Is the Mach-E really 7 years behind Tesla?

[dbsb3233]

Unless they decide it's worth it for their own BEV sales (or creates enough charging revenues) to justify doing what Tesla did -- pouring more money in to build it out further and reach more customers.

Sponsored

 

[dbsb3233]

That wouldn't do much good. Where people need chargers are between cities on road trips, and at home.

Few people are gonna want to spend 45 minutes at a dealership wasting time while the car slowly charges. That would be like sitting there bored while waiting for an oil change. No one likes that.

 

[dbsb3233]

Ford is saying over twice that time for the Mach-e. Direct from the horse's mouth:

With peak charging rate of 150 kW, the Mustang Mach-E with an extended battery and RWD can add an estimated average of 47 miles of range in approximately 10 minutes while charging on a DC Fast charging station.

https://media.ford.com/content/ford...ily--all-electric-mustang-mach-e-deliver.html

200 miles / 47 x 10 minutes = 43 minutes. Unless of course Ford is completely wrong about their own vehicle.

 

[mark360]

Ford is saying over twice that time for the Mach-e. Direct from the horse's mouth:

With peak charging rate of 150 kW, the Mustang Mach-E with an extended battery and RWD can add an estimated average of 47 miles of range in approximately 10 minutes while charging on a DC Fast charging station.

https://media.ford.com/content/ford...ily--all-electric-mustang-mach-e-deliver.html

200 miles / 47 x 10 minutes = 43 minutes. Unless of course Ford is completely wrong about their own vehicle.

Yeah I never really understood that. If it can charge at 150KW for 50% of the battery and the battery is 99kw, (just say 40kw of battery is @ 150kw speed) I've got 120 miles in 15 minutes added to the battery. My Model 3 can charge for 150kw up to like 55% or so until it tapers off. The interesting thing is that most other vehicles that use EA's network actually keep full power longer than a Tesla.

I did read that Ford has the capability to adjust the charge rate, regen rate, etc. over the air. Pretty much all aspects of the vehicle.

I am sure they are going to be very conservative until they collect enough data to push better dc charge times. 47 miles in 10 minutes is awfully slow, hopefully that is the worst case scenario.

 

[dbsb3233]

I could see it being a little conservative (just like the range), but it just makes no sense to me that they would undercut their own vehicle by advertising something that important and be off by a factor of 2 or something.

But OTOH, where range mostly matters is road trips, which is usually at high speed. And that's where people are generally going to use DCFC. Miles plummet at high speed, so maybe 47 per 10 minutes isn't really that far off.

It's the usual Catch-22 with BEVs. The better mileage at slow speed around-home driving is mostly irrelevant, since we'll be doing full charges overnight at home where charging speed doesn't matter.

 

[mark360]

Ahhhhh

Its an average! So it should take 45 minutes to an hour for a full charge on DC. That Makes more sense!

 

[dbsb3233]

No, the ER RWD they're referencing has an estimates 300 mile range. 85% of that is 255 miles. 255 / 47 = 5.4 x 10 minutes = 54 minutes for an 85% charge (not 80).

Now, that's using Ford's "47 miles in 10 minutes" quote. Obviously it won't be linear the whole way. We don't know whether that Ford number is an average, or a peak, or what. They only say it's when using charger that peaks at 150kw. We'll just have to wait and see what that quote really translates to.

 

[dbsb3233]

Ahhhhh

Its an average! So it should take 45 minutes to an hour for a full charge on DC. That Makes more sense!

That would be my guess too (that 47 miles in 10 minutes is the charge curve average). But it's only a guess at this point.

And since where range actually really matters for most people is on road trips, it makes sense to advertise it for a full charge average (or maybe a 70-80% charge).

Although if that's the case, it would make more sense to say it that way ("45 minutes to do an 80% charge") rather than as a confusing ("47 miles in 10 minutes"). That 10 minutes could be anywhere on the charge curve, and thus be dramatically different at different points.

 

[mark360]

That would be my guess too (that 47 miles in 10 minutes is the charge curve average). But it's only a guess at this point.

And since where range actually really matters for most people is on road trips, it makes sense to advertise it for a full charge average (or maybe a 70-80% charge).

Although if that's the case, it would make more sense to say it that way ("45 minutes to do an 80% charge") rather than as a confusing ("47 miles in 10 minutes"). That 10 minutes could be anywhere on the charge curve, and thus be dramatically different at different points.

no in the wording it says average

"With peak charging rate of 150 kW, the Mustang Mach-E with an extended battery and RWD can add an estimated average of 47 miles of range in approximately 10 minutes while charging on a DC Fast charging station.⁷

 

[dbsb3233]

no in the wording it says average

"With peak charging rate of 150 kW, the Mustang Mach-E with an extended battery and RWD can add an estimated average of 47 miles of range in approximately 10 minutes while charging on a DC Fast charging station.⁷

But an average of what? The average over a 0%-100% charge? 10%-100%? 10%-80%? Or even just a peak 10-minute slice?

Those would all have different averages because of the charge curve.

I suspect you're right though in assuming it's probably something like a a typical near-full road trip charge (like maybe 10%-80%).

Sponsored