By on November 14, 2019

Gee, what are we going to talk about today? What issue could possibly stimulate a little dialogue on this frosty November morning?

How about… the newest member of the Mustang family. Yes, the Mustang Mach-E, which is neither a coupe, a car, nor the recipient of an internal combustion engine, is now a member of a family that once hosted but a single occupant (with varying lengths of hair), stretching back to the time when Lee Iacocca was just a brash young Ford exec with an idea.

Totally awesome idea, or pull-your-hair-out, froth-at-the-mouth blasphemy?

The Mustang’s lineage is not without potholes and speed bumps. The Pinto-based Mustang II is seen as a low point in the nameplate’s journey, though the downsizing did spur a flood of buyers eager to thumb their nose at OPEC. Ford’s intent to replace the Mustang with a front-drive model that eventually became the Probe was another hiccup, with buyers flocking to the old Fox-body after word leaked out. A change of plans in Dearborn ensued.

This current-generation ‘Stang is a vehicle that’s hard to not love, what with its sleek body, right-on proportions, and wide array of power options. Ford really got the current-gen Mustang right. And then this.

As pony car sales dwindle, plans are afoot to broaden the model’s appeal. Things like hybrid power and (possibly) all-wheel drive could delay the model’s demise, but it’s hard to build a seawall against a fast-rising tide of market forces. The Mustang is still a performance coupe. A plaything for many. A luxury in a world that’s slowly shunning both oil and cars.

Is the answer to remake the Mustang, to transfer the pony car’s heritage to a wholly dissimilar vehicle, or to just let things run their course? If the real Mustang goes away one day, leaving us with a compact electric crossover with a pony badge, is that a better outcome? Or is this all just a cynical exercise to juice EV sales, to the detriment of history, heritage, and purity?

Few would complain if Buick brought back the Electra name and slapped it on an EV crossover, but this feels very different.

So, B&B, tell us — is Ford’s decision wrong-headed, or are we out to lunch?

[Image: Ford]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

107 Comments on “QOTD: Good Idea, or Graceless Exit?...”


  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    It’s crazy to use a duplicate name on two different vehicles. Perhaps all press really is good press; without the controversy, this thing would be ignored.

    I have no Mustang experience, so if I bought a Mach-E the heritage question wouldn’t bother me.

    In the long run, the real question is whether Ford’s gamble on a CUV EV will pay off.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      I think you hit it on the head – will this pay off?

      Personally, I think if there was a mistake made here, it was *not* making it a Lincoln. At this point, the luxury segment is a more natural fit for EVs.

      We’ll see.

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      “It’s crazy to use a duplicate name on two different vehicles.”

      Genesis Coupe
      Genesis Sedan

      Prius
      Prius C
      Prius V
      Prius Prime

      Lumina
      Lumina APV

      • 0 avatar
        ToddAtlasF1

        The Genesis coupe and sedan shared a platform and an engine. It didn’t work out well for Hyundai and they changed model strategies after one generation.

        The Prius C was a small Prius. The Prius V was a big Prius. It didn’t work out well for Toyota and they changed model strategies after one generation. The Prius Prime is just a plug-in Prius. It is only a different vehicle to you.

        The Lumina APV still had more in common with a Lumina sedan than a CUEV does with a…Mustang. It was also replaced by models that didn’t share their names with cars.

        Considering that every example you named was a flop, I’m sure you were just reinforcing SCE to AUX and FreedMike’s point.

      • 0 avatar
        NTGD

        Just because its been done doesn’t mean it isn’t crazy!

        I would love to know the logic behind the Genesis “twins” here is our new sporty RWD couple and here is our new refined luxury sedan, lets call them the same thing as they compete in two totally different segments!

        Even Chevy caught on and renamed to Venture for round 2.

        The Prius thing actually makes sense aside from the c they are/were all related and served the same market. Can’t blame them for trying to boast up the Prius C with name recognition.

      • 0 avatar
        Boff

        “‘It’s crazy to use a duplicate name on two different vehicles.’

        Genesis Coupe
        Genesis Sedan

        Prius
        Prius C
        Prius V
        Prius Prime

        Lumina
        Lumina APV”

        Corolla
        Corolla Tercel

        Malibu
        Malibu Classic

        Cutlass
        Cutlass Supreme
        Cutlass Ciera
        Cutlass Calais

        Lumina
        Lumina APV

        I’m sure there’s more!

