The idea of an electric mustang is not a non-starter. Electric vehicles can be fast as hell, if not terribly noisy.
But the fact that the electric mustang looks more like a Nissan Rogue than a Mustang car always threw me.
I guess my big take-away hearing that the eMustang sold well is that most people do not care much about cars compared to car guys.
Otherwise known as "market feedback." If only the company processed it correctly they might have been able to convince people to fork over medium 5 figures to get one.
https://www.macheforum.com/site/threads/slowest-selling-ev-i...
the Ford Mach E is now the slowest selling EV in US and 3rd slowest selling vehicle of any kind with a 362 market day supply on dealer lots.
https://qz.com/ford-mustang-mach-e-sales-price-cut-discount-...
the increase in Mach-E sales didn’t really start until late February when it announced price cuts of up to $8,100 on leftover 2023 Mach-Es. When the discounts hit, demand skyrocketed. Since then sales of the electric crossover have nearly tripled.
Plus, 'regular' Mustang sales are down big time as well. Last year was the worst sales numbers in the history of the car (60 years)
I feel like it’s just marketing to the “cool” demographic, similar to how Tesla is (or at least used to be) a big status symbol.
These two cars are targeting a completely different demographic and should not be compared/considered in competition.
> Who said Ford’s electric crossover SUV wasn’t a real Mustang? The Mach-E outsold the gas-powered Ford Mustang for the first time last year as one of the top-selling EVs in the US.
Just because the vehicle carries the name and outsold the original Mustang still does not make it a “real Mustang”.
Again, I’m glad it’s selling well (and also glad it’s selling better than the Mustang). I just don’t think the two vehicles can be compared.
What makes a Real Mustang? Head-turning looks? Acceleration? The Mach-E has both in spades. It's a new implementation of the Mustang formula, but it works. It out-Mustangs any parameter that a Real Mustang owner will tell you is the essence of his beloved pony car.
It's an SUV that can't out-run a Tesla. It's barely faster than the 4-cylinder Mustang
(Except for the most recent model (2024) that you can finally get a performance add-on with ($995). The previous model only lets you accelerate for about five seconds under full power)
> It's not an inexpensive RWD car with a V8, for the most part.
The Mach E had an optional performance package added in 2024 that allows it to beat some Teslas
https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2024-ford-mustang-mach-e-...
Nobody makes cars like that anymore. Even the ICE Mustang is a computer on wheels that requires professional dealer-provided software tools to work on. The concept of muscle cars accessible to the everyman for tinkering/souping up is basically dead now.
A RWD coupe that'll spin out and crash trying to show off leaving a cars & coffee.
In 10 years it might not even be profitable to build a gasoline car. How many times has the Viper being canned and reborn? The only way to continue the Mustang badge at all is electric.
How well accepted is the Urus now in Lambo circles?
The Mach-E has 4 doors, AWD, and is nearly a foot taller than the current Mustang. Its base MSRP is $10k (more than 30%) above the base Mustang.
Maybe ford is targeting older people who are at the stage where they give in and get a "practical" car.
I just learned that this is an example of the "jingle" fallacy, one half of the jingle-jangle fallacy pair. The "jangle" half being: the fact that two things are given different names does not make them different.
GenZ isnt interested in learning to drive AT ALL. I’m sure most young adults are most interested in a comfortable spacious box with lots of screens. Hence all cars tending towards SUVs.
Teslas are famous for their torque, which is expected with electric engines, but how are their handling and brakes — sports car like or more luxury SUV floating on a car? I grew up driving a Trans Am (dreamed of a KITT!), and the brakes and the grip on the road was awesome. I’ve never driven a BMW or Porsche, but I expect they are even more gripping. But I think most drivers today aren’t into that, and more interested in having the car drive for them.
Hence mustang was a goner no matter what.
Only those in dense urban areas with great public transport.
The statistics do not bear this out. In 2012 41% of people under 19 had a license. In 2022 49% of people under 19 had a license. However, it should be noted, that the total number of people under 19 has decreased since then, which is a normal population phenomenon. Failing to account for this can produce false trends in the analysis.
