BorgWarner supplying integrated drive module for Mach-E

[silverelan]

BorgWarner specifically said the secondary GT motor is in addition to the Mach-E's 50kW and 216kW motors.

Sponsored

 

[silverelan]

But we know what BorgWarner would have said if it was just another 216kW motor in front. It's what Ford has been saying from the launch til this press release. Something along the lines of, "there are two motors for the Mach-E, a 216kW motor that drives the rear wheels and a 50kW for the front. The GT just uses two of the 216kW motors."

That's not at all what BorgWarner says.

 

[JamieGeek]

But we know what BorgWarner would have said if it was just another 216kW motor in front. It's what Ford has been saying from the launch til this press release. Something along the lines of, "there are two motors for the Mach-E, a 216kW motor that drives the rear wheels and a 50kW for the front. The GT just uses two of the 216kW motors."

That's not at all what BorgWarner says.

So all this arguing is about this quote in Borg Warner's press release:

The iDM is being supplied to power the Mustang Mach-E’s rear-wheel drive and all-wheel-drive configurations. On the all-wheel-drive GT version, BorgWarner is supplying the secondary drive unit to power the front wheels as well. Start of production is slated to begin this year.

It is also possible that the front drive unit for non-GT AWD cars isn't a Borg Warner unit. Then that would make sense with this quote (and the fact that Ford has been saying all along that the front motor is the same as the rear in GT versions).

 

[macchiaz-o]

So all this arguing is about this quote in Borg Warner's press release:


It is also possible that the front drive unit for non-GT AWD cars isn't a Borg Warner unit. Then that would make sense with this quote (and the fact that Ford has been saying all along that the front motor is the same as the rear in GT versions).

BW says in the same PR that they supply the front non-GT unit too.

Remember though that they also state they do not build any of the traction motors. BW supplies the iDM which incorporates the motor, transmission gearing, and some electronics, into a housing.

Some bits of the housing and hearing and electronics might be different for the GT front motor. Or not -- it might be identical to the standard rear motor. Based on this PR, there's not enough info for me to know one way or the other... Just my humble opinion.

Anyhoo, once some of you get the GT and inspect from underneath the vehicle, we'll be able to "get to the bottom of this."

 

[silverelan]

You guys are free to call me out if it turns out I'm totally off-base on this.

I'm just saying, BorgWarner told us there are three separate and distinct motors on the Mach-E, not two as originally announced.

1. 216 kW rear motor - (all) non-GT variants
2. 50 kW front motor - AWD variants
3. x kW front motor - GT variants

 

[ChasingCoral]

Fine. We all know advertising and marketing folks quote engineering details flawlessly in press releases. That's why the Dealer Training and Packaging guide both list the Ford Mobile Charger in the US plugs into a NEMA 15-50 (a three-phase outlet one might find in industrial facilities but rare in US homes) -- note sarcasm.

I recommend caution in reading too much into press releases, especially when one line in one release might possibly, sort of, kind of differ from a consistent point made in several releases and interviews.

 

[silverelan]

BW says in the same PR that they supply the front non-GT unit too.

Remember though that they also state they do not build any of the traction motors. BW supplies the iDM which incorporates the motor, transmission gearing, and some electronics, into a housing.

Some bits of the housing and hearing and electronics might be different for the GT front motor. Or not -- it might be identical to the standard rear motor. Based on this PR, there's not enough info for me to know one way or the other... Just my humble opinion.

Anyhoo, once some of you get the GT and inspect from underneath the vehicle, we'll be able to "get to the bottom of this."

I think the news of a new front motor on the GT means they've made significant changes since the original prototype affecting weight, efficiency, performance, etc.

It partially explains why the kW and HP figures were removed from the configurator and the additional delivery delay beyond what could be expected from COVID shutdowns.

 

[macchiaz-o]

The only new thing I learned from the press release was that BorgWarner supplies iDMs for Ford's Mustang Mach-E. This is significant because vehicle manufacturers prefer to keep most of their tier 1 supplier information private. But with MME, we're learning about iDMs, brakes, audio, mapping/GIS, and more.

Nothing else in there was new information (in my own read of it). But like I've said, you and I are interpreting it very differently. So you may be right but I don't know yet.

Also, maybe the rear iDM for the GT is not supplied by BW. After all, they didn't give that any special mention.

 

[silverelan]

The only new thing I learned from the press release was that BorgWarner supplies iDMs for Ford's Mustang Mach-E. This is significant because vehicle manufacturers prefer to keep most of their tier 1 supplier information private. But with MME, we're learning about iDMs, brakes, audio, mapping/GIS, and more.

Nothing else in there was new information (in my own read of it). But like I've said, you and I are interpreting it very differently. So you may be right but I don't know yet.

Also, maybe the rear iDM for the GT is not supplied by BW. After all, they didn't give that any special mention.

Yup, agreed. Looking over BorgWarner's statement, they specifically say they're making the front motor for the GT. Not the rear.

On the all-wheel-drive GT version, BorgWarner is supplying the secondary drive unit to power the front wheels as well.

 

[buzznwood]

Until we get final specs all is not known however I do not see these statments as any change to what was initially said.

The large motor is just a cylinder from a space perspective however the front and rear cross members I expect to be completely different as a result I suspect the drive housing will also be very different between front and rear as the front no doubt needs provision for additional control modules being attached to it. So even though the motor is the same the housing is not.

I would not be surprised to find that the GT was a very late addition to the line up post mustangification with most of the initial work done on the styling side, with engineering limited to setting up some base specs with the real development work only just starting hence the removal of the specs which where always subject to change. Naturally we all want the final specs to be better than originally stated

 

[silverelan]

Until we get final specs all is not known however I do not see these statments as any change to what was initially said.

The large motor is just a cylinder from a space perspective however the front and rear cross members I expect to be completely different as a result I suspect the drive housing will also be very different between front and rear as the front no doubt needs provision for additional control modules being attached to it. So even though the motor is the same the housing is not.

I would not be surprised to find that the GT was a very late addition to the line up post mustangification with most of the initial work done on the styling side, with engineering limited to setting up some base specs with the real development work only just starting hence the removal of the specs which where always subject to change. Naturally we all want the final specs to be better than originally stated

BorgWarner did not say that the two motors they're building for Ford's Mustang Mach-E program are going to be used on both non-GT and GTs. Instead they said they've built two motors for the non-GTs and supplying the front motor for the GT. That front motor is either the originally intended 210kW motor or is possibly something else.

The GT rear motor is now a mystery unit from either a different supplier or is manufactured in-house by Ford.

No matter how you parse it, BW is saying the motorset on the GT is different than what was originally announced in November.

 

[RonTCat]

BorgWarner did not say that the two motors they're building for Ford's Mustang Mach-E program are going to be used on both non-GT and GTs. Instead they said they've built two motors for the non-GTs and supplying the front motor for the GT. That front motor is either the originally intended 210kW motor or is possibly something else.

The GT rear motor is now a mystery unit from either a different supplier or is manufactured in-house by Ford.

No matter how you parse it, BW is saying the motorset on the GT is different than what was originally announced in November.

The GT and Base PDU (rear motor) are the same.

The SDU (front motor) are different between Base and GT, with GT getting the high performance SDU.

 

[silverelan]

The GT and Base PDU (rear motor) are the same.

If that is the case, why does BorgWarner say that they are only providing the secondary motor for the GT?

 

[macchiaz-o]

If that is the case, why does BorgWarner say that they are only providing the secondary motor for the GT?

They didn't specifically say they were only providing the second iDM. So we don't really know yet about the rear motor, although Ford people implied it's the same rear motor on all MMEs.

Sponsored