    • 0 avatar
      SSJeep

      Agreed. I love the vehicle but hate the name. Its not a Mustang and not a Mach. There are so many better ways Ford could have gone about choosing a name for this vehicle. Heck, call it a Ford Galaxie or something, and resurrect a legacy name that just sounds cool with an EV.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Nissan Stanza [Wagon]. 2 pretty different vehicles they were

    • 0 avatar
      vvk

      Yes. Kind of like Mitsubishi Montero and Montero Sport. Vastly different, yet most customers never knew the difference.

  • avatar
    N8iveVA

    I love Mustangs and own one and this doesn’t really bother me. It’s almost like they’re trying to create a sub-brand like Toyota did with the Prius. Will it work out? Time will tell, but the Mustang ain’t going anywhere soon. It may turn into some sort of “performance hybrid” but a gasoline Mustang, like most cars (beat your EV’s are gonna take over drum all you want) will be around for another 20 years.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Boo… Are you trying to make Mustang into “Cutlass” or “Denali”?

    With apologize to my Latino friends and relations: “No bueno.”

    • 0 avatar
      ravenuer

      Ha, Cutlass came to my mind too.

      • 0 avatar
        tomLU86

        Graceless?

        That’s being charitable.

        In terms of prestige and recognition, the Mustang is Ford’s only model with any of that. (F-150 and F-Series generate more money, but not prestige).

        Now Ford will p*ss it away.

        How sad.

        They recovered from the “II” in Mustang II, but they won’t recover from this.

        I didn’t think it was possible, but I think even less of Ford’s CEO and leadership now.

  • avatar
    dwford

    I’m really not going to complain about this. Even Ferrari is about to make an SUV. So Ford wanting to expand the Mustang brand to include an EV crossover really isn’t totally crazy. It’s not like they are turning the Mustang itself into a crossover. And given the supercar hybrids and EVs out there, it only makes sense for Ford to consider it for the Mustang as well.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    The EV part doesn’t bother me in the least. But taking the (unchanged!) Mustang concept (front engine, RWD coupe with kid-size back seats) and extending it to a cross-over goes too far.

    A “performance crossover” is a crossover, no matter how it’s powered. It’s not a sports coupe. There’s a reason that Porsche didn’t name its performance crossover the “911+”.

    Moreover, we should remember why “crossovers” and “minivans” exist . . . because of government fuel economy regulations. Being classified as “light trucks” puts them in a more lenient category than, say, “station wagons.” It doesn’t take too much imagination to postulate that our regulatory-minded masters, in the search for less CO2emissions and lower fuel consumption, will end this madness by classifying “light trucks” as those vehicles with a GVWR of, say, not less than 6,000 lbs. and seating capacity for no more than 3. That is what the common understanding of a “truck” is.

    Bye-bye crew cab pickups and bye-bye “crossovers.” Station wagons will return. Interesting fact: the original BMW X5 had less cargo capacity than the 3-series wagon (and, of course, used more fuel).

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    Pretty sad that the electric Escape Mustang needs to leverage the heritage of the Mustang brand to make it appealing.

    God forbid you just design a vehicle that will stand on it’s own merits.

    Hackjob needs to go. After the botched launch of the Explorer and MKExplorer, and now this, it’s clear his goal is to put Ford in the grave.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      “ God forbid you just design a vehicle that will stand on it’s own merits.”

      Truer words do not exist in the current automotive landscape.

      • 0 avatar
        MiataReallyIsTheAnswer

        *ahem*

        “Blazer”

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        Remember that time GM put Hummer badges on a Colorado and a Tahoe? Peppridge Farm Remembers.

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          And Saab badge on .. Jimmy?

          “Honey, I left James at the dealership”

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            Saab 9-7X, a Trollblazer built by Trolls in Trollihan, Sweden.

          • 0 avatar
            tankinbeans

            Down the block from me somebody owns 3 of the TrailBlazer triplets under different banners.

            A Suzuki Grand Vitara (?), an Isuzu IL7 and a TrailBlazer.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          “Remember that time GM put Hummer badges on a Colorado and a Tahoe? Peppridge Farm Remembers.”

          Nope, care to elaborate? Or substantiate your claims with facts?

