Do you think it’s likely that the 5 second acceleration limit will change?

[Kevin P]

Who is this referring to?

The guy I quoted.

Sponsored

 

[Mach1E]

All the 5 seconds limit complaints by me and others are valid.

But every once and a while I have to give myself a reality check.

The reality check is this:
we are complaining about the acceleration of a crossover, that despite its flaws, still does 0-60 in 3.5 and the 1/4 mile in low 12 seconds.

Take a look at the list of cars that can do either or both of those things. I can guarantee “lack of acceleration” isn’t a complaint for any of them.

 

[BigMach-E]

All the 5 seconds limit complaints by me and others are valid.

But every once and a while I have to give myself a reality check.

The reality check is this:
we are complaining about the acceleration of a crossover, that despite its flaws, still does 0-60 in 3.5 and the 1/4 mile in low 12 seconds.

Take a look at the list of cars that can do either or both of those things. I can guarantee “lack of acceleration” isn’t a complaint for any of them.

This is a solid point.

However, I just went for a drive in my GTPE, and that low end torque is missing at 65 mph, and it’s disappointing. You hold steady at 65, then push the pedal down, and getting up to 85 takes 2+ seconds. I just want more pull, and the car seems like it “should” be capable of it, but it’s not.

 

[Mach1E]

This is a solid point.

However, I just went for a drive in my GTPE, and that low end torque is missing at 65 mph, and it’s disappointing. You hold steady at 65, then push the pedal down, and getting up to 85 takes 2+ seconds. I just want more pull, and the car seems like it “should” be capable of it, but it’s not.

For sure.

The disappointment shows up at that speed.

It’s really because it’s so obscenely fast down low that it feels “inadequate” up top.

But again, perspective, even the disappointing 101 mph trap speed……. iCE Mustang GTs didn’t top that until 2005! And they didn’t beat our time until 2018. Plus none of them can match (or come close) to us to 60.

And how many SUVs are doing the 1/4 mile faster? Not many. And none that people would call “slow.”

But yet I definitely want it to be faster.

 

[JLowe]

The reality check is this:
we are complaining about the acceleration of a crossover, that despite its flaws, still does 0-60 in 3.5 and the 1/4 mile in low 12 seconds.

Just think, 7 of that 12 seconds is at reduced output. Think this would be a 10 second car if full power was allowed for 10 seconds?

 

[Mach1E]

Just think, 7 of that 12 seconds is at reduced output. Think this would be a 10 second car if full power was allowed for 10 seconds?

Not even close.

But it would be a high 11 second car based on the 1/8th mile time.

High 11s is a looooong way from a 10 second car. Like a 200 hp difference.

 

[BigMach-E]

Not even close.

But it would be a high 11 second car based on the 1/8th mile time.

High 11s is a looooong way from a 10 second car. Like a 200 hp difference.

And that isn’t what is even being looked for here. We are talking give full power 480 bhp as an 8-9 second duration. Have it take 45 seconds to a minute to recover. If Ford can do that, I’ll buy the upgrade for my existing car. If Ford can’t do that or better, likely my last Ford. When I’m in the market again, I’ll be looking at the upcoming Stinger EV, or a Ionic 6 N.

 

[dtbaker61]

I’m not disagreeing with you on this, I want that to be clear.

I am just asking if you can point me in the direction to some data that validates that the battery has a high potential for thermal runaway due to complete pack design if there wasn’t a limiter in place.

Isn’t it possible that the limiter is in place due to the HVJB or another component? Does removing it require a full pack redesign?

Thermal runaway of the batteries during WOT is not the likely result if the 5 sec cap were to be lifted by a change in software.

More likely results would be:
- any undersize bus bars or wiring heating up beyond insulation ratings if they are in unventilated uncooled spaces.
- internal battery temps getting high enough to reduce life or damage BMS sensors/chips internally that are probably rated for 140F temps max
- motor windings/insulation damaged, shorting
- inverter wiring and guts overheating

Software hacks to remove cap without improved cooling and additional sensors would be disastrous ... thus requiring significant changes to both software, hardware, and additional sensors. Hence the 'dumb' predictive time limit based on energy in/outand some approximate cooling rate rather than sensor feedback closed loop capping

our cars are NOT set up to track with repeat WOT and regen braking back to back. Our cars are set up to compromise between performance, and temperature management, in all possible environments from arctic to desert under 'normal' driving conditions to maintain reaonable 100k mile warranty.

EV street cars cannot be 'souped up' without massive changes, and massive sacrifices of warranty.


that being said..... if you improved cooling in key areas, added sensors to keep track, and THEN hacked the software.... you'd have a pretty fun car! Maybe this will happen in future model years, or a different model optimized for performance, who knows.

 

[Mach1E]

Thermal runaway of the batteries during WOT is not the likely result if the 5 sec cap were to be lifted by a change in software.

More likely results would be:
- any undersize bus bars or wiring heating up beyond insulation ratings if they are in unventilated uncooled spaces.
- internal battery temps getting high enough to reduce life or damage BMS sensors/chips internally that are probably rated for 140F temps max
- motor windings/insulation damaged, shorting
- inverter wiring and guts overheating

Software hacks to remove cap without improved cooling and additional sensors would be disastrous ... thus requiring significant changes to both software, hardware, and additional sensors. Hence the 'dumb' predictive time limit based on energy in/outand some approximate cooling rate rather than sensor feedback closed loop capping

our cars are NOT set up to track with repeat WOT and regen braking back to back. Our cars are set up to compromise between performance, and temperature management, in all possible environments from arctic to desert under 'normal' driving conditions to maintain reaonable 100k mile warranty.

