2023 Mustang Mach-E Prices Rise $6000 to $8500.

[Trader 10]

https://fordauthority.com/2022/08/2023-ford-mustang-mach-e-prices-increase-substantially/
 

Not surprising after the 2023 Lightning price jumps, but still eye popping. 

[blwnsmoke]

Yup, I definitely won't be looking at one any longer as my next vehicle.  That's a whole lot of gas you can buy with that.

[Gurgeh]

Interesting. That is about the amount of money the new Inflation Enhancement Act (or whatever it was called) will be providing to folks who purchase electric vehicles going forward. Kinda just transfers the money from the buyer to FMC.

[silvrsvt]

21 minutes ago, Gurgeh said:

Interesting. That is about the amount of money the new Inflation Enhancement Act (or whatever it was called) will be providing to folks who purchase electric vehicles going forward. Kinda just transfers the money from the buyer to FMC.

 

But Ford announced the changes to the Lightning at least a week or two before this was even passed. It just put out the MME updated pricing now.

No car company can afford to have what is basically a 10-15% increase in pricing on product year to year. They need to get the battery pricing (which I'm assuming is driving this) to a more sustainable level

[jasonj80]

25 minutes ago, Gurgeh said:

Interesting. That is about the amount of money the new Inflation Enhancement Act (or whatever it was called) will be providing to folks who purchase electric vehicles going forward. Kinda just transfers the money from the buyer to FMC.

Except it will not qualify because of the sourcing rules. So if you get it delivered by Dec 31 you fall under the old rules and get the $7500, after Jan 1, 2023 it will not qualify and you get nothing.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/ford/2022/08/25/ford-ups-mustang-mach-e-price-order-bank-reopens-next-week/7894458001/

Edited August 25, 2022 by jasonj80

[jpd80]

Yes, the new rules apply to just a few vehicles and  maybe that was the plan, to limit how much money was given out….

[blwnsmoke]

2 hours ago, jasonj80 said:

Except it will not qualify because of the sourcing rules. So if you get it delivered by Dec 31 you fall under the old rules and get the $7500, after Jan 1, 2023 it will not qualify and you get nothing.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/ford/2022/08/25/ford-ups-mustang-mach-e-price-order-bank-reopens-next-week/7894458001/

 

Isn't the Mach e classified as a SUV?  If so, the rebate covers up to $80,000 MSRP so nobody is losing it.  It's just going in Fords pocket.  If it's a sedan, then it's $55k MSRP which majority of the versions still fall under.

Edited August 25, 2022 by blwnsmoke

[akirby]

1 hour ago, blwnsmoke said:

 

Isn't the Mach e classified as a SUV?  If so, the rebate covers up to $80,000 MSRP so nobody is losing it.  It's just going in Fords pocket.  If it's a sedan, then it's $55k MSRP which majority of the versions still fall under.

You forgot the sourcing rules

[j2sys]

4 hours ago, Gurgeh said:

Interesting. That is about the amount of money the new Inflation Enhancement Act (or whatever it was called) will be providing to folks who purchase electric vehicles going forward. Kinda just transfers the money from the buyer to FMC.

 

There currently is a federal tax credit of $7500 for which Mustang Mach-E and F-150 Lightning are eligible.  The new tax credit is $7500.  Buyers aren't being given additional tax credits; it's the same amount that already would've been factored in when setting the original pricing.

 

As mentioned by others, the cost and sourcing restrictions, if anything, will reduce the number of customers eligible for tax credits, ignoring that they were supposed to phase out for Ford soon.

 

Ford isn't raising prices to take the tax credit from consumers on top of current pricing.  Ford is raising prices because the entire supply chain is upside down, especially for BEVs.

[tbone]

These BEV price increases are just sad.  I was considering buying the base Pro model as an extra vehicle, but not anymore.  The value proposition just declined substantially for me.  

[Shelby32]

I think Ford is pricing themselves out of the market. The Mach E Gt performance is a joke with only 5 seconds of full power. They need to fix that issue like now because no one is going to buy one after it gets smoked by a KIA.. KIA's EV6 GT has 576 horsepower and will make a joke of the Mach E GT performance with almost 100 more horsepower and no time limit on max performance.  The Kia EV6 GT smokes the Mach E Gt in performance and it is headed here soon at almost 20,000 less then the Mach E  GT. The Mach E GT is a let down and Ford needs to fix that 5 second limit on power, its a bad joke on the customers. Ford charging almost 80,000 for the top spec Mach E is just crazy with less performance and slower charging then the Hyundai products like the GV60.  There is competition out there now and Ford does not need just seat on the product and do nothing until it stops selling, like they have so many times. Even the Blazer SS EV at 65,995 will have more horsepower 557 and performance.  I wish Ford would not have used the Mustang name on the Mach E it would not have been as hard knowing that a KIA EV will blow your doors off at a cheaper price and with faster charging. The name means something more than the Mach E offers now.  This is coming from a person who has had many high performance Fords in my life please wake up Ford.

