EPA Certifies Mach-E Range Targets, 300 Miles for Premium Extended Range RWD

[eager2own]

Likely different (more aggressive) H rated tires, bigger wheels and a wider track stance. The other enhancements, such as lowering the car would actually increase range.

However it looks extremely uncompetitive vs the Model Y Performance which has similar enhancements standard , (staggered tires 255 35/275 35 vs 255 45 square in the Long range mode), enhanced brakes, track mode software and has 303 miles of range (a 30% increase vs 230), and is significantly cheaper, MSRP vs MSRP with the GT Performance Package factored in for the MME. To add insult to the deficit, Model Y has a top speed of 155. That suggests that it’s stronger than the MME after 60 mph since the GT tops out at 120.
Ford is doing a very big ask if they plan on releasing the GT with those specs, and up charge for the performance package. The YP wipes it across the board in every performance aspect , and cheaper too. That’s not good.

I don’t disagree with everything you said. However, I’m not sure I’d describe the MY as cheaper given that most of us will benefit from the $7,500 fed tax credit (and some from state incentives). I know you’re comparing MSRP to MSRP but that is meaningless to me if one offers a credit and the other doesn’t. We still don’t know what the package will cost, but we have no reason to think it’ll be more than the MY after tax credits.
Also, I don’t think lower top speed limiting means weaker performance above 60 mph. The main driver for those top speed limitations tends to be tire rating. The car may change tires before launch and, frankly, I won’t need to go above 120.
I don’t think that limitation means the car is weaker or stronger 60 to 100 than an MY... just that Ford has selected tires not rated above 120. I wouldn’t read more into that.

We don’t yet know the final specs on brakes, but it will have “enhanced” suspension (with Magnaride) and will match the MY in acceleration. So the only shortcoming becomes the range, which doesn’t matter to me and isn’t part of my definition of “sporty.” I will sacrifice range for the other factors that made me decide on the MME vs. the MY.
By the way, if looks play a part in what is “sporty”, the MME beats the MY ten-fold.
As to utility being less than a RAV4 — that’s not why I’d buy an MME. Plus, I also wouldn’t say that the MY meets that criteria.

PS For full disclosure, I’m not a blinded, die-hard MME fan or Tesla hater. I had considered the MY Performance, but I do prefer the MME. In fact, I also have a deposit on the Rivian R1T and, honestly, I’m leaning in that direction.

Sponsored

 

[dbsb3233]

Yep. I know we talk a lot about realistic highway range, and some say it doesn't matter much because there's chargers roughly 60-100 miles along many major interstates. But simply wanting to avoid stopping so often is only half of the issue. The other half is being able to go more places period. Many routes and destinations are not along the major interstates, and don't have charger coverage (and may not for many years, if ever). Having more range can make the difference between getting to many places at all, not just whether it's convenient with fewer stops.

 

[JamieGeek]

Here is an example: over this past weekend we took the Bolt to visit some relatives (yeah pandemic and all: we masked up and stayed away while visiting). They are 60 miles away (so 120 miles round trip). The temp outside was hovering around 50F. The Bolt was fully charged (in its GM crippled state--their intermediate solution for the fire recall is to just force it only to charge up to 90%) and the guess-O-meter was reading 160 miles. We had 3 adults in the car. The trip was 95% highway... I did precondition the car while plugged in for 10 minutes prior to leaving as well.

If train A leaves Chicago only loaded 1/2 way and train B leaves New York City filled with nuns...oh wait I digress.

HVAC temp set to 70F and cruise control set to 70 mph with occasional increases for passing, etc. but only up to 75 mph or so. The Bolt's consumption was 3.3 miles/kWh as reported by its trip meter. (Only going 70 mph around here can be quite scary as just about everyone is passing you with at least an extra 10 mph on you ! LOL.)

Now if the Mach-E can get a similar performance at 70 mph out of the 88 kWh (usable) battery then we're talking 88*3.3 or 290 miles...I'd take that. Even 3.2 miles/kWh would be good (ER RWD of course): 88*3.2=281 miles.

 

[dbsb3233]

Now if the Mach-E can get a similar performance at 70 mph out of the 88 kWh (usable) battery then we're talking 88*3.3 or 290 miles...I'd take that. Even 3.2 miles/kWh would be good (ER RWD of course): 88*3.2=281 miles.

That would be great, but I suspect it's probably a bit optimistic. 281 at 70 MPH avg vs 300 EPA city-hwy "combined" range (which is like 30 MPH avg) is only a 6% loss. I'm preparing myself for double that (~12% loss) at 70 MPH avg.

On my AWD ER, that would be 270 - 12% = 238. 10-100% from home would be 214, while 10-80% enroute would be 150. In good weather/temps. When it's 30 degrees out, maybe just 130?

 

[Woeo]

well since the mache gt is 3.7 0 to 60 somehow I feel it will be 3.5 0 to 60 when it launches. kinda makes the post a waste of time. YAWN. The article was more about handing at high speeds than drag racing. Model y is not that type either. back to some

'Darren and his presentation partner announced 3.5 at SEMA

 

[ChasingCoral]

I hoped the CA Route 1 range would be official with the release of the new Tech Specs:
Mustang-Mach-E-GT-Performance-Edition-spec-sheet.pdf

Unfortunately they seem to have double-pasted the GT and GTP information in the CA Route 1 slot -- oops!

They did confirm it's one of the slowest ponies in the stable.

 

[ChasingCoral]

I hoped the CA Route 1 range would be official with the release of the new Tech Specs:
Mustang-Mach-E-GT-Performance-Edition-spec-sheet.pdf

Unfortunately they seem to have double-pasted the GT and GTP information in the CA Route 1 slot -- oops!

They did confirm it's one of the slowest ponies in the stable.

Reading more closely I realize the new Tech Specs doesn't even have the actual ranges, just the targets still

Sponsored