Ford Mustang Mach-E review: The people’s pony goes electric

Not quite as much fun—or efficient—as a Tesla Model 3.

Read the whole story

 

[Dr Gitlin]

I recall that a few years back, Tesla released a bunch of patents for free use by anyone.

Is Ford, or any other maker, availing themselves of those patents to improve their vehicles? Has that patent release had any real-world impact?

The terms of Tesla's patent license would require that any licensee give up any right to defend any of their OWN IP, not just against infringement by Tesla, but by any other automaker.

As you might expect, absolutely no one found those terms acceptable.

 

[Dr Gitlin]

Edit: Also proving that I am not the target consumer for this car. Where the hell is the USDM Honda-E!?

Never coming, because Honda would have to charge >$40,000 for a car with a trunk and back seat so small, few Americans would buy it.

K cars sold surprisingly well here. I'm not saying there's a large market (no pun intended), but I genuinely miss the smaller Honda bodies. My late model Civic is a nice car, but it's *big* relative to my preferences.

K-Cars didn't come with a bill of materials that would make them cost as much as a car two sizes up. EVs do, and that's why VW will not sell the small ID.3 here and Honda will not sell the Honda e. They want to make money, not lose thousands on every car sold, like Fiat did with the 500e.

 

[Uselessmode]

Even aside from the safety and convenience issues with touchscreen controls, I don't understand why no-one seems to make any effort at all to make them look like they belong there. Why does every car just have a big tablet glued in front of the dashboard? Surely it can't be that much effort to actually build it into place so that the screen seems like part of the fittings? It just looks so pathetically shoddy to try selling an expensive shiny car, and then just duck tape a cheap tablet to the front.

Agreed. Since it is the cheapest method to do, they are all doing that. It is the ugliest thing I spot from the beginning. Carmakers inherently are lazy and not known for revolutionary designs, not to mention incredibly cheap.

 

[nehinks]

Unless I missed it, I didn't see how you activate wipers - is there a stalk for it, or is it relegated to the touchscreen?

Normal stalks for the indicator and the headlights, and the windscreen wipers.

Thanks! I consider those both functions that need to be easily accessible. Glad to hear they were smart about it.

 

[DalexPHL]

Even aside from the safety and convenience issues with touchscreen controls, I don't understand why no-one seems to make any effort at all to make them look like they belong there. Why does every car just have a big tablet glued in front of the dashboard? Surely it can't be that much effort to actually build it into place so that the screen seems like part of the fittings? It just looks so pathetically shoddy to try selling an expensive shiny car, and then just duck tape a cheap tablet to the front.

Hear Hear!

I am *sick* of the "Slab-In-Blob" Screen integration that seems all the Rage.

 

[edm555]

Not a Mustang in the original sense, which was an affordable sports car for those we can't afford more expensive cars. ?

The original Mustang was not a sports car; it occupied a place in the market somewhat like that of a Hyundai Veloster or VW GTI or Civic Coupe, as a somewhat zoomy commuter with some performance options and extroverted styling at a good value. I actually think the Mach E is very true to that. And that's the charitable characterization, it was sneered at as a "secretary's car" for a good while, long before it got a sports car image.

I do think it could have also been called a Thunderbird, which would have worked on a couple levels, but I think it works as a Mustang.

The original Mustang was always considered a muscle car. I'm curious why you believe it to have been a commuter any more than say a GTO.

I'm curious why on Earth you think it was considered a muscle car. It was the literal definition of a pony car, first off, and was based on Ford's compact platform. Lee Iacocca, who basically made its production happen, had a "four-seat sporty car" with European influence in mind. Henry Ford II only signed off on it if it was under 2500lb and $2500. You could order it with a somewhat powerful V8, but not the most powerful one Ford sold.

It became a muscle car in its third generation, arguably, but circa 1964, muscle cars were based on midsize models and had a shitload more power than the Mustang ever got until they dropped a 5.0 in it.

The original engine options were a straight six or a choice of two V8s. Within just 2 years it had a Big Block option. It wasn't as big or as powerful as some other muscle cars but I'd still consider it one, Pony or not.

You do you, I guess, but there's a reason the Mustang, Camaro, and Barracuda are considered to be a different category than a Chevelle, Javelin, or Super Bee.

Right, small bodies with similar design characteristics.
The question is whether a pony car can be a muscle car or not. I believe it can given the proper performance options and the Mustang was a performance car to some degree the moment you went anywhere above the very most base trim package. I'd say if there are more performance options than non then it's appropriate to consider it a performance vehicle.

