Jump to content

Ford Puma Gen-E: Mustang Mach-E’s Little Brother With Up To 233 Miles Of Range


Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Chrisgb said:

Seems that the dogs' eye view is the de rigueur angle to photograph the Puma. Well, except for a giraffes' eye view:

 

 

images.jpeg

 

Seems like most car photography is done that way these days. I remember whoever styled the Chrysler Cirrus made it a point that he designed it to be looked from above, not below. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Seems to be an unpopular opinion around here, but I really don’t like the look of the Puma, especially the front end. 

Fair enough, I think it's the big eyes throwing you off, and their placement. When I judge a design, I go off what it is, and how it compares relative to other vehicles in the segment. The puma is better looking than most small, affordable crossovers imo. But I can see what it wouldn't be for everyone. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

I'm thinking it looks strange because your looking at it same angle a dog or squirrel would be...

The angle goes make a huge difference. I loved that Ford RS concept from some of the higher angles, the ones you'd actually be viewing the car from. But in low shots, I just wasn't a fan, it was too bulbous and awkward looking. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it, especially for the anticipated price indicated on Ford UK site.  It’s obviously small by US standards, but that’s a big part of how Ford got price down to approximately 2/3 of base Mach-E.  The 43.6 kWh battery is a lot smaller than many other Ford BEVs, yet it gets acceptable range in city and combined WLTP ratings.  EPA is roughly 10% lower, so in US it would be rated around 210 miles combined.  That’s still plenty for most city/urban use.

 

High-speed range rating drops off considerably according to specs.  It goes from a high of just under 5 miles per kWh to a not-so-great +/- 3.5 miles per kWh on WLTP Extrahigh energy consumption.  Combination of relatively high SUV aerodynamic drag and small battery effectively makes it a City-oriented car.  Given low price, I don’t see that as all bad.  I doubt many buyers would purchase with intent to take long road trips.


IMG_5185.thumb.jpeg.7d11a6bbf35ff0da0f29aa8292f31272.jpegIMG_5186.thumb.jpeg.0374402d7e7c524c5c42d3ac85a89678.jpeg

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Well, at 29k, a reasonable price for such an EV, in a market that claims to want small urban EVs, this is gonna be the ultimate test. If it sells, then Ford is golden. If it struggles, that's a worrying sign for Ford's other upcoming affordable small EVs. 

I believe that this will be far more successful than any of their current EV products anywhere on earth.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

Well, at 29k, a reasonable price for such an EV, in a market that claims to want small urban EVs, this is gonna be the ultimate test. If it sells, then Ford is golden. If it struggles, that's a worrying sign for Ford's other upcoming affordable small EVs. 

That's £29,995 GBP  which converts to $37,984.16 USD. Still in "Early Adopter" pricing. For comparison, the Mustang Mach-E shown is £43,330 GBP, which is $54,870USD; comparable to a MM-E Premium In the US before govt rebate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How in the world are the explorer and capri more expensive than the mach e? That makes zero sense.

 

The puma looks like a smaller temu version of the mach e. The shield grille also doesn’t work as well when the headlights are above it. It’s ok on the mach e when the lights are on the side.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rick73 said:

I like it, especially for the anticipated price indicated on Ford UK site.  It’s obviously small by US standards, but that’s a big part of how Ford got price down to approximately 2/3 of base Mach-E.  The 43.6 kWh battery is a lot smaller than many other Ford BEVs, yet it gets acceptable range in city and combined WLTP ratings.  EPA is roughly 10% lower, so in US it would be rated around 210 miles combined.  That’s still plenty for most city/urban use.

 

High-speed range rating drops off considerably according to specs.  It goes from a high of just under 5 miles per kWh to a not-so-great +/- 3.5 miles per kWh on WLTP Extrahigh energy consumption.  Combination of relatively high SUV aerodynamic drag and small battery effectively makes it a City-oriented car.  Given low price, I don’t see that as all bad.  I doubt many buyers would purchase with intent to take long road trips.


IMG_5185.thumb.jpeg.7d11a6bbf35ff0da0f29aa8292f31272.jpegIMG_5186.thumb.jpeg.0374402d7e7c524c5c42d3ac85a89678.jpeg

 

 keep in mind these prices include Taxes and fees.

