My GT Performance Edition (GTPE) first track launch with videos, timeslip! 0-60 in 4.12s, 1/4 mile in 12.657 @ 100.02 mph

[buzznwood]

I think we’re mostly aligned on the opinion that in its current form, the GT is disappointing, but we’re all hoping there is a solution. If it can live up to our expectations, it will be a *great* alternative to the Y. It would be great if Ford would weigh in at some point…

Either the eventual reviews will be amazing and a TSB will be issued to fix some existing shipped models or it is what it is and Ford will just ignore and give it the old 'look a squirrel' and then point at the f150 lighting.

For a lot of people the trap speed will be irrelevant and we know going in the GTPE with a top speed of 124mph isn't going to be competing up top end with a model Y, however what is very disappointing to me is the posted 50-70mph time of 2.51 seconds as 50-70 mph is the usable overtaking range for when going down a back road and coming across a slower vehicle.

Seems there really there was no point giving the GTPE two large monitors if they are not going to be fully utilized like the various competition does and as a result all have a much faster 50-70mph despite having less total power & torque.

So if the battery can supply it, then just let rip Ford and unleash the full potential it is not like everyone looking for a mustang coupe is going to be potentially cross shopping with a mach-e GTPE so who cares if it has significantly more power than a mustang coupe GT / mach 1.

The way the current EV performance power arms race is going soon only having 480 hp will be the reserve of entry level city cars lol.

Sponsored

 

[theo1000]

Reading this thread, all 663 posts, has anyone considered the tricky situation Ford is in. To keep the acceleration going after 6-8 seconds Ford has to worry about if this will damage the Battery. On the Etron, Audi engineers spent years working out the 8 second 100% acceleration window, without damaging the Battery, esp. long term. The maximum they were willing to push the envelope is 8 seconds. And even then it is not regularly available and needs a button push. Its not an accident IMO that that is where the software on the GT is intervening right now. People would be well advised to go read some of the write ups from the Audi engineers on all the things they were worrying about. I can bet you Ford Engineers read all of it.

If the cooling system for the GT battery is the same as the AWD ER how are you going to allow 12+ second acceleration windows without battery damage. The answer is you don't. My 'friends' experience on the ER AWD, going past 110 Mph is that there is a lot more power there that is being software limited. We will have to see if Ford engineers get confident enough to open up the acceleration profile. With this early generation car and all the recent recall activity I very seriously doubt it.

Your GT can be launched again and again and again on the same day, hour, minute with this acceleration profile with Zero limitations for Battery damage. Do folks realize how amazing that is for an EV. The only other car that can do this is the Porsche Taycan which cost $50,000 more!!

The other company allows a certain amount of battery damage from hard acceleration and simply software neuters the folks who use it too much to prevent a drop below 70% degradation. It not a fair comparison at all. The Battery neutering for all the hard acceleration folks for the other company is coming, they just don't know it. In fact they won't even be notified. This is simply not an option for Ford.

 

[MrClean]

Either the eventual reviews will be amazing and a TSB will be issued to fix some existing shipped models or it is what it is and Ford will just ignore and give it the old 'look a squirrel' and then point at the f150 lighting.

For a lot of people the trap speed will be irrelevant and we know going in the GTPE with a top speed of 124mph isn't going to be competing up top end with a model Y, however what is very disappointing to me is the posted 50-70mph time of 2.51 seconds as 50-70 mph is the usable overtaking range for when going down a back road and coming across a slower vehicle.

Seems there really there was no point giving the GTPE two large monitors if they are not going to be fully utilized like the various competition does and as a result all have a much faster 50-70mph despite having less total power & torque.

So if the battery can supply it, then just let rip Ford and unleash the full potential it is not like everyone looking for a mustang coupe is going to be potentially cross shopping with a mach-e GTPE so who cares if it has significantly more power than a mustang coupe GT / mach 1.

The way the current EV performance power arms race is going soon only having 480 hp will be the reserve of entry level city cars lol.

Totally agree.

