"Mustang Mach E" Confirmed, Reservations Begin Immediately After Nov 17 Live-Streamed Reveal

[shogun32]

look at hte ford Escape.

Damn if that doesn't look nearly identical to the 'Mach-E' doesn't it... Just squashed a little into a more 'car-like' shape and height.
Mustang, my ass.

Sponsored

 

[zackmd1]

The Mustang was only 3.3% of Ford’s 2018 sales. That’s not poor, that’s almost nonexistent. I’m beginning to think that if it weren’t for the Mach-E our Mustang could have gone the way of the Focus & Fusion. Think about that.

But that is the thing..... They are not going to be able to sell a meaningful amount of the Mach E because they can not produce them! The Mach E sales are going to be under the Mustang for at least a few years while they attempt to ramp up production. And that is also not including external forces like other EV models requiring the same source of batteries as the Mach E.

So I cannot see how in any way the Mach E helps "keep" the classic Mustang around.... It is going to be even lower volume then the Mustang.

 

[Cobra Jet]

Ford has already received about 14,000 reservations for the Mach-E so far:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4308040-ford-gets-14000-reservations-mustang-mach-e-electric-suv

Ford knew what it was doing naming the car the ‘Mustang Mach E’. That seems like a lot of deposits in a very short time (even if they're refundable, and some if not many of them are probably from speculators hoping to flip their spot for a profit to people who just gotta have it first). Even though many old-school gearheads like me (and it seems many people here) were aghast at their using the venerable Mustang name for a very non-Mustang like car, Ford successfully achieved much greater awareness - and, apparently, buying interest - for the thing than it otherwise would have had it been named anything else. The old maxim is true, all publicity is good publicity. It was good business for them to sell out the Mustang name for the sake of potential future Mach-E sales, so they did exactly that. To any company, profit will always win out over anything else.

Let’s think about that part of your statement:

1) Only 14,000 reservations? That’s nothing to talk about. This ME had almost a full year of hype build up, teases, discussions, sneak-peek advertisements, news articles, public forum discussions, Auto Tech Co articles, etc. Since it’s official unveiling, which was now almost (5) days ago - and the bazillions of people on this planet who are seeking a new EV - 14,000 reservations is extremely poor. Very poor especially for a top (3) MAJOR Automotive Manufacturer with over 100 years in the business. PLUS as you have stated, the numbers only reflect reservations - not actual sales AND those reservations can be pulled back at any time from now until actual units are coming off the assembly line.

2) Ford may have generated awareness but I don’t know where or what places you or others are reading online or off... The ME has had A LOT of negative publicity for Ford calling it a “Mustang”. Negative publicity not only from die hard Mustang or Ford fans, but from just people in the Auto, Finance and News Industries world wide - not just US based. What people are totally missing about the subject matter is all of the discussions are not bashing Ford for designing and bringing to light a brand new EV. Everyone IS for Ford popping out a EV - but naming it and calling it a Mustang totally zero’d out the exclusiveness and public positivity had it been named something OTHER THAN a Mustang.

3) Hackett’s ideology for bringing an EV to market was to pump Ford’s bottom line, to assist with a broad based “turn around” of the Corp and create profit - that IS good. BUT Hackett and Bill Ford agreed to call this new EV a “Mustang” in an attempt to create hyper-sales on an initial rollout for a new EV, period. Had they called it a “Brown Diarrhea MOCK-P” their thought process was, the public isn’t going to look at it in the same light against the competition, because what is a “Brown Diarrhea MOCK-P” AND it’s just another egg shaped Tesla biter EV built for “compliance” purposes (ie: US and overseas Govt’s pushing vehicle manufacturers into something other than gas powered vehicles to reducing global emissions footprints). It’s in every news article about the MACH-E how it was NEVER associated with or going to be a Mustang AT ALL. So their unveiling of this as a “Mustang” was supposed to be a huge hurrah that did absolutely boodiddly to Ford stock. Hell, the stock barely budged on opening day and it has barely moved since. So their attempt at creating this HUGE overwhelming attention or awareness has not paid out as expected.

4) Utilizing the Mustang name on a brand new vehicle that is NOT a Mustang HAS diluted the Mustang from the perspective that everyone who has known and come to love the Mustang for what it has always been - a 2 door sporty coupe - does not want a CUV (be it an ICE or EV) being called a Mustang - again, because it’s not. Put it this way for the simplest analogy possible - would you call a Horse an Antelope? No - because they have absolutely nothing in common as far as historical genealogy, “DNA”, function, performance or familia association.

