Mach-E EPA Ratings Revealed in Window Sticker!

[ChasingCoral]

Hmmm, exactly 270. That suspicious, very suspicious. ? I wonder what their adjustment factor was. How high could they have made it, OR did they go higher/lower than Tesla does to get that number? ?

I wonder if they could have gone higher.

I'm thrilled. It hits the 270 mile EPA range and beat the acceleration, down to 4.8 seconds.

Sponsored

 

[J Duce]

For Extended Range Premium:

Looks like they did hit the 270 mark exactly then for the AWD-EX models. More interested in real world reports after delivery though.

Thanks for sharing. Is there a link or website where this information can be found?

 

[EVer]

i think it depends on the battery pack. 480km is the SR AWD and 739 is the ER RWD. Just 1 guide for all the models. The car I had an ride allong in was displaying 18.0 km/kWh average during a time of 1.5 hours of driving (couldn’t see a distance), that was theER AWD.

duh, makes sense. Thanks.

 

[generaltso]

At least that window sticker says Mustang.

 

[FredT]

Very nice. Matched up spot on with the targeted figure. About the same EPA rating as Polestar 2 and Tesla Model X Performance, with driving range in between them, too:

Wait. Comparing it to Model X Performance? This is what it should be compared with:

 

[macchiaz-o]

Wait. Comparing it to Model X Performance? This is what it should be compared with:

You may compare it however you like.

 

[EVer]

Wait. Comparing it to Model X Performance? This is what it should be compared with:

Why?

What if the person doing the comparing wrote the Model Y off because of how terrible it looks?

 

[malba2366]

Efficiency is pretty bad compared to model Y.

 

[EVmodeler]

MPGe is provided with low precision, so these are your low-precision conversions of those numbers:

96 MPGe = 350 Wh/mi city
84 MPGe = 400 Wh/mi highway

Keep in mind that EPA sticker and test car list data is always AC energy from the grid - what the consumer pays for (like at the gas pump).

The EPA test data showed that 101.2 AC kWh were required to recharge the pack after 88.45 kWh were drawn from battery terminals, resulting in a charge efficiency of 87.4% - pretty typical of most EVs. This charge eff covers all the losses including charger, any parasitic/accessory loads (DC-DC for 12V) while charging, and actually also includes all of the internal battery losses while charging plus the internal battery losses while driving since the power/integrated energy is measured at the terminals.
The label/adjusted MPGe and thus AC Wh/mi are the grid energy consumption.
The energy from the battery are: 307 DC Wh/mi city, and a city range of 287 mi,
and 350 DC Wh/mi highway, and a range of 250 mi.
The adjusted combined range is 0.55*287 + 0.45*250 = 270 mi, as stated on the label.
I know many are interested in Highway range, rather than city or combined.

To get these label numbers based on the posted EPA emission certification data would require an adjustment factor of 0.76 rather than the standard 0.70. The data may be updated - it has not been from what I can find. The certification data specifically noted that Ford was working on road load refinement, and that could certainly improve the energy consumption results (so the adjustment factor may not be as high as 0.76).
At any rate - now we have the label values!

 

[timbop]

Efficiency is pretty bad compared to model Y.

Really? I think you need to reserve judgement until Kyle, Tom Mouloughney, or Bjorn Nyland due actual range tests. The EPA 203 mile Taycan just did 260 278 miles at 70 MPH in the real world.

Nonetheless the Mach E's EPA range is 83% of a model Y, with the EPA efficiency of about 73% of the Y. I wouldn't call that "bad" considering it is a lot sexier looking car than the Y and has parts that are actually painted and correctly attached.

 

[EVer]

Nonetheless the Mach E's EPA range is 83% of a model Y, with the EPA efficiency of about 73% of the Y.

Seems about right. 17% "bigger" battery, recouping about 14% of the efficiency discrepancy.

 

[malba2366]

Really? I think you need to reserve judgement until Kyle, Tom Mouloughney, or Bjorn Nyland due actual range tests. The EPA 203 mile Taycan just did 260 miles at 70 MPH in the real world.

Nonetheless the Mach E's EPA range is 83% of a model Y, with the EPA efficiency of about 73% of the Y. I wouldn't call that "bad" considering it is a lot sexier looking car than the Y and has parts that are actually painted and correctly attached.

The range is fine. The efficiency rating is the issue, cost of operation of the Mach e will be 30% higher than a vehicle which offers the same amount of space and performance. That is a big deal.

 

[EV Lab]

I am sure Ford is being very conservative, compared to the overly optimistic ratings from Tesla...

 

[Maric]

Efficiency is pretty bad compared to model Y.

The Y is rumored to be getting another range boost too.

https://electrek.co/2020/11/20/tesla-leaked-software-points-new-range-increase-model-y/

I just hope Ford can and *will* up MachE range over time with OTA. If they are serious about being in the EV game (and i think their future depends on it) they will follow Tesla's model here.

 

[timbop]

The range is fine. The efficiency rating is the issue, cost of operation of the Mach e will be 30% higher than a vehicle which offers the same amount of space and performance. That is a big deal.

I'm saying the EPA range is low, which means the reported mi/kwh is ALSO low. I would be willing to bet that in normal usage the mi/kwh is closer to the Y than the EPA MPGe would suggest

Sponsored