https://jalopnik.com/2020-ford-mustang-mach-e-heres-the-car-price-and-0-60-1839875945
Looks alright, kinda like a Jag I-Pace, hate the big tablet interior, pretty expensive in the $60K range, could have named it something better (Galaxy, Futura, Falcon, etc).
I hate that they are exploiting the Mustang (and Mach) name for an electric SUV.
It might be an OK car, otherwise. I'm glad Ford finally are trying seriously to compete in the EV market
:facepalm:
That tablet screen is a non-starter but otherwise it looks like a good idea. Nothing else to fault besides the name.
The price is OK. A similarly equipped Edge is gonna cost less obviously but will cost 5 figures more to fuel up over ~5 years. Add incentives and its reasonably priced.
Plus they beat Tesla to the punch for a mainstream EV crossover.
Don't really see this beating Tesla... Mustang faithful will hate it and no real benefit over a Tesla. Plus the lack of a charging infrastructure limits it to a 2nd car
Obviously Tesla fanboyism is undefeatable; I was just saying they beat them to market with a non-penalty box EV crossover.
The Mustang name is stupid and will probably hurt sales. But outside of that it looks pretty good.
Pretty much agree with everyone here, it looks good but the name is dumb.
Remember way back when in the '80s when Ford proposed replacing the Mustang with a FWD V6 derived from a Mazda?
The "Hey, Asshole" letter writing campaign was glorious, pre-internet viral criticism. And for what? So we could get an electric SUV instead?
Ford has a long long history of shortchanging their longest selling nameplate, and I've never figured out why.
It's pretty ugly. But 300 miles, mid 5s 0-60, for $50k - $7500 credit = $43,500? Solid deal
Rear end is hideous with those Mustang tail lights. I don't know what executive had this idea, but someone should have spoken up and told him he's retarded. Apparently they just have yes-men
It looks like a mustang got stung by a bumble bee.
I hate that body style. Someone at Ford needs their ass kicked.
Quote from: r0tor on November 15, 2019, 05:50:16 AM
Don't really see this beating Tesla... Mustang faithful will hate it and no real benefit over a Tesla. Plus the lack of a charging infrastructure limits it to a 2nd car
There are 20 public EV charging stations in my city. 1 Tesla Supercharger and 19 "generic" (e.g. SAE J1772) stations, mostly owned by ChargePoint. There's more infrastructure, locally, to support owning this car, or any other EV not using proprietary charging connectors and infrastructure, than a Tesla.
Quote from: MX793 on November 15, 2019, 08:43:15 AM
There are 20 public EV charging stations in my city. 1 Tesla Supercharger and 19 "generic" (e.g. SAE J1772) stations, mostly owned by ChargePoint. There's more infrastructure, locally, to support owning this car, or any other EV not using proprietary charging connectors and infrastructure, than a Tesla.
Plus someone buying a $40K car outside of a dense urban area probably has a driveway/garage to charge it
Even with a charging network EVs are still short range commuter type vehicles to me.
Junk
Quote from: MX793 on November 15, 2019, 08:43:15 AM
There are 20 public EV charging stations in my city. 1 Tesla Supercharger and 19 "generic" (e.g. SAE J1772) stations, mostly owned by ChargePoint. There's more infrastructure, locally, to support owning this car, or any other EV not using proprietary charging connectors and infrastructure, than a Tesla.
Teslas can also use J1772 chargers. An adapter comes with the car.
Also, J1772 chargers are fine for opportunity charging (e.g. topping off while shopping), but not what you want for critical away-from-home charging. You really want DC fast charging like a Supercharger unless you're OK sitting there for 4 hours.
Electrify America is building out standards-based DC fast charging, so I expect this situation to get better over the next few years. But right now it's a lot harder to charge a non-Tesla EV than a Tesla.
Quote from: MX793 on November 15, 2019, 08:43:15 AM
There are 20 public EV charging stations in my city. 1 Tesla Supercharger and 19 "generic" (e.g. SAE J1772) stations, mostly owned by ChargePoint. There's more infrastructure, locally, to support owning this car, or any other EV not using proprietary charging connectors and infrastructure, than a Tesla.
I looked nearby and the charge point chargers are at Nissan car dealers (probably for Leafs) and are not fast charging like the Tesla superchargers.
Quote from: afty on November 15, 2019, 10:02:35 AM
Teslas can also use J1772 chargers. An adapter comes with the car.
Also, J1772 chargers are fine for opportunity charging (e.g. topping off while shopping), but not what you want for critical away-from-home charging. You really want DC fast charging like a Supercharger unless you're OK sitting there for 4 hours.
Electrify America is building out standards-based DC fast charging, so I expect this situation to get better over the next few years. But right now it's a lot harder to charge a non-Tesla EV than a Tesla.
Sure, fast chargers are a must if you're trying to road trip. I don't see any EV as viable for a long-range road tripper. There's insufficient infrastructure even for Tesla to support that right now, IMO. If I have to carefully plan my trip around the limited locations of fast charge stations, it's not viable.
Slow chargers are pointless unless they are at a shopping mall or hotel where you are staying for many many hours
Quote from: r0tor on November 15, 2019, 10:16:22 AM
Slow chargers are pointless unless they are at a shopping mall or hotel where you are staying for many many hours
Everyone can't have a driveway and fast chargers are expensive. If EVs are gonna take over the world slow chargers for overnight street/parking lot/deck parking are gonna be mandatory. Doesn't make sense to spend $10K at every parking spot for "fast" charging when a slow charger at 1/10th the price will do it
But even fast charging is still like 2-4x slower than pumping gas. I remember once I timed filling up my Kia... it did 17 gallons (or 350 miles) in like 2 minutes. Tesla brags about its Superchargers doing 1000 miles in an hour. So there will always be a gap
I don't understand how anyone buys an EV car without having a garage and a level 2 charger. Street parking and relying solely on superchargers is nuts.
Some people get free charging at work. But yea I couldn't do that either
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 15, 2019, 10:36:27 AM
Everyone can't have a driveway and fast chargers are expensive. If EVs are gonna take over the world slow chargers for overnight street/parking lot/deck parking are gonna be mandatory. Doesn't make sense to spend $10K at every parking spot for "fast" charging when a slow charger at 1/10th the price will do it
But even fast charging is still like 2-4x slower than pumping gas. I remember once I timed filling up my Kia... it did 17 gallons (or 350 miles) in like 2 minutes. Tesla brags about its Superchargers doing 1000 miles in an hour. So there will always be a gap
The Tesla brag puts the slow Charge Point chargers into perspective. One you can plug in and grab a bite to eat and not be horribly delayed. The other you would spend half a day to drive another hour or two.
So yea, roadside slow chargers are pointless
Quote from: r0tor on November 15, 2019, 12:21:21 PM
roadside slow chargers are pointless
Depends on the road. Interstate? Probably (though there are plenty of road side motels etc.)
Residential street? Definitely not.
Again if EVs are the future its fanboys are promising (no swipes at the very reasonable EV SPINners here) slow chargers are going to be key for mass adoption outside of single family homes with driveways.
I'm still grappling with who could have possibly thought it was a good idea to name any SUV/CUV a Mustang. As with most of the recent stupidity at Ford, I'll chalk this up to Hackett. He needs to be sent packing. It's pretty clear that he should have stuck with the office furniture business.
Hackett is a clown, we can agree on that.
Quote from: MX793 on November 16, 2019, 06:19:00 AM
I'm still grappling with who could have possibly thought it was a good idea to name any SUV/CUV a Mustang. As with most of the recent stupidity at Ford, I'll chalk this up to Hackett. He needs to be sent packing. It's pretty clear that he should have stuck with the office furniture business.
My money is on Americans thinking "it's a Mustang that sits up high and doesn't hurt my hips! SWEET!"
I think you guys are being to critical, we will have to wait and see if it eats pedestrians upon leaving Cars&Coffees to see if it deserves the Mustang name. At least the RWD one has the potential with all of that torque.