 

[CharleyCarlos]

Reading this thread, all 663 posts, has anyone considered the tricky situation Ford is in. To keep the acceleration going after 6-8 seconds Ford has to worry about if this will damage the Battery. On the Etron, Audi engineers spent years working out the 8 second 100% acceleration window, without damaging the Battery, esp. long term. The maximum they were willing to push the envelope is 8 seconds. And even then it is not regularly available and needs a button push. Its not an accident IMO that that is where the software on the GT is intervening right now. People would be well advised to go read some of the write ups from the Audi engineers on all the things they were worrying about. I can bet you Ford Engineers read all of it.

If the cooling system for the GT battery is the same as the AWD ER how are you going to allow 12+ second acceleration windows without battery damage. The answer is you don't. My 'friends' experience on the ER AWD, going past 110 Mph is that there is a lot more power there that is being software limited. We will have to see if Ford engineers get confident enough to open up the acceleration profile. With this early generation car and all the recent recall activity I very seriously doubt it.

Your GT can be launched again and again and again on the same day, hour, minute with this acceleration profile with Zero limitations for Battery damage. Do folks realize how amazing that is for an EV. The only other car that can do this is the Porsche Taycan which cost $50,000 more!!

The other company allows a certain amount of battery damage from hard acceleration and simply software neuters the folks who use it too much to prevent a drop below 70% degradation. It not a fair comparison at all. The Battery neutering for all the hard acceleration folks for the other company is coming, they just don't know it. In fact they won't even be notified. This is simply not an option for Ford.

This is interesting. unfortunately, ICE is looking better and better for the coming couple of years.

 

[sotek2345]

Reading this thread, all 663 posts, has anyone considered the tricky situation Ford is in. To keep the acceleration going after 6-8 seconds Ford has to worry about if this will damage the Battery. On the Etron, Audi engineers spent years working out the 8 second 100% acceleration window, without damaging the Battery, esp. long term. The maximum they were willing to push the envelope is 8 seconds. And even then it is not regularly available and needs a button push. Its not an accident IMO that that is where the software on the GT is intervening right now. People would be well advised to go read some of the write ups from the Audi engineers on all the things they were worrying about. I can bet you Ford Engineers read all of it.

If the cooling system for the GT battery is the same as the AWD ER how are you going to allow 12+ second acceleration windows without battery damage. The answer is you don't. My 'friends' experience on the ER AWD, going past 110 Mph is that there is a lot more power there that is being software limited. We will have to see if Ford engineers get confident enough to open up the acceleration profile. With this early generation car and all the recent recall activity I very seriously doubt it.

Your GT can be launched again and again and again on the same day, hour, minute with this acceleration profile with Zero limitations for Battery damage. Do folks realize how amazing that is for an EV. The only other car that can do this is the Porsche Taycan which cost $50,000 more!!

The other company allows a certain amount of battery damage from hard acceleration and simply software neuters the folks who use it too much to prevent a drop below 70% degradation. It not a fair comparison at all. The Battery neutering for all the hard acceleration folks for the other company is coming, they just don't know it. In fact they won't even be notified. This is simply not an option for Ford.

I can totally see an ~8 second limit to max power, but that doesn't explain the poor 50-70 times and 70-90 times. If the ~8 second window is true, then if you are cruising at 50 (pretty lower power usage) and punch it, you should have full power - but that isn't what the Dragy results were showing.

 

[theo1000]

I can totally see an ~8 second limit to max power, but that doesn't explain the poor 50-70 times and 70-90 times. If the ~8 second window is true, then if you are cruising at 50 (pretty lower power usage) and punch it, you should have full power - but that isn't what the Dragy results were showing.

That part I do not know about. I do know this. The Etron cooling system is a cut above the Mach-E. It was specifically German over engineered to safely 'Boost' Torque the motors at 370 kw power draw! But even on the Etron. After 60 mph the boost is reduced. Not the same as at 30 mph. I have never gotten a good answer why though I assume the engineers know why. It is possible if you keep up enough pressure on Ford they may release some more power in this speed band with an OTA.

 

[GT500R]

Good thing I’m not in the market, but Eurocharged could get me what I’d want for $10K. And, I don’t care about slower than a Plaid, because they’re ugly af and after almost a decade still built worse than Hyundais in the ‘80s. They reflect Dear Elon perfectly, great tech, great numbers in some cases (acceleration), outright lies in others (EPA range) and a total disregard for all of the manufacturing lessons the legacy automakers have learned over the past century. Who needs continuous improvement when you’ve got Twitter? Amirite?

