can only wonder why anyone at Ford thought it was a good idea to culturally appropriate the brand.
 
If Ford says it's a Mustang, it's a Mustang.

Ford guys like to act like there aren't some absolute turds in the Mustang lineup.
lol.gif
lol.gif
lol.gif


This is the first Mustang I'm interested in. I know I'm not the only one.
 
It's not a Mustang becasue it is not a 2 door sports coupe.
It is a Mustang because Ford's marketing named it Mustang Mach-E.

Regardless, it is an important car. I hope it's a good one and wish the Blue Oval team good luck.
 
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
It's not a Mustang becasue it is not a 2 door sports coupe.
It is a Mustang because Ford's marketing named it Mustang Mach-E.

Oh come on, this is more Mustang than any '71-'73, vinyl top, 3 speed auto, gold-painted, 351 2V ever was.

And it's more Mustang than EVERY Mustang II.
 
I'll reserve judgment until I drive one. But I tend to really like EV's that perform well. What I don't like are typical EV prices.
 
Originally Posted by rooflessVW
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
It's not a Mustang becasue it is not a 2 door sports coupe.
It is a Mustang because Ford's marketing named it Mustang Mach-E.

Oh come on, this is more Mustang than any '71-'73, vinyl top, 3 speed auto, gold-painted, 351 2V ever was.

And it's more Mustang than EVERY Mustang II.

Guilty as charged...
'67 1/2 Mustang Fastback. Now there's a Mustang!
 
Some nutty car magazine or youtube looney is going to race a Mustang Mach E against a Mustang Bullit.
Thing is, in most numbers, they would compare closely. So does that make it a "Mustang"?
 
Ford was smart to name it "Mustang". People don't say they want and Electric car they say I want a "Tesla". Tesla sells EVs because they made EVs cool and to perform well.

Ford named it Mustang, because the "Mustang" is an Icon and everyone knows about the Mustang. If they said here's a EV called some random name it would get swept under the rug like every other none "Tesla" EV (volt, Kona, leaf, etc..). Now people will say look, there's the new Electric Mustang...Brilliant marketing plan on Fords part to leverage the names heritage and History.

IMO as a guy who isn't a Ford fanboy, this will be the first real competition for Tesla. It has good range, good specs on paper, looks pretty good, and is priced well. Ford is coming out of the gate swinging. This isn't a 80-100k car like the taycan or I-Pace. This in Ford fashion will be a car for the masses. Your IT guy or the Manager at your corner CVS will be able to afford to buy one of these.

This car will do well for Ford and will be Tesla's first real competition IMO. Kudos to Ford for actually competing in the space with an honest EV.
 
Originally Posted by MCompact
What a miserable way to destroy an iconic nameplate.


Mercedes, Honda, Tesla and BMW have all done cars in this shape, so Ford is only late to the party.
If Ford was going to do something like this, of course they'd use their only remaining model name with any cache at all.
Anyway, Mustangs as delivered were always mostly what used to be called secretary's GTs.
Most of these cars were not in any way performance machines in anything other than appearance.
 
I asked the Ford dealer, "Does it come in a carmel color"
"Nope; just the standard colors."

"Darn! I wanted a carmel Mach-E Auto".


I know, it's pretty bad, but catchy.
 
Back
Top