Quote from: Galaxy on November 17, 2019, 08:35:54 AM
I think you guys are being to critical, we will have to wait and see if it eats pedestrians upon leaving Cars&Coffees to see if it deserves the Mustang name. At least the RWD one has the potential with all of that torque.
It would take a person with an uncommon lack of self-awareness to take one of these to a Cars and Coffee.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 17, 2019, 09:20:28 AM
It would take a person with an uncommon lack of self-awareness to take one of these to a Cars and Coffee.
Perhaps, then, to an equivalent gathering of EV owners? As it stands today, there is no pedestrian-gobbling analog to the Mustang within the EV community. Then again, I don't think the EV crowd are the sort to impress their peers with smoky burnouts or other public demonstrations of speed and power.
Quote from: MX793 on November 17, 2019, 09:24:43 AM
Perhaps, then, to an equivalent gathering of EV owners? As it stands today, there is no pedestrian-gobbling analog to the Mustang within the EV community. Then again, I don't think the EV crowd are the sort to impress their peers with smoky burnouts or other public demonstrations of speed and power.
No, I found a few EV events, but it seems to mostly be about people agreeing with each other about how smart they are.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QLjRs336s90
Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 17, 2019, 09:20:28 AM
It would take a person with an uncommon lack of self-awareness to take one of these to a Cars and Coffee.
The Mustang crowd would beat him up?
Quote from: MX793 on November 17, 2019, 09:24:43 AM
Then again, I don't think the EV crowd are the sort to impress their peers with smoky burnouts or other public demonstrations of speed and power.
Quite a lot of Tesla owners seem to relish taking their cars to the drag strip.
Quote from: Galaxy on November 17, 2019, 09:52:47 AM
The Mustang crowd would beat him up?
Oh no.
Mockery perhaps.
Smacks of Mulally renaming the 500 to Taurus, with similar results (still no one will buy it).
The internet reaction to this car is a textbook example as to why I've been pulling back from online car commentary. It's all over the map, and it's hypercritical over the dumbest shit. And y'all wouldn't have bought the thing anyway.
The styling is fine; I actually think it's pretty well styled with good proportions, even if the rear lights are kinda meh.
The specs and pricing are right on the money. What would y'all have wanted Ford to do? I think it's a better effort at making an electric car than the already good, but clearly undersized for the USA Chevy Bolt.
I think complaining about crossovers or the use of the Mustang moniker is fuckin stupid.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 17, 2019, 12:09:47 PM
Smacks of Mulally renaming the 500 to Taurus, with similar results (still no one will buy it).
1. Didn't that work? I recall sales actually jumping when the car was restyled, got a better interior and engine, and a familiar name.
2. Either way, no one buys cars that size anymore so that's not even a fair comparison. The E-segment sedan is dead.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 17, 2019, 12:59:29 PM
The internet reaction to this car is a textbook example as to why I've been pulling back from online car commentary. It's all over the map, and it's hypercritical over the dumbest shit. And y'all wouldn't have bought the thing anyway.
The styling is fine; I actually think it's pretty well styled with good proportions, even if the rear lights are kinda meh.
The specs and pricing are right on the money. What would y'all have wanted Ford to do? I think it's a better effort at making an electric car than the already good, but clearly undersized for the USA Chevy Bolt.
I think complaining about crossovers or the use of the Mustang moniker is fuckin stupid.
1. Didn't that work? I recall sales actually jumping when the car was restyled, got a better interior and engine, and a familiar name.
2. Either way, no one buys cars that size anymore so that's not even a fair comparison. The E-segment sedan is dead.
IOW, only your opinion is the correct. Gotcha. Nothing new on the Internets ;).
No, the "Taurus" did not work. Mulally wanted to bring back the glory of the Taurus by slapping its name on a ho-hum no namer. In short, there was zero clue on product management, and endemic of the product issues that Mulally brought (by focusing on operations), which ultimately led to Ford's problems today - cancelling all its cars but the Mustang, the dead cat bounce of Ecoboost, way behind in EVs and no investment in AD (it will never work, but it's a bad PR move).
Quote from: GoCougs on November 17, 2019, 02:22:16 PM
IOW, only your opinion is the correct. Gotcha. Nothing new on the Internets ;).
No, the "Taurus" did not work. Mulally wanted to bring back the glory of the Taurus by slapping its name on a ho-hum no namer. In short, there was zero clue on product management, and endemic of the product issues that Mulally brought (by focusing on operations), which ultimately led to Ford's problems today - cancelling all its cars but the Mustang, the dead cat bounce of Ecoboost, way behind in EVs and no investment in AD (it will never work, but it's a bad PR move).
What does any of that have to do with this?
The Taurus' glory was long gone by the time they came out with the Taurus X; current Rustang is the best ever.
Taurus X was terrible pre-bailout era domestic crap; as far as EVs go this thing looks to be a cut above the competition.
And you are the absolute last person to cry about correct opinions. I'm guessing you will be playing peekaboo from behind the arbitrary morality tree in a few posts
Quote from: GoCougs on November 17, 2019, 02:22:16 PM
IOW, only your opinion is the correct. Gotcha. Nothing new on the Internets ;).
No, the "Taurus" did not work. Mulally wanted to bring back the glory of the Taurus by slapping its name on a ho-hum no namer. In short, there was zero clue on product management, and endemic of the product issues that Mulally brought (by focusing on operations), which ultimately led to Ford's problems today - cancelling all its cars but the Mustang, the dead cat bounce of Ecoboost, way behind in EVs and no investment in AD (it will never work, but it's a bad PR move).
Taurus outsold the 500 despite being the exact same vehicle with a rename. But by that time, it was the beginning of the end for large sedans and sales were flagging anyway. And years of stagnation had taken a lot of wind out of the Taurus brand anyway.
Last I checked, GM was cancelling pretty much their entire car line as well, save the Corvette. Camaro may not even be around beyond 2021. Dodge/Chrysler doesn't have much of a car line left either (the Challenger and the now very dated LX sedans) after cancelling all of their compact and midsize cars several years ago.
And no investment in AD? What do you call their acquisition of Argo AI back in 2017 (for a cool Billion)? Or the currently ongoing testing programs in Miami, Detroit, and DC?
I like that the screen has a physical dial on it like with Land Rovers, also the frunk is huge and like the Puma it comes with a drain, and can be hosed out. Curiously most people seem to say Mach-E like Marquis.
I think being stuck on the name is silly.
Pricing, styling, range, and size are all a home run.
Well, it's nice that they have a display where a gauge cluster would be, but this is shamelessly applying the Tesla/Chinese "tack an iPad on it" school of interior design. Ford can do better than that. :facepalm:
(https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/DSC0328-768x510.jpg)
I wish they had made the screen less tall, and maybe broken it up between the HVAC and the radio. That screen (and the model 3's) look so precocious perched on the dash.
I do appreciate the actual gauge cluster and real vents in this car, though.
Not sure about the door handles.
What's that dial near the center armrest? Looks like it's fixed function.. HVAC?
Quote from: Laconian on November 17, 2019, 11:10:53 PM
What's that dial near the center armrest? Looks like it's fixed function.. HVAC?
PRND.
The Mustang name and that stupid screen are my biggest gripes with this. But it's still several steps on the way to an EV that feels like a conventional car. The fact that Jalopnik's peanut gallery hates it means they're clearly doing something right
Looks way better in real life than the original pictures leaked. I kind of like the black out hatch trim to make it look sleeker.
Cool use of what looks like tweed fabric on the dash.
This is the first electric car I've been interested in to some degree. It's like a Tesla without the Tesla problems :lol:
Exterior looks ok, I guess.
But man, that interior just looks dull and uninspired. :confused:
Is this the future of personal transportation or just a feel good purchase for high income millennials?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 18, 2019, 05:34:28 AM
The Mustang name and that stupid screen are my biggest gripes with this. But it's still several steps on the way to an EV that feels like a conventional car. The fact that Jalopnik's peanut gallery hates it means they're clearly doing something right
Quote from: MrH on November 18, 2019, 07:39:49 AM
Looks way better in real life than the original pictures leaked. I kind of like the black out hatch trim to make it look sleeker.
