Team Edison where are you??

[stevec73]

Did you not know you were buying a first-gen Ford EV? I never expected perfection or Tesla-level integration, but I love my car, appreciate the improvements, and of course sometimes get disappointed by delays (like the availability of BC 1.4). By many accounts, the 2024 models are a huge leap forward in many ways. I’m excited to see what 2026 brings. Hope that the second generation Mach E isn’t delayed too…

Sponsored

 

[DaMeatMan]

Did you not know you were buying a first-gen Ford EV? I never expected perfection or Tesla-level integration, but I love my car, appreciate the improvements, and of course sometimes get disappointed by delays (like the availability of BC 1.4). By many accounts, the 2024 models are a huge leap forward in many ways. I’m excited to see what 2026 brings. Hope that the second generation Mach E isn’t delayed too…

I 100% knew I was buying a first gen vehicle and I was, and am fully prepared to deal with being an early adopter. That said, I think you miss my point.

Ford has just released a brand new (refreshed Mach-E) with brand new hardware and software. Despite being almost 4 years in, and launching a brand new refresh, they completely ommitted all these tiny little things that keep the Mach-E from being great. Virtually every single reviewer of the new refresh says this, I'll pointvto Kyle's as just one example of this.

We are talking about (intentional) design choices, either through silly logic, or via inaction to change what virtually every single reviewer has criticized about the Mach-E (since launch in 2021). The lead engineers are aware, Ford is well aware, they keep telling reviewers "it's in the pipeline", but it's almost 4 years later and these silly little issues are ignored. This is such low hanging fruit, that requires such little effort and resources to change, (this is software) nit hardware, yet would improve upon what many have been complaining about for YEARS! LOL

To be fully transparent, I absolutely love my Mach-E. I'm not one of those guys that says he's going to sell his vehicle because of a software glitch. But this level of inaction is annoying, and the whole post came from a place of concern for Ford.

I'm asking what the heck happened to the team that was supposed to allow them to move fast, innovate, iterate, and improve their product to provide a product that directly competes with Tesla, as well as all the other competition that has sprung up since the first 2021 Mach-E rolled off the assembly line.

My point is, Ford needs to get back to that place of fear, and self awareness of what lead to the creation of Team Edison, and realize that the job ain't done just because they managed to put out the Mach-E in 2021, and they need to (continue) to behave in a way like their livelihood depends on remaining relevant, moving quick, innovating, and improving upon their original product, as well as getting better with new iterations.

I mean it's 2024, the Mach-E has one of the largest batteries in its class, yet charges slower than virtually every other competitor, many of which charge twice as fast with half the size pack. Allot of this is a software design choice in how the BMS logic is programmed, and I never mentioned it in my original post, because it also contains elements of hardware. But their is no excuse to not improve software design choices that either don't make sense, or leave the customer lacking what could otherwise be a much better user experience.

To watch them launch a brand new refreshed hardware with the exact same old software, without addressing any of this is just silly and beyond compression, and it's not excusable given the level of competition out there today!

Lastly I'll add this. I've owned my vehicle for over 3 years now, and just within the last month or so I can now open the frunk electronically via software, when I was supposed to be able to do this on day 1. Again this is a silly little thing, but I'm pointing out how HORRENDOUSLY SLOW they are at fixing very obvious known issues, and that is very concerning when Farley knows and acknowledges that what makes these vehicles unique is NOT the electric drivetrain, but rather that they are computers on wheels, and software is such a huge aspect of the user experience, and it can make or break the product, and you would expect that the prioritize software accordingly particularly when their CEO is the one saying this, not me.

 

[phil]

I 100% knew I was buying a first gen vehicle and I was, and am fully prepared to deal with being an early adopter. That said, I think you miss my point.

Ford has just released a brand new (refreshed Mach-E) with brand new hardware and software. Despite being almost 4 years in, and launching a brand new refresh, they completely ommitted all these tiny little things that keep the Mach-E from being great. Virtually every single reviewer of the new refresh says this, I'll pointvto Kyle's as just one example of this.

We are talking about (intentional) design choices, either through silly logic, or via inaction to change what virtually every single reviewer has criticized about the Mach-E (since launch in 2021). The lead engineers are aware, Ford is well aware, they keep telling reviewers "it's in the pipeline", but it's almost 4 years later and these silly little issues are ignored. This is such low hanging fruit, that requires such little effort and resources to change, (this is software) nit hardware, yet would improve upon what many have been complaining about for YEARS! LOL

To be fully transparent, I absolutely love my Mach-E. I'm not one of those guys that says he's going to sell his vehicle because of a software glitch. But this level of inaction is annoying, and the whole post came from a place of concern for Ford.

