Unexplainedbacon
Active Member
- First Name
- Jordan
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2021
- Threads
- 2
- Messages
- 27
- Reaction score
- 32
- Location
- SoCal
- Vehicles
- Mach E GT hopeful
- Thread starter
- #1
I thought I'd share some preliminary thoughts after test driving each of these this weekend. At first (and probably second) glance they're different cars for different buyers but they overlap enough to appeal both to my desire for a peppy EV thats big enough to fit a couple kids and small dogs and they're in similar price brackets.
Everything I say here is just my opinion after less than 10 min driving each so take that for what its worth.
The biggest differences that jump out right away are the range and performance. That is to say the range on the MME is much higher while the Volvo ironically feels much faster. C&D tested the Mach at 5.1 0-60 and the Volvo 4.3 and my eyeballs could feel that difference as the Volvo pushed them into the back of my sockets . That nearly 1 second difference was enough to put a big smile on my face and have me scratching my head at the Mach. A MME GT would make up that difference and then some though.
The build quality/feel I have to give to the Volvo. The MME felt good, no doubt, but the door release and other buttons felt lower grade and there's a good amount of hard plastics. I liked the feel of the fake leather and the cabin was well dressed and hushed but the Volvo was just a cut above as you'd expect. There are almost no hard plastics to be found while even the styling seemed more refined (those air vents are gorgeous IMO). The buttons etc. just felt nicer to touch, the door releases were chrome looking and had a nice resistance to them when pulled. Here I think all the little things kind of add up to a sense of refinement the Mach doesn't have (or need?) given its purpose.
The cost of the Volvo is a little more than the MME 4X premium and a little less than a GT. Tough to speculate on value here though I know the Volvo could be had for some substantial discounts based on other peoples posts. Currently the XC40 qualifies for around 3-4k in incentives and even then you can call for "today's price" as shown online, so I bet the Volvo would be the cheaper buy. Given the large difference in range (223 on the Volvo currently and 270 on the ER Mach) I'd think the Mustang would suffer less depreciation as it's range will likely still be somewhat competitive in 5 years time where people may lol at anything under 250.
On paper the Mach has a lot more cargo capacity but it didn't seem so much different to my eye and would be enough for my needs. The Volvo also has some clever storage overall like grocery bag hooks that make for nice little touches.
One thing of note; I hear people complain about the Mach's infotainment screen being laggy and although I didn't play around with it much, it seemed OK. Definitely less responsive than the iPad-like quickness of a Tesla's panel. However, during my test drive of the XC40 the infotainment screen crashed for 2-3 minutes leaving the screen blank and non-responsive while the Volvo saleswoman stammered off that it just needs to be updated (after researching on the forums it seems this is more of a hardware issue and has been fixed under warranty for others). It eventually rebooted and worked fine.
Another note on infotainment; I kinda feel like its a wash between the two. On one hand the Mach has that giant centerpiece screen. Its beautiful and you do get a drivers panel as well, though the thin rectangle seems just slightly goofy to me. The Volvo's screen is much smaller (9" vs 15" I think) but it is responsive and its a lot of fun to say "hey google" and then give it a command or ask a question. The drivers screen is big and displays Nav really elegantly too. Another thing; Mach has wireless CarPlay and Android Auto while the Volvo doesnāt, though data is free and unlimited for 4 years so you can essentially use itās infotainment system stand alone with Spotify/maps etc.
I'm as yet undecided. I think if I go Mach it'll definitely be GT for the acceleration (don't care how fast it is above 80, I'm too pretty to die). The Volvo's performance is absolutely plenty for my needs though. My butt-o-meter has it about equivalent to the Model 3 Long Range which is fine, my stomach can only handle so much. And while I don't need any more range than the Volvo provides, for roughly equivalent pricing it seems weird to leave 50 miles on the table.
So for me it comes down to a more luxurious experience or more range.
The future remains uncertain.
*edited for correcting factual error and grammar
Everything I say here is just my opinion after less than 10 min driving each so take that for what its worth.
The biggest differences that jump out right away are the range and performance. That is to say the range on the MME is much higher while the Volvo ironically feels much faster. C&D tested the Mach at 5.1 0-60 and the Volvo 4.3 and my eyeballs could feel that difference as the Volvo pushed them into the back of my sockets . That nearly 1 second difference was enough to put a big smile on my face and have me scratching my head at the Mach. A MME GT would make up that difference and then some though.
The build quality/feel I have to give to the Volvo. The MME felt good, no doubt, but the door release and other buttons felt lower grade and there's a good amount of hard plastics. I liked the feel of the fake leather and the cabin was well dressed and hushed but the Volvo was just a cut above as you'd expect. There are almost no hard plastics to be found while even the styling seemed more refined (those air vents are gorgeous IMO). The buttons etc. just felt nicer to touch, the door releases were chrome looking and had a nice resistance to them when pulled. Here I think all the little things kind of add up to a sense of refinement the Mach doesn't have (or need?) given its purpose.
The cost of the Volvo is a little more than the MME 4X premium and a little less than a GT. Tough to speculate on value here though I know the Volvo could be had for some substantial discounts based on other peoples posts. Currently the XC40 qualifies for around 3-4k in incentives and even then you can call for "today's price" as shown online, so I bet the Volvo would be the cheaper buy. Given the large difference in range (223 on the Volvo currently and 270 on the ER Mach) I'd think the Mustang would suffer less depreciation as it's range will likely still be somewhat competitive in 5 years time where people may lol at anything under 250.
On paper the Mach has a lot more cargo capacity but it didn't seem so much different to my eye and would be enough for my needs. The Volvo also has some clever storage overall like grocery bag hooks that make for nice little touches.
One thing of note; I hear people complain about the Mach's infotainment screen being laggy and although I didn't play around with it much, it seemed OK. Definitely less responsive than the iPad-like quickness of a Tesla's panel. However, during my test drive of the XC40 the infotainment screen crashed for 2-3 minutes leaving the screen blank and non-responsive while the Volvo saleswoman stammered off that it just needs to be updated (after researching on the forums it seems this is more of a hardware issue and has been fixed under warranty for others). It eventually rebooted and worked fine.
Another note on infotainment; I kinda feel like its a wash between the two. On one hand the Mach has that giant centerpiece screen. Its beautiful and you do get a drivers panel as well, though the thin rectangle seems just slightly goofy to me. The Volvo's screen is much smaller (9" vs 15" I think) but it is responsive and its a lot of fun to say "hey google" and then give it a command or ask a question. The drivers screen is big and displays Nav really elegantly too. Another thing; Mach has wireless CarPlay and Android Auto while the Volvo doesnāt, though data is free and unlimited for 4 years so you can essentially use itās infotainment system stand alone with Spotify/maps etc.
I'm as yet undecided. I think if I go Mach it'll definitely be GT for the acceleration (don't care how fast it is above 80, I'm too pretty to die). The Volvo's performance is absolutely plenty for my needs though. My butt-o-meter has it about equivalent to the Model 3 Long Range which is fine, my stomach can only handle so much. And while I don't need any more range than the Volvo provides, for roughly equivalent pricing it seems weird to leave 50 miles on the table.
So for me it comes down to a more luxurious experience or more range.
The future remains uncertain.
*edited for correcting factual error and grammar
Sponsored
Last edited:
gotta love preteens! 
