Mach e Battery Issue - sharply reduced battery range -- and getting worse.

alexgorod said:

I have standard battery and I don't care about energy consumption when I drive, or just sit in the car. Here is my trip info where my standard battery went from 90% to 41%, so roughly 50% while the temperature was about 40F.

160 miles on the standard battery in a mild winter sounds very reasonable to me.

Click to expand...

I agree. I took a 112 miles round trip yesterday, was 48 leaving and 32 when I got home, using 55% of the charge on my SR AWD. No heat used on the way out, but 68 auto the whole way back and it was uphill all the way.

Mustang? said:

considered this. But if temps in the 40s and 50s cut range in half, this car cannot be used for half of the year in most of the US. Doesn't make sense.

Click to expand...

My Tesla Model Y is not even affected by this situation with the MME aboulsly terribe compared to Tesla, I have Ford MME extented range and compared ot Teslas its is

kltye said:

The problem is your original post just mentioned that the range is down, with no discussion of what had already been done to try to diagnose it (apart from going to the dealer). What is your cabin temperature set at? What does the display say about where your energy went? Have you looked at your pack temperature when driving? What does your miles per kWH meter say for energy consumption?

This is why everyone had assumed your post was another "GOM is showing low range, what's wrong" post.

Click to expand...

I have both Tesla MMY and MME.. MMY is VERY accurate, no math to do.. Ford GOM and Battery % is Very Weak.. I parked my MME until they get it figured out..

RickMachE said:

I believe you're wrong in that regard also. Selling a BEV in the first 2 years isn't going to have noticeable drop in anything. Too many on this forum greatly exaggerate the "damage" that a driver is doing by "abusive" practices.

Charge, drive, charge. Not an issue. Have at it.

The general population isn't comprised of software developers or engineers in the proportion that this forum is.

Click to expand...

You can look at the numbers out there already...the average degradation over 3 years is about 6%. That means there are absolutely going to be people buying used EV's with 10% range loss or so after 3 years...about the time of a lease when many will be turned back in(Not Mach-Es since the lease wasn't that appealing to many). It doesn't take an engineer to notice their range < stated range.

All I'm saying is the average person that ends up with a sub-average used battery likely won't understand or anticipate all of this. They're just going to complain when they hop in their car one winter and see the GOM showing 150 miles at 100% charge. Along with a push for chargers and such, there needs some educational push about EVs as well.

https://www.geotab.com/blog/ev-battery-health/

RickMachE said:

I believe you're wrong in that regard also. Selling a BEV in the first 2 years isn't going to have noticeable drop in anything. Too many on this forum greatly exaggerate the "damage" that a driver is doing by "abusive" practices.

Charge, drive, charge. Not an issue. Have at it.

The general population isn't comprised of software developers or engineers in the proportion that this forum is.

Click to expand...

Are you enjoying being a beta tester? The general population is not going to be happy with type of problems reported in this forum. However, since most of those problems appear to be software related hopefully most of the bugs will be worked out in the next couple of years.

ahg said:

Are you enjoying being a beta tester? The general population is not going to be happy with type of problems reported in this forum. However, since most of those problems appear to be software related hopefully most of the bugs will be worked out in the next couple of years.

Click to expand...

- "type of problems reported in this forum" - do you participate in many forums? I do. Probably 1/2 dozen currently, and my forum experience goes back close to 30 years, even before that on bulletin boards. People come to these to BITCH. Rarely do they come to PRAISE.

- I bought a May produced vehicle in the middle of the first year of production of a brand new type of vehicle never before manufactured by the company I bought it from. If I didn't foresee that they're would be issues, some of them faceplant type of issues, then I wasn't very bright.

- People who buy anything, especially something that costs $60,000+, and don't do their research, and become fully informed as to potential pluses and minuses, IMO deserve whatever they get. I don't have 4 vehicles in my garage to move around and take what I want for a drive. I did my research, knew the potential challenges I faced with a company that isn't on the bleeding or even leading edge of anything. I had a PHEV for 3 years with MyFordMobile, and the support was atrocious and never once did a promise OTA update come. I told my dealer that I suspected Ford would screw things up from time to time, and I looked to him and his service manager to help work through the issues. So far, they've been responsive. I also have a Lightning on order. IMO, if we (we the public we) don't support Ford and other auto companies on BEVs, they won't survive. I choose to support Ford by buying their vehicles and pushing them to do better.

So yes, I enjoy being a beta tester.

breeves002 said:

There is a software update available for a lot of MMEs pre June 18 build that helps make it less pessimistic.

Click to expand...