Cool use of what looks like tweed fabric on the dash.
This is the first electric car I've been interested in to some degree. It's like a Tesla without the Tesla problems :lol:
+1 to both.
I won't poo-poo it too much, since the bones look good. Might be a slight improvement compared to my Bolt. Looks like 0-60 time and overall range are similar to the Bolt at the base level, but both can be improved depending on trim level & options.
Quote from: shp4man on November 18, 2019, 08:36:27 AM
Is this the future of personal transportation or just a feel good purchase for high income millennials?
(https://media.giphy.com/media/fH985LNdqFZXOFHygK/giphy.gif)
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 18, 2019, 05:34:28 AM
The Mustang name and that stupid screen are my biggest gripes with this. But it's still several steps on the way to an EV that feels like a conventional car. The fact that Jalopnik's peanut gallery hates it means they're clearly doing something right
Same. Never been a fan of crossover body styles as the rear end looks just plain ugly. Mach E, however, does a slightly better job of it...
(https://i.postimg.cc/4yFZ73LP/6ea9eba2-a4a1-4f7c-a826-95cb1cd5a4c0-2019-1029-mo-Ford-Electric62.jpg)
...as opposed to the Model Y, which is the worst looking, imo.
(https://i.postimg.cc/wT8YrSK7/tesla-model-y-like-tesla-2.jpg)
After my initial disparagement of the Mach E, I would say that I'm glad Ford is making it, but I wish they hadn't called it a Mustang.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on November 18, 2019, 08:38:21 AM
+1 to both.
I won't poo-poo it too much, since the bones look good. Might be a slight improvement compared to my Bolt. Looks like 0-60 time and overall range are similar to the Bolt at the base level, but both can be improved depending on trim level & options.
It's also a bigger, faster car than the Bolt.
I like the Bolt, but I feel like it's the wrong car for most markets. It feels like it was originally designed for Opel/Vauxhall then retooled at the last minute when GM internal realized they could dump those brands.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 18, 2019, 08:57:14 AM
It's also a bigger, faster car than the Bolt.
I like the Bolt, but I feel like it's the wrong car for most markets. It feels like it was originally designed for Opel/Vauxhall then retooled at the last minute when GM internal realized they could dump those brands.
Only because Americans think they need way larger cars than they actually do.
Quote from: MX793 on November 17, 2019, 02:52:59 PM
Taurus outsold the 500 despite being the exact same vehicle with a rename. But by that time, it was the beginning of the end for large sedans and sales were flagging anyway. And years of stagnation had taken a lot of wind out of the Taurus brand anyway.
Last I checked, GM was cancelling pretty much their entire car line as well, save the Corvette. Camaro may not even be around beyond 2021. Dodge/Chrysler doesn't have much of a car line left either (the Challenger and the now very dated LX sedans) after cancelling all of their compact and midsize cars several years ago.
And no investment in AD? What do you call their acquisition of Argo AI back in 2017 (for a cool Billion)? Or the currently ongoing testing programs in Miami, Detroit, and DC?
It's not the result, bit the intent.
GM cut models - but plenty remain - Corvette, Camaro, Bolt, Regal, CT4 and CT5, etc.
Ford didn't buy Argo - merely invested. It's a start, but Argo is new to the scene (2016), also taking money from others (VW). The three major players in AD - Google/Waymo, Tesla and GM/Cruise - have been at it for much longer. Ford/Argo is not seen as a major AD player.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on November 18, 2019, 09:27:42 AM
Only because Americans think they need way larger cars than they actually do.
I think it's more that Americans want bigger cars than we need. Which is fine. A purchase as expensive and high utility as a car can't be 100% left brained.
I prefer this...
(https://i.postimg.cc/qMXKLynt/BBWUBoR.jpg)
...to the blank grille.
Oh no doubt about it, that's MUCH better!
I'm still trying to find any remote resemblance to an actual Mustang beyond having 4 wheels and a roof
Quote from: r0tor on November 18, 2019, 01:08:29 PM
I'm still trying to find any remote resemblance to an actual Mustang beyond having 4 wheels and a roof
The styling is pretty clearly inspired by the current Mustang (IMHO).
Quote from: SJ_GTI on November 18, 2019, 01:09:50 PM
The styling is pretty clearly inspired by the current Mustang (IMHO).
And they do have the little pony as the badge.
This is a product planning and PR disaster.
A Mustang'd Fiesta would have been a better idea. Fiesta EXP!
Hey, Dodge made Ram into its own marque *r0tor shrug*
Ford Mustang Mach-E
Ford Mustang F150
Ford Mustang Bronco
Ford Mustang Explorer
Marketing people have been off their rockers for a while. They love creating sub-brands. People have been saying Chevy should do it with the Corvette. Toyota already did it with the Prius. Ram did it.
It's all stupid and just creates confusion.
I like sub brands :cry:
I can imagine the Ford marketing guys sitting around coming up with ideas.
One guy says, I know, let's build an electric station wagon! It'll be great.... we'll call it a Mustang!
Another guy says ....uhhh, but the Mustang isn't really...
Shut up! We'll tack a Mustang looking grill and tailights on it!
I'm a marketing genius !!!!!!!!!!
:lol:
Personally, I'm confused as to whether this is even a Ford product. Without a blue oval on the front, I just don't know to emotionally resonate with this experience. Can't Ford pick a name that begins with an F, to better relate this product to my consumer values?
Quote from: r0tor on November 18, 2019, 01:08:29 PM
I'm still trying to find any remote resemblance to an actual Mustang beyond having 4 wheels and a roof
Tail lights; and a similar curve along the hoodline.
I think it's weird about the name, but once again, no one else aside from Tesla is making a car like this at this price point. The other cars are either way smaller or more expensive by a lot.
At 43k for the base Mach E, that's a pretty good deal for the amount of car and range you're getting. It's directly comparable to the Model 3 and Model Y, but it looks better than those cars and likely won't feel homemade with bad ergonomics.
The real story is that the Bolt CUV is dead on arrival.
Quote from: Laconian on November 18, 2019, 11:23:23 AM
Oh no doubt about it, that's MUCH better!
He means the car. Don't make me get the hose.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 18, 2019, 03:27:24 PM
The real story is that the Bolt CUV is dead on arrival.
All EVs are effectively DOA, and this "Mustang" is the pinnacle of it.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 18, 2019, 03:47:04 PM
All EVs are effectively DOA, and this "Mustang" is the pinnacle of it.
Just because you keep repeating the same thing doesn't make it true.
Quote from: Laconian on November 18, 2019, 02:20:43 PM
Personally, I'm confused as to whether this is even a Ford product. Without a blue oval on the front, I just don't know to emotionally resonate with this experience. Can't Ford pick a name that begins with an F, to better relate this product to my consumer values?
Freestar
Fusion
F150
Fiesta
Festiva
Focus
.
.
.
.
Frenulum!
Quote from: SJ_GTI on November 18, 2019, 01:09:50 PM
The styling is pretty clearly inspired by the current Mustang (IMHO).
Just not seeing it... Looks more inspired by an old infiniti FX
Quote from: Laconian on November 18, 2019, 02:20:43 PM
Personally, I'm confused as to whether this is even a Ford product. Without a blue oval on the front, I just don't know to emotionally resonate with this experience. Can't Ford pick a name that begins with an F, to better relate this product to my consumer values?
Has Mustang ever had a blue oval? Don't think so.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on November 18, 2019, 04:57:01 PM
Freestar
Fusion
F150
Fiesta
Festiva
Focus
.
.
.
.
Frenulum!
Festivus
Feces
Frankfurter
Fart Cannon
Free Mason
Fornicater
Quote from: FoMoJo on November 18, 2019, 05:46:24 PM
Has Mustang ever had a blue oval? Don't think so.
Fox bodies did.
Quote from: r0tor on November 18, 2019, 05:49:22 PM
Festivus
Feces
Frankfurter
Fart Cannon
Free Mason
Fornicater
Funeral
Mach Foose
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcZP4Y7Pk9A
Fabulous.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 18, 2019, 04:04:35 PM
Just because you keep repeating the same thing doesn't make it true.
