Ford Range Increase Coming?

[GScott]

Speaking as someone who has owned a Model 3 for 2.5 years you won’t get close to Tesla’s claimed range. I’m hoping Ford is more accurate but the only way you will get close with a Model 3 is to drive under 50 or 60 with no climate control. In freezing temps expect less than half.

Sponsored

 

[mark360]

Speaking as someone who has owned a Model 3 for 2.5 years you won’t get close to Tesla’s claimed range. I’m hoping Ford is more accurate but the only way you will get close with a Model 3 is to drive under 50 or 60 with no climate control.

Agree. I saw 80% range on average.

 

[kdryden99]

exactly. if everyone stops talking to that wall, the echoes coming back from that wall will stop.

I was going to respond but you reminded me again. It's hard to take your own advice sometimes.

 

[Nak]

As was noted, the size of the vehicles are different. At least the Mach E has more width for rear seat passengers than the Y, and the Y has less than the 3. So the Y isn't really the "larger" vehicle, even if people think it is. That's where the "tricks" come in. Why wasn't the Y bigger for passenger than the 3 for rear passengers across the row? Because they wanted to get more range from the vehicle sacrificing interior space. There is always a trade off even if people don't realize all the other missing parts off of the Y.

You're picking one measurement to claim the Y sacrifices interior space. That's the definition of cherry picking the data. I have both a 3 and a Y and the Y has a significantly larger interior. You are correct in that three adult males would have to be fairly comfortable with each other to sit in the back, LOL. It's certainly doable, but the person in the center wouldn't be all that comfortable. Two large people can sit very comfortably with great leg room and head room, even for people over 6'6". I recently had a gentleman who stood 6'9" look over my car. He was pleasantly surprised at the comfort of the back seat. (Although he could not recline the rear seat without hitting his head. ) Regardless, most people looking for a five seater are looking for a car that will carry a typical family of five, not five basketball players.

Depending on individual need, it is completely appropriate to compare the 3 and the E. That is one of the E's strengths. It is more car-like than the Y with more utility than the 3. If you don't need the space and utility the Y provides, you might be better served by a 3 or an E. If the 3 is a bit too small, you might be better served by the E or the Y. The E sits comfortably between the two Teslas, able to compete with either depending on the buyer. Individual buyers will determine which combination of space, performance, utility and looks meet their needs best. A buyer looking at a Tesla 3 would be foolish not to consider the Mach-e, and vice a versa.

 

[dbsb3233]

I do think within the next year or so, 300 will be the new acceptable baseline for most high end electric offerings. And as much as I wouldn't buy one at this point, tesla is setting the benchmarks in this segment.

Hoping that eventually reaches 400-500 instead (although that won't happen in the next yer). At least until charging happens 3x faster. Slow charging time on road trips is still the biggest negative, and the main reason people want more range (to avoid so many slow charges). But long road trips are usually at high speed, where practical 10-80% distance between charging stops is only around 60% of EPA range. So 500 is really 300 for that purpose.

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

Even if they gave it a 100kWh battery and it went 600 miles from a 10-90% charge cheaper than everyone, I still wouldn't buy a Tesla. I used to want one but too many bumpers, tail lights, and roofs falling off for me. Tesla is dead to me until they can make a whole car for 2-3 years straight.

They're a non-starter for me. Don't like the style of any of them at all. Detachable sunroofs, doors that are better as walls than doors, mud collector bumpers, greyhound sized panel gaps, paint jobs that lack ... paint; all those just add to the reasons I'd not consider a Tesla even if they somehow managed to find a design I thought wasn't butt ugly.

But since this thread was about an increase in the MME range beyond the currently know estimates, Tesla's recent range increases are entirely irrelevant.

 

[Nak]

Speaking as someone who has owned a Model 3 for 2.5 years you won’t get close to Tesla’s claimed range. I’m hoping Ford is more accurate but the only way you will get close with a Model 3 is to drive under 50 or 60 with no climate control. In freezing temps expect less than half.

Interesting. That's not been my experience at all. The worst I've seen with our 3 is about 2/3 rated range driving in heavy rain at 75 -80 mph. Driving at 60 in the summer with the AC on we pretty much get rated range. Ours is newer than yours, perhaps Tesla improved the 3 since you bought yours?