I haven't noticed a decrease in pessimism since updating my car. I don't really care what the GOM says, but I don't think the update is going to make the panickers less panicky. I think the only thing that would appease some people is if Ford took the Tesla route and just showed rated range instead of an estimate. People will be happy if they see a big number. It doesn't seem to matter if it has any basis in reality.

Here’s one segment of my weekend trip in my Premium 4X. Left at 100% with preconditioning departure time and ran down to 51% remaining, 75 mph ACC on, Whisper mode with 1PD off, set heat to 67F auto 1 with heated seat auto and heated steering wheel on. Into a 5-10 mph headwind and a couple hundred feet of elevation gain.

2.3 miles per KWh and 33F temperature outside.



Here I am a couple hundred yards from the EA chargers.

RickMachE said:

People come to these to BITCH. Rarely do they come to PRAISE.

Click to expand...

Well, of course we do!

What would be the fun in having a mutual admiration society?

Truth is if you REALLY hate the car, get rid of it. The forum gives those of us who are interested a chance to bitch to other folks who probably ALSO love the car and understand that the issues being bitched about are not deal killers for most of us.

I am certain Ford is listening and I am hoping that they are able to translate the legitimate concerns with this vehicle into fixes. MMe's a great car, beautifully made and good looking (and NOT just for a Ford), but in the end, if Ford is unable to keep up with the market, there are plenty of other mfgs coming for us.

For those of us old enough to remember the garbage that Detroit was putting out before Datsun and Toyota arrived back when, I hope that lesson was learned.

Mustang? said:

if Ford is unable to keep up with the market

Click to expand...

Hmm. Their first BEV (the Mach E) has consistently finished in the top tier of every head-to-head range test, road rally, and subjective review. The model Y has a rated range 50 miles further than the Mach E, yet EVERY HEAD-TO-HEAD TEST has the Mach E going further on a charge. Even in Norway where the Mach E was up against the much smaller, more efficient and aerodynamic Model 3 it finished second by 1 mile, way ahead of Kia, Hyundai, Chevy, VW, Renault, and a dozen other cars.

I get that you were unaware of Ford's philosophy of underpromise and overdeliver and can't seem to come to terms with that, but you are now being ridiculous.

Oh, and Tesla increased the size of the Model Y's battery to keep up with FORD.

Mustang? said:

I drove about 60 miles yesterday in 45 degree weather (combo of highway and local but all moderate speed and gentle terrain) and averaged 3.9 mkwh. IF the battery capacity is accurate (and using the approach you did) I have plenty of range--despite the fact that it is cold outside and the GOM says I don't. So if this approach is accurate, where's the reduced capacity due to weather that everyone is crowing about? If your approach is accurate, I am barely seeing ANY reduced range driving around in the 40 degree December air.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone else answered this question, maybe because the answer is obvious.

You previously mentioned that you are not using heat because you like a cold car. The electric heat (E-Heat) is a massive drain on the battery. The GOM assumes you will want to keep the cabin at something like 70 or 71 degrees, so it assumes you are running the heat. But you are not, and you are parking in a fairly warm garage, removing some of the warming load needed to warm a 45 degree battery.

Charge to 90% like you normally do, and run it down to 40% before charging again. Record the miles driven and then multiply times two. That is your range based on what you did with 50% of the battery. If you still think there is a problem, then go see Ford. But I would not complain to the dealer or Ford until you have more data other than the GOM BS.

My GOM is showing around 200 miles of range, when the EPA rating is 270. I did a 4.5 hour drive over the weekend and based on battery usage and efficiency my calculated range is 300 miles from 100% to 0%.

For exactly the reasons stated by @Murse-In-Airy, the GOM is worst case, and I always ignore it. Always. Well, I mostly do. It is hard to not be annoyed by it, but really I prefer a pessimistic estimate over an optimistic one as it is less likely to get me stranded with a dead battery.

timbop said:

I get that you were unaware of Ford's philosophy of underpromise and overdeliver and can't seem to come to terms with that, but you are now being ridiculous.

Click to expand...

I did not say that Ford is not keeping up with the market. I am a MMe owner. I purchased the car because I loved it and I still do. I want Ford to succeed with this but that won't stop me from pointing out what I don't like.

I said that I was hopeful that Ford WOULD be able to keep up with the market because the market will pass by manufacturers who aren't able to sort things out.

The complaint in this thread is that the MMe starts out with great range and (for me at least) a pretty accurate GOM. Mine stayed mostly accurate from April until late August. Then it started to drift down. So not a knock on the MMe as new, but a question as to what's going on here.

And as a general observation, as far as Ford's supposed philosophy of 'under promising and over delivering' my dealer loaned me an Ecosport during a recent service. You ought to try driving one and let me know how if that is 'over delivering' what exactly the 'under promise' was.

mkhuffman said:

I don't think anyone else answered this question, maybe because the answer is obvious.