> Hence all cars tending towards SUVs.
I think government regulations and worldwide markets have more to do with this than the imputed preferences of a single generation in the US.
> But I think most drivers today aren’t into that
I think most drivers have never been into that, as I think most people see their car as a utility, and not a high performance entertainment option.
> Hence mustang was a goner no matter what.
I think producing a 315 horse power 10 speed "EcoBoost" compromise to get to a whopping 26mpg was the death knell. It's a car that has no practical value in today's market. I don't exactly know who it's made for other than ignorant first time buyers.
EDIT: Since the site thinks I am "posting too fast."
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2012/
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2022/
"Licensed drivers, by sex and percentage in each age group"
Maybe not Gen Z specifically but the general trend absolutely exists.
„The percentage of 19-year-olds with a driver’s license dropped steadily from 87.3% in 1983 to 68.7% in 2022, according to most recent data from the Federal Highway Administration.“ https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/teens-drivers-license-car-sale...
This also shows different numbers compared to your comment, where did you get those values?
The assertion that it's "Gen Z don't want to learn to drive" might be wrong, could it instead be "Gen Z can't afford to drive"?
My 17 year old son just passed his test in the UK (in a manual, none of that automatic rubbish!) and the costs are astronomical, and out of reach to many.
If you are looking at a spike in 2022 as proof that the number of interested people isn't going down, I hope you have better evidence than comparing 2021 and 2022!
> In 2012 41% of people under 19 had a license. In 2022 49% of people under 19 had a license
I have already addressed why this is entirely predictable & the worst dumbest possible indicator one could use, because it looks specifically at and compares COVID and non-COVID years.
It looks like you are getting tripped up & confused with your reply here. It seems to be arguing something else entirely, and seems non-sequitorial.
I've rented a couple Ecoboost Mustangs, and I see the appeal.
315 HP is enough. It's faster than a Mustang Cobra from the 1990s or Mustang GT from the early 2000s. With the premium interior, the car is a surprisingly nice place to be for two adults - about as nice as the last BMW I rented. The back seat is usable in a pinch, and cargo space is adequate for daily driving and road trips. Maybe the fuel economy could be a little better, but it's easy to do worse. If the steering feel wasn't nonexistent even on the hardest setting, I think I might want one.
Sales seem to be OK: 44000 cars a year for an an enthusiast-oriented car is a significant number.
My preferred type of car is a small, efficient, highly practical hatch like the Honda Fit but those largely aren’t sold in the US anymore.
What finally pushed me over the edge was moving to a suburb during the pandemic to cut down on housing costs. It’s possible to get along without a car since my area is broken up by shopping centers (it’s not a house desert), but still clearly designed to be driven around with few sidewalks. There’s bike lanes which is nice, but a lot of them run right alongside 45mph+ traffic including big trucks which is not so nice.
I just did a year in Chicago without a car and rental electric bikes are an absolute godsend when the weather isn't shit. I can get across the city way faster than any car.
Camaro was canceled last year.
And I highly suggest a day of performance driving lessons from your local HPDE club. It will help you understand what is going on with the car that makes it lose traction, and to unlearn some bad habits when that happens.
- There's the people you're talking about, who treat public roads like their own playgrounds with little regard for public safety or road laws.
- There's also people who will keep an eye on their surroundings, understand how weather affects driving performance (acceleration, braking, cornering) and when to use or not use automation like adaptive cruise
As long as we've got a car-centric society in North America I'm more than fine with more drivers falling into that second bucket but having to deal with roads in Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal very regularly, most people just don't pay attention on the road.
Cars of today are far more complicated systems, where there's no longer clear mechanical linkages connecting components together but instead opaque unobservable digital systems weaving the together.
The way cars are made has killed the ability to be a knowledgeable useful enthusiast. The car is just a commodity now. And sure, you can spend a lot of money to have your car modded for performance or looks, but there's so much less of a diy culture that genuinely knows cars. The industry has superficialized out its best fans.
