So why do they need the Mustang name for that? Those who want performance will know to look for it, and I'm sure that you know Ford would be pitching the performance stats no matter what the SUV's name was. Do they even advertise the Mustang at all (other than on the Ford website and on dealership sales brochures)?
That's why I've been trying to say "tall-ish" rather than "tall". With its 63" height, it's at least 4" too tall to suit me.
Exactly. Hackett has bought into the idea that cars are going to be electronic appliances and the driving isn't even going to be a thing any longer. For the majority of the public he is probably right. Betraying your most passionate, loyal customers didn't have to be part of getting there. I will find a company that still caters to driving enthusiasts and keeps their brand promise.
This SUV needs to succeed in a way something with any other badge from Ford simply won't. That's the biggest reason. There's a lot banking on BEVs and the SUV segment is the most lucrative one, so no matter how great they make this SUV, with a name that doesn't attract people to the showrooms it would be a greater financial risk not to use the Mustang name on it. People will own a Mustang in a form that is arguably more desirable. The most important thing in all this is they've instilled a good deal of Mustang DNA in Mach E, which is what these prospective buyers expect. It's true to the name. If I were a betting man I would say this will actually be a sales hit and therefore allow the core Mustang a greater future budget.
You're making it sound like Mach is replacing Mustang.
But it doesn't. It doesn't remotely. Most of them are no faster than an Ecoboost Mustang and the "hot" GT will likely be slower than the fastest Tesla Model 3 while costing almost twice as much.
Wait, I thought we were talking about Mustangs. ;)