I'm asking what the heck happened to the team that was supposed to allow them to move fast, innovate, iterate, and improve their product to provide a product that directly competes with Tesla, as well as all the other competition that has sprung up since the first 2021 Mach-E rolled off the assembly line.

My point is, Ford needs to get back to that place of fear, and self awareness of what lead to the creation of Team Edison, and realize that the job ain't done just because they managed to put out the Mach-E in 2021, and they need to (continue) to behave in a way like their livelihood depends on remaining relevant, moving quick, innovating, and improving upon their original product, as well as getting better with new iterations.

I mean it's 2024, the Mach-E has one of the largest batteries in its class, yet charges slower than virtually every other competitor, many of which charge twice as fast with half the size pack. Allot of this is a software design choice in how the BMS logic is programmed, and I never mentioned it in my original post, because it also contains elements of hardware. But their is no excuse to not improve software design choices that either don't make sense, or leave the customer lacking what could otherwise be a much better user experience.

To watch them launch a brand new refreshed hardware with the exact same old software, without addressing any of this is just silly and beyond compression, and it's not excusable given the level of competition out there today!

Lastly I'll add this. I've owned my vehicle for over 3 years now, and just within the last month or so I can now open the frunk electronically via software, when I was supposed to be able to do this on day 1. Again this is a silly little thing, but I'm pointing out how HORRENDOUSLY SLOW they are at fixing very obvious known issues, and that is very concerning when Farley knows and acknowledges that what makes these vehicles unique is NOT the electric drivetrain, but rather that they are computers on wheels, and software is such a huge aspect of the user experience, and it can make or break the product, and you would expect that the prioritize software accordingly particularly when their CEO is the one saying this, not me.

It's almost as if you're suggesting that manufacturers should produce high-quality products. Bizarre!

 

[TheSteelRider]

That's an interesting take on this. So you believe that Ford is intentionally designing their cars to charge to 100% every single day to cater to those who couldn't care less to intervene? That sounds like a risky move, particularly given how conservative Ford is as a company, and would potentially and (knowingly) open themselves up to a large number of warranty claims on what is actually the most expensive part of the vehicle (the battery) several years down the road.

Honestly I have a hard time believing that they would do this intentionally, and a more likely explanation is simply sloppy programming logic. But of course that's just my opinion, and my opinion is no more correct than your own. But I would love to know what Ford was actually thinking here.

In short, YES.

The car (at least the ER) has a ~99KWh battery, but you can only use ~91KWh (or maybe 89 if you are a Job-1 '21, that debate was never completely settled IMHO). Therefore, they are providing a ~10% buffer. So, you charging to what you think it 100% is really only 90%.

If you take a minute to read the owner manual, it recommends (but not not force) you to set a 90% limit. I'm no math wizard, but 90% of 91KWh usable means you are really only charging to ~83% of the true battery capacity. Further, Ford undervolts the battery much more than other BEVs (and is tangentially probably a minor cause of the less-than-stellar charging speed due to P=I2R) meaning they are being so conservative it's not even funny, even if you charge to "100%" every day.

 

[RMoore]

So, you charging to what you think it 100% is really only 90%.

And this is why I have no qualms about charging to 100%. I don’t do it all the time, but I’m fine doing it if I think I need to.

 

[RMoore]

The OP does make some excellent points. But I did chuckle at the frequent use of “beurocracy” when the video posted right below is titled “How bureaucracy works…” and shows the correct spelling ?.

 

[Dear_OP]

TL;DR.

Is the issue here about software in the MME or MME improvements overall or Ford's bureaucracy?

After sampling many EVs I (along with my wife) have come to the conclusion that no legacy makers are in the same league as Tesla when it comes to software and EV tech. Some of them are quite embarrassing by slapping battery propulsion on an ICE platform. Just forget it. The packaging could've been so much better with dedicated BEV platform. But instead you have a compromised product. The entire EV design architecture has to be totally reimagined.

There was a reviewer that explained one of the reason why Tesla is able to iteratively improve its products. The early Model 3 were quite unrefined. However the car experienced incremental changes all the time. For those well verse in Photoshop will relate to this. He gave an example of folks developing an image as jpg vs one who develops as PSD. With the former, it is destructive. Changes are hard to make. While the later in PSD form, you keep the layers. Make constant changes as needed and re-export to jpg.


The software for MME isn't the worse. I've experienced worse ones. With MME, you should just cast AA/AP and call it a day. The computer behind it needs to be powerful. It has lag when switching apps. Just not as smooth as Tesla's.