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            Yes I know…go ahead and tell me all about how the 2500 series Front subframe and a bunch of other little nonsense makes it this whole different vehicle and the H3…well other than adding a bunch of weight I’m not sure what they did.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Can you tell me exactly what about either of them makes them similar?

            Or you just pulling more crap out your behind? So your not sure the differences on an H3, but your still going to stand by that claim? Good luck finding similarities between an H2 and a Tahoe, the radio and AC controls are the same, is that what makes them the same vehicle to you?

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            The H2 was a 1500 frame out back with a 2500 series front subframe grafted on. I didn’t know this wasn’t common knowledhe. The H3 used a modified Colorado/Canyon chassis. I will grant you though, it is more dissimilar than I initially thought based on some quick research.

            But yeah, other than the starting with the same frame and sharing powertrains, yeah, totally different I guess.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            “The H2 was a 1500 frame out back with a 2500 series front subframe grafted on.“

            This is not true.

            3/4 front (1 ton for 06-07) the center section is a 1-1/4 ton all new section, and the rear is a modified 1500 HD section. This IS common knowledge, not your modified version.

            There was no grafting a 3/4 section on a 1/2 frame. I’d also ask that you provide proof that any part of the H2 drivetrain is shared with a Tahoe.

            Axles, transfer case, transmission, engine – none shared with the Tahoe, so what encompasses a drivetrain to you?

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            http://www.lynchhummer.com/Changes/index.html

            http://www.lynchhummer.com/h2pages/h2chassis.html

    • 0 avatar
      MeJ

      I think you nailed it EB.
      Using the Mustang name on that ugly thing is insulting to the brands heritage.
      It is sad that it can’t stand on its own.

  • avatar
    Big Smoke

    Two door electric car, will only Epeal to 2 door car buyers.

  • avatar
    tankinbeans

    Been done before with varying levels of success.

    Taurus / X
    Accord / Crosstour
    Lumina / MPV
    all the Cutlasses.

    I’m not sure if those sullied the name too much. I’m probably missing some.

  • avatar
    gasser

    This is reminiscent of what happened to Thunderbird. Two door coupe goes to four door whatever, then a gussied up Ford Tudor sedan. Ford is in the business of making money, not making legends or supporting prior sales with heritage parts or memories. Right now they make trucks and are flailing around in an effort to get some sore of an EV out there to have something to sell down the road. I don’t think Ford is counting on Mustang to be a big money maker in its future.

  • avatar
    Land Ark

    I honestly don’t have a strong feeling one way or another so instead I tried to conjure up a time when something similar happened.

    I am brought to the early 60s when Chevy and then Ford took established names and applied them to totally different types of vehicles with the Corvair and then Falcon vans. I wasn’t alive then so I’m curious how the reception was. Were they trying to create sub brands?
    Were there other examples?

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      “I tried to conjure up a time when something similar happened“

      2 years ago when GM put a full-size SUV name onto a lousy front drive minivan?

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      Well “Ranger” was an option package on F-series trucks that became a stand alone model.

      Explorer was as well.

      • 0 avatar
        tankinbeans

        Also Malibu.

      • 0 avatar
        Robotdawn

        Similar to the Silverado, which was a trim of the C/K pickups. I want to say the Yukon and Tahoe names were also trims at one time as well.

        I *think* I saw a F-150 out in Washington State with both the Explorer and Ranger badges on it! Didn’t move in the 2 years I lived near it, but it looked good.

        However, anyone who complained about the Blazer better be complaining about this. An electric CUV branded as a Mustang is a much bigger offense than branding a CUV with a name that graced two different size SUVs 30 years ago.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        Ranger was an Edsel model, as were Citation and Pacer.

    • 0 avatar
      Russycle

      The Corvair van was on the same platform as the sedan and coupe, with the same powertrain. Not sure about the Falcon.

      • 0 avatar
        Land Ark

        The Falcon Club Wagon (excuse me) was on the Falcon platform too.

        • 0 avatar
          Scoutdude

          The Falcon Club Wagon was not on the Falcon Platform. Engines were shared but the Club Wagon and Econoline had leafs and an I beam up front not IFS like the Falcon. They also had full length frame rails on their flat floor unibody, not disconnected stubs like on the Falcon. They also had larger brakes that were all 5 lug, even though they only had the 6.