Oh yeah, almost forgot. FSD stands for fucking stupid donors. Because even Tesla says it doesn’t really mean full self driving when they respond to regulators. ?

Cool… I’m sure $10 k looks good in the rear view mirrors of the Plaid. Looks are subjective, speed isn’t when you run 9’s vs mid 10’s.

Great numbers in some cases? Lol, every performance model run less than 4 sec 0-60, what’s not the case there?

 

[theo1000]

This is interesting. unfortunately, ICE is looking better and better for the coming couple of years.

That's a little too pessimistic. From 0-60 your GT can crush any other car on the road, including all ICE at traffic light after traffic light after traffic light. No limits. Like I said the only other car that can do this is priced about $50,000 more.

ICE do have advantages and BEV's are not there yet but man are they fun to stomp the accelerator on! It bet you in a single week you will stomp your foot through the floor of your EV more than you ever did on your ICE in its entire life. EV's love to be driven hard through acceleration and on curves and the low center of gravity. They are in their element. ICE are a pale shadow and disappointing when ridden hard.

 

[Brofessional]

Reading this thread, all 663 posts, has anyone considered the tricky situation Ford is in. To keep the acceleration going after 6-8 seconds Ford has to worry about if this will damage the Battery. On the Etron, Audi engineers spent years working out the 8 second 100% acceleration window, without damaging the Battery, esp. long term. The maximum they were willing to push the envelope is 8 seconds. And even then it is not regularly available and needs a button push. Its not an accident IMO that that is where the software on the GT is intervening right now. People would be well advised to go read some of the write ups from the Audi engineers on all the things they were worrying about. I can bet you Ford Engineers read all of it.

If the cooling system for the GT battery is the same as the AWD ER how are you going to allow 12+ second acceleration windows without battery damage. The answer is you don't. My 'friends' experience on the ER AWD, going past 110 Mph is that there is a lot more power there that is being software limited. We will have to see if Ford engineers get confident enough to open up the acceleration profile. With this early generation car and all the recent recall activity I very seriously doubt it.

Your GT can be launched again and again and again on the same day, hour, minute with this acceleration profile with Zero limitations for Battery damage. Do folks realize how amazing that is for an EV. The only other car that can do this is the Porsche Taycan which cost $50,000 more!!

The other company allows a certain amount of battery damage from hard acceleration and simply software neuters the folks who use it too much to prevent a drop below 70% degradation. It not a fair comparison at all. The Battery neutering for all the hard acceleration folks for the other company is coming, they just don't know it. In fact they won't even be notified. This is simply not an option for Ford.

Nope. Over 600 posts and battery compromise has not once been uttered. /s

Seriously though, have you not read how the 4x WITH THE EXACT SAME BATTERY is pulling harder for longer?

 

[Pushrods&Capacitors]

Reading this thread, all 663 posts, has anyone considered the tricky situation Ford is in. To keep the acceleration going after 6-8 seconds Ford has to worry about if this will damage the Battery. On the Etron, Audi engineers spent years working out the 8 second 100% acceleration window, without damaging the Battery, esp. long term. The maximum they were willing to push the envelope is 8 seconds. And even then it is not regularly available and needs a button push. Its not an accident IMO that that is where the software on the GT is intervening right now. People would be well advised to go read some of the write ups from the Audi engineers on all the things they were worrying about. I can bet you Ford Engineers read all of it.

If the cooling system for the GT battery is the same as the AWD ER how are you going to allow 12+ second acceleration windows without battery damage. The answer is you don't. My 'friends' experience on the ER AWD, going past 110 Mph is that there is a lot more power there that is being software limited. We will have to see if Ford engineers get confident enough to open up the acceleration profile. With this early generation car and all the recent recall activity I very seriously doubt it.

Your GT can be launched again and again and again on the same day, hour, minute with this acceleration profile with Zero limitations for Battery damage. Do folks realize how amazing that is for an EV. The only other car that can do this is the Porsche Taycan which cost $50,000 more!!

The other company allows a certain amount of battery damage from hard acceleration and simply software neuters the folks who use it too much to prevent a drop below 70% degradation. It not a fair comparison at all. The Battery neutering for all the hard acceleration folks for the other company is coming, they just don't know it. In fact they won't even be notified. This is simply not an option for Ford.

