Mach-E GT and GT Performance Edition Hit Final EPA Range of 270 miles and 260 miles!

[dbsb3233]

Had I known I could get a GT without sacrificing any range…. ?

I'm holding out hope for the opposite -- that whatever they're doing to increase range from 250 to 270 on the GT (or 235 to 260 on the Performance version) will also be applied to our non-GTs via OTA. That would translate to my FE going from 270 to something like 290.

The bigger front motor in the GT is surely going to make it less efficient than the regular AWD. Just like the RWD is more efficient than the AWD.

Sponsored

 

[MachTee]

That is impressive. I do hope Ford is keeping its EPA ratings conservative and is not simply hyping it.

Alex on Autos on Youtube has upsized the tires on his MME ER AWD, I think to 245 19s on a set of Lincoln wheels. Will be very interested to see what the hit is on efficiency.

 

[All Hat No Cattle]

Under promise.

Over deliver.

How can you go wrong with that?

 

[JonathanEzor]

If you've never driven a performance-oriented car, you need to do so. Some people love the stiffened ride, many hate it.

I had a 2011 GT500. It was stiff as hell. It was stiffened even further with aftermarket mods. My wife couldn't stand it. I absolutely loved it. The "connected-to-the-road" feeling was amazing.

My dad had a C6 corvette that was nice but more "floaty" than my GT500. He now has a C8 corvette with the magneride. Having driven that, I was absolutely going for the GTPE over the GT for that upgrade alone.

The adaptive damping is tempting to me, but I really don't want the overly narrow sport seats or the summer tires. (Can't have the perfect car, I guess.) {Jonathan}

 

[silverelan]

That is impressive. I do hope Ford is keeping its EPA ratings conservative and is not simply hyping it.

Maybe I'm misremembering, but didn't Tesla previously bump the range on the Model 3 with a re-certification and not actually make any changes to the buffer or efficiency?

 

[shutterbug]

That's pretty impressive considering it has wider/stickier tires. And I think it weighs slightly more, too.

I would have been more tempted by the GT if I knew the range was going to be so close.

Not to mention avoid being rear-ended

OTOH, you would have waited another 6-9 months for the car and shelled out more money.

Personally, I'm just a little jealous because of a couple of cosmetic differences on GT (body colored roof, bigger tires). But I was happy with my choice 3 months ago, and this doesn't change that.

 

[Plutoman15]

Any chance they added a heat pump to get the milage up? I realize it only helps in a certain temp range but an insider had hinted they were taking a look at a heat pump for the GT to help range.

 

[Cnote]

Not to mention avoid being rear-ended

OTOH, you would have waited another 6-9 months for the car and shelled out more money.

Personally, I'm just a little jealous because of a couple of cosmetic differences on GT (body colored roof, bigger tires). But I was happy with my choice 3 months ago, and this doesn't change that.

I'm a little jealous of some of the cosmetic differences as well (front grill, GT seats and interior copper accents - but not the performance edition seats) and really jealous of the magnaride suspension. I just don't know if that large price difference is worth it (although it would include a little bump in range for me as well). Things that make you go hmm.

 

[RedStallion]

Nobody is going to drive GT the EPA testing assumes. You can safely assume half of this range on highway.

 

[Lola2004]

Mustang Mach-E GT and GT Performance Edition Hit Final EPA-Estimated Range of 270 miles and 260 miles |

DEARBORN, Mich., June 23, 2021 – Today, Ford announced that the Mustang Mach-E GT and Mustang Mach-E GT Performance Edition have completed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency certification and range labeling processes.

With torque of 634 lb.-ft/860 Nm1 and 0-60mph in 3.5 seconds2, the Mustang Mach-E GT Performance Edition will now take you an EPA-estimated range of 260 miles3 while the Mustang Mach-E GT has an EPA-estimated range of 270 miles3.

“With Pirelli summer tires4 and MagneRide® damping system, Mustang Mach-E GT Performance Edition drivers get the performance thrills of 0-60 mph in 3.5 seconds while being able to travel further with the final EPA-estimated range of 260 miles3.’ said Darren Palmer, global director, battery electric vehicles, Ford Motor Company. “More than half of our orders for the Mustang Mach-E GT have been for the Performance Edition, and I’m particularly pleased that we have had orders from every state across the U.S.”

