[St00k]

Anyone have thoughts on what the Mach E's 0-60 would or could be?

EVs are usually crazy fast to 60 and if this is really going to be Mustang inspired, I figure it should be performance focused for sure.

Even the base EcoBoost Mustang makes 310-hp and will go 0-60 in 5.3 seconds. The new Shelby GT500 0-60 time is just 3.3 seconds... which is crazy for something that's rear-wheel drive.

I figure it's probably closer to the Mustang GT 0-60 time, which is about 4.0 seconds with 460 hp, 420 lb-ft of torque.

Any guesses, or estimates?

 

[ReturnOfTheMack]

My guess is that it's going to have a 0-60 time that's similar to the Jaguar I-Pace, so around 4.5 seconds.

 

[atkruz789]

A "Ford engineer" on reddit claimed that the top level trim would do 0-60 in less than 3.5s. If correct, I imagine the spec sheets will an exact copy of the model Y with range costing performance and vice-versa.

 

[St00k]

Really? 0-60 in less than 3.5 would be amazing. There's NO WAY it can cost $40k for that.

 

[atkruz789]

Agreed. The performance version of the Model Y is $61k doing 3.5s 0-60 and expect the top level Mach E trim to be near $55k. I think the $40k version will not be 3.5s and more likely around 5.5s 0-60. Ford feel free to prove me wrong!

 

[ReturnOfTheMack]

Agreed. The performance version of the Model Y is $61k doing 3.5s 0-60 and expect the top level Mach E trim to be near $55k. I think the $40k version will not be 3.5s and more likely around 5.5s 0-60. Ford feel free to prove me wrong!

That makes the most sense to me, there's going to be a lot of similarities between the Mach E and the Model Y. It would be a complete game changer if Ford sold a $40,000 EV that went 0-60 in 3.5 seconds but that's just wishful thinking.

 

[FStephenMasek]

That makes the most sense to me, there's going to be a lot of similarities between the Mach E and the Model Y. It would be a complete game changer if Ford sold a $40,000 EV that went 0-60 in 3.5 seconds but that's just wishful thinking.

Unless Ford (and others) decide to run money-losing tesla out of business. Ford is large enough to do just that.

 

[St00k]

Looks like we have official specs now

Ford Mustang Mach E Select 0-60: 5.5 seconds
Price $43,895

Ford Mustang Mach E Premium 0-60: 5.5 seconds
Price $50,600

Ford Mustang Mach E California Route 1 0-60: 6.0 seconds
Price $52,600

Ford Mustang Mach E First Edition 0-60: 5.5 seconds
Price: $59,900

Ford Mustang Mach E GT 0-60: 3.5 seconds
Price $60,500

 

[Ford Engineering Alum]

Additional refinement of ranges/time from configurator (apologies for formatting):

		SR | RWD [Range = Miles; Capacity = kWh]​	​	​	​	SR | AWD [Range = Miles; Capacity = kWh]				ER | RWD [Range = Miles; Capacity = kWh]				ER | AWD [Range = Miles; Capacity = kWh]
Base Price	Trim Level	Range	Capacity	0-60 Time	Upcharge	Range	Capacity	0-60 Time	Upcharge	Range	Capacity	0-60 Time	Upcharge	Range	Capacity	0-60 Time	Upcharge
$59,900	First Edition	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	270	98.8	mid-5 second	-
$43,895	Select	230	75.7	low-6 second	$0	210	75.7	mid-5 second	$2,700	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
$50,600	Premium	230	75.7	low-6 second	$0	210	75.7	mid-5 second	$2,700	300	98.8	mid-6 second	$5,000	270	98.8	mid-5 second	$7,700
$52,400	CA Rt1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	300	98.8	mid-6 second	0	-	-	-	-
$60,500	GT	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	250	98.8	under-4 second	-

 

[machstang]

Mach-E GT Performance Edition 0-60 time of 3.5-seconds is good enough for me!

more from Ford:
"The Mustang Mach-E GT Performance Edition packs thrilling performance into a whole new shape for the electric era – targeting a comparable 0-60 mph time to the 2019 Porsche 911 GTS1"

impressive indeed.

 

[ChasingCoral]

Official news, at least in Europe. The Mach E4X:
5.1-second 0-100 km/h (0‑62 mph) acceleration

Hopefully that means 5.0 or 5.1 0-60 mph on NA models.

It was a buried lede in https://media.ford.com/content/ford...y-quick-mustang-mach-e-gt-for-europe--no.html

Ford also today announced that the standard Mustang Mach-E equipped with an extended-range battery and all-wheel drive delivers 5.1-second 0-100 km/h (0‑62 mph) acceleration5 – equal to the Tesla Model Y Long Range model – and a targeted WLTP pure-electric driving range of up to 540 km (335 miles).4

4Officially homologated energy efficiency figures will be published closer to on-sale date. The declared fuel/energy consumptions, CO2-emissions and electric range are determined according to the technical requirements and specifications of the European Regulations (EC) 715/2007 and (EU) 2017/1151 as last amended. Light Duty Vehicle type-approved using the World Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP) will have fuel/energy consumption and CO2-emission information for New European Drive Cycle (NEDC) and WLTP. WLTP will fully replace the NEDC latest by the end of the year 2020. The applied standard test procedures enable comparison between different vehicle types and different manufacturers. During NEDC phase-out, WLTP fuel consumption and CO2 emissions are being correlated back to NEDC. There will be some variance to the previous fuel economy and emissions as some elements of the tests have altered, so the same car might have different fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.

5Ford test data based on testing methodology using 1-ft rollout i.e. from a rolling start.