Until it is true, it is false.
Just as with hybrids, some 20 years on, and pretty much nobody buys a hybrid that isn't a Toyota/Prius. And those that do, do so unknowingly or without choice (as in the new Audi A6, in which all trims are mild hybrid (to zero IRL benefit)).
EVs are simply too expensive - most consumers can afford them and no automaker can turn a profit making them. Those that legit want to be environmental will buy a used Civic or something, with the added benefit of saving $20k+.
Fibonacci
I eagerly await the Shelby GT100kWh edition.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 18, 2019, 06:59:47 PM
Until it is true, it is false.
Just as with hybrids, some 20 years on, and pretty much nobody buys a hybrid that isn't a Toyota/Prius. And those that do, do so unknowingly or without choice (as in the new Audi A6, in which all trims are mild hybrid (to zero IRL benefit)).
EVs are simply too expensive - most consumers can afford them and no automaker can turn a profit making them. Those that legit want to be environmental will buy a used Civic or something, with the added benefit of saving $20k+.
EVs are now a reality for the foreseeable future. The infrastructure is now underway. For a time, it was fuel cell vehicles or EVs, EVs have proven a better choice. As stated, at the time, hybrids were merely a stop-gap measure, as are small displacement turbo engines and the ridiculous 'displacement on demand' nonsense.
Nothing is false, it merely awaits the means of achievement. Electricity has unlimited supply and methods of capture and containment will continually improve. The very nature of its existence promises this.
Quote from: FoMoJo on November 18, 2019, 08:18:33 PM
EVs are now a reality for the foreseeable future. The infrastructure is now underway. For a time, it was fuel cell vehicles or EVs, EVs have proven a better choice. As stated, at the time, hybrids were merely a stop-gap measure, as are small displacement turbo engines and the ridiculous 'displacement on demand' nonsense.
Nothing is false, it merely awaits the means of achievement. Electricity has unlimited supply and methods of capture and containment will continually improve. The very nature of its existence promises this.
Unlimited supply? Tell that to the folks in California who deal with rolling blackouts and brownouts on a regular basis. Not to mention that a huge amount of electricity used today is generated via burning fossil fuels, which are not unlimited.
Quote from: FoMoJo on November 18, 2019, 08:18:33 PM
EVs are now a reality for the foreseeable future. The infrastructure is now underway. For a time, it was fuel cell vehicles or EVs, EVs have proven a better choice. As stated, at the time, hybrids were merely a stop-gap measure, as are small displacement turbo engines and the ridiculous 'displacement on demand' nonsense.
Nothing is false, it merely awaits the means of achievement. Electricity has unlimited supply and methods of capture and containment will continually improve. The very nature of its existence promises this.
How are EVs a reality? Few can afford them, no automaker can turn a profit making them, sales are flat, there is an economic downturn coming, and as California is proving, electricity is gonna have to get a WHOLE lot more expensive.
Few can afford them? The average price of new cars is $35k, same ballpark as a Bolt, Model 3, Kia/Hyundai EVs, and this Ford.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on November 18, 2019, 11:11:11 PM
Few can afford them? The average price of new cars is $35k, same ballpark as a Bolt, Model 3, Kia/Hyundai EVs, and this Ford.
And think of what people are spending on their big ol' trucks these days... huge purchase price, mega interest over god knows how many months, and then the cost of keeping the gas tank full!~
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.autoblog.com/amp/2018/12/04/ford-mach-e-trademark-ev-crossover/
It looks like originally Ford was going to call this the Mach E or Mach-E but later on decided to add "Mustang" to it. It's styling clearly has used the Mustang for inspiration with the tail lights looking similar and the long hood.
So it's really a question of whether Ford will generate more interest and therefore sales in this Tesla Model Y competitor with the name Mach-E or the name Mustang Mach-E. Since the great majority of potential customers don't read or talk about cars as a hobby, having a name that's recognizable and associated with a cool car is perhaps worth it to bastardize a bit that said name since it does have some very similar styling cues. Other than the name, this car does seem really good.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 18, 2019, 06:59:47 PM
EVs are simply too expensive - most consumers can afford them and no automaker can turn a profit making them.
This is true today but things change. I do think govts and automakers are being way too aggressive in forcing EV adaptation. I also think the dream of a 100% EV world is ridiculous. But it's an idea worth continuing to develop and invest in.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 18, 2019, 06:59:47 PMThose that legit want to be environmental will buy a used Civic or something, with the added benefit of saving $20k+.
Every car has a finite life so at some point every car will need to be replaced. Over time it will be better to replace dead ICEVs with new EVs
Quote from: CaminoRacer on November 18, 2019, 11:11:11 PM
Few can afford them? The average price of new cars is $35k, same ballpark as a Bolt, Model 3, Kia/Hyundai EVs, and this Ford.
Quote from: Laconian on November 18, 2019, 11:32:30 PM
And think of what people are spending on their big ol' trucks these days... huge purchase price, mega interest over god knows how many months, and then the cost of keeping the gas tank full!~
Few can (legit) afford a $35k+ car and even fewer can afford a $35k+ car that carries a a ~75% premium for less utility (vs. a base model $20k Corolla or the like).
If people legit bought what they could afford and need - base model Corolla, Tacoma, Accord, etc. - US retail fuel consumption would be but a fraction of what it is, and there'd not be near this anxiety about EVs needing to save the world (wash/rinse/repeat for anything from home size to travel to fast food).
Buck up and afford your life, and most everything else will sort itself out.
The Big 3 would die immediately if few people in the USA could afford a $35k vehicle
Quote from: MX793 on November 18, 2019, 08:31:45 PM
Unlimited supply? Tell that to the folks in California who deal with rolling blackouts and brownouts on a regular basis. Not to mention that a huge amount of electricity used today is generated via burning fossil fuels, which are not unlimited.
Will we ever run out of electricity as long as we have the means to capture it? My point is that ongoing research and development in capturing and storage of electrical energy is constantly improving.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 18, 2019, 10:46:59 PM
How are EVs a reality? Few can afford them, no automaker can turn a profit making them, sales are flat, there is an economic downturn coming, and as California is proving, electricity is gonna have to get a WHOLE lot more expensive.
Few aspects of technology are static. As an emphasis is now being directed towards the capture and storage of electricity, there will be rapid improvement in this specific technology. This is key to EVs.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 19, 2019, 09:18:56 AM
Few can (legit) afford a $35k+ car and even fewer can afford a $35k+ car that carries a a ~75% premium for less utility (vs. a base model $20k Corolla or the like).
If people legit bought what they could afford and need - base model Corolla, Tacoma, Accord, etc. - US retail fuel consumption would be but a fraction of what it is, and there'd not be near this anxiety about EVs needing to save the world (wash/rinse/repeat for anything from home size to travel to fast food).
Buck up and afford your life, and most everything else will sort itself out.
GM/Ford/Tesla etc don't operate in Cougs-land, though, so your macro-financial fantasies don't usually sway their decisions.
Quote from: r0tor on November 19, 2019, 10:12:39 AM
The Big 3 would die immediately if few people in the USA could afford a $35k vehicle
Well, there's afford, and there's afford.
Quote from: r0tor on November 19, 2019, 10:12:39 AM
The Big 3 would die immediately if few people in the USA could afford a $35k vehicle
Correct - between unions, debatable profitability, the consumer debt needed to buy the product, and being but a half an economic downturn from a bailout - yeah, the Big 3 died some time ago.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 19, 2019, 11:17:13 AM
Correct - between unions, debatable profitability, the consumer debt needed to buy the product, and being but a half an economic downturn from a bailout - yeah, the Big 3 died some time ago.
Fortunately, Ford has never needed a bailout as have the other 2.
Quote from: FoMoJo on November 19, 2019, 12:04:22 PM
Fortunately, Ford has never needed a bailout as have the other 2.
Ford absolutely has. Ford did not take TARP loans and related shenanigans but Ford did take government loans at that time (and is still working on paying them back).