 

[DalexPHL]

Honestly it looks beautiful but...not a Mustang.

They didn't want to call it a Mule?

"Clydesdale"

 

[L0neW0lf]

FTA:

plenty of Mustangs have been unexciting cars

I once visited the factory when these damned things wore the Mustang badge:

A pretty low period for all.

Yeah, I like Mustang's, even the over plasticized late 80's version. This car is boring.

There were prettier versions:

Also, while the initial Mustang II wasn't much of a Mustang due to its base engine, they added a 2.8L V6 and the 302 Windsor V8 as later options.

 

[dlux]

There were prettier versions

That still suffers from the 'Monte Carlo' styling deficits: small wheels, and long overhangs front and back. It may have been more economical to build but what's the point if it's marketed as a sporty 'performance' car?

 

[timber]

That liftback does wonders for that car look.

Doesn't solve it surely improves a lot.

 

[luckof13]

... And winter is a terrible time to test EVs.

[Looks outside at a foot (30 cm) of new snow]

No, if EVs want to come out to play in the real world they should absolutely be tested in the winter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp-5FLPADIQ

 

[Chemical Tribe]

a handle that's supposed to pop out? How well is this going to work after an ice storm? There are times when you have to pick the less-frozen side of a car and jerk the hell out of it to get it open, hoping to not bust the handle off, and then push the other car doors open from the inside. What the hell ya gonna do if the handle doesn't even pop out because it's frozen shut? I guess given that this is a hatch back maybe that side will be able to be opened and you can crawl into the front from there, but yeesh.

These doors don't work exactly like that, you push a button that pops them ajar, then there's a fixed "handle" (grab location?) you can pull on. Here's a video: https://youtu.be/D_VC8bIWZ0I?t=278

Do those buttons and actuators work if the door is iced over? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If anything the ability to heat the car before you get to it will alleviate that issue, as it does with Tesla.

 

[LDA 6502]

They are going to sell boatloads of these, and it's unfortunate. Not because of the electrified future - we all know that's coming, and parts of it are really exciting!

No, it's a bummer because there are certain design trends very prevalent in this car that will be propagated to other products because of those sales. Things like using an established marque to sell a (nearly) completely unrelated product, the lack of physical and easy to use controls for things that are used fairly constantly (like heat/AC controls in climates outside of CA!), and the iPad-stuck-to-the-dash aesthetic. Hell, even the move into truly MASSIVE vehicles by weight.


*Car-enthusiast sigh*

Edit: Also proving that I am not the target consumer for this car. Where the hell is the USDM Honda-E!?

Agree completely. I was cautiously optimistic when the Mach-E was first announced, despite the SUVness of the design. I thought Ford woudl at least make it engaging to drive and fun to throw around, but it sounds like it's actually kind of meh. That's really disappointing from an enthusiast standpoint.

But you're right, they'll sell boatloads because a) Ford, and b) it's an SUV. This will be the Explorer craze all over again.

I used to own an early '90s Gen 3 Mustang LX with the hatchback and 88 hp (66 kW) 2.3 L I4. The Mach-E is absolutely spry, nimble, and majestic in comparison.

 

[Snark218]

Even aside from the safety and convenience issues with touchscreen controls, I don't understand why no-one seems to make any effort at all to make them look like they belong there. Why does every car just have a big tablet glued in front of the dashboard? Surely it can't be that much effort to actually build it into place so that the screen seems like part of the fittings? It just looks so pathetically shoddy to try selling an expensive shiny car, and then just duck tape a cheap tablet to the front.

Agreed. Since it is the cheapest method to do, they are all doing that. It is the ugliest thing I spot from the beginning. Carmakers inherently are lazy and not known for revolutionary designs, not to mention incredibly cheap.

It's not lazy or cheap to do it that way. A big binnacle around that screen would be incredibly cheap to implement. As repeatedly pointed out by several posters, doing that would affect safety, interior volume, and make the dash incredibly high and bulky. The tablet approach allows a touchscreen positioned high enough for a driver to use, keeps the dash lower in height and volume, and (believe it or not) does not actually bug most typical car buyers as much as it bugs a small, vocal number of internet commenters.

 

[DalexPHL]

A brief history of ‘frunks’. A splattering of low priced, mid-engined cars from the 60s/70s like the Lotus Europa, Porsche 914, Fiat X1/9 and Lancia Beta Montecarlo introduced the masses to frunks. However, I’ve never met anyone who uses the term. ‘Stick it in the front trunk’ is common at shows or car runs. Frunk is used in a jesting manner.

