Our comparison video of the Mach-E GT Performance Edition vs. the more practical Premium RWD Extended Range model: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-S5ys3WYpS9Y.html
Would really love to see this video re-done on a '24 GT W/Performance Upgrade option! 0-60 is now 3.2-3.5 sec range, 1/4 Mile is 11.8@114, no more 5 second power limiter (happens just after 1/4 mile now).
Thanks for the vid! Most surprising to me was the aero drag. Compared to the Plaid and other crazy button EV's, this one hits a lot of headwind once it gets to about 80. Also, your runs betray a little software work that needs to be done. The front end breaking loose, etc... means there's more to do. But so much of it can be fixed with software updates! Such a strange new world us car peeps are living in...
My 1988 IROC with SC 383 would kill this thing. I built it back in 1993. Bummer on SOC affecting 0-60 My gas powered car gets QUICKER with less fuel onboard. My Camaro trap speed was like 30 MPH faster than this electric thing.
It could be a loss of short term reserve power, like when capacitors run dry in other electronics. On the other hand, I really wonder if it's just aero; this is a pretty tall vehicle compared to the Plaid and other crazy button EV's.
@@heathwirt8919 At least Tesla’s issues are cosmetic (if any these days) Seriously, what issue would you rather have in the middle of nowhere? Panel gaps? Or motor/battery issues that are common amongst owners on the Mach e and FB groups? We already sold ours off to Carvana and ordered an Rivian R1T and Tesla Model 3.
Great video, why didn't you just try unbridled without going unbridled extend just to see what would happen. I'm not understanding why they would have unbridled if the engineers say to use normal mode. Not as fast as the Tesla but still very fast. And at least you proved to all the haters that you can run it all day without heat problems. Also if 18% loss was good for 4 tenths maybe starting at 100% would get you down to 12.2.
@@EVPulse now here's the real question. Do you think the GT standard model would be any quicker because it's lighter and you wouldn't have that torque steer?
@@letsgomarq yeah, what's really surprising is ford's using a larger battery pack as well (93 kwh I think???) vs the Teslas 75 kwh packs in the 3 and y long range and performance. It seems like even with all that for some reason Ford can't match the performance at the moment. Teslas 100 kwh pack in the base model s does 10.8@131 in a 4800 lbs sedan. Kinda crazy. I hope manafactuerers catch up soon on that top end and battery tech!
5:27 I know that with the Chevrolet Bolt EV, it loses power for every 10% the battery state of charge (SOC) dropped below 100%. The Mach-E also appears to have a top buffer of close to 10%, so it's very likely that your 88% run was actually closer to 75% to 80% actual SOC. If that's the case, your peak power was probably down ~10%, which could account for 2 tenths of a second.
The battery total capacity is 98.7kw with a usable 88 kw. The difference between the two numbers...10.7kw is the buffer which is split roughly half on top and half on the bottom. Which means that if you take half off the top...an 88% SOC would be more equivalent to about 82-83% of total battery capacity.
@@Fence82246 The usable capacity between 0% and 100% SOC has only been measured at about 85 kW, which means there's an additional ~3 kW buffer. Given the range of the Mustang Mach-E after it hits 0%, that ~3 kWh is likely at the bottom, and the full ~10 kW difference between gross and usable capacities would be at the top.
It's not the battery it's the Borg Warner motors. The Motors have tons of back EMF and make half the horsepower over 100mph. I can't link it here but there is a manufacturer Dyno plot on Mach e forums. Tons of up front power than falls flat on its face.
@@heathwirt8919 There is an 80 or so page thread on it on Mach E forums. Why don't you go look before you criticize. There are actual motor power plots from the Manufacturer Borg Warner. The motor literally makes 1/2 the power at higher speeds. Since RU-vid won't let me post direct links. The drive units used in the front and rear of the Mach E GT is a Borg Warner iM-225. A quick Google of the spec sheet for this motor shows EXACTLY half power at maximum RPM. This is not a software limitation but a design limitation of the motors themselves. The back EMF is so bad at 12,000 rpm it barely makes 100 lb/ft of torque at that speed. This is not opinion but based on OFFICIAL released data from Borg Warner themselves.
