Will the real 0-60 please stand up?

[MikeyC]

Last week I got the itch to look at the Mach-E to replace my 2019 Bolt. I'm happy with the Bolt but coming from a long line of performance cars before the Bolt, I was interested in the Mach-E and it's better performance. I had a silver Premium with the long range battery lined up (from a canceled order) so I went to the dealer to look. Really liked the Mach-E in every respect except size: it's so much bigger than my Bolt and I like the subcompact or sort of "hot hatch" category so the Mach-E is likely too big for just me. But the real kicker is that I have to pay a little over $60k to get a Mach-E that is just marginally quicker than the Bolt acceleration-wise. Hence my question...

I've seen probably a dozen 0-60 tests on YouTube for the Mach-E and they don't seem to be getting anywhere near Ford's claimed acceleration. The RWD Select with standard battery seems to be getting in the high 6's. The extended battery RWD in the low 6's (about the same as the Bolt). The Premium with standard battery in the very high 5's. And the top of the line Premium with extended battery (the one I was looking at) anywhere between 5.5 and 5.8 seconds. Ford claimed 4.8 on that one and I've not been able to find a single video where it is achieving that: they seem to be between 3/4 and 1 second slower.

So my question is have any of you, by chance, tried any 0-60 times? I almost wonder if Ford put in a safe "tune" to get these on the road and they will upgrade them OTA eventually? Or... maybe most of the reviews I've seen that included 0-60 runs were on pre-production models and the ones sold to customers are actually fully "unbridled" and hence, faster than the reviews?

Inquiry minds want to know. I know the Mach-E is a better car than the Bolt as far as quality and performance in every regard other than (depending on trim) acceleration but we don't have a lot of twisties here and I'm not much of a canyon carver anyway. So I'm interested more in straight line performance.

Mike

Sponsored

 

[generaltso]

Ford‘s tests were done with a 1 foot rollout.

 

[supertramp]

I would say - do not buy it if you are looking for a smaller and faster car. In your case, Model 3 will fit you much better - cheaper than MME, smaller and quicker (especially if you add $2000 performance software upgrade).

 

[EVmodeler]

Ford‘s tests were done with a 1 foot rollout.

Yes there is the 1 ft roll out used by most but not all sources. There is also quite a bit of variability in accel testing, including the surface, driver, timing method, test weight, etc.
Fords estimates are consistent with the motor and battery ratings; see
https://www.macheforum.com/site/threads/mach-e-extended-range-acceleration-modeling.2177/

 

[malba2366]

Car and driver got 5.1 seconds in a Mach E extended awd...that is with a roll out, and c&d typically gets really low 0-60 numbers. Fords 4.8 number (coincidentally the same as the Model Y LR) is a marketing ploy...no way it is going to go that fast.

 

[DocOfClocks]

5.2 seconds from Edmunds. https://www.edmunds.com/ford/mustang-mach-e/

 

[silverelan]

Edmunds test is probably the best you'll see since it's on their own track. They regularly can't duplicate acceleration times away from their test track. For example, the GT500 gets 3.7s 0-60 on their track but at Willow Springs, they couldn't get it to hook up properly.

 

[MikeyC]

Thanks. 5.2 is fast enough for me: a second quicker than the Bolt. And honestly, the Mach-E is so much nicer inside that I'd take 5.2 with all the niceness and tech of the Mach-E. The Bolt is a bit squirrely at 75 MPH on the highway: the short wheelbase makes it follow detents in the road so the Mach-E would be much better there. The Model 3 is on my radar but there are some things I don't want to lose like Android Auto, satellite radio, and the 360 parking cam. I just like Ford's tech better in that regard. Due to not needing the bigger vehicle, I might have to wait for the next/smaller Ford EV. Sad for me because the Mach-E is everything I want except for being too big for my needs/wants.

Mike

 

[Scarpia]

A lot of people have been going out and timing their cars by just flooring it from a standing stop, and complaining. The 0-60 times that we see in the car mags are done under carefully controlled conditions. C&D and R&T explain how they do their tests - launch control, rollout, temperature, preconditioning, tires, etc., all affect the times.
The key is that they test all of the cars the same way. You may not get as fast a time as the magazine, but you wouldn't with any of the other cars, either. How sure are you about the 0-60 time of your Bolt? I'll bet that is proportionally slower than the times you're seeing for the Mach E.
Give this a read:
https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/buying-maintenance/a30905608/how-0-to-60-tests-work/

 

[malba2366]

I think the confusion here is that Ford has quoted the 0-60 time with a rollout and in a best case scenario. Most automakers quote 0-60 times that are very conservative and the magazines routinely beat those numbers with the roll out and ideal conditions. So looks like Motor Trend actually got 4.8 sec in the Mach E, but they got 4.1 sec in the Model Y LR ( which is also manufacturer quoted at 4.8 sec). The Chevy bolt was tested by MT at 6.3 sec, but Chevy quoted 6.5 sec.

To the OP. If you are looking to get any meaningful improvement in straight line acceleration over your Bolt, you probably need to go with the extended range AWD (or GT). There will be other improvements such as more room, a nicer interior, better handling/braking etc.

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

There's been at least one report by a forum member with an early delivery FE of the 0 to 60 in the high 4's. So that's right on target. But yeah, you're never going to achieve the track 1-foot rollout standards except by accident.

 

[Mirak]

I can confirm that when I floor my Grabber Blue (the fastest color) AWD Extended Range from a dead stop, my 0-60 time feels like around 4 seconds. Give or take a second or two. I haven’t tried to actually measure this, because how fast it feels matters a lot more to me than a number on a display.

Granted, I am a bit of an anomaly in that I am not a professional drag racer, so take this for what it’s worth.

 

[MikeyC]

How sure are you about the 0-60 time of your Bolt? I'll bet that is proportionally slower than the times you're seeing for the Mach E.
Give this a read:
https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/buying-maintenance/a30905608/how-0-to-60-tests-work/

I've tested my own Bolt with my Passport G-Timer which I don't believe uses a rollout. I got 6.5s on all 5 runs I tested. Battery was at 80%. The car mags all seem to get 6.1 to 6.3 but my guess is that's with rollout and 100% battery. From what I've seen, the Bolt is probably neck and neck with the Mach-E Select with the standard battery. The Select with the extended battery is probably just a hair quicker but probably not noticeable in "feel".

Mike

 

[Murse-In-Airy]

I’ve gone an actual 5.6 without rollout on a dirty road and cold tires. Clean up the road, warm the tires, and give me rollout, I think I’d see around 5.2. But, like the response above, I am not a professional drag racer either, so I think 5.6 is fine for an old guy with a beer gut who really just wanted an AWD car with enough range in the winter time.

 

[MikeyC]

True. In reality, the 0-60 times on even the lowest trim are enough to be fun! I'm so impressed with the gadgets and customization ability on the Mach-E. They really did it right... all the way down to letting you adjust the "Tolerance" of the lane keeping! Other manufacturers should take note!

Mike

Sponsored