FTW:

 

[real mikeb_60]

Why am I reminded of the Mustang II despite absolutely everything about the two vehicles being as different as possible?

This one looks like a generic fastback crossover, similar to several BMW and Acura and Honda models. Can just barely see a "lifted Focus" aspect to it. Has the height & heft (++, due to the battery) of a small crossover, but overall doesn't look bad and seems from the review to work well. To my mind, it's still not a Mustang (for all its faults, and they were overwhelming, the Mustang II *was* the actual Mustang at its time), but given that Ford has extinguished all non-truck/SUV names other than the Mustang, I can see the marketing reasons for calling this one, and it does seem to work well. The price kind of stinks, but unless looking at a 4-cyl rental car version these days that's near what would be paid for any Mustang.

Funny, a friend back in the 70s had a 4 cyl, automatic Mustang ii. She loved it. I had a Capri II at the time. I didn't love it (it Really Needed power steering but didn't have it, and Ford 4-cyl cars at the time including my Capri all had big-car gas mileage), but it did drive well, and was quieter and more comfortable than the Mustang (though she did have p/s, lucky person); it served my needs at the time. I suspect that a lot of people wanting this will get it because it serves their needs better than a real 'Stang (if they can live with the short range) but is still more fun to drive than, say, an Explorer (and it's an EV, bro).

 

[dlux]

...every since I've had a car with auto climate control I have pretty much had it set to 72 and never touched it again. If it's hot outside it cools it down. If it's cold it warms it up.

I once owned a used '73 Chevy Caprice wagon ($200 cash) and it had GM's ComfoTron Astro-Ventilation system. That sucker held the dialed-in temperature rain or shine, with no difference in gas mileage whether it was turned on or off. It was pretty state-of-the-art for a low-end vehicle. (The Caddy's all had that, of course, but those were like $4000 more to buy and '73 was not a pretty year for luxury spending.)

The downside, alas, was it operated through a complex series of vacuum tubes and solenoids and valves the likes of which would baffle a NASA engineer. I had the service manual and the climate-control section was the only part with color diagrams, to show all the tubes and whatnot, on fold-out pages because there was no way to contain all that technology on a single printed page. The automatic transmission had fewer parts. When mine broke I had to do without A/C until the vehicle ultimately got crushed under a fallen tree in a hurricane.

Damn, I miss that car.

 

[freaq]

I do not understand car companies desire to make vehicles less safe by the inclusions of a giant touch screen that controls nearly everything in the car. And of course the waste of power to drive such a large display. It is almost bland enough on the inside that you could call it a Tesla. I'm all for the future of electric vehicles, but you don't have to make them less safe and boring at the same time.

The waste of power is negligable, were talking a few watts. Driving one mile will be the same amount of energy as running that display for atleast a week probably more like a month. Its not an energy hog.

 

[real mikeb_60]

a handle that's supposed to pop out? How well is this going to work after an ice storm? There are times when you have to pick the less-frozen side of a car and jerk the hell out of it to get it open, hoping to not bust the handle off, and then push the other car doors open from the inside. What the hell ya gonna do if the handle doesn't even pop out because it's frozen shut? I guess given that this is a hatch back maybe that side will be able to be opened and you can crawl into the front from there, but yeesh.

These doors don't work exactly like that, you push a button that pops them ajar, then there's a fixed "handle" (grab location?) you can pull on. Here's a video: https://youtu.be/D_VC8bIWZ0I?t=278

Do those buttons and actuators work if the door is iced over? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If anything the ability to heat the car before you get to it will alleviate that issue, as it does with Tesla.

***while plugged in***. Pre-heating/cooling doesn't help much if on battery, other than for comfort when you arrive. BTW, Bolt has it too.

As for the door handles, that's the Tesla influence in spades. Imitate everything, including the features that don't make sense outside of a show car. I much prefer the ordinary door handles of my Bolt on a cold morning. OTOH, if it's been left plugged in overnight (recommended for any EV when temps are below freezing) and you hit the pre-heat before heading out of the house, it should warm things up enough for the funny door handles to work fine.