EV street cars cannot be 'souped up' without massive changes, and massive sacrifices of warranty.


that being said..... if you improved cooling in key areas, added sensors to keep track, and THEN hacked the software.... you'd have a pretty fun car! Maybe this will happen in future model years, or a different model optimized for performance, who knows.

While this is a nice well thought out response……..

He asked for references and data and you just repeated all the theories.

The reality is…….. there is no actual data. We have no clue what the actual temperature and power limits of the car are.

We do know (from some people posting here) that Ford is actually considering different ways to increase power or possibly adjust the time limit.

But until they do, or someone does aftermarket, it’s all just theories and speculation.

My theory, based on 18 months of evidence, is that we aren’t close to the real hardware limits. Why? Because we have zero hardware failures due to acceleration.

Zero.

And that’s extremely unusual for a high hp vehicle. On ICE cars, at least a few people would have broken a transmission or rear end at this point.

 

[dtbaker61]

While this is a nice well thought out response……..

He asked for references and data and you just repeated all the theories.

The reality is…….. there is no actual data. We have no clue what the actual temperature and power limits of the car are.

We do know (from some people posting here) that Ford is actually considering different ways to increase power or possibly adjust the time limit.

But until they do, or someone does aftermarket, it’s all just theories and speculation.

My theory, based on 18 months of evidence, is that we aren’t close to the real hardware limits. Why? Because we have zero hardware failures due to acceleration.

Zero.

And that’s extremely unusual for a high hp vehicle. On ICE cars, at least a few people would have broken a transmission or rear end at this point.

My comments are based in personal experience in building and running performance Evs that did not have fancy software limits and DID suffer hardware failures.

Evs have very different mechanical failure than high hp ICE.

Over torque breaks transmissions. Over current melts insulation.

 

[BigMach-E]

My comments are based in personal experience in building and running performance Evs that did not have fancy software limits and DID suffer hardware failures.

Evs have very different mechanical failure than high hp ICE.

Over torque breaks transmissions. Over current melts insulation.

That’s really cool that you cobbled together DIY EVs. And I applaud that. However, what you are referring to is something that has absolutely no sensors, and no monitoring system whatsoever, that was built in a garage, versus something that was engineered by a very large company, that seems to have quite a great deal of sensors, and a rather stout BMS. It’s not exactly the same thing.

I think that the 5 second limitation is overly conservative, but only time will tell.

 

[Mach1E]

My comments are based in personal experience in building and running performance Evs that did not have fancy software limits and DID suffer hardware failures.

Evs have very different mechanical failure than high hp ICE.

Over torque breaks transmissions. Over current melts insulation.

Again, all true, but no real data to prove how this applies to the Mach E GT and the 5 sec limit.

Yes, “too much” would be bad. But what’s the real limit? We don’t know since noone has melted insulation.

 

[AKgrampy]

While this is a nice well thought out response……..

He asked for references and data and you just repeated all the theories.

The reality is…….. there is no actual data. We have no clue what the actual temperature and power limits of the car are.

We do know (from some people posting here) that Ford is actually considering different ways to increase power or possibly adjust the time limit.

But until they do, or someone does aftermarket, it’s all just theories and speculation.

My theory, based on 18 months of evidence, is that we aren’t close to the real hardware limits. Why? Because we have zero hardware failures due to acceleration.

Zero.

And that’s extremely unusual for a high hp vehicle. On ICE cars, at least a few people would have broken a transmission or rear end at this point.

I do believe there have been several hundred HVBJB failures.

 

[BigMach-E]

I do believe there have been several hundred HVBJB failures.

I think, and this is anecdotal, of course, but my dealer, which is a small local dealer, has probably worked on about 100 HVJB failures alone at this point. There have probably been over a thousand HVJB failures, but that has almost nothing to do with this 5 second limitation on throttle events. Evidence is that RWD/AWD Selects and Premiums (that don’t have the limitation) have had this happen, and the HVJB failure has been well documented to be rather independent of the 5 second throttle limitation.

Listen, I’m tired of the reasoning that has been provided here, because it’s a circular argument, with no one providing data, only supposition.

Ford really should fix the issue, and yes, it’s a fix, for a problem, it’s not a “throw the hands in the air, move on to next gen” sort of thing. The vehicle is awesome as a daily driver, but it’s been, and continues to be, misrepresented as being a performance EV.

Folks who bought the car who care about performance have been disappointed. Almost every notable review of the GTPE has mentioned the limitation after 5 seconds.

I think Ford will have to do something, because soon, this car will get romped by rather basic, pedestrian EV models that are coming out in the next few years, performance wise.

It’s not a performance EV, if it’s power gets cut to almost half after 5 seconds.

It’s not a performance EV if a non-performance EV (TMYLR) can beat it in a quarter mile. And it costs about 20k less.

A Kia, for Christ’s sake, absolutely romps on it. Costs about 10k less.

A Volvo, will likely smash on it (EX30 AWD) in a quarter mile. Expected to cost about 20-25 k less.

If you have felt the limitation after 5 seconds of throttle, it’s very very significant.

 

[Mach1E]

I do believe there have been several hundred HVBJB failures.

And they have nothing to do with the 5 second GT limit.

If it did, only GTs would fail.

The HVJB was a poor design that came in all Mach Es and something Ford figured out later (thus the recall).

Sponsored