Jump to content

Mach e prototype on the streets


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Dequindre said:

What is the target market for this vehicle? Mustang enthusiasts looking for something a bit more practical? Tesla Model 3 owners? Former Focus/Fiesta ST/RS buyers?

 

That's a good question!

 

I'm a Mustang enthusiast (fan boy) and would have no intention of buying this car. Teslas don't interest me either. If I wanted or needed a more practical Mustang......well, I wouldn't, I'd have the Mustang as the fun car and another more versatile car as well (actually, I own 2 Mustangs, one garage queen, one daily driver and a Kuga (Escape) for family/dog hauling duties). I don't want my Mustang to be more practical. I like what it stands for as it is.

 

I would imagine the majority of potential Mach E owners will be those cross shopping Teslas and/or other hybrid "SUVs".......but it'll be interesting to see. 

 

What will also be interesting to see is if/when a Mach E turns up at a Mustang meet. Or would they? Would a Mach E owner care about the previous 55 years of Mustangs?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Twin Turbo said:

 

What will also be interesting to see is if/when a Mach E turns up at a Mustang meet. Or would they? Would a Mach E owner care about the previous 55 years of Mustangs?

 

 

Maybe, why not.  I'm a Mustang owner too, and may give it a look.  (Can't be any worse than Cobra badges non-Cobra cars . . . . ?  But even then, it's your car do what you want with it! ?)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Twin Turbo said:

 

That's a good question!

 

I'm a Mustang enthusiast (fan boy) and would have no intention of buying this car. Teslas don't interest me either. If I wanted or needed a more practical Mustang......well, I wouldn't, I'd have the Mustang as the fun car and another more versatile car as well (actually, I own 2 Mustangs, one garage queen, one daily driver and a Kuga (Escape) for family/dog hauling duties). I don't want my Mustang to be more practical. I like what it stands for as it is.

 

I would imagine the majority of potential Mach E owners will be those cross shopping Teslas and/or other hybrid "SUVs".......but it'll be interesting to see. 

 

What will also be interesting to see is if/when a Mach E turns up at a Mustang meet. Or would they? Would a Mach E owner care about the previous 55 years of Mustangs?

 

I've owned a few Mustangs and I'm an enthusiast, but I would love to have an all electric Mustangized version of a Mercedes GLC Coupe.  I would love it even more with a supercharged 5.2L.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Deanh said:

I was told think Tesla X..hopefully less dumpy looking....IMO the only acceptable recipient of this styling so far is the Mercedes variant....which looks pretty damn good in the flesh...unlike the X and BMW's ...

 

This definitely is more sleek looking than the Model X or Y, which are more "bubbly" looking.

 

I agree with you that the Mercedes ones are the best implementations of the crossover coupe trend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Dequindre said:

What is the target market for this vehicle? Mustang enthusiasts looking for something a bit more practical? Tesla Model 3 owners? Former Focus/Fiesta ST/RS buyers?

 

As the story goes, the Mach E was originally a very boring looking car.  Jim Hackett took a look, didn’t like it, and told the stylists to draw something they would want to own.  So we get a Mustang inspired BEV.  

 

As for its market, Ford probably wants the car to stand out in an increasingly competitive BEV market.  They’re hoping a snazzily styled, performance BEV will do that.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, jpd80 said:

 

It's a BEV based on C2 architecture but clearly not a regular C2

Without a transverse ICE engine in front, then of course the proportions change.

 

It's kinda the same development that GM used with the Bolt, it started as a share with Gamma

but then, GM switched away form those components and lost most of its scales of economy.

 

 

 

The whole point of C2 was that it has fixed mounting point for firewall to save cost - all the transverse ICE car are using it so Ford can use one set of components to save money both during engineering/design phase and manufacturing. BEV without the engine in front means moving the firewall and a lot of hard mounting points like steering rack and transmission etc. Location of battery also changes calculation for a lot of crash safety protection envelope. So no, you will not save any significant sum of money by starting with C2. Ford had said before the BEV is a cleansheet design to take advantage of the fact that it is not an ICE car. The lesson they learned from Focus EV was to not do an EV based on ICE platform.

 

GM lost the economy of scale because it failed to capitalized on the Bolt platform to quickly add model and scale up. Ford is planning to introduce a whole bunch of models based on this platform so we shall see.

Edited by bzcat
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bzcat said:


The whole point of C2 was that it has fixed mounting point for firewall to save cost - all the transverse ICE car are using it so Ford can use one set of components to save money both during engineering/design phase and manufacturing. BEV without the engine in front means moving the firewall and a lot of hard mounting points like steering rack and transmission etc.

Model E has electric motor in front and back, without tall ICE and radiator in front of wheels, the whole look of the car changes.