 

[Dr Gitlin]

I'm always excited for more electric cars, and cheaper electric cars, but I seriously question some design decisions. I'm not a fan of the giant flat screen control panels, and a handle that's supposed to pop out? How well is this going to work after an ice storm? There are times when you have to pick the less-frozen side of a car and jerk the hell out of it to get it open, hoping to not bust the handle off, and then push the other car doors open from the inside. What the hell ya gonna do if the handle doesn't even pop out because it's frozen shut? I guess given that this is a hatch back maybe that side will be able to be opened and you can crawl into the front from there, but yeesh.

Did you even read the review? Like the bit where it says UNLIKE Tesla or Audi, there are no retracting door handles?

 

[chiup01]

I do not understand car companies desire to make vehicles less safe by the inclusions of a giant touch screen that controls nearly everything in the car. And of course the waste of power to drive such a large display. It is almost bland enough on the inside that you could call it a Tesla. I'm all for the future of electric vehicles, but you don't have to make them less safe and boring at the same time.

The primary reason Teslas had giant touch screens is because they can add functionality to the car in a way that is impossible if everything is hard coded to a physical button. Over the course of 3 years that I have owned a Model X, there have been so many totally new functions added (not just updates to existing functions), that I would happily trade off the tactile benefits of physical buttons for it.

 

[samcantrell]

Dr. Gitlin, is that a physical volume knob on the touch screen? I looked through the photos, and believe it is physical, but wanted to confirm. And, since it appears that the center of the volume knob is cut away to expose the touch screen for the "power button," does it look at goofy as it does in the photos?

 

[dkediger]

There were prettier versions

That still suffers from the 'Monte Carlo' styling deficits: small wheels, and long overhangs front and back. It may have been more economical to build but what's the point if it's marketed as a sporty 'performance' car?

In that era, 15" wheels were considered gargantuan, with 13" the overwhelming standard outfit. These days, 15" wheels are considered puny and purely a monetary econo choice.

The overhangs were largely a function of Federal impact regulations at the time and early engineering iterations at meeting them.

 

[ImFriendsWithMyDad]

No, it's a bummer because there are certain design trends very prevalent in this car that will be propagated to other products because of those sales. Things like using an established marque to sell a (nearly) completely unrelated product, the lack of physical and easy to use controls for things that are used fairly constantly (like heat/AC controls in climates outside of CA!), and the iPad-stuck-to-the-dash aesthetic. Hell, even the move into truly MASSIVE vehicles by weight.

A note on the weight; this is a mid-sized SUV, comparable in size to something like a Highlander. It's loaded with safety features, including a very strong (and therefore heavy) safety cell. These things add weight, and are non-negotiable in today's market. People don't like dying in crashes and are willing to pay for it in both monetary cost and weight.

... and that's before you add the inherently heavy battery pack, and the structural elements to protect it, which adds even more weight.

Every electric car is heavy; there's no way around it barring some unforeseen revolution in battery technology. This car is no heavier than other similarly sized electric vehicles.

If you want a light vehicle, a battery-electric SUV is the last place you should be looking.

 

[Mitlov]

I do not understand car companies desire to make vehicles less safe by the inclusions of a giant touch screen that controls nearly everything in the car. And of course the waste of power to drive such a large display. It is almost bland enough on the inside that you could call it a Tesla. I'm all for the future of electric vehicles, but you don't have to make them less safe and boring at the same time.

The primary reason Teslas had giant touch screens is because they can add functionality to the car in a way that is impossible if everything is hard coded to a physical button. Over the course of 3 years that I have owned a Model X, there have been so many totally new functions added (not just updates to existing functions), that I would happily trade off the tactile benefits of physical buttons for it.

You could still have added features on a touchscreen while also having dedicated physical controls for air vent direction, seat heating, volume knob, etc. It's not an either-or choice.

 

[real mikeb_60]

Has conventional stalks for turn signals/high beams and wipers? Kind of looks like it in the pics. Prefer that to having to jab the touch screen.

 

[Deleted member 174040]

I need electric cars to get two things right: a proper dashboard, and pedals that work properly.

I'm just not on board with the totally absent dash on Teslas... without a dashboard and gauges, it's just not a car it's... something else, a golf cart or something, and you're not driving it...
--
Particularly if GM and Ford are committed to going all-electric soon, they need to put some attention to this.

Sure. You just keep on waiting.

 

[Dr Gitlin]

Dr. Gitlin, is that a physical volume knob on the touch screen? I looked through the photos, and believe it is physical, but wanted to confirm. And, since it appears that the center of the volume knob is cut away to expose the touch screen for the "power button," does it look at goofy as it does in the photos?