 

[patmurphey]

Tesla Model Y long range AWD 0-60 4.6 seconds. Not knocking the Mach-E, it's on my list for purchase next fall, between long range AWD versions of Mach-E, Tesla Model Y, and Audi Q4 etron. Meeting NJ "less than $55,000 MSRP for $5,000 rebate" will be a prime factor.

 

[MachDrive]

Tesla Model Y long range AWD 0-60 4.6 seconds. Not knocking the Mach-E, it's on my list for purchase next fall, between long range AWD versions of Mach-E, Tesla Model Y, and Audi Q4 etron. Meeting NJ "less than $55,000 MSRP for $5,000 rebate" will be a prime factor.

As per Tesla website, The Model Y AWD LR 0-60 is 4.8 seconds.
There is a new $2,000 option that will boost that to about 4.3. Funny about this one, they released it as soon as Ford announced they made the AWD/ER match the Model Y.

The +10,000 Performance edition does 3.5 0-60. Which is why Fords claim the GT is faster because it does 0-62 in 3.5 seconds.

To me, these fractions of a second become meaningless at some point. They are only good for bragging rights and to silence the petrol-heads.

And the speed won’t matter anyway for the Teslas, they will all be a robo-fleet according to Elon’s grand design.

 

[Maric]

I my FE gets 0-60 in under 5 I'll be extremely happy. That's a huge leap from the original speculation of 5.5 seconds.

 

[JTK44]

As per Tesla website, The Model Y AWD LR 0-60 is 4.8 seconds.
There is a new $2,000 option that will boost that to about 4.3. Funny about this one, they released it as soon as Ford announced they made the AWD/ER match the Model Y.

The +10,000 Performance edition does 3.5 0-60. Which is why Fords claim the GT is faster because it does 0-62 in 3.5 seconds.

To me, these fractions of a second become meaningless at some point. They are only good for bragging rights and to silence the petrol-heads.

And the speed won’t matter anyway for the Teslas, they will all be a robo-fleet according to Elon’s grand design.

Just went to the Tesla web site to look for the $2000 option.

Could not find it.

Can you post the link?

Thanks.

.

 

[MachDrive]

Just went to the Tesla web site to look for the $2000 option.

Could not find it.

Can you post the link?

Thanks.

.

Sure thing,

it is an OTA option. Here is an article about it.

Tesla launches $2,000 'Acceleration Boost' upgrade on Model Y

Tesla is launching a $2,000 ‘Acceleration Boost’ upgrade for Model Y Dual Motor AWD vehicles — shaving half a second...

electrek.co

 

[JTK44]

Sure thing,

it is an OTA option. Here is an article about it.

Tesla launches $2,000 'Acceleration Boost' upgrade on Model Y

Tesla is launching a $2,000 ‘Acceleration Boost’ upgrade for Model Y Dual Motor AWD vehicles — shaving half a second...

electrek.co

I am old guy who used to say when it came to ICE there is no substitute for cubes (cubic inches).

Then I went through supercharging and turbo charging which is ubiquitous on almost all ICE.

But what Tesla does really annoys me:

Remember during the hurricane about 3 years ago: Tesla, via OTA increased the range of the Model S so that people in Florida could drive to safety and then afterwards reduced the range?

There is nothing comparable in an ICE: can you imagine buying a V8 where only 6 cylinders worked and if you wanted all 8 to fire you had to pay extra? I cannot (I am not talking about deactivation of cylinders to improve gas mileage)

This OTA does not change anything on the car: so if you want extra range, you pay for it. if you want extra acceleration you pay for it.

Why not just let the car perform the way you designed it? Why give the public 50% and make them pay extra for the 50% which is already there.

It is not like an OTA to improve range and performance actually cost Tesla anything. They didn't have to add anything that cost them to improve range and performance.

Sorry for the rant.

 

[patmurphey]

...But what Tesla does really annoys me:

Remember during the hurricane about 3 years ago: Tesla, via OTA increased the range of the Model S so that people in Florida could drive to safety and then afterwards reduced the range?

There is nothing comparable in an ICE: can you imagine buying a V8 where only 6 cylinders worked and if you wanted all 8 to fire you had to pay extra? I cannot (I am not talking about deactivation of cylinders to improve gas mileage)

This OTA does not change anything on the car: so if you want extra range, you pay for it. if you want extra acceleration you pay for it.

Why not just let the car perform the way you designed it? Why give the public 50% and make them pay extra for the 50% which is already there.

It is not like an OTA to improve range and performance actually cost Tesla anything. They didn't have to add anything that cost them to improve range and performance.

Sorry for the rant.

The temporary boost in range was for an emergency (and of course publicity), but restoring the original setting puts the car back to its battery longevity design.

The performance upgrade comes at the expense of range. It's a perfectly reasonable offer. Since the base power was set and sold as the long range option, the increased power could not be standard, Its a nice deal to offer the option.

Remember it's range OR performance.

 

[symos]

The performance upgrade comes at the expense of range. It's a perfectly reasonable offer. Since the base power was set and sold as the long range option, the increased power could not be standard, Its a nice deal to offer the option.

Remember it's range OR performance.

True. But you've already paid more in order to get the extra range. And now you have to pay more again (on top of what you've already paid) to trade this extra range (which you've already paid for) for extra performance.

In other words, you've already paid for a car/hardware that is capable of X range or Y performance. Why do you have to pay extra in order to switch from one to the other?

 

[patmurphey]

It's an option!

Over on the Tesla forum, those that have chosen it are mostly happy. The few that weren't took the refund option. They did the same thing with the Model 3. The full performance package is around $10,000 and includes a number of other enhancements.