[silvrsvt]

3 hours ago, Shelby32 said:

I think Ford is pricing themselves out of the market. The Mach E Gt performance is a joke with only 5 seconds of full power. They need to fix that issue like now because no one is going to buy one after it gets smoked by a KIA.. KIA's EV6 GT has 576 horsepower and will make a joke of the Mach E GT performance with almost 100 more horsepower and no time limit on max performance.  The Kia EV6 GT smokes the Mach E Gt in performance and it is headed here soon at almost 20,000 less then the Mach E  GT. The Mach E GT is a let down and Ford needs to fix that 5 second limit on power, its a bad joke on the customers. Ford charging almost 80,000 for the top spec Mach E is just crazy with less performance and slower charging then the Hyundai products like the GV60.  There is competition out there now and Ford does not need just seat on the product and do nothing until it stops selling, like they have so many times. Even the Blazer SS EV at 65,995 will have more horsepower 557 and performance.  I wish Ford would not have used the Mustang name on the Mach E it would not have been as hard knowing that a KIA EV will blow your doors off at a cheaper price and with faster charging. The name means something more than the Mach E offers now.  This is coming from a person who has had many high performance Fords in my life please wake up Ford.

 

 

Your bitching about something you can't even buy at the moment nor does have a price attached to it yet....

 

As for the charging issue-its a design issue with 800v vs 400v systems. 

[T-dubz]

With higher prices and no EV credit, it essentially is getting a $15k price bump (up to 8k price increase plus 7500 tax credit). I’m not a buyer at that price. 
 

Instead of giving money for buying an EV, the government should have used the money to build out the electric infrastructure. More charging stations would help adoption by reducing range anxiety. Higher adoption should lead to lower prices due to economies of scale.  

[Willwll313wll]

37 minutes ago, T-dubz said:

With higher prices and no EV credit, it essentially is getting a $15k price bump (up to 8k price increase plus 7500 tax credit). I’m not a buyer at that price. 
 

Instead of giving money for buying an EV, the government should have used the money to build out the electric infrastructure. More charging stations would help adoption by reducing range anxiety. Higher adoption should lead to lower prices due to economies of scale.  

 

That makes more sense..

[sullynd]

1 hour ago, T-dubz said:

With higher prices and no EV credit, it essentially is getting a $15k price bump (up to 8k price increase plus 7500 tax credit). I’m not a buyer at that price. 
 

Instead of giving money for buying an EV, the government should have used the money to build out the electric infrastructure. More charging stations would help adoption by reducing range anxiety. Higher adoption should lead to lower prices due to economies of scale.  

Why not both? The government is investigating significantly in EV charging infrastructure.  
 

Do you not qualify for the new EV credit because your income is too high?

[akirby]

1 hour ago, T-dubz said:

 

Instead of giving money for buying an EV, the government should have used the money to build out the electric infrastructure. More charging stations would help adoption by reducing range anxiety. Higher adoption should lead to lower prices due to economies of scale.  

I’ve been saying that for a couple of years.  Consumer demand is established - put incentives on infrastructure.

[akirby]

32 minutes ago, sullynd said:

Why not both? The government is investigating significantly in EV charging infrastructure.  
 

Do you not qualify for the new EV credit because your income is too high?

Why do we need incentives for EVs that have more demand than the mfrs can build?

[T-dubz]

3 hours ago, sullynd said:

Why not both? The government is investigating significantly in EV charging infrastructure.  
 

Do you not qualify for the new EV credit because your income is too high?

I haven’t read the whole plan but I think there is some restrictions for cars that can qualify and where the materials are sourced from is part of the issue. According to others here, the mach e itself wouldn’t qualify after this year.

 

As far as incentives go, I believe the manufacturers will keep high MSRPs for EVs as long as the price is basically being subsidized by the government. Once the tax breaks go away automakers will be forced to lower their price to stay competitive.

[jpd80]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

Why do we need incentives for EVs that have more demand than the mfrs can build?

The Chinese and Koreans stand to make billions from battery sales,  the government is trying to encourage manufacturers to invest in regional resources and manufacturing to stop this being a complete walk over.

