Extended Range EV or Battery EV

[Mach1E]

I don't want to haul-around a 500+lb engine, etc. that will very rarely ever get used. On road trips, I'd rather stop at a charger for 20 to 30 minutes after driving for 4 or 5 hours once or twice a year. I think I would end-up spending more time getting the oil changed per year on the EREV than I do charging my BEV in public per year.

The irony of your first line is that most of us haul around an extra 500+ lbs in battery that rarely gets used.

The EREV vehicles can weigh less because they use a battery half the size.

In the 4 years I owned my Mach E, I only remember going below 50% charge once. I would have been fine with 150 mile max range or less. Smaller battery, less cost, less weight, more efficient and better performance.

But that’s my use case.

Sponsored

 

[DWIL]

You hit the nail right on the head! We started with a Tesla because it was the best available in 2018. And we loved it, only dumping it when the CEO's immature behavior became destructive in areas where he should not be involved.

Switching to the 2024 Mach E GT new in April, 2025, we were delighted with the perfect t transitional setup of a much better laid out set of controls. And it really us a great bridge from ICE car controls to more futuristic ones.

But what especially got us hooked was the performance, looks, and balance of the vehicle. It is a terrific first car coming from ICE because it is familiar--but it just performs WAY better.

in September, we bought our second EV--the VW Buzz second edition--to replace my low mileage, trouble free Pacifica minivan as a dedicated two person windsurf vehicle. Had Chrysler offered an all electric version, they would have kept us as customers, but the lie maintenance, low fuel cost (we have home solar), and the torque and acceleration of an EV are incomparable.

we can speculate what the future may bring, but Ford did a great job at introducing a good looking, great performing "first EV" transitional vehicle.

I just hope that all the roadblocks thrown up by the current administration do not prove too difficult for car businesses to surmount.

Well said, and your experience mirrors exactly what I was getting at.
The Mach-E succeeds because it doesn’t force people to unlearn how to drive or interact with a car just to go electric. The controls feel intentional, the layout makes sense, and the performance immediately reminds you that this isn’t an experiment, it’s a finished product.

That “bridge” matters more than some people want to admit. For a lot of drivers coming from ICE, familiarity lowers the barrier, and once they experience the torque, smoothness, and low maintenance, there’s no going back. Ford understood that psychology and executed it well.

Your point about loyalty is also spot on. If legacy automakers don’t offer compelling EV options, customers won’t wait around out of brand loyalty alone, they’ll move on. Ford kept many of us in the family by delivering something that looks right, drives right, and performs right.

As for the future, I agree, speculation is easy, but execution is what counts. So far, Ford got the Mach-E right where it matters.

 

[CoyoteMach]

The EREV vehicles can weigh less because they use a battery half the size.

And you throw away that weight savings by putting in an engine/generator/fuel tank that probably weighs more than the battery weight savings.

 

[phoenixfun]

What I think is irrelevant, it’s what the executives at Ford think that matters. The mme in its present form is unlikely to ever be a EREV. There’s little room for the gas engine in the frunk for starters. Secondly, the mme uses a unique platform, it’s not based on the universal platform they’re supposedly building.

The most likely future I see for the mme is Ford allowing it to wither on the vine and die. There’s no longer any talk of a generation 2 mme, nor even a hint of a model refresh. The fact that it escaped the axe is only a stay of execution imo. You’re free to believe something else.

I get the same vibe.

 

[StevenC56]

When our lease is up in 2.5 years and at that time Ford no longer has any EV's, we'll either keep the car or we'll be buying an EV from one of Ford's competitors.

 

[Mach1E]

And you throw away that weight savings by putting in an engine/generator/fuel tank that probably weighs more than the battety weight savings.

“Can weigh less.”

In a large pickup truck with a standard battery weighing 2,000 lbs, the engine and extras would weigh less with a half sized battery.

In something like the Mach E? It would probably be a wash.

I was responding to a post where someone made it sound like having an EREV would add 500 lbs. It won’t if you drop the battery size.

 

[Blue highway]

The increase in DCFC locations over the last 2 years is so impressive, I can’t believe anyone who has has actually used DCFC would be the least bit apprehensive about range. The concept seems a bit silly to me.

The issue here is that the facts don't really matter. DCFC is good and on its way to great. Range issues will be solved mostly by adding a bunch of new charging infrastructure... which is coming.

Hybrids and EREVs are a passing phase that will likely last about a decade before being seen for what it is... an interim step on the way to BEV.

 

[Blue highway]

The irony of your first line is that most of us haul around an extra 500+ lbs in battery that rarely gets used.

The EREV vehicles can weigh less because they use a battery half the size.

In the 4 years I owned my Mach E, I only remember going below 50% charge once. I would have been fine with 150 mile max range or less. Smaller battery, less cost, less weight, more efficient and better performance.

But that’s my use case.

It takes real world experience to come to the conclusion you did about range... but most of those playing stompy foot for 500 miles of range have not ever driven a BEV.

Weird case in point... the ID Buzz is criticized for having too short a range... (230 ish) with pundits saying " the original VW bus from the 70's was a long range tripping monster... actually a 1970 VW bus had a 10.5 gallon tank and got 20 mpg... that's 210 miles to out of gas... but remember... the facts don't matter.

 

[Mach1E]

It takes real world experience to come to the conclusion you did about range... but most of those playing stompy foot for 500 miles of range have not ever driven a BEV.

Weird case in point... the ID Buzz is criticized for having too short a range... (230 ish) with pundits saying " the original VW bus from the 70's was a long range tripping monster... actually a 1970 VW bus had a 10.5 gallon tank and got 20 mpg... that's 210 miles to out of gas... but remember... the facts don't matter.