Quote from: GoCougs on November 19, 2019, 01:14:09 PM
Ford absolutely has. Ford did not take TARP loans and related shenanigans but Ford did take government loans at that time (and is still working on paying them back).
Not a bailout.
It's weird how people are harping on the name when
1. It's not like the Mustang already doesn't feel like a large house to drive. A good handling house, but a house nonethelesss
2. People act as if it's "diluting a brand name" when mustangs are languishing on lots and they're incentivized to all fuck to get them on the lot. People aren't buying coupes.
I've changed my initial reaction. After seeing the commercial...the youtube I posted...I see their strategy. Who wouldn't want to have a Mustang CUV, especially when Indris Elba told them they should.
A Mustang is a very specific type of car. The archetype of an entire class/segment of cars, called the "Pony" cars in honor of the Mustang that was their progenitor. That formula does not include:
-4WD/AWD
-Elevated or "off road" ground clearance (although this doesn't appear to have terribly much ground clearance by SUV standards)
-Rear doors
A Mustang is a 2-door, 2+2, RWD coupe or convertible. Anything that does not fit that mold is not a pony car and not Mustang. Calling this a Mustang is as silly as GM deciding to rename the Bolt a "Corvette Stingray-E". The car isn't a Corvette in any way shape or form, it shouldn't be associated with one by model name.
If this has been a 2 door, 2+2 coupe with an EV powertrain, I'd be all for calling it a Mustang Mach-E. But it's not and they shouldn't have.
Ford has a number of legacy names that would have worked better. "Thunderbolt" comes to mind. Perfect name for an EV trying exude performance, and it traces back to a factory experimental drag racing version of the Fairlane that won an NHRA title back in the mid-60s. Falcon is a fine name as well. Or pulled from the old Mercury name bin and used Cyclone or Comet. Any and all of these would have worked better than branding a vehicle that isn't a pony car as a Mustang.
Ford Ficus would have been a great green name
Quote from: MX793 on November 19, 2019, 06:36:54 PM
A Mustang is a very specific type of car. The archetype of an entire class/segment of cars, called the "Pony" cars in honor of the Mustang that was their progenitor. That formula does not include:
-4WD/AWD
-Elevated or "off road" ground clearance (although this doesn't appear to have terribly much ground clearance by SUV standards)
-Rear doors
A Mustang is a 2-door, 2+2, RWD coupe or convertible. Anything that does not fit that mold is not a pony car and not Mustang. Calling this a Mustang is as silly as GM deciding to rename the Bolt a "Corvette Stingray-E". The car isn't a Corvette in any way shape or form, it shouldn't be associated with one by model name.
If this has been a 2 door, 2+2 coupe with an EV powertrain, I'd be all for calling it a Mustang Mach-E. But it's not and they shouldn't have.
Ford has a number of legacy names that would have worked better. "Thunderbolt" comes to mind. Perfect name for an EV trying exude performance, and it traces back to a factory experimental drag racing version of the Fairlane that won an NHRA title back in the mid-60s. Falcon is a fine name as well. Or pulled from the old Mercury name bin and used Cyclone or Comet. Any and all of these would have worked better than branding a vehicle that isn't a pony car as a Mustang.
I actually tend to agree. Mustang is one of the most, perhaps the most, iconic profiles in the automotive industry. We all recognize it and although it has been used to some degree in designs of other manufacturers but still, we recognized the authentic look as only Mustang. This is true from the first Mustang fastback through to the latest GT500.
As for name, plenty of names to choose from. It might've been a good opportunity to resurrect the Edsel name as gesture to one of the Ford family who is underappreciated for all that he contributed. Hopefully it would be a hit this time.
I don't think it's a great name or use of branding, but I also don't think it's that serious. The vast majority of people complaining would have likely still derided it no matter what it was called, or would have never bought this type of car either.
I think Ford had made a lot of missteps lately, but I think this particular model isn't one of them.
Edit: also weren't there several early prototypes for a four door mustang? And also doesn't the Challenger come with AWD?
It's just really weird how much vitriol people have for a *name*.....
Quote from: 2o6 on November 19, 2019, 07:43:17 PM
I don't think it's a great name or use of branding, but I also don't think it's that serious. The vast majority of people complaining would have likely still derided it no matter what it was called, or would have never bought this type of car either.
I think Ford had made a lot of missteps lately, but I think this particular model isn't one of them.
Edit: also weren't there several early prototypes for a four door mustang? And also doesn't the Challenger come with AWD?
The earliest Mustang concept was actually a mid-engine speedster. There was a sedan concept in the mid 60s, but it never officially made it out of the design studio. At that time, the Mustang wasn't an icon and there technically wasn't a "pony car" segment yet. There's even been rumors of a sedan based on the current platform, but nothing has ever really been seen. Also no guarantee any such car would actually be branded as a Mustang.
The current Challenger is not a pony car. It's a full class size larger than the Mustang or Camaro and not a 2+2. V8 models are muscle cars. The V6, which is the only trim available in AWD, is just a 2-door sedan. Just like how a Chevelle SS was a musclecar while the Malibu, which was the same car but fitted with a lesser engine (either a 6 or a smaller V8) was just a midsize 2 or 4 door sedan.
QuoteIt's just really weird how much vitriol people have for a *name*.....
Because names, and brands, have meaning. They are something people connect to.
The Challenger not being a "pony car" seems like an online only semantics debate. The vast majority of the public view the Camaro, Challenger, and Mustang as direct competitors.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 19, 2019, 08:25:39 PM
The Challenger not being a "pony car" seems like an online only semantics debate. The vast majority of the public view the Camaro, Challenger, and Mustang as direct competitors.
That they are all performance oriented 2-doors in the same price segment makes them competitors in the minds of many. Doesn't mean they are the same category of car. "Pony car" has a meaning (hey, there we are again with words and names and meanings). One could argue that some or most of the sport compact and hot-hatch segment competes with the Mustang/Camaro/Challenger, particularly the base engine versions thereof. Don't see anyone claiming that the WRX, Focus ST, or GTI are pony cars. Because they're not.
Quote from: MX793 on November 19, 2019, 08:38:06 PM
That they are all performance oriented 2-doors in the same price segment makes them competitors in the minds of many. Doesn't mean they are the same category of car. "Pony car" has a meaning (hey, there we are again with words and names and meanings). One could argue that some or most of the sport compact and hot-hatch segment competes with the Mustang/Camaro/Challenger, particularly the base engine versions thereof. Don't see anyone claiming that the WRX, Focus ST, or GTI are pony cars. Because they're not.
The whole "pony car" debate seems like a semantics issue; especially since the definition of what segment is what seems to be a marketing driven moving target? And the fact that words and definitions tend to move and change with time and use. Even a few places online call the Challenger a "Pony Car".
Either way, I just don't see how a "Mustang" moniker on this car merits more than an eye roll and a scoff maybe. Some of y'all are acting as if Ford stopped producing the Mustang coupe entirely for this car, or that somehow this car threatens Mustangs as a whole. I think the vast majority of buyers will think the name is kinda funky and probably buy it after seeing it's merits.
Quote from: MX793 on November 19, 2019, 06:36:54 PM
A Mustang is a very specific type of car. The archetype of an entire class/segment of cars, called the "Pony" cars in honor of the Mustang that was their progenitor. That formula does not include:
-4WD/AWD
-Elevated or "off road" ground clearance (although this doesn't appear to have terribly much ground clearance by SUV standards)
-Rear doors
Let's compare the E-Mach to the OG.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/Mustanggelding.jpg/1024px-Mustanggelding.jpg)
I would argue that the Mach-E comes closer to the Mustang (horse) then the car. The horse Mustang was essentially used as an SUV to haul people and their stuff around the Midwest, and West, over great distances. The car Mustang is actually closer to a Quarter Horse.
Quote from: Galaxy on November 19, 2019, 09:22:57 PM
Let's compare the E-Mach to the OG.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/Mustanggelding.jpg/1024px-Mustanggelding.jpg)
I would argue that the Mach-E comes closer to the Mustang (horse) then the car. The horse Mustang was essentially used as an SUV to haul people and their stuff around the Midwest, and West, over great distances. The car Mustang is actually closer to a Quarter Horse.