  • avatar
    MiataReallyIsTheAnswer

    Now that you mention it, an electric Buick named Electra is a pretty good idea…instead of a 225 version there could be a 240, for volts :)

  • avatar
    R Henry

    “Brand dilution” and “marketing misstep” are the terms that come to mind.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    If we accept the underlying assumption here – that the Mustang’s market is dwindling – then branding a range of vehicles as “Mustang” is the best way to save the core traditional model. P

    Is the EV “blashphemous”? Of course it is. So were the Cayenne, Panamera and Macan. Meanwhile, you can still buy a 911, and from all I’ve read, it’s better than ever.

    The only question is whether traditionally-powered Mustangs will carry on, and I think they will as long as Ford is making trucks powered by V-8s or uprated Ecoboost sixes. No reason there can’t be an electric Mustang as well – as a matter of fact, I’d like to see one. Why not?

    If Ford handles this right, this won’t be seen as the moment the Mustang died – it’ll be the moment it was saved.

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      Cayenne and Macan will always make me think of a particular class of lady – there is a teacher in our district who is also the dance team coach and whose husband is one of the wealthiest lawyers in town (also descended from a monied family) and she drives a Macan turbo. (Switches from MB to Porsche to Denali/Escalade.)

      That is what I will always picture with Porsche SUVs.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        You’re probably on target. But if that’s the case, then Porsche has succeeded in making their line appealing to a bunch of buyers who wouldn’t have looked twice at a 911 or Cayman, and in the meantime, 911s and Caymans are still kick-a** cars. Good business move, if you ask me.

        Say what you want about Porsche SUVs, but as long as you’re willing to drop a BUNCH of stacks on them, they offer performance that’s worthy of the badge. And that’s what I think this “Mustang” line has to do, just at a lower price point. If Ford can make a “Mustang” four-door hatch along the lines of a Kia Stinger, and sell it for Stinger money, that’d get me in the door of a Ford store. Same for the CUV – make it a less-expensive “Mustanged” Macan, and that teacher at your school might take a look. And if those sell, then the “core” Mustang survives, just as the 911 has.

        We’ll see how this goes. As others have said, it’s all on them to execute. That’s the piece that worries me – Ford’s batting average on this doesn’t exactly conjure Wade Boggs.

    • 0 avatar
      NTGD

      Not the same situation Porsche needed SUVs to make money to keep making 911s, Ford already has a plenty of trucks and SUV/CUV to make money. The Cayenne and crew didn’t have 911 stuck in there model names either, and SUV were booming when the Cayenne was introduced, EVs are not at that point.

    • 0 avatar
      IBx1

      Good point, but Porsche didn’t call it the 911 Cayenne.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        OK, let’s say they called it the 911 Cayenne. Does that mean a) 911 buyers were immediately going to jump ship, and 2) the 911 model range would have suffered?

        Hard to make the first case, and clearly the second issue never happened.

        • 0 avatar
          IBx1

          But when a Bob or Karen says they drive a 911, you only have to worry about it being automatic, not an abberation. Now when they say they’re buying a Mustang, it could mean an electric Ford Escape.

  • avatar
    MiataReallyIsTheAnswer

    As for expanding the “Mustang brand”, may as well run with where the name recognition and equity is. I’m generally a GM guy but have owned several Mustang GT’s, new and used, and would not be especially offended by it. What I didn’t like was trotting the Taurus name back out, because to me it has always signified Rental Car. I could never stand very tall telling someone I drive a Taurus.

  • avatar
    Art Vandelay

    Eh, the important factor here remains “Does the vehicle deliver on the performance and range promised and Can Ford not botch a launch for a change?”

    The name wont matter to 99 percent of people here.

    The irony of all of this is that, for all the hate, given the performance threshold for EV’s that the Mustang with 4 doors and the crossover body may be the fastest one down a drag strip. THAT would make waves I believe.

  • avatar
    JMII

    I’m OK with Mach-E… I am fine with EVs however I am NOT OK with an SUV named “Mustang”.

    My first car was a Mustang GLX, which I actually hated because it was ’83, auto, inline 6 = yuk! A Mustang is a 2 door sports coupe. This Mach-E is none of the above. This is as bad as Mitsubishi’s Eclipse CUV. Maybe its me because I also owned an ’96 Eclipse GST, which was a great car, that Mitsubishi ruined with that 3rd generation Pontiac-look-alike body work.