Yeah range obsession is real. But even still for BEV owners. It’s the title of so many threads and on the wish list of so many owners.

But it’s really about cost and ability to refuel.

If range REALLY mattered that much in a car, we would have all had 50 gallon gas tanks in our ICE vehicles.

Instead gas cars care about fuel economy- because cost. Range rarely matters.

Solving for refueling speed (DC charging) is still a stop gap, not a complete solution, because cost.

The “complete solution” would be a way to charge on the road BOTH fast and cheap. And then range is nearly irrelevant.

 

[Gloff]

Yeah range obsession is real. But even still for BEV owners. It’s the title of so many threads and on the wish list of so many owners.

But it’s really about cost and ability to refuel.

If range REALLY mattered that much in a car, we would have all had 50 gallon gas tanks in our ICE vehicles.

Instead gas cars care about fuel economy- because cost. Range rarely matters.

Solving for refueling speed (DC charging) is still a stop gap, not a complete solution, because cost.

The “complete solution” would be a way to charge on the road BOTH fast and cheap. And then range is nearly irrelevant.

Range doesn't matter in gas because refueling options are plentiful and quick. If you could charge as fast and as easily as gas, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

If fuel economy and cost really mattered, the Prius would be the best selling car in the world.

Cost of EVs is still so much higher than gas equivalents. Given price parity, people choose an EV at about the same rate as gas. Enough charging saturation at a speed equivalent to gas, and it'll be majority EV.

 

[Mach1E]

Range doesn't matter in gas because refueling options are plentiful and quick. If you could charge as fast and as easily as gas, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

If fuel economy and cost really mattered, the Prius would be the best selling car in the world.

Cost of EVs is still so much higher than gas equivalents. Given price parity, people choose an EV at about the same rate as gas. Enough charging saturation at a speed equivalent to gas, and it'll be majority EV.

Again, speed is only half the issue.

DC charging is expensive. Significantly more than charging at home. Gotta solve both problems for range to be a non-issue.

On the related note- DC charging as a business model stinks.

So when a product stinks for the consumer AND stinks for the business….. it cannot last.

 

[Gloff]

Again, speed is only half the issue.

DC charging is expensive. Significantly more than charging at home. Gotta solve both problems for range to be a non-issue.

On the related note- DC charging as a business model stinks.

So when a product stinks for the consumer AND stinks for the business….. it cannot last.

DC charging is expensive relative to home charging for sure. Relative to gas, it's parity, and yet people pay for gas all the time.

Time=money, if charging was as quick and ubiquitous as gas stations, EVs would take off at a much higher rate than would otherwise.

You're thinking like an EV owner, most customers have a perception of EVs, and don't care about the cost of gas. It's not the single biggest driver for the average consumer. If it was they'd be sacrificing convenience and size for fuel economy. Fuel economy is a consideration after vehicle class for most consumers.

 

[rsummerset]

I personally don’t want a bunch of parts from an ICE that can break on top of an EV. If I did I would have looked at plug in hybrids in the first place. I guess you can rebrand those as EREVs and try a convince me it’s something different…but you’re still adding more that can break for something I don’t need.

Majority of people are not towing, majority of people don’t have a range problem. Even most realistic “drive to grandmas”, or “trip to Disney” is 2-3 charge stops for large portions of the population. It really doesn’t add much time compared to an ICE…I’ve done it, many times.

But none of the facts really matter, because we have a perception problem. Many anti EV people are dug in and it doesn’t really matter what you say. They need 500 miles of range and to tow 15 elephants…and even then they might rather have a diesel truck because it’s their God given right.

Ford can’t fix that logic.

Government regulation could help steer and force change…but not happening in EV direction currently so you have that.

So really your best option is to make something that looks good and is AFFORDABLE. Because money speaks louder than anything.

"500 miles of range and to tow 15 elephants…and even then they might rather have a diesel truck because it’s their God given right."

Now that was funny to me!!!

 

[rsummerset]

The irony of your first line is that most of us haul around an extra 500+ lbs in battery that rarely gets used.

The EREV vehicles can weigh less because they use a battery half the size.

In the 4 years I owned my Mach E, I only remember going below 50% charge once. I would have been fine with 150 mile max range or less. Smaller battery, less cost, less weight, more efficient and better performance.

But that’s my use case.

You have only gone below 50% charge once in 4 years? WOW! I have gone below 50% twice and I have only had the vehicle for a week!

 

[Mach1E]

DC charging is expensive relative to home charging for sure. Relative to gas, it's parity, and yet people pay for gas all the time.

Time=money, if charging was as quick and ubiquitous as gas stations, EVs would take off at a much higher rate than would otherwise.

You're thinking like an EV owner, most customers have a perception of EVs, and don't care about the cost of gas. It's not the single biggest driver for the average consumer. If it was they'd be sacrificing convenience and size for fuel economy. Fuel economy is a consideration after vehicle class for most consumers.

People pay for gas all the time because they don’t have a choice.

If they could put gas in their cars for 1/5 the price at home, they would 99% of the time.

I would argue that cost is a very large motivator when it comes to car purchases. Almost always one of the top two reasons people buy something.

However, people have an easier time making “cost” decisions though when they understand them. Price of the car, price of gas at one station vs the other- easy.

Fuel economy costs- more difficult

Maintenance costs, depreciation- very difficult.

Price per kWh AC vs DC charging- this is only for the nerds to figure out.

Sponsored