14,000 reservations is a miserable figure to be happy about - more so when weighing in all of the costs to design, manufacturer, labor hrs, vendor award fees, subcontractor fees, facility revisions, import fees, technology fees, specific licensing, legal fees, Patents/Copyright fees, EPA fees, NHTSA safety/crash tests, etc etc etc. Even with Ford capping initial production to 50k units - still won’t break even. It surely will make the Govt happy and will appease SOME people on Wall Street - but in the grand scheme of things - 14k reserved units is nothing to be excited about.

Hell, how many new Vettes have been reserved? What about when the first Teslas were rolling out - how many of those were reserved (or sold) from a basically fledgling company that could have rolled over??

I do agree Ford should move forward and produce EVs - but don’t call something new a Mustang that isn’t and never was....

IMO - Ford should have brought to market that SEMA Lithium S550 EV (or something like it) FIRST, before another CUV - because THAT would have been an instant hit - then after rolling that out, then bring to market your new CUV and call it ANYTHING but a Mustang.

Plus, if you take all of the newest (and up and coming) CUV EV’s - there’s no design challenges - they ALL LOOK THE SAME with an egg shape, a rounded boring ass bullnose, an interior that is boring as hell.... etc. I challenge anyone to post images of the CUV EVs that are out there and the similarities between all are so close - that’s it’s boring as hell. Sure, they each have their own characteristics, creature comforts and levels of performance - but damn, why can’t an EV have a similar good looking interior like a “normal” gas powered vehicle - AND at least a front end that looks half way decent?

 

[Norm Peterson]

I personally am disgusted to see the Mustang name used on an electric SUV, and I also personally am extremely unlikely to ever buy an electric car. But I realize I'm a dinosaur. I represent Ford’s past customer, not the future. As much as I absolutely hate it, I know the future ultimately belongs to vehicles like the Mach-E, not the fuel-wasting, gas-burning, tire-smoking, manual transmission relics of the past that I grew up with and love.

Pretty much the same here, though I'm not at all sure whether it's the EV part of the Mach E or the CUV part that turns me off more. I'm OK with getting cars with a modicum of fuel efficiency, just not to the point where I'll give up any of the fun or the involvement to get more. And when I'm driving, I don't want to have a kitchen-chair seating posture (I find it gets in the way of making the finer levels of throttle and brake pedal modulation).

There is a deeper basis in experience for my attitudes here, called "been there, sort of". We've had to cope with car mfrs gradually shifting to only building the kinds of cars/vehicles that neither of us wants to drive. Never mind having to commit something like a full year's worth of Social Security income for the "privilege". So we've jumped ship among the mfrs at least twice (out of only eight car purchases) specifically to stay in a 3-pedal car. I'm saying 'we' here because my wife is just as adamant about driving stick as I am, and she just joined me in the club of "70-somethings".


Norm

 

[BuckeyeBOSS]

1969 by BuckeyeBOSS, on Flickr

 

[zackmd1]

To me all these electrics are like vape pens. in a few years we are gonna have junk yards full off electric car husks cause the batteries died. And to replace the battery is cost prohibitive so the owners will just ditch them for a new car like a cell phone. and since these cars are nothing but a flat battery with seats sitting on top and a screen on the interior there is nothing much to spare part out. its gonna go from cars that we got 5 , 10....20 years of use out of to cars that are disposable and expensive. I dont think anyone knows the long term harm of these cars yet all anyone on is focused on is the exhaust and lack thereof. but what about the strip mines for the battery elements? the increased coal , natural gas and nuclear power production for the increased power grid to charge the things. (you may not be directly putting exhaust in the air but you are still polluting it with that electric car). All the toxic chemicals required to make and recycle these batteries? What happens when a couple container ships full of these dead chemical laden batteries sinks in the ocean? it all might look good now but just wait. Everything comes with a price and sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.

A current Tesla battery can last 300-500k miles and they have designs for a battery that can last 1 million miles. Even when the battery is no longer usable in an EV it can be directly recycled into energy storage products like home batteries. It is not as bad of a story as you think. And the issues that are present (mining, fossil fuel power generation, etc...) will improve as time progresses. The power grid for instance is increasingly becoming cleaner with the sharp decline of coal and the increase in renewable power generation (solar, wind, hydroelectric, etc..). Then when considering other sources such as nuclear (fission and fusion) the story gets alot better. Even now, an electric car charging in the current power grid is still cleaner than a gas equivalent over its lifetime. Gas vehicles are on the way out plain and simple....

