Alleged Mach-E Pricing, Specs, and Photos Leaked Ahead of LA Reveal - Page 2 - Ford Mustang Forum
Like Tree36Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
PONY Member
 
07redstang's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2018
Location: Poteau
Posts: 394
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedknot View Post
They definitely pulled from that playbook. As crappy as this concept was to Mustang purists, the Mustang II was actually a great seller for Ford and won a lot of awards. As if the Mustang II wasn't a kick in the face enough, the Cobra II "appearance package" was a spit in your eye moment for the mustang crowd.
At least the Mustang II was still a Mustang although it came off as a character of "honey I shrunk the kids movie". They should name this the Mus"turd". How can anyone who is planning to use this as the family vehicle take a long trip in it since it has a range of only 250 miles. I can drive 600 easy on one of my trips.

I can also see a very large electrical fire as a major failure mode.

my89foxbody and Grimbrand like this.

07redstang is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
PONY Member
 
GT'sGT's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 970
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenv View Post
More cars were steam powered than were electric powered in 1900.

Of the 4,192 vehicles accounted for being produced in the United States in the 1900 Census, just 936 of them ran on gasoline, 1,575 were electric, and 1,681 ran on steam.

GT'sGT is offline  
PONY Member
 
GT'sGT's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 970
 
I actually like the car and the heritage and think it's a positive direction to take it. To me it's more Mustang than the fox body things they tried to pass off as Mustangs.
Let the fox body owners say what they will, those were not Mustangs.
gtballer likes this.
GT'sGT is offline  
 
Apprentice
 
skramblr's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Location: Cornelius
Posts: 80
 
Mustang defined the pony car market as 2 door sedan, long hood, short trunk. Some people complain about the Mustang II or Fox Body, but they still had the pony car characteristics of a Mustang. The Mach E is an 4 door SUV. Kind of a stretch to call it a pony car.

What heritage does the Mach E have? None. It's a new platform. Mustang styling cues on an SUV is putting lipstick on a pig. It's still an SUV and not a sports car.
Urambo Tauro and Grimbrand like this.
skramblr is offline  
PONY Member
 
07redstang's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2018
Location: Poteau
Posts: 394
 
Styling cues... ?? A horse on the steering wheel and Mustang tail lights do not make it a Mustang. The only comparisons for this vehicle in the media is to another suv made by Tesla. When your comparing turds, they are still turds. Sorry Ford, its a swing and a miss.
my89foxbody and Grimbrand like this.

07redstang is offline  
Rookie
 
randmag's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Location: Placer County
Posts: 15
 
Garage
An electric crossover? Well, you know...I'm not in the market for one myself, but it might be a good vehicle...probably sell a few of them.
An electric Mustang? Hey, as long as it shares the same body with other Mustangs, what the hell make a few and see if it catches on.
A electric crossover Mustang??? NO! The electric aspect is not nearly as offensive as the 4-door crossover aspect. This is a mistake worse than the Pontiac Aztec. Whoever signed off on this should be fired from Ford.

Maybe Chevy should come out with an electric Equinox and call it a Corvette E-ray, huh? I mean hey, as long as we're affixing model badges indiscriminately...

Man...for decades, Ford was the first to come out with all the best ideas, and now this... Lee Iacocca is turning over in his grave. He hasn't even been gone for six months, and THIS is what they do...
my89foxbody and Grimbrand like this.
randmag is offline  
GLOBAL MODERATOR
5.0L Member
S197 Member
 
ONEZ ST's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Location: Iowa Park
Posts: 7,155
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by randmag View Post
An electric crossover? Well, you know...I'm not in the market for one myself, but it might be a good vehicle...probably sell a few of them.
An electric Mustang? Hey, as long as it shares the same body with other Mustangs, what the hell make a few and see if it catches on.
A electric crossover Mustang??? NO! The electric aspect is not nearly as offensive as the 4-door crossover aspect. This is a mistake worse than the Pontiac Aztec. Whoever signed off on this should be fired from Ford.

Maybe Chevy should come out with an electric Equinox and call it a Corvette E-ray, huh? I mean hey, as long as we're affixing model badges indiscriminately...

Man...for decades, Ford was the first to come out with all the best ideas, and now this... Lee Iacocca is turning over in his grave. He hasn't even been gone for six months, and THIS is what they do...

At least the Pontiac Aztec came with a car cover and tent, in case the car cover blew off you could still hide the ugly thing.
my89foxbody likes this.

----------------------------
2012 Mustang GT, Roush 2300 Black
2006 Mustang V6 Manual Legend Lime Sold
2019 Charger Scat Pack White
2016 Jeep Willys Silver Vin 060 RIP
2016 Jeep Willys Silver Vin 059 Sold
ONEZ ST is offline  
GT Member
 
Urambo Tauro's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Location: SE Mich
Posts: 1,763
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GT'sGT View Post
...To me it's more Mustang than the fox body things they tried to pass off as Mustangs.
Let the fox body owners say what they will, those were not Mustangs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skramblr View Post
Mustang defined the pony car market as 2 door sedan, long hood, short trunk. Some people complain about the Mustang II or Fox Body, but they still had the pony car characteristics of a Mustang. The Mach E is an 4 door SUV. Kind of a stretch to call it a pony car.