I hope computing can a good similar fates, somehow (doesn't look great right now!). We don't even need material inputs to improve our machines; software gives us vast flexibility. If we can maintain some cultures beyond base consumerism.
only if your definition of "decades" is ~5 years? Otherwise the resurgence of the pony car was only like 20 years ago in the first place (5th gen mustang & charger 2005, Challenger 2008, camero zeta 2010).
Also, I'm biased, but I have to disagree with the "impractical vanity car" part. The current Mustang coupe is super fun to drive and affordable - the trunk is huge and it is quite comfortable for two people (even 3). The coyote v8 is a marvel of engineering - 460 HP with instant torque, but you can get 29 MPG with it on the highway (if you drive calmly). The turbo 4 is even more efficient.
To get anything comparable from European or Japanese coupes, you have to pay twice as much.
I apologize for the rambling.
Pretty much the only thing against them is, as you say, they are only practical for two people.
That all being said I don't get the Mustang. If I were buying a car to have fun there are so many that appeal to me more than it does. My ideal car has bugs on the side windows.
They're damn nice cars though, IMHO.
https://www.automotivedive.com/news/fords-ev-losses-q2-earni...
> The losses go far beyond the cost of building and selling those 10,000 cars, according to Ford. Instead the losses include hundreds of millions being spent on research and development of the next generation of EVs for Ford. Those investments are years away from paying off.
So the “loss” includes R&D.
I'm sure at least a good portion of it will pay off eventually, but there's no guarantee of how much, or how long it will take.
Unless I’m missing it, neither article shows the profit/loss of manufacturing the vehicle vs sales revenue of the vehicle itself, so we can’t know that. Even if it’s true, it’s not unusual when bringing up a new product as you optimise for scale.
> There needs to be a lot more R&D to get the vehicles to a price point that consumers will purchase them and they can actually make a profit.
Does there? Maybe all of the retooling and new assembly lines are done, all the designs are finished? Maybe not and they still have R&D budget left? They are also not operating in isolation - If another company comes out with a cheaper battery then Ford can just buy it with minimal R&D, they don’t have to invent everything themselves.
> Thus far, their R&D has been a net loss for the company.
I mean, that’s R&D? It’s an investment. The alternative is to do nothing and end up like Nokia. Even if they are losing money on every vehicle, “shipping fast” is better than not shipping at all and they can control the numbers. Most people want the 2nd or 3rd gen when all of the bugs have been worked out, so having units on the road lets you learn what doesn’t work.
Of that 40 percentage points, 20 of them are directly attributable to economies of scale. As they sell additional units those costs will amortize out. i.e. the more they sell the less they lose.
They expect to pick up another 15 points via engineering changes that will unify a lot of parts between the different product lines. They apparently initially just focused on shipping the vehicles so each model has a lot of bespoke parts that could semi-trivially be reworked to de-duplicate them between product lines.
That gets you down to 5% losses. The bulk of the remaining 13 points they expect to pick up via battery design improvements and cost reductions in their supply chain.
And their stated deadline for this is the end of 2026 so it's not exactly like they intend this to take ages. Rather they expect to achieve this within a handful of model revisions.
People talk about EV’s underperforming etc, but there’re still steady year over year increases. They are just about to break 10% market share, and everyone sees the writing on the wall.
Where do we find these guaranteed risks and investments that you apparently know of?
What you describe is the nature, the purpose, the challenge of business.
I'd be interested to know the profit/CAFE for each Ford model and how much they are spending on R&D for EV vs ICE.
You sell what you can and at least offset costs somewhat, and also build marketshare, build infrastructure (dealerships, etc.), and learn invaluable lessons about everything from sales to service to reliability to performance, etc.
Or wait until you have the perfect machine that makes you profitable, then begin sales. That doesn't make any sense.
Easy way to send sales up 30%
I don't doubt it but that just makes its sales all the more impressive. (One of?) the worst electric vehicle on the market still was better than a classic mustang.