The starting MSRP5 of the Mustang Mach-E GT is $59,900 and the Mustang Mach-E GT Performance Edition is $64,900 in the United States. Both qualify for as much as $7,500 in federal tax incentives6. Customers can order a Mustang Mach-E GT here. Deliveries will begin in the fall.

1 Calculated via peak performance of the electric motors at peak battery power. Your results may vary.

2 Ford test data based on typical industry methodology using 1-foot rollout. Your results may vary.

3 Based on full charge. Actual range varies with conditions such as external environment, vehicle use, driving behaviors, vehicle maintenance, lithium-ion battery age and state of health.

4 Designed to optimize driving dynamics and provide superior performance on wet and dry roads. Ford does not recommend using summer tires when temperatures drop below approximately 45 deg F (7 deg C) or in snow/ice conditions. If the vehicle must be driven in these conditions, Ford recommends using mud and snow, All-season or snow tires.

5 Manuacturer Suggested Retail Price. Taxes, title and registration fees extra.

6 You may qualify for as much as $7,500 in federal tax incentives for purchasing an all-electric Ford vehicle. The federal tax credit is a potential future tax savings. The amount of your tax savings will depend on your individual tax circumstances. Please consult with your own tax or legal professional to determine eligibility, specific amount of incentive or rebates available. The federal tax credit amount may be reduced according to credit phase-out rules. Incentives and additional rebates are not within Ford’s control. This information does not constitute tax or legal advice. For additional information, go to https://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/409.

Awesome, makes me,think I should switch up to the GT

 

[RedStallion]

Under promise.

Over deliver.

How can you go wrong with that?

How? Just compare F with TSLA market valuations. BS sells.

 

[dbsb3233]

Nobody is going to drive GT the EPA testing assumes. You can safely assume half of this range on highway.

Not half, but yeah, EPA overestimates where range actually matters: highway road trip driving.

I'm averaging 2.8 MPK on 4000 miles of road trips at mostly 75-80 MPH speed limits (AWD ER) across CO/UT/NV. That's 10% below the EPA 3.1. Not too bad of a high speed penalty. Of course, then we have to adjust for driving between 10-80% SOC, and any elevation gains, wind, cold, wet roads, etc. All those reduce realistic road trip leg range down to around 60% of EPA.

I've ranged anywhere from 2.1 to 3.5 MPK on high speed road trips legs. 2.8 +/- 25%.

 

[silverelan]

Not half, but yeah, EPA overestimates where range actually matters: highway road trip driving.

I'm averaging 2.8 MPK on 4000 miles of road trips at mostly 75-80 MPH speed limits (AWD ER) across CO/UT/NV. That's 10% below the EPA 3.1. Not too bad of a high speed penalty. Of course, then we have to adjust for driving between 10-80% SOC, and any elevation gains, wind, cold, wet roads, etc. All those reduce realistic road trip leg range down to around 60% of EPA.

I've ranged anywhere from 2.1 to 3.5 MPK on high speed road trips legs. 2.8 +/- 25%.

If GT can match that, I'll be stoked. Especially if Ford puts the extra battery cooling to good use to increase charging speeds (narrator: they won't).

 

[agoldman]

I'm holding out hope for the opposite -- that whatever they're doing to increase range from 250 to 270 on the GT (or 235 to 260 on the Performance version) will also be applied to our non-GTs via OTA. That would translate to my FE going from 270 to something like 290.

The bigger front motor in the GT is surely going to make it less efficient than the regular AWD. Just like the RWD is more efficient than the AWD.

I'm not sure how the EPA measured the Premium AWD (FE here) to begin with, but my "summer" range is consistently 300-320. Average speed maybe 67. When winter comes back in to play, all bets are off again.

 

[dbsb3233]

If GT can match that, I'll be stoked. Especially if Ford puts the extra battery cooling to good use to increase charging speeds (narrator: they won't).

I'd still expect around 5-10% worse range in the GT vs the AWD. I don't see how they can put in a bigger motor (more weight), and bigger/stickier tires and get the same MPK. (If/when both get the same software, that is.)

But even 20 miles worse than what most are experiencing in the AWD is still pretty good. And most people doing GT burnouts and other inefficient sportscar stuff probably aren't doing it on a road trip anyway. That's more around home where range rarely matters.

Sponsored