"For Passenger Vehicles: This is the manufacturer's Recommended 'On the Road' price for the model shown. This price includes (1) delivery to Dealer; (2) VAT at 20%; and (3) First Registration Fees comprising 12 months Government Vehicle Excise Duty, DVLA First Registration Fee and estimated cost of number plates. This price also includes a Ford Customer Saving where this is available."

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Cheaper labor from Mexico even counting shipping costs.


The pricing is interesting, 

With the Explorer, Ford isn't offering the Smallest MEB battery, and the 

The Explorer has more range and more power than the base Mach-E (374 miles to 292 miles and 286 hp vs 268 hp)

Due to regulatory requirements, Ford may be selling the Mach E below cost in the UK.   FWIW, the UK mandated that 22% of vehicles be EVs in 2024. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Biker16 said:

 keep in mind these prices include Taxes and fees.

"For Passenger Vehicles: This is the manufacturer's Recommended 'On the Road' price for the model shown. This price includes (1) delivery to Dealer; (2) VAT at 20%; and (3) First Registration Fees comprising 12 months Government Vehicle Excise Duty, DVLA First Registration Fee and estimated cost of number plates. This price also includes a Ford Customer Saving where this is available."

 

 


Puma EV seems  a good deal to me compared to much higher-cost vehicle options.  The Puma EV may not be what everyone wants, but probably meets the requirements of what many people need for daily transportation.  It’s not very powerful like many EVs, but can hit 62 MPH in 8 seconds, making it as fast as ICE counterparts.  Maximum charging rate is only 100 kW, but because battery is relatively small it charges fairly fast.  Weight around 3,500 pounds is enough to make it relatively safe IMO even though that’s below most popular full-size EVs.   Puma seems to provide everything many drivers need and not much more; which of course helps keep costs down.  Whether Ford is subsidizing sales (or will in future) by pricing below cost I have no idea, but it does offer buyers a lower-cost Ford EV option.  If Puma EV meets basic needs, a buyer may have hard time justifying spending 50% more to get one of the other Ford EV.  I think lower price is probably the most significant motivator and expect Puma EV will do well, though it’s hard to know what buyers are willing to spend to get exactly what they prefer.  It will definitely be interesting to follow sales over the next 6 months or so; and I hope it does well.  👍 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Seems to be an unpopular opinion around here, but I really don’t like the look of the Puma, especially the front end. 

 

15 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

I'm thinking it looks strange because your looking at it same angle a dog or squirrel would be...

I have to agree with both of you, the ICE nose looks better.

I don’t know why Ford feels that it has to push the Mach E style nose, to my thinking that’s the least desirable part.

 

And like the other Ford BEVs sold in Europe, the starting price is too high at near on 30,000 pounds 

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jpd80 said:

And like the other Ford BEVs sold in Europe, the starting price is too high at near on 30,000 pounds 

 

There is a difference of roughly 3600 Pounds between the Puma Platnium (which is the base model) and the EV Puma. It has the same power specs as the ST model but is 3K cheaper. Not much in the way of options either vs what I've seen on US products too. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, jpd80 said:

 

I have to agree with both of you, the ICE nose looks better.

I don’t know why Ford feels that it has to push the Mach E style nose, to my thinking that’s the least desirable part.

My guess is the mach-e nose was added because Ford wanted to make sure people knew this version of the puma was electric. But here's the dealio, brands seem to think that electric car buyers want their cars to look drastically different, most buyers don't. Just use ev tech to make the car look better, you can do things like pushing the wheels to the corners more, giving more sculpture to the hood because there are no engine clearance issues, etc.

 

Just give us a better design, not some science project on wheels. Let's stop with the no grille, sea of blank metal look evs have, or the desire that designers have to push the a-pillar super far forward because there's no engine. It's like the lack of limitations EVs have provided has made designers forget how to make a good looking car. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

My guess is the mach-e nose was added because Ford wanted to make sure people knew this version of the puma was electric. But here's the dealio, brands seem to think that electric car buyers want their cars to look drastically different, most buyers don't. Just use ev tech to make the car look better, you can do things like pushing the wheels to the corners more, giving more sculpture to the hood because there are no engine clearance issues, etc.

 

Just give us a better design, not some science project on wheels. Let's stop with the no grille, sea of blank metal look evs have, or the desire that designers have to push the a-pillar super far forward because there's no engine. It's like the lack of limitations EVs have provided has made designers forget how to make a good looking car. 

 

Volkswagen is learning that lesson in realtime.

  • Like 1
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...