Quote

Location of battery also changes calculation for a lot of crash safety protection envelope. So no, you will not save any significant sum of money by starting with C2. Ford had said before the BEV is a cleansheet design to take advantage of the fact that it is not an ICE car. The lesson they learned from Focus EV was to not do an EV based on ICE platform.

Respectfully, you're incorrect with a lot of your presumption.

There  were two projects, the initial compact BEV started well before the two Mid sized crossovers.

Model uses a skateboard set up with battery under floot and motors front and back, it was run under

C2 project to get top hat, steering and suspension modules and put the whole thing under a project

that could help amortize costs.

 

Quote

GM lost the economy of scale because it failed to capitalized on the Bolt platform to quickly add model and scale up. Ford is planning to introduce a whole bunch of models based on this platform so we shall see.

Bolt began as an extension of Gamma and part way through, GM realised that it needed to change those parts as well

so yeah, no parts in common from Gamma yet retains a G2 prefix to the platform code.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/24/2019 at 8:44 PM, Harley Lover said:

 

Are the 2 mid sized crossovers on a different, C/D sized chassis, or based on the same 'bones' as Model E?

They are  different but again being based on a skateboard frame that uses many if not all current

production build sequences as applied to C2 / CD4 ICE. the whole aim was to change what needed

to be change and keep all the production knowledge and processes. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/23/2019 at 9:56 AM, mackinaw said:

 

As the story goes, the Mach E was originally a very boring looking car.  Jim Hackett took a look, didn’t like it, and told the stylists to draw something they would want to own.  So we get a Mustang inspired BEV.  

 

As for its market, Ford probably wants the car to stand out in an increasingly competitive BEV market.  They’re hoping a snazzily styled, performance BEV will do that.

 

If Ford really wants to be competitive they should work out a deal with Tesla for their cars to be able to use the Tesla supercharging network.  Everyone else is currently had a huge disadvantage.  That would allow Ford to leapfrog the competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, msm859 said:

 

If Ford really wants to be competitive they should work out a deal with Tesla for their cars to be able to use the Tesla supercharging network.  Everyone else is currently had a huge disadvantage.  That would allow Ford to leapfrog the competition.

 

Why would you want to be at the mercy of your competition when it comes to powering your vehicles? IIRC Ford will be putting recharging systems at their dealerships and I'm sure they'll have other places you can charge at also. We'll just have to wait and see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Why would you want to be at the mercy of your competition when it comes to powering your vehicles? IIRC Ford will be putting recharging systems at their dealerships and I'm sure they'll have other places you can charge at also. We'll just have to wait and see. 

I don't see it as being at the mercy of your competitor.  Ford and Chevy just did a joint venture building transmissions.  No one comes close to the charging infrastructure of Tesla.  Tesla made a deal and are adding super stations pretty much at all Targets.  They are conveniently placed and spaced near restaurants and shopping. At this point I would see it as a strategic alliance.  Tesla has always said anyone can join.  Besides their charging cords are the sleekest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, msm859 said:

I don't see it as being at the mercy of your competitor.  Ford and Chevy just did a joint venture building transmissions.  No one comes close to the charging infrastructure of Tesla.  Tesla made a deal and are adding super stations pretty much at all Targets.  They are conveniently placed and spaced near restaurants and shopping. At this point I would see it as a strategic alliance.  Tesla has always said anyone can join.  Besides their charging cords are the sleekest.

 

The difference is that Ford still builds there own transmissions-they just did developmental work-the 6F/10F aren't parts compatible with the GM 6T/10L. If they went with Tesla super charging stations, they would be completely dependent on them...plus if it was that great, why hasn't any other auto maker taken Telsa up on that deal?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

The difference is that Ford still builds there own transmissions-they just did developmental work-the 6F/10F aren't parts compatible with the GM 6T/10L. If they went with Tesla super charging stations, they would be completely dependent on them...plus if it was that great, why hasn't any other auto maker taken Telsa up on that deal?  

 

OK, I can't barely spell EV, but how does a company like this offer a product then?  I see plug-ins at airports, stores, state buildings. What plug do they use?

 

https://www.chargepoint.com/drivers/

 

HRG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

OK, I can't barely spell EV, but how does a company like this offer a product then?  I see plug-ins at airports, stores, state buildings. What plug do they use?

 

https://www.chargepoint.com/drivers/

 

HRG

Everyone but Tesla uses an industry standard plug in the US, the SAE J1772.  Tesla uses a proprietary plug, but they provide an adapter to the J1772 for use in non-Tesla charge stations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, msm859 said:

I don't see it as being at the mercy of your competitor.  Ford and Chevy just did a joint venture building transmissions.  No one comes close to the charging infrastructure of Tesla.  Tesla made a deal and are adding super stations pretty much at all Targets.  They are conveniently placed and spaced near restaurants and shopping. At this point I would see it as a strategic alliance.  Tesla has always said anyone can join.  Besides their charging cords are the sleekest.