I think they named the Mustang after the P-51D fighter plane. But I suppose that was named after the wild horses that roam the Western US. :lol:
Quote from: Galaxy on November 19, 2019, 09:22:57 PM
Let's compare the E-Mach to the OG.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/Mustanggelding.jpg/1024px-Mustanggelding.jpg)
I would argue that the Mach-E comes closer to the Mustang (horse) then the car. The horse Mustang was essentially used as an SUV to haul people and their stuff around the Midwest, and West, over great distances. The car Mustang is actually closer to a Quarter Horse.
"Real" mustang's are wild/feral horses, so no, they were not used as domesticated beasts of burden. Once domesticated, a horse is no longer a mustang.
Quote from: MX793 on November 19, 2019, 06:36:54 PM
A Mustang is a very specific type of car. The archetype of an entire class/segment of cars, called the "Pony" cars in honor of the Mustang that was their progenitor. That formula does not include:
-4WD/AWD
-Elevated or "off road" ground clearance (although this doesn't appear to have terribly much ground clearance by SUV standards)
-Rear doors
A Mustang is a 2-door, 2+2, RWD coupe or convertible. Anything that does not fit that mold is not a pony car and not Mustang. Calling this a Mustang is as silly as GM deciding to rename the Bolt a "Corvette Stingray-E". The car isn't a Corvette in any way shape or form, it shouldn't be associated with one by model name.
If this has been a 2 door, 2+2 coupe with an EV powertrain, I'd be all for calling it a Mustang Mach-E. But it's not and they shouldn't have.
Ford has a number of legacy names that would have worked better. "Thunderbolt" comes to mind. Perfect name for an EV trying exude performance, and it traces back to a factory experimental drag racing version of the Fairlane that won an NHRA title back in the mid-60s. Falcon is a fine name as well. Or pulled from the old Mercury name bin and used Cyclone or Comet. Any and all of these would have worked better than branding a vehicle that isn't a pony car as a Mustang.
A Rustang is whatever Ford sells under that name
OCD pedantry seems to run counter to what I thought enjoying cars was all about. The name of this thing has zero effect on the "real" :rolleyes: Mustang.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 19, 2019, 08:53:15 PM
Even a few places online call the Challenger a "Pony Car".
There are people online who call any long gun a "rifle" or any knife a "dagger". There are people online who write that the world is flat or that vaccines are a government conspiracy. The point: there are a lot of ill-informed people writing things on the internet, and not everything written on the internet is correct or true.
Fact is, a large number of online automotive journalists are not very knowledgable about cars. Why do people call the Challenger a pony car? Well, the original from the early 70s was a pony car, so many assume that the recent one must also be. These same people are likely not aware of what a pony car actually is, or haven't paid enough attention to the recent Challenger's characteristics to note that it doesn't fit the criteria. I would wager that you'd find a large amount of overlap between the population of people who think that the current Challenger is a pony car and those who think that any 2-door car is a "coupe".
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 20, 2019, 05:03:48 AM
A Rustang is whatever Ford sells under that name
OCD pedantry seems to run counter to what I thought enjoying cars was all about. The name of this thing has zero effect on the "real" :rolleyes: Mustang.
Then I can fully expect you to charge in to the defense of the Cadillac Cimmeron when somebody claims that it tarnished the Cadillac brand?
Quote from: MX793 on November 20, 2019, 04:57:18 AM
"Real" mustang's are wild/feral horses, so no, they were not used as domesticated beasts of burden. Once domesticated, a horse is no longer a mustang.
The Mustang car, according to official marketing "lore," is named after the fighter plane rather than the wild horse.
Quote from: MX793 on November 20, 2019, 05:39:23 AM
Then I can fully expect you to charge in to the defense of the Cadillac Cimmeron when somebody claims that it tarnished the Cadillac brand?
Excuuuse me. The Cimarron by Cadillac. Not a real Cadillac mind you, just a sort of side project by Cadillac. Just like Chrysler's TC by Maserati.
I like to think of them as children from a significant other's previous low-class marriage. They got some lessons on how to be posh, but still feel more at home in the trailer park.
Quote from: MX793 on November 19, 2019, 08:38:06 PM
That they are all performance oriented 2-doors in the same price segment makes them competitors in the minds of many. Doesn't mean they are the same category of car. "Pony car" has a meaning (hey, there we are again with words and names and meanings). One could argue that some or most of the sport compact and hot-hatch segment competes with the Mustang/Camaro/Challenger, particularly the base engine versions thereof. Don't see anyone claiming that the WRX, Focus ST, or GTI are pony cars. Because they're not.
The Charger is the pony car, because it too was named after a horse. Obviously this class includes not only the Hyundai Pony, Mitsubishi Colt and Subaru Brumby, but also the Ford Bronco.
Quote from: MX793 on November 20, 2019, 05:39:23 AM
Then I can fully expect you to charge in to the defense of the Cadillac Cimmeron when somebody claims that it tarnished the Cadillac brand?
The Cimarron's problem was that it was a shitty, overpriced car, not necessarily that it was called a Cadillac
From what we know now the
Mustang Mach-E is not a shitty car.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 19, 2019, 05:51:56 PM
It's weird how people are harping on the name when
1. It's not like the Mustang already doesn't feel like a large house to drive. A good handling house, but a house nonethelesss
2. People act as if it's "diluting a brand name" when mustangs are languishing on lots and they're incentivized to all fuck to get them on the lot. People aren't buying coupes.
Big +1 to that.
I think this "Mustang" branding is a fair amount of a PR disaster.
I also think it really doesn't matter as no one will really buy it.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 20, 2019, 05:03:48 AM
A Rustang is whatever Ford sells under that name
OCD pedantry seems to run counter to what I thought enjoying cars was all about. The name of this thing has zero effect on the "real" :rolleyes: Mustang.
I'm sure you would feel the same about a 3 row Nissan Z56 SUV. Maybe even with Fairlady badges.
I blame all of this nonsense on the introduction of the 4 door luxury coupes.
The fact of the matter is that people have emotional attachments and expectations when it comes to storied car names. If companies mess with those expectations they risk angering and alienating their customers. It may not be entirely rational but it is real.
Quote from: RomanChariot on November 20, 2019, 09:49:05 AM
I'm sure you would feel the same about a 3 row Nissan Z56 SUV. Maybe even with Fairlady badges.
I blame all of this nonsense on the introduction of the 4 door luxury coupes.
The fact of the matter is that people have emotional attachments and expectations when it comes to storied car names. If companies mess with those expectations they risk angering and alienating their customers. It may not be entirely rational but it is real.
No, I wouldn't feel that way at all. I think Infiniti moving to the Q name is stupid, but I'd still get a Q50/60 over most of its competitors.
I guess the question for me is how much material impact tacking the Mustang name on this thing had. I seriously doubt anybody is canceling their Mustang orders over this, because like 2o6 said sadly people are not buying Mustangs much in the first place. If anything this thing might have
*sparked*
new interest in the whole Mustang marque. There are definitely more people talking about Mustangs today than a week ago or whatever, and outside of the binary, hyperbolic, backwards looking and contradictory world of the auto enthusiasts the sentiments are pretty neutral or mildly positive.
Names mater and labels mean things. There is a reason why GM went through back to back to back generations of small car names before giving up, why Porsche made the Cayane/Panamera look like a 911 but didn't call them such, and why people were underwhelmed by the Supra even though by all accounts the basics of the car were super promising. Names have meaning and expectations and a connection to something that brands would kill to have. Ford slapping a Mustang name on this thing is just diluting that brand, IMO, for really no benefit. If Ford would have made an EV Mustang and called it the Mustang Mach-E, how cool would that have sounded? But no, it wasted it here.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 20, 2019, 12:05:43 PM
No, I wouldn't feel that way at all. I think Infiniti moving to the Q name is stupid, but I'd still get a Q50/60 over most of its competitors.