    However as current Corvette owner I fear the rumors that GM is considering a ‘Vette SUV in effort to expand that brand as well. The only good news there is everyone assumes the 6.2l V8 would be the power plant.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      ” I fear the rumors that GM is considering a ‘Vette SUV in effort to expand that brand as well. ”

      You know who has been pushing the idea of Corvette brand expansion? Bob Lutz. He made those comments on Autoline. GM has also extended the copyright on “Corvette E-Ray” in July. Don’t know what that’s going to be, but probably some sort of electrification.

  • avatar
    Sigivald

    “Ford really got the current-gen Mustang right. […]

    As pony car sales dwindle […]”

    And here we see the conundrum of auto fandom and press (no offense to Steph, who is a fine writer and not dodging the issue) – “right” for enthusiasts of muscle cars doesn’t necessarily translate into “sales”.

    (I’m not a muscle car guy, so I have no revulsion for a ‘crossover’d’ Mustang qua Mustang.

    I’m too bearish on EVs to want one, but a hybrid might be compelling – I know I’d lust after a hybridized “more power AND more economy” version of my XC70.

    Pure electrics I view as something for city commuters, fanatics, and marketing purposes, as of now.)

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      FWIW I think the Camaro and (less so) the Mustang lean too hard into “sports car” over “muscle car”, which is probably to the detriment of sales.

      For the next gens I think Ford and GM really need to be willing to sacrifice some road course performance in the name of offering a more comfortable 4-person coupe.

  • avatar
    JimZ

    show of hands- all of you who are complaining about the name but would actually buy one if it was called something different, signify by raising your hand and saying “aye.”

    *crickets*

    Thought so.

    • 0 avatar
      jack4x

      The name will only be problematic to me if Corey’s hypothesis of this replacing the V8 powered sport coupe Mustang in the near future turns out to be true.

      Until today I scoffed at the theory, and I still think it’s a <50% chance, but I have to admit this move makes me worry he could be right.

      I actually have bought a traditional Mustang new before, and might again, but have no interest in an electric crossover under any name.

    • 0 avatar
      SPPPP

      Are you here to talk about cars or check our credentials? Would you let us slide for one post if we slip you some rubles and cigarettes?

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        It is a valid point though. Ford is in the business of selling cars to make money. Typically, the more they sell, the more they make. So:

        How many people who were interested in the Mustang will now not buy one because this exists (Not many I’d wager)

        How many would have been interested in the Mach E but now won’t buy one because it wears Mustang badges (not many)

        How many complaining never would have considered either and are just flapping their gums online (By far the highest number)

        What we should be talking about is:

        1. Will this now be the fastest Mustang in a 1/4 mile? – Possible given EV performance thresholds
        2. Can Ford Launch it without all of the nonsense plauging previous product launches? – Possibly but I’m not optimistic
        3. How will it stack up to a simillarly equipped Model 3 with respect to range, performance, and quality? – I’m optimistic
        4. Will it sway model 3 buyers and/or people who were considering ICE options or is it just going to be carving up a smaller pie for buyers? – No Idea

        This name stuff is just internet fodder. The Mustang has shared platforms with the Falcon, Pinto, and Fairmont until recently. Having an EV share the badge isn’t going to hurt it and if YouTube videos of the thing smoking Hellcats at the drag strip start coming out it can only help. I know, I know…”But muh Veee Eight sound”. Kids don’t care and you aren’t getting any younger. They think 4 door Teslas are cool. A 4 door tall Mustang won’t offend their sensibilities.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          Art gets it. Well said.

        • 0 avatar
          Scoutdude

          “3. How will it stack up to a simillarly equipped Model 3 with respect to range, performance, and quality? – I’m optimistic

          4. Will it sway model 3 buyers”

          I’m not sure that how it stacks up to a Model 3 is relevant, how it stacks up against the Model Y, on the other hand could be relevant, once it does come to market.

          I also don’t see that kids think the Model 3 is cool. Yes they did think the Model S was cool but the 3 isn’t as cool as an Audi or Subaru with the kids I know.

          • 0 avatar
            jdowmiller

            My teen son and his friends have no interest in vehicles whatsoever. I’m not sure what the reason is but man, when I was fourteen (and younger) I could name every model of every brand in the world.