LOL,,,too many wanting or expecting super high performance from this first time effort from Ford. These people just don’t get it,,,,Ford is building an economy car here not a super car. After diving this car and Teslas back to back I can honestly say Ford did a damn good job and it’s range is better than claimed.
This video was awesome! Thanks a mil! Considering getting an EV but I’m torn between the Mach-E GT and the Tesla model Y. Currently own a mustang ecoboost perf. pack and it’s been the most fun car I’ve ever owned and I don’t wanna downgrade.
@@CT-ip5oe I hear you. But I’m so not comfortable with buying a car manufactured in China. If I go for Tesla, I’m gonna wait for their Berlin factory to be fully operational.
It would be great if you could test all 4 modes Whisper, Engage, Unbridled and Unbridled Extend to compare 0-60. You should have more subs, great content and great host :)
@@EVPulse I'd just be interested in knowing for the sake of the difference rather than the resulting numbers. So if the 0-60 were run on the same flat piece of road, that'd definitely satisfy my curiosity. Thanks again for the vid!
Waiting for the Tesla fan bois to show up and tell you it’s not lmfao. It looks great. It shouldn’t be a mustang though! It should have a totally different name!
Not even close to the best. If you're a fan of the Honda CRV you'll love this. This isn't a Mustang it's another ugly crossover that just happens to be an EV.
Fastest I could get with my dragy in my select awd standard range verified was 5.7. 5.4 0-60 but it said invalid do to incline. Both we’re in engaged. Unbridled seems better for regular driving but engaged feels much faster from the dig.
Ford backs down the battery after a 5 second burst reducing quarter mile times but keeping the battery from rapidly discharging. The reason for this is to keep the battery maintained at 70% life for a minimum of 8 years. Ford could override this setting keeping the power at 100% through out the run, but the battery life will be shorter
Now if there was only a way to keep that motor current at 100 percent Past the three second point where it kills the power for the entire quarter mile I think you'd pick up about five mile an hour
I can't believe no one has mentioned that the Mach-E GT is also speed limited to 124 mph. Then again, based on the 1/4 mile trap speed, it would appear there's no chance of it reaching 124 on a track.
Well, it was awfully nice of you to do all the test in the fall on a cold night. Now, do this same test in the daytime in June and you will get different results.
Our video producer now owns one and it’s kinda grown on me. I like the lighting elements and a few other “Mustang”-y things. It was designed during a transition time for EVs. They just started to have their own distinct look but not like what some are doing today. -Chad
@@EVPulse you misunderstand my comment. Unbridled and Unbridled Extend are two different modes. Unbridled is supposed to be the most exhilarating driving experience while Extend tames certain characteristics to give more consistent lap times. But "Engage" is a step level below Unbridled. Why would it be faster on the drag strip? It is not intuitive. My Mustang has Normal, Sport, Track, and Rain/Ice. The most aggressive throttle response is mapped to Track along with the tightest steering and least traction control. When I go to the drag strip, I do not go to Sport mode. I rarely use it on the street. And my car is 900 rwhp.
It's weird that the 0-60 is much faster than a Polestar 2 (4.1) but the 1/4 mile is pretty close (12.46 GT compared 12.7 Polestar) and the Polestar 2 has a much higher trap speed 109 compared to the GT's 102.
Not weird at all. Acceleration over time and distance varies in a vehicle. It's not a constant. You could have the exact same speed at finish with different times, or you could have the exact same time at finish with different speeds.
the car looks amazing especially in cyber orange. however this is a little underwhelming. the car has nothing above 60mph. I was totally expecting this car to be in the low 12.1-12.3 and a peak of 11.8-11.9 1/4mile. I just think ford has to get the power to carry much longer than this. again, the car looks great, but is straight line performance isn't what I was expecting compared to how they hyped it. either way, more EVs the better.
