Have you had a chance to drive a RWD version? I'm certain the AWD's are like they're on rails, but wondering about how the RWD will handle sharp curves at speed - there's a really curvy back road near me where I am looking forward to driving
no RWD sorry not yet.
I can't imagine it will be noticeable to most drivers. Perhaps onboard lateral G sensors or suspension data may notice a bit more body roll here or a bit more grip there, but the cars are so fundamentally similar that most people won't notice. The SR is a little lighter and the ER is a little more powerful but at the end of the day, they're both fast, and they both store their batteries low in the chassis and between the axles. I'd also expect Ford to calibrate the suspension to minimize any difference the driver might perceive between the 2 battery options. If there's any meaningful handling difference it'll be RWD vs AWD, and I'm sure they'll want the GT to have its own signature feel as well.
It's like the folks all worried about the added weight of the glass roof on the GTs. I doubt it will be noticeable considering the low weight of the battery -- especially with Magneride.
You may be right. In an ICE car I would agree completely. I'm not sure it will have a noticeable impact on handling in the Mach E, even on a track. That battery is really heavy.
... oh, so looking forward to driving this instead of the van
Sort of.
It is true that in the Dakotas, especially, the charging network is not good. I am not sure why, but I assume low population? Still, it needs fixed, and quickly. I hope EA is working on this.
Population, and long distances. For instance, it's >1000 miles between Butte and Minneapolis, across MN, MT, and the Dakotas (I-90 or I-94). Same way with I-80 across WY. Long distance means a lot of chargers to cover it (at high cost). Low population in the region means few customers using it, generating revenue to recover that big expense.
If you have a Tesla to CCS converter, there is a Tesla destination charger 0.4 miles from the Mt. Rushmore Monument. And, I know this won't work for CCS, but there is a Supercharger 19.7 miles south of Mt. Rushmore. But, yeah, if you are going to travel to remote areas like this it's a great benefit to have 350-400 or more miles of range. It can be done with a lot less but more is always nice for convenience sake.
I'm not convinced the glass roof weighs enough more to matter much, even on a track. And, even if it does, it's probably worth it for the additional safety, particularly in a side-impact scenario. I know it seems like glass would be weaker than steel but that's not really applicable in this scenario. The glass distributes point impacts, like if the car slides sideways into a telephone pole or tree, through the entire sheet in a way steel cannot match. This limits deformation of the passenger compartment and offers superior protection to the occupants.