 

[medriver]

Tesla designed a car around the assumption that FSD works. It's an inferior usability experience without fully functioning FSD but they are really going all in, plus it makes their car cheaper so why not.

 

[DaMeatMan]

TL;DR.

Is the issue here about software in the MME or MME improvements overall or Ford's bureaucracy?

After sampling many EVs I (along with my wife) have come to the conclusion that no legacy makers are in the same league as Tesla when it comes to software and EV tech. Some of them are quite embarrassing by slapping battery propulsion on an ICE platform. Just forget it. The packaging could've been so much better with dedicated BEV platform. But instead you have a compromised product. The entire EV design architecture has to be totally reimagined.

There was a reviewer that explained one of the reason why Tesla is able to iteratively improve its products. The early Model 3 were quite unrefined. However the car experienced incremental changes all the time. For those well verse in Photoshop will relate to this. He gave an example of folks developing an image as jpg vs one who develops as PSD. With the former, it is destructive. Changes are hard to make. While the later in PSD form, you keep the layers. Make constant changes as needed and re-export to jpg.


The software for MME isn't the worse. I've experienced worse ones. With MME, you should just cast AA/AP and call it a day. The computer behind it needs to be powerful. It has lag when switching apps. Just not as smooth as Tesla's.

The software isn't horrible, and that's not really the issue. The issue is that it's an incredible vehicle, but it feels half baked, and the parts that are missing are so incredibly basic, and simple, that you have to ask yourself what the heck is Ford thinking over there. It was totally understandable in 2021 when they released the product, but it's 2024 and they just refreshed the vehicle and released it to the public with the exact same software.

The points I made in the OP, are just a few gripes, none of which is a big deal on its own. But taken together as a whole, it becomes obvious that the effort that went into understanding what customers wanted out of the hardware, is not quite the same as what went into the software design.

I mean so much of this stuff is so incredibly trivial and silly it's hard to comprehend. Like displaying literally zero information on charge rate when charging.. besides displaying "charging..." wow.. awesome.. thanks.. super useful information Ford! How about telling me the current charge rate??

Also it's an EV, and regen braking is totally a thing, but let's not display that info to the driver, and let's not give them any sort of usable information or feedback on what's going on with the vehicle, other than to display the speed. Ya that's a fantastic idea for our flagship product when literally every single other EV, gives you this info.

I mean so much has been said about preconditioning by Ford in response to complaints from customers about cold weather performance when charging etc... this could be solved with one freaking "precondition battery" button on the charging screen, yet Ford's solution was to lock it away in the built in nav, let alone not even telling you the vehicle is preconditioning when you jump through the hoops to use this feature by setting a charger as your destination with their built-in navigation. Honestly, one button guys.. how freaking hard is that to implement??

And literally ZERO customization of that center console display??? Really Ford? My Kia Sorento let's me chose from like 5 different preset display templates, and the info the displayed data on those preaets can also be customized... but not on our flagship product Mach-E.. nope.. you get a speedometer, and that is all. Have you guys seen the center console display in a modern ICE Mustang, its got all sorts of customizable options for that center display? Yet they called this a Mustang.. but I guess adding "ground speed" under the speed will suffice for you EV folks!

I can't understand the logic here, and I cannot accept that they are just so strained with resources that they "just didn't get around to it", and it's not that they haven't heard these criticisms before because literally every single reviewer has commented on it, and some have like Tom Mologney have pressed Farley and the lead engineer on these points as well, so they obviously know what customers want, and they have extremely good feedback on what's missing.

So what gives!?

 

[medriver]

The software isn't horrible, and that's not really the issue. The issue is that it's an incredible vehicle, but it feels half baked, and the parts that are missing are so incredibly basic, and simple, that you have to ask yourself what the heck is Ford thinking over there. It was totally understandable in 2021 when they released the product, but it's 2024 and they just refreshed the vehicle and released it to the public with the exact same software.

The points I made in the OP, are just a few gripes, none of which is a big deal on its own. But taken together as a whole, it becomes obvious that the effort that went into understanding what customers wanted out of the hardware, is not quite the same as what went into the software design.

I mean so much of this stuff is so incredibly trivial and silly it's hard to comprehend. Like displaying literally zero information on charge rate when charging.. besides displaying "charging..." wow.. awesome.. thanks.. super useful information Ford! How about telling me the current charge rate??