What heritage does the Mach E have? None. It's a new platform. Mustang styling cues on an SUV is putting lipstick on a pig. It's still an SUV and not a sports car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 07redstang View Post
Styling cues... ?? A horse on the steering wheel and Mustang tail lights do not make it a Mustang...
These are all valid points, begging us to question just what exactly is essential to brand identity? Why do cars have their own names, if not to serve as a shorthand, identifying them from among the automaker's other offerings? When we mention a car's name, what kind of vehicle does that name instantly describe?

In my opinion, there are two major factors that comprise the identity of a car, the most important of which being its fundamental architecture. There needs to be a consistency to its basic size, shape, compartment (engine, cabin, trunk) arrangement, and drivetrain layout. Otherwise, it's a completely different type of vehicle and must be given its own name. But there's another factor that I think is only slightly less important- its appearance. If a car shares the name of a previous car, then it should be recognizable as such. Just as an animal inherits bodily similarities from its parents, so should a car pass distinctive traits down to the next "generation".

Now, Ford has spent over 5 decades reinforcing the Mustang's identity as a coupe/convertible. Not a truck. Not a van. Not a SUV, nor motorcycle... but a 2-door car. Always with the engine up front, always driven by the rear wheels. This is what a Ford Mustang is, deep down in its bones.

Appearance-wise, the Mustang has been... a little less consistent. But Ford finally decided on what key elements are needed to define the Mustang look. Much as I love the Foxbody, it was nearly indistinguishable from other boxy cars of the '80s. That's why it was such a huge deal when Ford started to bring back iconic design cues, like the running horse emblem, side scoops, and the tri-bar tail lamps. I would argue that the S197 was more than just "retro"; it was a comprehensive return to form for the Mustang aesthetic. The most important Mustang design cues are carried forward by the S550 and I expect the next two-door Mustang to do the same.

Note that just now I had to say "two-door Mustang" because the name "Mustang" is apparently too vague to describe what kind of car I'm talking about anymore. We are now forced to say "two-door", or "not the Mach-E", or recite a platform code to avoid confusion with the SUV "Mustang". It's ridiculous.

The Mach-E SUV presents an identity crisis for the Mustang in a way that's eerily similar to the whole Probe thing. Ford eventually saw the light and repented from its threat to build a FWD "Mustang", but this time Ford seems bound and determined to disregard, contradict, and confuse the Mustang's well-established brand identity. This mess could have been easily avoided if they had just given the SUV its own look, its own name, and allowed its awesomeness to speak for itself.
Grimbrand likes this.

1995 Mustang GT (5.0), daily driver
1995 GMC C2500 (5.7), alternate daily driver
Urambo Tauro is offline  
PONY Member
 
GT'sGT's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 970
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urambo Tauro View Post
These are all valid points, begging us to question just what exactly is essential to brand identity? Why do cars have their own names, if not to serve as a shorthand, identifying them from among the automaker's other offerings? When we mention a car's name, what kind of vehicle does that name instantly describe?

In my opinion, there are two major factors that comprise the identity of a car, the most important of which being its fundamental architecture. There needs to be a consistency to its basic size, shape, compartment (engine, cabin, trunk) arrangement, and drivetrain layout. Otherwise, it's a completely different type of vehicle and must be given its own name. But there's another factor that I think is only slightly less important- its appearance. If a car shares the name of a previous car, then it should be recognizable as such. Just as an animal inherits bodily similarities from its parents, so should a car pass distinctive traits down to the next "generation".

Now, Ford has spent over 5 decades reinforcing the Mustang's identity as a coupe/convertible. Not a truck. Not a van. Not a SUV, nor motorcycle... but a 2-door car. Always with the engine up front, always driven by the rear wheels. This is what a Ford Mustang is, deep down in its bones.

Appearance-wise, the Mustang has been... a little less consistent. But Ford finally decided on what key elements are needed to define the Mustang look. Much as I love the Foxbody, it was nearly indistinguishable from other boxy cars of the '80s. That's why it was such a huge deal when Ford started to bring back iconic design cues, like the running horse emblem, side scoops, and the tri-bar tail lamps. I would argue that the S197 was more than just "retro"; it was a comprehensive return to form for the Mustang aesthetic. The most important Mustang design cues are carried forward by the S550 and I expect the next two-door Mustang to do the same.

Note that just now I had to say "two-door Mustang" because the name "Mustang" is apparently too vague to describe what kind of car I'm talking about anymore. We are now forced to say "two-door", or "not the Mach-E", or recite a platform code to avoid confusion with the SUV "Mustang". It's ridiculous.