Ford is just a "me too" EV manufacture at the moment. They're building an EV based on what they know from building an ICE powered car. That won't cut it when cars, like a Tesla, are doing 9 second 1/4 mile runs at 150+ mph. I was hoping they'd bring a high-performance EV version of the Focus RS to their fleet. But that seems a bust. Ford is terrified of losing market share of the Mustang, so they offer us this "Mach-E" anemic version rather than a fun sport-compact. Let's hope they step up their game. We need the market to be flooded with FUN to drive EVs.
I really would have been nice to start at a 100 or near 100% charge when doing the test, but Im guessing your time constraint didnt allow for that. I hope you guys get to try it again when its near 100% and then try in all the different modes.
@@Magicinstalls The funny thing is, and two years later, if you want a new Ford that's as quick as a Tesla, you'll still spend more on a Mustang than what a Plaid is currently priced. 🤣
It would have been nice to see the stats for each of the driving modes. I wonder if unbridled without the extend feature turned on would have been quicker. Also how much slower is the vehicle in the whisper mode.
Underperformance never looked so good with that blistering 102-104 mph trap. Race it against a Model Y Performance for more subs. 12.8 @ 70%? That's actually pretty bad considering many people would be driving around in that range.
What's actually pretty bad is Tesla's autopilot systems that cause their EVs to run into emergency vehicles then into flames so pick your poison. And is that why Auto Trader just gave their assessment of the Tesla Model Y saying it was lackluster, late to the party, not that good and there are and there are better EV'S out there like the Mustang Mach E ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-NDjS2ayi9Tg.html
@@twany442 It's no secret Ford spends boat loads of money on ads that influence reviews. I've seen mag reviews with their ads on the same page. Ford wines and dines to get what they want. However, none of that changes the fact that the Mach-E has design flaws that limit thermal efficiency and performance. They'll eventually get it right.
@@Fence82246 You can say that about any high performance car. In this case, the drag strip is simply a tool to measure performance. Afterall, the Mach-E GT was hyped up as a Model Y competitor. So naturally, its overall performance will be scrutinized, not just the 0-60. And these cars are not cheap. They can run about 70K.
Gas weighs a little over 6lbs per gallon...anyone leaving their gas tank empty in a gas powered vehicle is either blissfully unaware of how little fuel weighs (10 gallons is 70ish lbs, 15 gallons is 90ish lbs) or is trying to shave off a tenth to set some kind of personal best/record. A full tank on my Durango Hellcat is 25 gallons so you are looking at 150lbs max if you let the tank run down past the low fuel light and that's not even worth 2 tenths in the 1/4.
Unbridled extendex chops the power down by a lot, makes no sense as new f150 does not have these restrictions. Teslas modeY dual motor puts up 4.1s 12.4 1/4mile and has no limitations imposed on it, only state of charge affects it. So this "performance model" isnt really performance. lets put it another way, the new f150 lightning with dual motor (tested at around 4.2sec to 60 with no power cut) will dust this performance model as it is unrestricted, and the lightning is almost 7900lbs, and suposed to be a "work truck".
Kudos to the driver for using the correct term of "quick" rather than "fast" when talking about the ET. And if the track doesn't require the driver the wear (at least) a helmet, it's means the car is still dog slow. :-)
@@IReahpZz If Ford can get this car to compete (performance wise) with the Plaid they'll have a winner. This car should never have been given the "Mustang" name. So far, it's been an insult to the heritage.