Agreed. And to sum it up - there are no free lunches.

 

[Pushrods&Capacitors]

Cool… I’m sure $10 k looks good in the rear view mirrors of the Plaid. Looks are subjective, speed isn’t when you run 9’s vs mid 10’s.

Great numbers in some cases? Lol, every performance model run less than 4 sec 0-60, what’s not the case there?

FSD baby, FSD. I bet you optioned it. Troll elsewhere homie. ?

 

[Brofessional]

Either the eventual reviews will be amazing and a TSB will be issued to fix some existing shipped models or it is what it is and Ford will just ignore and give it the old 'look a squirrel' and then point at the f150 lighting.

For a lot of people the trap speed will be irrelevant and we know going in the GTPE with a top speed of 124mph isn't going to be competing up top end with a model Y, however what is very disappointing to me is the posted 50-70mph time of 2.51 seconds as 50-70 mph is the usable overtaking range for when going down a back road and coming across a slower vehicle.

Seems there really there was no point giving the GTPE two large monitors if they are not going to be fully utilized like the various competition does and as a result all have a much faster 50-70mph despite having less total power & torque.

So if the battery can supply it, then just let rip Ford and unleash the full potential it is not like everyone looking for a mustang coupe is going to be potentially cross shopping with a mach-e GTPE so who cares if it has significantly more power than a mustang coupe GT / mach 1.

The way the current EV performance power arms race is going soon only having 480 hp will be the reserve of entry level city cars lol.

If they try going radio silence on the whole thing I will be canceling my lightning order as well. And, they can just add me to the list of power shift owners who won’t be buying a s650 GT either, even if they do put the tremec manual in them.

Big talk I know. Take that multi billion dollar multinational. 2 less sales.

 

[theo1000]

Nope. Over 600 posts and battery compromise has not once been uttered. /s

Seriously though, have you not read how the 4x WITH THE EXACT SAME BATTERY is pulling harder for longer?

But no one reflects on why the compromise is there.

WRT to the AWD ER, correct me if I'm wrong but it has a different front motor and it max draw is lower by about a 100kw!! which hints at why it can go much longer at max draw. So its not the same vehicle at all. On the GT you get much faster acceleration to 0-60 but then pay for it on the back end. That's just how EV's are.

BTW no need to yell, perfectly capable of reading.

 

[buzznwood]

That part I do not know about. I do know this. The Etron cooling system is a cut above the Mach-E. It was specifically German over engineered to safely 'Boost' Torque the motors at 370 kw power draw! But even on the Etron. After 60 mph the boost is reduced. Not the same as at 30 mph. I have never gotten a good answer why though I assume the engineers know why. It is possible if you keep up enough pressure on Ford they may release some more power in this speed band with an OTA.

While we can agree that tesla may like to play fast and loose with battery longevity, the 50-70mph of the GTPE is slower than an I-pace and a polestar 2 which do not have some over engineered battery cooling for the power of the GTPE it is really is an anomaly, and while yes a Taycan can run again & again it also manages to do that with a power overboost on launch unlike a GTPE, yet even in the Taycan once battery charge gets low it will drop in performance so with EV's people will have no problem with power being state of charge / battery temps dependent.

Once ford went down the mustangification from the original compliance route and started used terms such as performance edition and fastest acceleration in its class in marketing they have set expectations, so when developing the GTPE Ford would know full well people will be expecting a certain level of performance that they would need to meet.

Otherwise Ford could have saved a lot of development costs and just instead made a GT-Line trim for those of that prefer the cosmetics of GT front end and GTPE wheels if they are not going to bother making the relevant changes to support the marketing.

 

[Iknownothing]

I saw this short article from The Drive I thought was interesting and maybe relevant to this discussion:

https://www.thedrive.com/news/42140/ford-was-caught-off-guard-by-mustang-mach-e-gts-popularity

In it, they quote Jim Farley as saying

"We didn’t have the right spec levels, the GT was much more popular than we thought,"

"We couldn’t react. It was like, the marketing team could, but the industrial system that creates the physical product, and the software team—they didn’t like, get the memo of this demand."

There’s a bit more and it’s not the direct response people are hoping for, but it may explain the “product readiness” (or lack, thereof) at this point.

Sponsored