  • avatar
    jkross22

    This is the wrong question.

    The right question is whether or not Ford can stop botching launches of important new cars and SUVs. Sorry, just SUVs now.

    Recent Lincoln launches should give everyone in Dearborn reason to be concerned.

    • 0 avatar
      ToddAtlasF1

      The answer is no and this is just more proof. They aren’t even limiting themselves to ruining new product now. They’re making a play that can wipe out about a third of their brand equity however it turns out.

      In a fantasy world where Ford isn’t a dumpster fire, suppose this new CUEV turns out to make every Tesla obsolete, the Taycan suitable only for attention seekers, and people who were planning on buying their third consecutive Highlander or RX350 join a Dearborn waiting list instead. Wouldn’t that make it as capable of creating a nameplate with recognition and desirability as the 1965 Mustang was? The Mustang wasn’t called Falcon 2+2. The Bronco wasn’t called the Falcon Utility. The Model A wasn’t called the Model T II. The Explorer wasn’t called the Grand Bronco. More recently we’ve seen Ford squander the brand equity of the Taurus name, having launched it to great fanfare. The Explorer was not called the Bronco III or the Grand Bronco, and it has succeeded in spite of mediocrity and scandal. Why don’t they have the courage to bestow a new name on their CUEV? Do they know it will need reflected glory to compensate for being a penalty box? Solved it.

      • 0 avatar
        SPPPP

        ToddAtlasF1, I am not quite as pessimistic about this vehicle’s potential as you, but I agree with the analysis of the name confusion. It comes off as a bit desperate for attention. If the mainstream manufacturers are being told that they must become EV-first companies in the next 10 years, but consumers ignore every EV not named Tesla, that would be a major problem.

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        “Do they know it will need reflected glory to compensate for being a penalty box? Solved it.”

        Penalty box? WTF? How is a mid 3 second 0-60 time vehicle a penalty box? Sorry, but with that kind of performance it’s definitely earned the name.

        • 0 avatar
          Art Vandelay

          “Sorry, but with that kind of performance it’s definitely earned the name.”

          I mean it gets to 60 as quick as a GT500, with AWD it will likely launch harder. Not sure what it’ll do in a 1/4 mile but the right question may be do the current Mustangs deserve the badge if we are basing it on performance alone here.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “basing it on performance alone here.”

            I greatly disagree with your implication. You’ve left a lot of comments the past two days about the Mach E’s acceleration. When did “performance” (and the Mustang badge in general) become solely about drag racing? If that is the case then Ford has been screwing up for decades.

            A Jeep Trackhawk is faster down a drag strip than a GT350. Does that make the FCA product a better performance car?

        • 0 avatar
          ToddAtlasF1

          “Penalty box? WTF? How is a mid 3 second 0-60 time vehicle a penalty box? Sorry, but with that kind of performance it’s definitely earned the name.”

          There are street legal cars that can cover the quarter mile in 9 seconds that are miserable junk to commute in. How often do you go from 0-60 in 3 seconds? In 5 seconds? Why didn’t GM call the GMC Cyclone the Corvette Turbo? It was quicker than any Corvette after all.

  • avatar
    ToddAtlasF1

    “A luxury in a world that’s slowly shunning both oil and cars.”

    By world you mean unaccountable bureaucracies usurping self-government to rid the western world of its middle class.

  • avatar
    ajla

    Reading the comments today, I think I might just need to go for broke and buy a GT350 while I still can.

  • avatar
    GeoFLL

    Dumb idea! Build on the future, don’t take a chance on ruining the Mustang name. What happens if the Mustang Mach E is a dud in the marketplace. It will tarnish the reputation of the Mustang. You say Mach E won’t be a dud ? Where are Flex, Freestar and Taurus in the marketplace today? What happened to the Cutlass division at GM?

  • avatar
    Boff

    2X former Mustang owner and lifelong Mustang fan here…for me, it’s just the resignation that I feel that performance cars are an endangered species. The market doesn’t care about performance any more…it’s more about utility and gizmos and lifestyle branding…and the trend will only accelerate. So its interesting that Ford is choosing to leverage one of its few nameplates with any cachet at all. Some of that cachet is about performance, yes, but Mustang has also been about freedom and carefree youth. And, more recently, about Cars & Coffee mishaps.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      The world still cares about performance. Tesla and Porsche duking it out at the Ring, Teslas and Hellcats duking it out at the strip, Toyota bringing back the Supra, a mid engiened, LS powered Corvette, and the fastest crop of hypercars in the history of cars.