 

[shogun32]

there would have been zero cognitive dissonance selling the SEMA Lithium as the 2020 Mach-E. It would have checked all the proper boxes with it's eyes closed.

 

[Bikeman315]

But that is the thing..... They are not going to be able to sell a meaningful amount of the Mach E because they can not produce them! The Mach E sales are going to be under the Mustang for at least a few years while they attempt to ramp up production. And that is also not including external forces like other EV models requiring the same source of batteries as the Mach E.

So I cannot see how in any way the Mach E helps "keep" the classic Mustang around.... It is going to be even lower volume then the Mustang.

Zack I’m surprised that you’re being a little short sighted. This isn’t a one year plan. This is the just the start for the new Mustang brand. Think 5 to 10 years out. That’s what Ford is doing. For that to happen they have to keep our car alive. Maybe, just maybe we should be saying thank you.

 

[shogun32]

A current Tesla battery can last 300-500k miles

Nope, 100 to 120k is all they are warrantied for. Not saying they won't last longer, obviously, but replacement is so cost prohibitive the car has no residual value left should the battery let go.
There is no industrial scale recycling of these batteries. The value of the recovered is far too low to break even. The EV industry has in effect brought us the disposable car and has no economic interest in addressing the AfterLife. The financials are great if you can ignore the full lifecycle costs!

 

[zackmd1]

Zack I’m surprised that you’re being a little short sighted. This isn’t a one year plan. This is the just the start for the new Mustang brand. Think 5 to 10 years out. That’s what Ford is doing. For that to happen they have to keep our car alive. Maybe, just maybe we should be saying thank you.

I fully understand that. My point though is that if you knew you cant produce more then 50k models for the first few years, why make a mass market CUV? Why not make a 2 door coupe MUSTANG and have an instant hit and again, the only affordable EV sports car in the market? Accept the lower sales for the first few years until you can iron out production bottlenecks and then introduce the CUV when you can make more than 50k.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Zack I’m surprised that you’re being a little short sighted. This isn’t a one year plan. This is the just the start for the new Mustang brand. Think 5 to 10 years out. That’s what Ford is doing. For that to happen they have to keep our car alive. Maybe, just maybe we should be saying thank you.

So after that 5 to 10 years of Ford pushing the Mustang as the Mach e more than they do the Mustang as a ponycar . . . then what???

I suspect that shortsighted also applies to assuming that the ponycar will continue to trot along as usual, in the face of advertising and increasing awareness working against it.


Norm

 

[shogun32]

> So after that 5 to 10 years ... then what???

Per the incessant barking of eco-alarmists, the earth will end in a massive ecologic calamity and die-off so there won't be an auto industry... And while I might elect to be buried in my S550, we'll all be pushing daisies and won't care.

But more seriously, in 10 years this epic branding screwup will be taught in business schools as the Rubicon moment when Ford managed to go from a tier 1 automaker to 3 separate and no longer consequential companies: The F150 company, the Mustang company, and Ford Credit - a division of Goldman Sachs.

Meanwhile the Corvette will have been converted into a hovercraft with ION drive - a compact nuclear power plant sitting in the mid-engine bay.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Good morning Norm. Honestly I wanted this thread to just die, period. Just so much of our energy and heart being spent on this. I think the Mustang community has let Ford know just where we stand. I hope they do something. We have time for them to reconsider. They got their press. Let them wait till after the holidays and announce that they have heard us and changed their minds. That's what I want for the holidays.

That would be a nice holiday present.

But I'm afraid if the furor dies down that Ford will consider it to be nothing more than a momentary spike of initial resistance and go ahead with it anyway. Sustained pressure is what's needed to convince them otherwise.


Norm

 

[Muff Muff]

That would be a nice holiday present.

But I'm afraid if the furor dies down that Ford will consider it to be nothing more than a momentary spike of initial resistance and go ahead with it anyway. Sustained pressure is what's needed to convince them otherwise.

"Mustang" is not a mere baseline performance level that a vehicle needs to meet in order to earn the title, like the Ford executives would like us to believe. Mustang has a very specific definition of heritage, layout, and performance that a car must meet to earn the title.

Norm

This ^

The worst thing we can do is shut up. The least we can do is keep up the negative pressure. The best thing we can do is not buy the car.

 

[BuckeyeBOSS]

This ^

The worst thing we can do is shut up. The least we can do is keep up the negative pressure. The best thing we can do is not buy the car.

I can't see many current Mustang owners actually buying the Mach E. If anything, I think the older Mustang owners' wives might buy the Mach E or the younger Mustang owners' mothers.

Sponsored