Also it's an EV, and regen braking is totally a thing, but let's not display that info to the driver, and let's not give them any sort of usable information or feedback on what's going on with the vehicle, other than to display the speed. Ya that's a fantastic idea for our flagship product when literally every single other EV, gives you this info.

I mean so much has been said about preconditioning by Ford in response to complaints from customers about cold weather performance when charging etc... this could be solved with one freaking "precondition battery" button on the charging screen, yet Ford's solution was to lock it away in the built in nav, let alone not even telling you the vehicle is preconditioning when you jump through the hoops to use this feature by setting a charger as your destination with their built-in navigation. Honestly, one button guys.. how freaking hard is that to implement??

And literally ZERO customization of that center console display??? Really Ford? My Kia Sorento let's me chose from like 5 different preset display templates, and the info the displayed data on those preaets can also be customized... but not on our flagship product Mach-E.. nope.. you get a speedometer, and that is all. Have you guys seen the center console display in a modern ICE Mustang, its got all sorts of customizable options for that center display? Yet they called this a Mustang.. but I guess adding "ground speed" under the speed will suffice for you EV folks!

I can't understand the logic here, and I cannot accept that they are just so strained with resources that they "just didn't get around to it", and it's not that they haven't heard these criticisms before because literally every single reviewer has commented on it, and some have like Tom Mologney have pressed Farley and the lead engineer on these points as well, so they obviously know what customers want, and they have extremely good feedback on what's missing.

So what gives!?

What would you like to customize on the driver display and why?

 

[Snakebitten]

I have long been accustomed to "legacy" ICE vehicle not providing all the information that I prefer to see on the instrument cluster. And with the technology advances of the OBD interface, along with the plethora of PIDs available to query, I fill those gaps with my own efforts and hardware.
But I admit that there's something odd about an EV being even more spartan at providing data on request. You would assume that an electric vehicle made up with literally a electronic drivetrain, would be the perfect canvas for the manufacturer to EASILY provide a user interface that is just as differentiating from the legacy vehicle as the drivetrain is.

I love the Mach-E.
Honestly, when I'm driving it I am amazed that it's a Ford product. I've driven their products for more than half a century. It's a fantastic product considering what it is and who designed and produced it.

But since I'm accustomed to building my own "enhanced informational dashboards" on other vehicles, I just did the same on the Mach-E.
What’s so baffling is that Ford has equipped the vehicle with a VAST array of PIDs. All the information that the OP references is already measured and available. Whether I am charging L2 or DCFC, I can real-time monitor every value that I could possibly want to know.
So Ford provided everything I desire already, except the screen real estate to display it. That does seem a whole lot more bizarre in an EV than a Bronco Sport.

Grab a throw down smartphone. It doesn't even need a SIM.
Add an OBDlink MX adapter.
Add a holder to put that display exactly where it should be for comfortable/safe glancing. And simply extend the OEM cluster to include anything and everything that you want to know.

I have one dashboard extension for while driving, and another while charging. Swipe of the thumb is all it takes.

This amazing car is an 8 for driving and riding. (my opinion)

It's a 4-5 on user interface providing information I desire.
It's a 2-3 on OTA updates meeting delivery success potential.

FDRS and OBDlink changes the car to an 8 or better on everything for me.

I'm too old to wait on Ford (or anyone) to get better at what they aren't good at. But for lots of things there's wonderful options that weren't available in the past that are today.

 

[DaMeatMan]

What would you like to customize on the driver display and why?

I'm honestly not sure if your being serious, but I'll humor you and let's say we start here. This is what Ford is currently offering in the ICE mustang:



Now here's what we get:

If I didn't know anything at all about the Mach-E, and I told you that we were 4 model years into the Mach-E, and this is what they are offering on their flagship product, I would have thought you were joking!

To add insult to injury, we used to be able to at least get rid of that completely usless vehicle icon, and center the display, and we even had some animated graphics in 2 of the drive modes, but Ford broke that several updates ago with no fix in sight.

Now.. I'm not a vehicle designer, but Ford is. They obviously know how to make this stuff customizable, engaging, and fun for their customers. But apparently that doesn't apply to EV's for some reason, which is particularly insulting when one pays $80k for said EV. Yes.. it retails for about $70k in ?? with 13% sales tax. But my freaking Kia Sorento has got more going on with the center cluster display than my $80,000 Mach-E.

So sure.. go ahead and ask me what I want from it, and "explain why" like I'm some unreasonable schmuck that just asked for the ability to make my car hover and fly!

This topic has been beaten to death, Ford knows customers want this, and some very talented folks even went so far as to create some mock ups for Ford for goodness sakes! I wish I knew who created these so I can link to their original post and give them credit for their work, but here it is:

Lol... "What would I like to customize and why?" Are you freaking serious...