I guess the question for me is how much material impact tacking the Mustang name on this thing had. I seriously doubt anybody is canceling their Mustang orders over this, because like 2o6 said sadly people are not buying Mustangs much in the first place. If anything this thing might have
*sparked*
new interest in the whole Mustang marque. There are definitely more people talking about Mustangs today than a week ago or whatever, and outside of the binary, hyperbolic, backwards looking and contradictory world of the auto enthusiasts the sentiments are pretty neutral or mildly positive.
You think that moving to the Q naming scheme was done. I imagine that was because when someone mentioned a G35 or G37 you knew exactly what they were talking about. That was a car name that had only been around for relatively short amount of time but when Infiniti changed the name is confused and frustrated people. Anybody that knows anything about cars in the United States knows exactly what a Mustang is. To throw that name on a car that doesn't match that 55 year history confuses and frustrates people, especially enthusiasts.
Lets be frank... the vast majority of enthusiasts don't matter. We generally just judge and hate cars instead of actually buying them. So if it's a choice between selling more cars or appeasing enthusiasts........... :huh:
No name is sacred at Ford
https://www.motor1.com/news/383538/mustang-mach-e-shelby-plans/
Well, there's the Mustang Ranch in Nevada.
Quote from: r0tor on November 21, 2019, 08:26:03 AM
No name is sacred at Ford
https://www.motor1.com/news/383538/mustang-mach-e-shelby-plans/
I was joking when I said
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on November 18, 2019, 07:49:48 PM
I eagerly await the Shelby GT100kWh edition.
You know when EVs are dead when...
A Dodge Challenger is a pony car.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pony_car
The only reason a Challenger would not be considered a Pony car is because it's too big. The dimensions between the larger Challenger and smaller Mustang are not that radically different though. Same width. Challenger is 3 inches taller, 10 inches longer, and 300 lbs heavier.
A Mustang is by no means a "compact" car.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 21, 2019, 09:21:27 AM
You know when EVs are dead when...
More and more new ones keep coming out and car enthusiasts are talking about them? :confused:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 21, 2019, 10:26:41 AM
More and more new ones keep coming out and car enthusiasts are talking about them? :confused:
On the tiny street I live on there are 2 Teslas and a Bolt but EVs are definitely dead.
Quote from: veeman on November 21, 2019, 09:29:23 AM
A Dodge Challenger is a pony car.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pony_car
The only reason a Challenger would not be considered a Pony car is because it's too big. The dimensions between the larger Challenger and smaller Mustang are not that radically different though. Same width. Challenger is 3 inches taller, 10 inches longer, and 300 lbs heavier.
A Mustang is by no means a "compact" car.
The Challenger is neither a compact nor a coupe. The Challenger is a 2-door sedan. It's also not a 2+2, there is seating for 3 in the back. And 10" of length is huge. That's the difference between an Accord and a Civic, or Camry and Corolla. That's a size class difference.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on November 21, 2019, 10:29:49 AM
On the tiny street I live on there are 2 Teslas and a Bolt but EVs are definitely dead.
I've been seeing a number of Teslas popping up in the parking lot at work. Older Model Ses and a couple Model 3s.
Seen lots of Testla. Don't think I'd recognize a Bolt.
Quote from: MX793 on November 21, 2019, 03:37:23 PM
The Challenger is neither a compact nor a coupe. The Challenger is a 2-door sedan. It's also not a 2+2, there is seating for 3 in the back. And 10" of length is huge. That's the difference between an Accord and a Civic, or Camry and Corolla. That's a size class difference.
While Wikipedia is not the end all argument of authority, that particular article on pony cars is pretty damn comprehensive with lots of references. A Challenger is a pony car as excellently explained in that article. Your definition is too narrow in scope I think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ft7q36XsTbw
Quote from: veeman on November 21, 2019, 05:13:59 PM
While Wikipedia is not the end all argument of authority, that particular article on pony cars is pretty damn comprehensive with lots of references. A Challenger is a pony car as excellently explained in that article. Your definition is too narrow in scope I think.
The wiki article says the current Challenger is a pony car, yet the very first sentence contradicts this. From the article;
QuotePony car is an American car classification for affordable, compact, highly styled coupés or convertibles with a sporty or performance-oriented image.
I repeat: The current Challenger is NOT a compact, is NOT a coupe, and therefore NOT a pony car. The original Chally was a pony car. The current one is not.
In case you're wondering why a Challenger is not a coupe, the SAE defines a coupe as having less than 33 cu.ft of rear passenger volume (J1100). The Challenger is 36 cu.ft. Mustang is 32. Challenger is a 2-door sedan, not a coupe.
It's classified as a midsize vehicle per the EPA. The Chally has an interior volume of 110.1 cu.ft. Midsize is 110-119.9 cu.ft.
Quote from: MX793 on November 21, 2019, 06:29:03 PM
The wiki article says the current Challenger is a pony car, yet the very first sentence contradicts this. From the article;
I repeat: The current Challenger is NOT a compact, is NOT a coupe, and therefore NOT a pony car. The original Chally was a pony car. The current one is not.
In case you're wondering why a Challenger is not a coupe, the SAE defines a coupe as having less than 33 cu.ft of rear passenger volume (J1100). The Challenger is 36 cu.ft. Mustang is 32. Challenger is a 2-door sedan, not a coupe.
It's classified as a midsize vehicle per the EPA. The Chally has an interior volume of 110.1 cu.ft. Midsize is 110-119.9 cu.ft.
You're being an ultra purist on this. Here SAE refers to the Challenger as a pony car:
https://www.sae.org/news/2018/08/2019-dodge-challenger-lineup
Last paragraph: they refer to the Challenger as a throw back pony car coupe.
By googling, most sources are saying there is overlap between pony cars and muscle cars now
as the Mustang and Camaro are no longer compact. May be for racing purposes a Challenger is not in the same class as a Mustang or Camaro, but many many automotive sources are referring to the Challenger as a pony car.
Car and Driver:
https://www.caranddriver.com/dodge/challenger
Motortrend
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.motortrend.com/news/magnificent-seven-pony-car-rankings/amp/
Road and Track
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/first-drives/a22747324/2019-dodge-challenger-srt-hellcat-redeye-first-drive/
Etc Etc. Be a purist fine. It's no longer common vernacular in the automotive industry.
Current Challenger is 100% a pony car.
The definition of a 2-door sedan is that it has a body-line'd b-pillar:
2-door sedan (1955 Chevy):
(https://live.staticflickr.com/4848/32065878207_2c15564fe2_b.jpg)
2-door coupe (1955 Chevy):
(https://i.wheelsage.org/pictures/c/chevrolet/bel_air_sport_coupe/chevrolet_bel_air_sport_coupe_1.jpeg)
A coupe is a coach that has been cut down to a two-seater. That's two passengers, a footman and a driver, and two horses.
Anything else is Not a coupe.
Quote from: veeman on November 21, 2019, 09:33:07 PM
You're being an ultra purist on this. Here SAE refers to the Challenger as a pony car:
https://www.sae.org/news/2018/08/2019-dodge-challenger-lineup
Last paragraph: they refer to the Challenger as a throw back pony car coupe.
By googling, most sources are saying there is overlap between pony cars and muscle cars now
as the Mustang and Camaro are no longer compact. May be for racing purposes a Challenger is not in the same class as a Mustang or Camaro, but many many automotive sources are referring to the Challenger as a pony car.
Car and Driver:
https://www.caranddriver.com/dodge/challenger
Motortrend
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.motortrend.com/news/magnificent-seven-pony-car-rankings/amp/
Road and Track
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/first-drives/a22747324/2019-dodge-challenger-srt-hellcat-redeye-first-drive/
Etc Etc. Be a purist fine. It's no longer common vernacular in the automotive industry.
The current Mustang has an interior volume of 99 cu.ft. It's technically a subcompact per the EPA. It certainly is not a midsize car.
The author of that piece from SAE is not one of SAE's technical writers, he's a general journalist. $10 says he couldn't tell you what SAE's definition of a coupe is.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 21, 2019, 09:57:22 PM
Current Challenger is 100% a pony car.