      Increasingly however the pinnacle of performance involves electrification in some manner…be it all in like the insane Teslas and Taycan or some form of Hybridization like the LaFerrari and others.

      If this “Mach-E” isn’t the fastest Mustang off an assembly line it is because Ford hobbled it electronically. The youth you speak of likes electrics.

      Back in the day you couldn’t get a sensible car that performed like these cars do. The Ludicrous mode Teslas would have necisitated Race Fuel and trailering to the strip. Now you can have your cake and eat it too.

      • 0 avatar
        Boff

        Yes but those cars have rarified prices (Supra excepted) and sell in small numbers. I’m talking about the mass market. If the market was there Honda Nissan and Mazda would have a Supra fighter.

        • 0 avatar
          Art Vandelay

          3.5 to 60 for 60k seems OK to me. Or I could spend 20 Grand more for the GT500 I guess. Sure, on a track its likely no contest but as far as street performance or at the drag strip The Mach E is probably better and definitely easier to live with.

          It is a golden era for performance…people are just too hung up on outdated ways to define performance to realize it. Yes, I like a V8 soundtrack, but launching to the soundtrack of Doc Brown’s Delorean is pretty freaking cool too.

  • avatar

    Game…
    set…
    match…
    This thing will never sell.

  • avatar
    MRF 95 T-Bird

    The Chevrolet Citation was later badged as a Citation II for the 84-85 model years before its demise.

  • avatar
    loner

    Mustang is now an EV crossover.

    The Toyota Supra is a BMW.

    Chevy Silverados are made in Mexico.

    Wasn’t all this mentioned in the Book of Revelation?

  • avatar
    ToolGuy

    As an automotive enthusiast and explosion-engine purist, I was very disheartened recently to learn that the ICE Mustang uses an *electric battery* to power the starter motor. Shame on you, Ford!

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      The cold snap killed the 12v battery in my kid’s Leaf the other day. Honestly I wish they could just step down the main battery’s voltage somehow to run the accessories (like on my freaking Golf Cart). It seems like a stupid thing to leave an EV stranded (it wouldn’t even go into gear).

      • 0 avatar
        ToddAtlasF1

        When an EV’s 12V battery dies, can it be jump started by a real car?

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          Yes. The 12V battery in an EV is a 12V battery just like any other.

          I recently used my Bolt to jumpstart my Highlander after my kid left an interior light on while the Highlander sat for three weeks. I wondered at the time how many times, ever, an EV has been used to jumpstart a hybrid.

        • 0 avatar
          ToolGuy

          I once jump started a massively-engined Suburban in bitterly cold weather with a Leaf (probably shouldn’t have, as the Leaf 12V battery is pretty small).

          Art – dead 12V battery should never result in “stranded” – refer to TTAC buying guides on jump starters and jumper cables.

          • 0 avatar
            ToolGuy

            dal20402,

            Todd’s question was less of a question and more of a subtle dig… which I am pretending not to notice… :-)

          • 0 avatar
            ToddAtlasF1

            Do you know what is even better than a jump box? A clutch pedal.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            I like giving earnest answers to trolls. It’s hard to troll back.

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            @Todd:”Do you know what is even better than a jump box? A clutch pedal.”

            Agree 100%. However what percentage of under 40’s understand how to jump start a car? Or can even drive a MT.

            MT’s are now referred to as ‘anti-theft devices’.

          • 0 avatar
            ToolGuy

            I tried using a clutch pedal to charge my dead smartphone and call for help when I was stuck in a snowbank and it was *completely* useless. I am discounting your advice from here on out. :-)

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • RHD: When you have solar panels, charging is basically free.
  • RHD: The oil companies are making record, multi-billion dollar quarterly profits. This situation is brought about by...
  • EBFlex: “No. Your “issue with EVs” involves a single use case which is not relevant to everyone and not the...
  • EBFlex: “Congrats, enjoy the truck and ignore the sourpuss.” Huh? If anything I am showing how much I...
  • raynla: Wait…I thought Mary led Joe?

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber