Ford Range Increase Coming?

[Deleted member 367]

That's not true at all! My Model 3 has always achieved the 310 EPA rating it carried, and my Model S has consistantly achieved or bested it's 402 EPA rating.It seems that if misinformation were gold, this site could house Fort Knox.

Sponsored

 

[DBC]

I’m kind of hoping they’re doing it strategically. That way they can adjust and leapfrog Tesla just by one or 2 miles for bragging rights. It is the mustang way, they have been dogfighting with Camaro for 50 years for incremental bragging rights. If anything it’s kind of appropriate, Tesla is Ford’s new Chevy.

I wouldn't hold my breath. The Model Y will have the advantage in range because of its motors. The Mach E will have the advantage in handling because of its motors.

 

[DBC]

That's not true at all! My Model 3 has always achieved the 310 EPA rating it carried, and my Model has consistantly achieved or bested it's 402 EPA rating.It seems that if misinformation were gold, this site could house Fort Knox.

This would be a great example of misinformation. No you did not get the EPA rated range on a Tesla Model Anything when driving US06. Now if you never drive aggressively then yes, very likely.

 

[JellyBelly]

RWD 300 / 88 kWh = 3.40 miles/kWh already, for combined range (not 70 MPH).
AWD 270 / 88 = 3.07.

Those numbers will surely be lower at 70 MPH, probably at least 10-15%. I know we're hoping the final range numbers increase, but I'd guess more like 5%. My guesses:

RWD range 315 - 12% @ 70 MPH = 277 / 88 = 3.15 miles/kWh.
AWD range 290 - 12% @ 70 MPH = 255 / 88 = 2.90 miles/kWh.

Driving in states on highways on long trips where 70MPH or 75MPH is the speed limit (like some parts of CA, NV, AZ, TX) - I have to learn driving at 70MPH and not at 85 MPH - or be prepared for more charging times.

 

[JellyBelly]

Yep, I've said pretty much the same -- because they're having to really stretch to get acceptable range out of batteries today, it requires squeezing all they can out of aerodynamics. Which means lower, sleeker wing-like shapes. Which means sedans and low hatches.

But OTOH...

(1) I expect battery energy density will improve enough in 5-10 years so that compromise won't have to be made (as much), and
(2) US consumers have fallen in love with taller, roomier SUV/crossover shapes, and most will simply buy ICE/PHEV if they can't get that in BEV. That's why I think PHEV will be big in the US this decade, maybe bigger than BEV, until battery energy density gets far better and makes it moot.

Plus, aerodynamics really only make a lot of difference at high speeds.

Totally agree that PHEV s will be big in the near future

 

[dbsb3233]

Driving in states on highways on long trips where 70MPH or 75MPH is the speed limit (like some parts of CA, NV, AZ, TX) - I have to learn driving at 70MPH and not at 85 MPH - or be prepared for more charging times.

I'll have that too. UT is 80 MPH the whole way through. NV 75, and CO 75 in parts (although much of the mountain part is 65).

No way I'm spending 60k for a great car and slowing down from what I normally drive. Any speed limit 70+ I just set cruise control right to the speed limit. At 65 I usually set it at 68.

Really curious to see my miles/kWh with cruise control set at 80 through UT.

 

[JellyBelly]

I'll have that too. UT is 80 MPH the whole way through. NV 75, and CO 75 in parts (although much of the mountain part is 65).

No way I'm spending 60k for a great car and slowing down from what I normally drive. Any speed limit 70+ I just set cruise control right to the speed limit. At 65 I usually set it at 68.

Really curious to see my miles/kWh with cruise control set at 80 through UT.

Exactly I plan to enjoy the driving experience as well.

 

[Nak]

Agreed. As trutolife27 points out, when gas is cheap, people don't care about mpg. Prior to the OPEC embargo in the early 70s, only dweebs bought small cars. The sedans and station wagons of the day dwarfed many of today's "Large" cars and "SUVs." No one saw the embargo coming and later Detroit was blamed for "not building great small cars" like the Japanese, when just months earlier it was hard to give a Datsun (Nissan) or Toyota away. After sitting in lines for hours to buy enough gas to drive 50 miles, people's attitude on small cars changed instantly. Gas is cheap, cars are getting bigger. When gas gets expensive again--and it will--people will swarm to EVs like they swarmed to Toyota and Datsun in the post-embargo 70s.

With gas prices down, people can drive whatever and not worry MPG. If gas prices go up then Ice vehicles are cutting their throat only quicker.
Just a double edge sword now and your big oil companies are not putting their money back into oil , but tech companies. They have been in talks for the last 10 years that oil is dying.

 

[buzznwood]

Another issue is not just the speed but also the topology of your route, I have no doubt that plenty of people will be able to easily get the range specified even at highway speeds, on some nice flat as a pancake highways, but throw some hills in the way and it becomes a lot different.

Having friends living in the LA county area that visit las Vegas a few times a year, the model s that they own has plenty of range per the specs to make the trip at highway speeds and while it does make it the drive through the Cajon pass has other ideas on that total available range.

For most of us that will primarily be charging at home and using the mach-e as a commuting / local errands vehicle as long as the range fits your worst case scenario then it is fine, however when it comes to paper specs and the real world if people accept that the actual % is going to be much lower then starting with a low number compared to the completion will start to impact overall sales as while early model adopters will be more forgiving the subsequent batch of potential owners will be less so.

Based on the specs shown show so far I don't think the mach-e will be a million miles away from the model-Y / 3 when it comes to people comparing on paper and as the mach-e battery buffer is quite large there is potential for ford to increase the range via OTA, the only unknown is the GT and that is where the original estimated paper specs at present at are a lot less favorable when it comes to not only range but also overall performance.

 

[reddog554]

The Model 3 is a much smaller car so the 350 is irrelevant to the Mach-E. But the Y jump to 326 is interesting. Almost like they timed it right for when the Mach-E is (presumably) about to release it's EPA range. Maybe Tesla found out the number, and it's just above 316? (But below 326)

You guys also got to remember that the 3 does not qualify for the tax credits/rebates that the Mach-E does. Your also comparing a small size sedan to a mid-size SUV.

 

[jeffdawgfan]

Based on various bits of information and clues here and there. I think we should prepare for 3.2 miles per kWh at 70 mph for the AWD ER and 3.4 miles per kWh at 70 mph for RWD ER. 80 degrees ambient no precipitation.

I get 3.8 to 3.9 m/kwh on Leaf SL Plus at highway speeds. (65-70mph). I am hoping to get close to that with the MME...though the AWD is going to hurt that number a bit.

 

[MailGuy]

I was waiting to add the topography criteria as well. It definitely matters at highway speed. Climbing the 1.5 mile hill on the interstate on my drive home at 70MPH translates to a little less than 2KWH consumed in less than 2 minutes in my Bolt. You get a lot of that back downhill, but these are the types of things that cause your heart to skip a beat until you're used to them and need to be accounted for. It also sounded like Darren was trying to address these types of issues in how the MachE learns your patterns and gives realistic range expectation.

 

[DBC]

The Mach E uses two permanent magnetic motors. The Model Y uses a kinda magnetic motor and an induction motor. The permanent magnetic motors have an efficiency advantage at full load but the induction motor has an efficiency advantage at light loads (field proportional to V/f --voltage to frequency).

Sponsored