[Dequindre]

Policies that favor EVs are policies that disproportionately impact middle and lower class Americans. How are the middle and lower classes going to afford EV vehicles with the volatility of battery pricing? 

[mustang84isu]

I seriously wonder what is going to happen in 10 years when we start seeing the sunset of ICE mandated by states like California, yet EV's are basically unaffordable for any household not making $150K+.  I remember reading articles 2-3 years ago talking about pending supply chain issues for lithium ion batteries and other minerals that go into EV batteries, and now it is playing out in real-time.  Definitely feels like the cart is being put before the horse and legislators are only looking at the end game and not looking at how we actually get there.  I'm for sustainability and reducing carbon/emissions, but I'm also a realist.

[Shelby32]

23 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

 

Your bitching about something you can't even buy at the moment nor does have a price attached to it yet....

 

As for the charging issue-its a design issue with 800v vs 400v systems. 

Its coming in a few months and is already in Europe at 10,000 more then the top spec EV6 which puts it at 62,000 and it will be here is at the same time as 2023 Mach e. This EV makes the Mach E look weak with 0-60 in 3.3 seconds, top speed 166 mph and can do some drifting for fun. The Mach e cannot do anything that this EV does, Mustangs burn rubber and the Mach E can't, so how much is the Mach E a Mustang zero. Ford needs improve the Mach E it looks great but its performance is a let down  with the GT's 5 second limit for full power.  

 

Edited August 27, 2022 by Shelby32

[Gurgeh]

13 hours ago, jpd80 said:

The Chinese and Koreans stand to make billions from battery sales,  the government is trying to encourage manufacturers to invest in regional resources and manufacturing to stop this being a complete walk over.

 

There's the rub. So on the one hand, the government is trying to encourage domestic sourcing of materials and on the other hand and is enforcing land use policies that make it almost impossible to open a new lithium, metals, or rare earth mining operation in the U.S. -- even though domestic resources rival those of China and elsewhere. Some of that, however, is due to environmental group efforts to kill projects through litigation, not necessarily by killing them outright but making the court delays so long they become non-economical -- yes, the same environmental groups that are insisting we move quickly to all-electric vehicles.

[jpd80]

8 hours ago, mustang84isu said:

I seriously wonder what is going to happen in 10 years when we start seeing the sunset of ICE mandated by states like California, yet EV's are basically unaffordable for any household not making $150K+.  I remember reading articles 2-3 years ago talking about pending supply chain issues for lithium ion batteries and other minerals that go into EV batteries, and now it is playing out in real-time.  Definitely feels like the cart is being put before the horse and legislators are only looking at the end game and not looking at how we actually get there.  I'm for sustainability and reducing carbon/emissions, but I'm also a realist.

USA or a free trade partner to qualify…a country like Australia?
 

Quote

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/08/02/1056606/ev-tax-credits-battery-supply/
There are two major parts to the new rules. First are the limitations around the critical minerals used in the battery, like lithium, nickel, and cobalt. Starting when the tax credits kick in at the start of 2023, 40% of these minerals in the car’s battery must be mined, processed, or recycled in the US or a free-trade partner. This ramps up over time, hitting 80% in 2026.
 

There’s also guidance about where the battery is actually made—starting in 2023, half the components need to be manufactured or assembled in North America. This reaches 100% by 2029.

Finally, a vehicle can be excluded from the tax credits if any mining, processing, or manufacturing for a battery is done by a “foreign entity of concern.” This requirement takes effect in 2024 for the battery components and in 2025 for critical minerals.

 

While it’s not clear exactly which countries will count in this definition, the rules are an obvious attempt to slow China’s dominance in the battery business, says Jonas Nahm, a professor of energy, resources, and environment at Johns Hopkins.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2022 by jpd80

[silvrsvt]

1 hour ago, Shelby32 said:

Its coming in a few months and is already in Europe at 10,000 more then the top spec EV6 which puts it at 62,000 and it will be here is at the same time as 2023 Mach e. This EV makes the Mach E look weak with 0-60 in 3.3 seconds, top speed 166 mph and can do some drifting for fun. The Mach e cannot do anything that this EV does, Mustangs burn rubber and the Mach E can't, so how much is the Mach E a Mustang zero. Ford needs improve the Mach E it looks great but its performance is a let down  with the GT's 5 second limit for full power. 

 

Pricing hasn't been given out for the US yet...and if you think the price increases that Ford is having isn't going to affect other manufactures pricing, your smoking something. 

 

So your in a penis measuring contest with a CUV now...sounds like your just mad about it being called a Mustang and are picking pepper from the fly shit to prove your agenda.