 

[TheSteelRider]

I'm honestly not sure if your being serious, but I'll humor and let's say we start here. This is what Ford is currently offering in the ICE mustang:



Now here's what we get:

If I didn't know anything at all about the Mach-E, and I told you that we were 4 model years into the Mach-E, snd this is what they are offering on their flagship product, I would have thought you were joking.

To add insult to injury, we used to be able to at least get rid of that completely usless vehicle icon, and center the display, and even had some animated graphics in 2 of the drive modes, but Ford broke that several updates ago.

Now.. I'm not a vehicle designer Ford is. They obviously know how to make this stuff customizable, engaging, and fun for their customers. But apparently that doesn't apply to folks who just dropped $80k on an EV. Yes.. it retails for about $70k in ?? with 13% sales tax. But my freaking Kia Sorento has got more going on with the center cluster display than my $80,000 Mach-E.

So sure.. go ahead and ask me what I want from it, and "explain why" like I'm some unreasonable schmuck that just asked for the ability to make my car hover and fly!

This topic has been beaten to death, Ford knows customers want this, and some very talented folks even went so far as to create some mock ups for Ford for goodness sakes! I wish I knew who created these so I can link to their original post and give them credit for their work, but here it is:

Lol... "What would I like to customize and why?" Are you freaking serious...

What would a mock-up be if all the ADAS features are on, enabled, and BlueCruise HF mode is active/on and you are cruising at 75 MPH?

 

[medriver]

Let's cover the stock driver display, left to right.

Range and Battery Percentage - we know how much gas we have left. GT has a power gauge, somewhat analogous to a tachometer, feel free to critisize ford for keeping that GT only.

The empty space is where turn by turn directions go.

The car shows the status of your lane keeping, the car in front of you, following distance, copilot or blue cruise status, it shows if a lane change is available aka ADAS status at a glance.

Right side is speed which is clustered with the latest speed sign recognized and what your cruise control is set at and if its active or not, all handily placed right next to each other, followed by what gear the car is in.

Bottom row shows direction, headlight status, more ADAS status, warning lights, finally the odometer with a extra decimal point which I find so funny.

What more could you possibly need to operate the car?

I personally would not mind the temp, but an ice warning light or extreme upper temperature warning would probably be adequate as the information lives on the center screen.

I think the trip stats is a MAYBE, but its the only app I leave open on the center screen, when its minimized it shows your MI/KWH on the app bar (free tip), trip info lies in there.

The first mockup, Radio Station laughable, but what's playing maybe, but that's not necessary for driving so why should it be on the drivers display.

I don't really get the hard on for the power meter (and given it's not on the non GT mustangs, ford doesn't either) but the efficiency could actually be argued to be on there, somewhere, but my workaround for that is mentioned above, it's got range. The lack of the kWh is a deliberate obfuscation (the car's kWh's are not a normal scale, its different for the two battery packs, varied by year, its different for every car, it's not good info for the general public, its not 0-100, it's not simple, its also why the gas tank doesn't say how many gallons are left generally), as a result you lose precision but ford doesn't get extra phone calls with questions about where all my kWh's are going.

Trip info, I'm lukewarm on that. It's tracked on the center console, why does it need to be there, taking up critical real estate, my navigation and turn by turn's got me this is 2024.

I wont poke fun at how the efficiency range and battery status are split on different sides of the display.

The second mockup while endearing is pretty bad highlights include forgetting the odometer, some information that simply deserves a binary state on a drivers display if anything including tire pressure and battery temperature.

The energy information while interesting has no real utility for this screen, what factors can you actually modify that make an impact here, the outside temperature? Climate use = HVAC on AUTO 1-3, Accessory use, gonna turn down that stereo?

I spent a long time trying to spell this out for you, I hope it helps.

Fords implementation while boring and utilitarian is quite usable for the thing is meant to do, be a drivers display.

Let's take it to the next level.

There is a thing called cognitive load, you don't always want the kitchen sink up there, you want it simple and interpretable. People give them a hard time for having the pretty cartoony static car but you are not distracted by an animation or extraneous information. etc. etc. etc.

 

[dj_stang]

I’m willing to bet, most people, not even just old people, want their car to go from A to B, more than watching YouTube on another device.

Then why is Ford bothering with all this new fangled electricity stuff, the people you’re talking about are buying Camrys.

Don’t kid yourself that Ford wasn’t trying to directly compete with Tesla with this product.

Sponsored