You previously mentioned that you are not using heat because you like a cold car. The electric heat (E-Heat) is a massive drain on the battery. The GOM assumes you will want to keep the cabin at something like 70 or 71 degrees, so it assumes you are running the heat. But you are not, and you are parking in a fairly warm garage, removing some of the warming load needed to warm a 45 degree battery.

Charge to 90% like you normally do, and run it down to 40% before charging again. Record the miles driven and then multiply times two. That is your range based on what you did with 50% of the battery. If you still think there is a problem, then go see Ford. But I would not complain to the dealer or Ford until you have more data other than the GOM BS.

My GOM is showing around 200 miles of range, when the EPA rating is 270. I did a 4.5 hour drive over the weekend and based on battery usage and efficiency my calculated range is 300 miles from 100% to 0%.

For exactly the reasons stated by @Murse-In-Airy, the GOM is worst case, and I always ignore it. Always. Well, I mostly do. It is hard to not be annoyed by it, but really I prefer a pessimistic estimate over an optimistic one as it is less likely to get me stranded with a dead battery.

Click to expand...

It's a fair point and I have tried this experiment a few different ways without getting to a satisfactory answer. BUt I think the only real way to know is to run the battery dead. My thinking is that if the gom is bs at 180 miles, it is the same bs at 90--so why would I trust the number at either end?

The dealer has suggested that we try that-- he would have the car driven in a loop in the area with a service vehicle ready to collect it when the battery pooped out. Haven't done it yet. Maybe I will.

Mustang? said:

My thinking is that if the gom is bs at 180 miles, it is the same bs at 90--so why would I trust the number at either end?

Click to expand...

I am not saying to use the GOM at all to determine the actual range. I think you misunderstood my suggestion. Ignore the GOM. Record your miles driven. As someone else suggested, you can use Journeys or you can simply write down your odometer reading when you start at 90%, and write down your odometer reading when you get to 40%. Calculate the miles you drove on 50% of the battery then your range is double that. Right? It has nothing to do with the GOM.

The GOM does not know if there is a problem with your battery. If there really is a problem with your battery you will only know by measuring your actual range by miles driven and battery used.

I noticed a card in the app about cold weather battery capacity. It said that if you reset EV driving history, the gom will report (for the moment anyway) 'summer driving range' until it repopulates the algorithm with new data.

So I reset the history to see what the summer range actually would be.

The answer is that the gom reports 192 miles as the full range of the fully charged (100%) battery.

So again, if Ford is saying that you can return the gom to 'as new' (and mine was 272 at delivery last April with a 100% charge) by deleting EV driving history and the number it returns now as 'new' range is 192, is anyone at least a little curious as to why that should be? According to Ford, this eliminates all other variables and when we do that, the capacity is 30% lower than when the car was delivered.

mkhuffman said:

I am not saying to use the GOM at all to determine the actual range. I think you misunderstood my suggestion. Ignore the GOM. Record your miles driven. As someone else suggested, you can use Journeys or you can simply write down your odometer reading when you start at 90%, and write down your odometer reading when you get to 40%. Calculate the miles you drove on 50% of the battery then your range is double that. Right? It has nothing to do with the GOM.

The GOM does not know if there is a problem with your battery. If there really is a problem with your battery you will only know by measuring your actual range by miles driven and battery used.

Click to expand...

I did misunderstand what you are suggesting. BUt I have already done what you suggest and posted about it somewhere earlier in the thread. I used the new 'Notes' feature which came with my last software update and which allows you to write on the screen and save notes. I have been tracking odometer, range displayed and battery % writing it on the screen with my finger for a week. The gom is a bit more pessimistic than the real world results but not markedly so. Of course, if the Battery % number is not accurate, then it really doesn't mean much but I have no way of knowing that unless I run the battery out.

Others have said, and I think I kind of agree, that this is a new world that takes some getting used to. We have all had phones and laptops that showed adequate charge and watched that supposedly adequate charge drain away inexplicably and too fast. Until I feel comfortable that the numbers the car shows for battery % and range are reasonably real, or at least predictably off ( I know that the first quarter tank on nearly any ICE vehicle I have ever owned is bs), I can't feel comfortable using the car the way I want to. Ford may not know exactly what is off here, although I think they agree with most of us that the current software leaves much to be desired--but this issue is at the center of what will make their EV program successful. Real world dependable range, accurately reported, is pretty critical to building confidence in this product.

For the many here who are comfortable driving based upon odometer divided into battery % there are plenty of us who are not. Or at least, not yet.