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

yeah since tesla doesn't make a helicopter I have to compare the model 3 to this. Sometimes it's like talking to a wall.

I really prefer it when my wings stay in the same spot all the time. So I think we should compare it to the SolarImpulse EV. It flew around the world. Here it is along southshore Oahu before heading out for its last leg of the journey. Its range kicks the MY, M3, and MME's wimpy electric tushes.

 

[darren]

It seems like Ford already has the EPA numbers. Why are they not releasing them?

Did they come in lower than expected?

 

[MailGuy]

Yes, range is a huge deal in BEVs because the charger coverage and recharge time aren't there yet. Exactly right.

But until they are, then range continues to be huge. And they likely won't be there for years. It'll gradually improve, but we're still many years from right-sized chargers being ubiquitous, and charge times under 10 minutes (more like <5 minutes to match ICE, which will probably never happen).

Fortunately that's a non-issue when using a BEV charged at home. That's where they excel.

I do think there's probably something to your point that people get used to the compromise on slow and sparce charging though. While it's clear takes longer and is more difficult to find than ICE refueling, it's likely something many will just get used to and live with to gain the other advantages of cheap and easy home charging the rest of the time.

Home charging is key to success. Not only is it cheaper, you’re in control of 95%+ of your trips. In three years of BEV ownership, I can count on one hand the number of public charges I’ve done. And that brings up the next problem. BEV ownership is biased to homeowners. Here in my area there’s a trend, an apartment building goes up, then a supercharger hub pops into the middle of a big box or grocery store parking lot nearby.

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

It seems like Ford already has the EPA numbers. Why are they not releasing them?

Did they come in lower than expected?

Not likely. They'll be released at a time when it's most advantageous to them. I'd not anticipate anything less than the estimates.

 

[trutolife27]

It seems like Ford already has the EPA numbers. Why are they not releasing them?

Did they come in lower than expected?

The numbers are not out yet and have not been done. IT has been explained before how it's done before. Please don't assume and put false ideas out there.

 

[MailGuy]

For the Mach-E to be successful long term, it has to compete with the basic specs of the comparable Tesla on range & recharging and it has to do so at a close price point. That's before other things can even be considered (build quality, service stations, looks, etc).

If the range/recharging is not there at a close price point for Ford, then it's just not going to be viable long term and we'll be stuck with an orphaned vehicle.

Possibly. We should ask original Leaf owners feel abandoned before we jump to any conclusions. Personally I know many who don’t.

With the MachE Ford seems to be offering options for buyers to figure out what matters to them. It’s a smart choice. I’ll happily raise a glass to the marketing team in the hope it works.

 

[1pt21Gigawatts]

No, that doesn't mean that at all.

Lawd everyone stop beating up Jolteon just because he’s saying uncomfortable things, nothing he’s saying is wrong. We are starting to straddle the line a little bit too close to becoming the fanatics, like what happened to some Tesla enthusiasts.

Vehicles don’t exclusively compete against their class either. Mustang competes against corvette all the time, for instance, despite not being comparable.

IMO the range needs to be 315+ in order to compete especially with the lesser charge rates. We know the 100kwh pack was chosen to give headroom on spec increases, they’ll have to use it. We have the advantage of being 335mi WLTP which is still more than the Y, but only ~10mi more now which is uncomfortably close. That being said I feel Tesla is overextending itself on range to compete. Same on the Model S plaid. They might end up hurting themselves by constantly trying to nose ahead rather than polishing their competencies. That big shiny façade of being the universal is too valuable to them right now, and it can’t last forever. No oem can ever be the best at everything for long.

For us, we’re lead users and we’re gonna take some lumps to be first. Hopefully range won’t be one of those, but the first Tesla owners took lots of lumps, and I don’t think we can expect to be anywhere near as poor of an experience as them due to Ford’s experience and the quality we’re hearing with JD Power from Trutolife. So long as it is 310+ I think that I’ll be personally happy, but honestly if we’re not close then mustang is going to lose sales or exclusively appeal to people that prefer the vehicle itself over its actual functionality.

I don’t think will have to make that choice though, we will have to see once the range numbers come out

Sponsored