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.
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.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!
Unless Ford (and others) decide to run money-losing tesla out of business. Ford is large enough to do just that.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.
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 | - |
As per Tesla website, The Model Y AWD LR 0-60 is 4.8 seconds.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.
Just went to the Tesla web site to look for the $2000 option.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.
Sure thing,Just went to the Tesla web site to look for the $2000 option.
Could not find it.
Can you post the link?
Thanks.
.
I am old guy who used to say when it came to ICE there is no substitute for cubes (cubic inches).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
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....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.
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.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.