Yes, it's a physical knob. It looks fine IMO.

 

[Deleted member 174040]

Not a Mustang in the original sense, which was an affordable sports car for those we can't afford more expensive cars. ?

The original Mustang was not a sports car; it occupied a place in the market somewhat like that of a Hyundai Veloster or VW GTI or Civic Coupe, as a somewhat zoomy commuter with some performance options and extroverted styling at a good value. I actually think the Mach E is very true to that. And that's the charitable characterization, it was sneered at as a "secretary's car" for a good while, long before it got a sports car image.

I do think it could have also been called a Thunderbird, which would have worked on a couple levels, but I think it works as a Mustang.

That doesn't matter, and this shouldn't be an editors choice.

'Mustang' has a popular meaning, and this car isn't it.

 

[dkediger]

No, it's a bummer because there are certain design trends very prevalent in this car that will be propagated to other products because of those sales. Things like using an established marque to sell a (nearly) completely unrelated product, the lack of physical and easy to use controls for things that are used fairly constantly (like heat/AC controls in climates outside of CA!), and the iPad-stuck-to-the-dash aesthetic. Hell, even the move into truly MASSIVE vehicles by weight.

A note on the weight; this is a mid-sized SUV, comparable in size to something like a Highlander. It's loaded with safety features, including a very strong (and therefore heavy) safety cell. These things add weight, and are non-negotiable in today's market. People don't like dying in crashes and are willing to pay for it in both monetary cost and weight.

... and that's before you add the inherently heavy battery pack, and the structural elements to protect it, which adds even more weight.

Every electric car is heavy; there's no way around it barring some unforeseen revolution in battery technology. This car is no heavier than other similarly sized electric vehicles.

If you want a light vehicle, a battery-electric SUV is the last place you should be looking.

From Ford's model lineup, the Mach-E seems to be positioned fairly close to the Edge in passenger and cargo capacity.

 

[Snark218]

Not a Mustang in the original sense, which was an affordable sports car for those we can't afford more expensive cars. ?

The original Mustang was not a sports car; it occupied a place in the market somewhat like that of a Hyundai Veloster or VW GTI or Civic Coupe, as a somewhat zoomy commuter with some performance options and extroverted styling at a good value. I actually think the Mach E is very true to that. And that's the charitable characterization, it was sneered at as a "secretary's car" for a good while, long before it got a sports car image.

I do think it could have also been called a Thunderbird, which would have worked on a couple levels, but I think it works as a Mustang.

That doesn't matter, and this shouldn't be an editors choice.

'Mustang' has a popular meaning, and this car isn't it.

My point is that the popular meaning of "Mustang" has changed, and will change, over time, and that of all the things to give a fuck about, this really doesn't strike me as a high priority. It's just a car. Call it a Mach E if you want. Call it George.

 

[Snark218]

No, it's a bummer because there are certain design trends very prevalent in this car that will be propagated to other products because of those sales. Things like using an established marque to sell a (nearly) completely unrelated product, the lack of physical and easy to use controls for things that are used fairly constantly (like heat/AC controls in climates outside of CA!), and the iPad-stuck-to-the-dash aesthetic. Hell, even the move into truly MASSIVE vehicles by weight.

A note on the weight; this is a mid-sized SUV, comparable in size to something like a Highlander. It's loaded with safety features, including a very strong (and therefore heavy) safety cell. These things add weight, and are non-negotiable in today's market. People don't like dying in crashes and are willing to pay for it in both monetary cost and weight.

... and that's before you add the inherently heavy battery pack, and the structural elements to protect it, which adds even more weight.

Every electric car is heavy; there's no way around it barring some unforeseen revolution in battery technology. This car is no heavier than other similarly sized electric vehicles.

If you want a light vehicle, a battery-electric SUV is the last place you should be looking.

From Ford's model lineup, the Mach-E seems to be positioned fairly close to the Edge in passenger and cargo capacity.

I think it's more comparable to an Escape in overall dimensions, but like the post you replied to said - batteries are heavy. EVs are therefore heavy.

 

[ImFriendsWithMyDad]

That doesn't matter, and this shouldn't be an editors choice.

'Mustang' has a popular meaning, and this car isn't it.

The name 'Mustang' means whatever its owner, Ford, applies it to. A few enthusiasts will whine for a while, and after a year or two everyone will be used to the new usage.

There have been some truly terrible cars with the Mustang nameplate applied over the years. This isn't one of them.