What if Standard Oil had decided to outfit all of their gas stations with a proprietary nozzle way back when?  The problem is that Tesla is acting as a auto manufacturer and as a fuel supplier and making it so for anyone to use their fueling station they have to pay a royalty or fee to Tesla.  No automaker should help fund Tesla.  The private market will install compatible charge stations as EV's become more prevalent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Flying68 said:

Everyone but Tesla uses an industry standard plug in the US, the SAE J1772.  Tesla uses a proprietary plug, but they provide an adapter to the J1772 for use in non-Tesla charge stations.

It is kind of like Apple with their proprietary plugs. I understand it causes issues and a single plug would be ideal, but the reality is if you look at both plugs the Tesla plug is in fact the more elegant and streamlined.  It they had used a Tesla plug the new Aviator could have probably had the plug under the Aviator emblem so you wouldn't have that extra door underneath.  Cleaner design.  However, adopting the same plug would probably not be necessary to use their superchargers.  They could just use an adaptor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/23/2019 at 3:09 PM, jpd80 said:

Model E has electric motor in front and back, without tall ICE and radiator in front of wheels, the whole look of the car changes.

Respectfully, you're incorrect with a lot of your presumption.

There  were two projects, the initial compact BEV started well before the two Mid sized crossovers.

Model uses a skateboard set up with battery under floot and motors front and back, it was run under

C2 project to get top hat, steering and suspension modules and put the whole thing under a project

that could help amortize costs.

 

Bolt began as an extension of Gamma and part way through, GM realised that it needed to change those parts as well

so yeah, no parts in common from Gamma yet retains a G2 prefix to the platform code.

 

There was no presumption in my post. No one has ever reported that Ford has two EV platform under development. You are the only one saying that.

 

C2 was a standardized platform matrix for vehicles with an ICE on top of front axle. There are certain fixed hard points like the placement of firewall in relation to the front axle for engineering reasons. For example, if the distance is the same, you can use the same steering rack and subframe module for all the vehicles. You can of course make an EV out of C2 but you are still married to those hard points laid out - which is not a very efficient way to make an EV. You certainly don't need all that room in front of the windshield for ICE. If you are changing all the hard point on C2 for EV, it is no longer a C2. That was my point. The MACH E prototype (and the mules before that) clearly showed very different proportions and hard points compare to C2.

 

Also I didn't say Model E platform is a clean sheet design. Ford did. EV platform was outlined as one of the 5 platforms that Ford will deploy going forward:

1. C2 for transverse mounted ICE

2. CD6 for longitude mounted ICE

3. Unibody platform for vans

4. BOF platform for trucks

5. Platform for EV

 

Here is Hau Thai-Tang talking about the EV platform

 

https://www.automobilemag.com/news/ford-platforms-hau-thai-tang-interview/

Quote

 


Hau Thai-Tang: We shifted from nine platforms under One Ford to five flexible architectures. The first is unitized body, front-wheel drive/all-wheel drive. This underpins the new Focus just launched in Europe. Eventually, a lot of our other C-sized products will come off this flexible architecture. Next is unitized body, but rear-wheel drive/all-wheel drive underpinning the new Explorer and the Lincoln Aviator. All rear-drive unitized body products will come off this architecture. The third is commercial vehicles, being led out of Europe for the next-generation Transit products.

This is part of the memorandum of understanding of what’s under consideration. Number four is body-on-frame, rear-wheel drive—the truck platform, which started with the launch of the F-150. We followed with Super Duty and Expedition/Navigator. The final one is for battery-electric vehicles, unitized body. For the first time, we have a full, BEV-only architecture that allows us to really take advantage of the design freedom around proportions and design silhouettes [and] optimize the attributes, everything from occupant package to performance, vehicle dynamics, those types of things.

 

 

Again

https://autoweek.com/article/car-news/ford-will-build-all-vehicles-five-platforms

Quote

Moving forward, each of the automaker's vehicles will be on one of five platforms: rear-wheel-drive/all-wheel-drive body-on-frame; front-wheel-drive/awd unibody; commercial van unibody; rwd/awd unibody; and a unibody platform for battery-electric vehicles.

 

And agin

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/ford-platform-sharing-plan/

Quote

That's why Ford is pushing to use modular platforms that can share components between vehicles. Thai-Tang told reporters in Detroit on Thursday that Ford's plan is to use just five platforms for all of its vehicles in all of its markets. Specifically, those platforms are: a front-wheel-drive unibody (i.e. small cars and

crossovers), a rear-wheel-drive unibody, a commercial-vehicle unibody (i.e. a van), a body-on-frame platform (i.e. trucks) and an all-electric car platform.

 

 

Edited by bzcat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...