The definition of a 2-door sedan is that it has a body-line'd b-pillar:
2-door sedan (1955 Chevy):
(https://live.staticflickr.com/4848/32065878207_2c15564fe2_b.jpg)
2-door coupe (1955 Chevy):
(https://i.wheelsage.org/pictures/c/chevrolet/bel_air_sport_coupe/chevrolet_bel_air_sport_coupe_1.jpeg)
Please cite a specification.
The absence of a B pillar is the distinction of a hardtop, not a coupe. Coupes, sedans, and even wagons may or may not be hardtops. The mid 50s Bel Air could be had as either a 2 or 4 door hardtop (no pillar) or sedan (with pillar).
I also wouldn't take Chevy marketing as to what is or isn't a coupe as gospel. They marketed fixed-roof Corvairs as "spyders". A spyder is a roadster.
What is the prize of this pedantry contest, and can we set a deadline for final entries to win it?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 22, 2019, 05:15:05 AM
What is the prize of this pedantry contest, and can we set a deadline for final entries to win it?
I quit :lol:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 22, 2019, 05:15:05 AM
What is the prize of this pedantry contest, and can we set a deadline for final entries to win it?
I have to agree. This is some dumb ass discourse for shit nobody buys.
I think this thing will do well and is a positive sign for Ford's electric future.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 22, 2019, 07:43:13 AM
I think this thing will do well and is a positive sign for Ford's electric future.
The Tesla truck is the best publicity the Mach E could have got.
Quote from: MX793 on November 22, 2019, 04:58:07 AM
Please cite a specification.
The absence of a B pillar is the distinction of a hardtop, not a coupe. Coupes, sedans, and even wagons may or may not be hardtops. The mid 50s Bel Air could be had as either a 2 or 4 door hardtop (no pillar) or sedan (with pillar).
I also wouldn't take Chevy marketing as to what is or isn't a coupe as gospel. They marketed fixed-roof Corvairs as "spyders". A spyder is a roadster.
Actually, the specification is what an automaker calls it:
Pontiac LeMans coupe:
(http://www.americandreamcars.com/1970pontiaclemanscp011712.jpg)
Cadillac Coupe DeVille:
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/iV2FRXzMo3w/maxresdefault.jpg)
A coupe can have a b-pillar, if the rear window doesn't roll down:
(https://cdn.bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/1937_ford_coupe_15374771145fe0f7aa0090daaee7IMG_1679-940x705.jpg)
(https://suncoastautoauction.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/1986-oldsmobile-cutlass-supreme1.jpg)
The classification fail is cars have grown and the SAE standard has not been updated
Who looks up SAE classifications before deciding what to call a car?
A Coupe, BTW, is a cut-down sedan for two passengers, plus a driver and (optionally) a footman that is pulled by no more than two horses.
Cutlass Supreme with nacho cheese :wub:
Well since trying to define specifications for what vehicle terms mean is pedantry, I am going to say that the Challenger is a Pickup truck in the vein of a Chevy Avalanche. It is RWD, it has 2 rows of seats and it has an exterior cargo area with a locking hard cover.
Quote from: RomanChariot on November 22, 2019, 10:13:30 AM
Well since trying to define specifications for what vehicle terms mean is pedantry, I am going to say that the Challenger is a Pickup truck in the vein of a Chevy Avalanche. It is RWD, it has 2 rows of seats and it has an exterior cargo area with a locking hard cover.
Arguing over inches of length and rear seating space is pedantic.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 22, 2019, 10:29:19 AM
Arguing over inches of length and rear seating space is pedantic.
Men have been arguing over that since they first looked in their pants.
Quote from: RomanChariot on November 22, 2019, 10:32:22 AM
Men have been arguing over that since they first looked in their pants.
Well, those inches are more precious to come by.
Quote from: RomanChariot on November 22, 2019, 10:32:22 AM
Men have been arguing over that since they first looked in their pants.
:clap:
Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 21, 2019, 10:51:31 PM
A coupe is a coach that has been cut down to a two-seater. That's two passengers, a footman and a driver, and two horses.
Anything else is Not a coupe.
:lol:
:golfclap:
Quote from: 2o6 on November 22, 2019, 07:44:05 AM
The Tesla truck is the best publicity the Mach E could have got.
+1!
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 22, 2019, 07:43:13 AM
I think this thing will do well and is a positive sign for Ford's electric future.
+1
I don't like the mustang name going on a non-sports car but whatever.
EVERYONE said Porsche was nuts building an SUV, but that probably saved them?....
Porsche had the good sense not to name their SUV the "911 GT3X".
If they did the outcome would have been exactly the same.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 22, 2019, 10:09:37 AM
Who looks up SAE classifications before deciding what to call a car?
A Coupe, BTW, is a cut-down sedan for two passengers, plus a driver and (optionally) a footman that is pulled by no more than two horses.
This?
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f5/76/3c/f5763cd9d46c18030f362183fb414f3e.jpg)
Quote from: MX793 on November 24, 2019, 08:05:11 PM
Porsche had the good sense not to name their SUV the "911 GT3X".
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 25, 2019, 05:30:06 AM
If they did the outcome would have been exactly the same.
In retrospect, it may have sold even better..
Quote from: NomisR on November 25, 2019, 11:47:00 AM
This?
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f5/76/3c/f5763cd9d46c18030f362183fb414f3e.jpg)
Exactly!
Keep going.
Would it hurt a horse's feelings if it were found to not produce 1 SAE horsepower?
Quote from: r0tor on November 25, 2019, 01:27:07 PM
Would it hurt a horse's feelings if it were found to not produce 1 SAE horsepower?
Horses in general produce around 4 hp (peak), but there's of course a story behind that too...
The difference of course is "coupe" is not a standardized unit of measurement.
Hmmpf...Chevy Camaro EV Crossover Imagined To Take On The Mustang Mach-E (https://www.msn.com/en-ca/autos/news/chevy-camaro-ev-crossover-imagined-to-take-on-the-mustang-mach-e/ar-BBXnrje?ocid=spartandhp)
(https://i.postimg.cc/vmY4J1Dk/BBXmQvw.jpg)
Quote from: FoMoJo on November 28, 2019, 07:45:03 AM
Hmmpf...Chevy Camaro EV Crossover Imagined To Take On The Mustang Mach-E (https://www.msn.com/en-ca/autos/news/chevy-camaro-ev-crossover-imagined-to-take-on-the-mustang-mach-e/ar-BBXnrje?ocid=spartandhp)
(https://i.postimg.cc/vmY4J1Dk/BBXmQvw.jpg)
Isn't that just a 2-door Blazer?
Wow. read the WHOLE thread. Arguing worse than anything I ever did here. And Cougs being a royal idiot once again who really doesn't know what he's talking about especially when it comes to modern EVs.
I'm a multi time Mustang owner of modern and classic Mustangs and a fan of the marque. And I like this EV. I understand what they were doing with the branding, generating buzz that an Escape EV would not have done. How much buzz?
The first year's production of the $61k First Edition is sold out already. So much for the "it won't sell" remarks in the thread.
I would love to have one of these as the daily driver in a garage next to a GT350 or GT500.
The Mustang is dead.
Quote from: ChrisV on January 30, 2020, 02:30:44 PM
Wow. read the WHOLE thread. Arguing worse than anything I ever did here. And Cougs being a royal idiot once again who really doesn't know what he's talking about especially when it comes to modern EVs.
I'm a multi time Mustang owner of modern and classic Mustangs and a fan of the marque. And I like this EV. I understand what they were doing with the branding, generating buzz that an Escape EV would not have done. How much buzz?
The first year's production of the $61k First Edition is sold out already. So much for the "it won't sell" remarks in the thread.
I would love to have one of these as the daily driver in a garage next to a GT350 or GT500.
Fusion or Galaxy would have been so much better than Mustang Mach-E, though. Especially since everyone is calling it the Mocky
Quote from: CaminoRacer on January 30, 2020, 06:53:19 PM
Fusion or Galaxy would have been so much better than Mustang Mach-E, though. Especially since everyone is calling it the Mocky
Galax-E
Fucking genius
Garbag-E... Oh wait