 

[nolij]

I really like it and hope it sells well.

I wouldn't have called it a Mustang (Thunderbird or just Ford Mach E would've been great) but I don't think its a big deal. I'm a car enthusiast and most car online car enthusiasts don't buy new cars anyways (they complain about manual transmissions dying but don't buy new cars with manuals) so I don't think the complaints about the name will matter to most potential buyers.

I'd prefer to have the tablet integrated into the dash but I'm glad they still have physical buttons for controlling important stuff.

Yes, its not quite as efficient as a Tesla but its also cheaper and still has tax credits available which makes it significantly cheaper. It's still fast, has plenty of daily range, and has a national dealership network. Looks like good competition for the Model Y which is a win for customers.

 

[real mikeb_60]

I understand that one reason Tesla went with as huge a screen as the Model 3 has is that it's the entire dash in one piece. Ford has a small separate screen to provide the traditional eyes-front instrumentation, so it could have made the big screen slightly shorter vertically (IOW not copy Tesla completely) and improve outward visibility. Other than that, and the fact that I hate touch screens that must be used in moving cars due to lack of tactile response, it's not badly done.

 

[Chemical Tribe]

Not a Mustang in the original sense, which was an affordable sports car for those we can't afford more expensive cars. ?

The original Mustang was not a sports car; it occupied a place in the market somewhat like that of a Hyundai Veloster or VW GTI or Civic Coupe, as a somewhat zoomy commuter with some performance options and extroverted styling at a good value. I actually think the Mach E is very true to that. And that's the charitable characterization, it was sneered at as a "secretary's car" for a good while, long before it got a sports car image.

I do think it could have also been called a Thunderbird, which would have worked on a couple levels, but I think it works as a Mustang.

That doesn't matter, and this shouldn't be an editors choice.

'Mustang' has a popular meaning, and this car isn't it.

My point is that the popular meaning of "Mustang" has changed, and will change, over time, and that of all the things to give a fuck about, this really doesn't strike me as a high priority. It's just a car. Call it a Mach E if you want. Call it George.

IMO does it look like a Mustang? Yes. Sure it has 4 doors and doesn't handle like a "Mustang". So what? It's also their first real EV attempt. What will we compare it to since the Mustang isn't electric?

 

[Snark218]

That doesn't matter, and this shouldn't be an editors choice.

'Mustang' has a popular meaning, and this car isn't it.

The name 'Mustang' means whatever its owner, Ford, applies it to. A few enthusiasts will whine for a while, and after a year or two everyone will be used to the new usage.

There have been some truly terrible cars with the Mustang nameplate applied over the years. This isn't one of them.

Right? Let's not get too precious, here, about a badge that also got slapped on the ass of the Fox body and the Mustang II and, well, everything from 1972-2004. Great name? Best possible name? No and no. But this is, importantly, not a total piece of garbage, is fun to drive, and won't rust, and that's more than one can say about most of the Mustangs that have ever been produced up to now.

 

[Snark218]

I really like it and hope it sells well.

I wouldn't have called it a Mustang (Thunderbird or just Ford Mach E would've been great) but I don't think its a big deal. I'm a car enthusiast and most car online car enthusiasts don't buy new cars anyways (they complain about manual transmissions dying but don't buy new cars with manuals) so I don't think the complaints about the name will matter to most potential buyers.

I'd prefer to have the tablet integrated into the dash but I'm glad they still have physical buttons for controlling important stuff.

Yes, its not quite as efficient as a Tesla but its also cheaper and still has tax credits available which makes it significantly cheaper. It's still fast, has plenty of daily range, and has a national dealership network. Looks like good competition for the Model Y which is a win for customers.

My feelings exactly.

 

[CompactManifold]

I saw a comment somewhere about the change of the Mustang into a... whatever this is. They claimed that GM would follow suit and in 2030 you'll be able to choose from two different Corvettes, a heavy duty electric pickup and an 8 person electric SUV.
.

The Mustang is still the Mustang. This is another model under the Mustang sub-brand.

GM will be selling an electric Corvette at some point. It will also be selling electric pickups, SUVs, and crossovers, but under different names.

I'm fairly sure the Corvette thing was a joke

As for it being a Mustang, as long as it can do 10 under the speed limit in the left lane with its turn signal stuck on, it's still a Mustang.

 

[Deleted member 174040]

Snark218[/url]":37zhax0g] Call it a Mach E...

Exactly!

That’s what we were all saying on page 1.