The Mach-E SUV presents an identity crisis for the Mustang in a way that's eerily similar to the whole Probe thing. Ford eventually saw the light and repented from its threat to build a FWD "Mustang", but this time Ford seems bound and determined to disregard, contradict, and confuse the Mustang's well-established brand identity. This mess could have been easily avoided if they had just given the SUV its own look, its own name, and allowed its awesomeness to speak for itself.
Technically, the true mustang was the 62 Mustang II concept car, the true public Mustang is the original design of the 65 and 66 and everything else just used the name on a different vehicle. This is no different.
GT'sGT is offline  
GT Member
Classic Member
5.0L Member
 
Grimbrand's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2016
Location: Sedgwick
Posts: 2,157
 
Garage
Send a message via Skype™ to Grimbrand
GT, given that this car has been in continuous production with consistent layout and design (despite changing appearances), I have to say that yeah, "It's an electric 4-door jeep now!" is different. Even the concept was a front-engine, rear drive, 2 door sports car, not that different from all the other Mustang models, even if its appearance was pretty wild.



Sometimes you bring up really good points, but that last one just sounded a lot like "TROLOLOLOLOL!" to me.



I smile a lot. It makes people wonder what I'm up to...
Grimbrand is online now  
OX1
Rookie
 
OX1's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2013
Location: Lakehurst
Posts: 26
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GT'sGT View Post
Technically, the true mustang was the 62 Mustang II concept car, the true public Mustang is the original design of the 65 and 66 and everything else just used the name on a different vehicle. This is no different.
No different, except for the 55 years of defining what a mustang is?
That's as bad as the dumb argument that Ford didn't like the Mustang name
for the first 2 weeks of the 55 years, irrelevant, just like that concept.
Grimbrand likes this.

14 GT-Roush Phs 3, VMP 93 tune, Whiteline Sway Bars, Roush U/L Control Arms, 18 X 9/10 Bullits with 295/255 NT05's, Street, 18 X 8/10 Bullits with 305/35R18 MT ET STR SS and 235/50ZR-18 Michelin PSS, Track, 11.23 @ 125.46...........

86 Capri, 5.0, 5Spd, A9L QH/BE, 47 lb Inj PMAS 3" MAF, Single T44 Turbo, Front Mount IC, TW170's, Stock Cam, Explr Intake/TB, 1.7 Rockers, CF dual friction clutch, 3" DP, 2.5" full Exh, 3.27's, 11.932 @ 115.78
OX1 is offline  
PONY Member
 
07redstang's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2018
Location: Poteau
Posts: 394
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GT'sGT View Post
Technically, the true mustang was the 62 Mustang II concept car, the true public Mustang is the original design of the 65 and 66 and everything else just used the name on a different vehicle. This is no different.
There is a difference, a concept car is just that, a concept not production.
Grimbrand likes this.

07redstang is offline  
GLOBAL MODERATOR
5.0L Member
S197 Member
 
ONEZ ST's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Location: Iowa Park
Posts: 7,155
           
Trying to take the Mach E seriously is like eating a dry Thanksgiving turkey.

The power connection on the Mach E is type J-1772. You need a charging station that handles that type of connection unless you want to run a 75 foot 120 volt extension cord out of your hotel window and use the charging cable that comes with the Mach E intended to plug in to your garage outlet.

Out of curiosity I went to Fords web site and pulled up the Mach E and at the bottom of the Mach E page is an app to map a trip. It showed various stations for a trip I mapped from Tx to CA. Not a lot of info accompanies the locations but it seems if you plan carefully you can make a trip.

Then I went to PlugShare and mapped the same trip from Texas to California and what alarms me is the limited number of connections for J-1772 and many of them are located at hotels. Very few charging stations along the route were equipped with more than a handful of connections. So you might find a charging station along your travel but you might wait for an open connection.

Next I looked at some of the hotel reviews where charging stations were located in smaller towns where those were the only stations, and read more than a few reviews stating the hotel has one connection for Tesla and one for J-1772. And it was not uncommon to read that the J-1772 outlets were not powered or that none of the spots were reserved for electrics causing problems.

Very unsettling to say the least.

----------------------------
2012 Mustang GT, Roush 2300 Black
2006 Mustang V6 Manual Legend Lime Sold
2019 Charger Scat Pack White
2016 Jeep Willys Silver Vin 060 RIP
2016 Jeep Willys Silver Vin 059 Sold
ONEZ ST is offline  
PONY Member
 
GT'sGT's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 970
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbrand View Post
GT, given that this car has been in continuous production with consistent layout and design (despite changing appearances), I have to say that yeah, "It's an electric 4-door jeep now!" is different. Even the concept was a front-engine, rear drive, 2 door sports car, not that different from all the other Mustang models, even if its appearance was pretty wild.



Sometimes you bring up really good points, but that last one just sounded a lot like "TROLOLOLOLOL!" to me.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaqC5FnvAEc
I can say the same of you, but will rise above the urge.
(Its far from a Jeep.)
Grimbrand likes this.
GT'sGT is offline  
PONY Member
 
GT'sGT's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 970
 
For all the Mach E haters here... here is an ally for you...


GT'sGT is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Tags
None

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1