@@phillipzx3754 they won't come close to a plaid my man they are no where near that tech a whole 55 mph in trap off 🤣give em a dead they might give you p100d performance. It's crazy how this is slower than say a p85 from 2012
When you add the acceleration boost option, Tesla makes 9 cars in total and this car is faster in the 1/4 mile than only one of them lol! That’s the $40K base model 3. Oh boy 😳
@@taurussho86 Why would I make this up? Look on the Macheforum (Issues, Warranty, Recalls, TSB, SSM) . Owners showing screens being forced to pull over while driving due to battery issues. Look at the many posts, some dating back to as far as May. “Those fucking problems”
@@taurussho86 "And this 1 car beats Tesla total cars in fit and finish." Not according to Munro Associates, who've done a complete teardown of the Mach-E. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-p0kFZ9CVLNg.html
The MME PE enjoys 5 seconds of full power surge, after which performance ramps down, presumably to keep the heat buildup under control. Imagine if the engineers and performance people at Ford figure out how to extend that 5 seconds of surge to say, about 10 seconds with proper thermal management. Any prediction on the 1/4 time and trap speed? Let me know when that happens; I'll trade in my MME Premium AWD X for the GTPE. Thanks for the great video; glad to see consistency of performance over repeated runs.
The pulse might be a limit of the battery, not the thermal management system. Many batteries are rated for maximum continuous and maximum pulse discharge rates. The peak power might only be available as the maximum pulse discharge rate (358 kW or a ~3.5 C discharge rate) for 5 seconds. Often, though, that limit is set by the battery cell manufacturer, and it might or might not be conservative. If Ford determines that it is overly conservatively, they can simply allow the max pulse discharge rate to persist for several seconds longer. The alternative is to reduce the discharge rate slightly (say 325 kW), and possibly sustain that for 8 to 10 seconds. Whether that would end up providing a faster 1/4 mile time is something Ford could test and determine. Basically, they could preset a 1/4 mile launch profile that results in the fastest times.
@@sacballa_kills_em_wit_facts Its not a guess. Its facts outlined by Ford engineering department regarding the HVBJ, coupled with the real world results of this poor engineering.
Sorry, but with software connectivity problems with the phone and fob (as per other youtuber with a model 3 and mache e) and ford dealership refuse to software fix because of car bricking, not having remote ability to open frunk, (only by hood release inside like ice car) stupid shifter using up possible console space and is harder to reach than having on stalk, vertical screen useless for entertainment, inferior charging infrastructure, narrow tires making handling and performance worse, having speed throttled after 5 sec (due to obvious cooling issues although ford lies and says battery usage which would be an owners discretion anyway), less storage and cabin space than a model 3 in a larger heavier vehicle, and poor engineering in a mess of hoses and clamps increasing risks of parts failure and leaks while carrying about dozens of pounds more cooling fluid etc. (see monroe tear down) No dasham or sentry features, no live footage. (which protects car and has saved us and others from being able to prove fault and harm. No future potential for FSD which tesla is so far ahead right now. Ford could not handle curve on highway. It goes on and on. Oh, and greedy dealers try to mark up price 10k and when potential buyer complains to ford exec, the exec tells them just to buy a tesla? LOL. It has happened more than once apparently. NO THANK YOU. YOU WOULD BE A COMPLETE IDIOT TO BUY ANYTHING BUT A TESLA. I CAN TELL YOU FROM EXPERIENCE. P.S. contrary to what probably most people think, tesla charges less than any other oem I have seen for parts costs. Tesla has said that they do not intend to make large profits on service and supercharging. Don't forget that franchise dealers main profits come from Service. They want to rip you off.
@@TheCrusher72 no, I did a thorough side by side, down the long list of specs. Tesla wins and the performance version beats the Equivalent GT all day. Mustang looks better but thats all. Im no Tesla fan, not biased. But Ford has a way to go if they want to compete with Tesla and lagging sales are proof.
@@TheCrusher72 Dont have to convince me. Im not an EV buyer but considered it once. Mustang EV, though has better this or that as you say, OVERALL can’t compete and public agrees and settled that debate already. Ford has to address a few issues where Tesla excels. Tesla is #1 selling EV in world by far. EV Mustang is doing poor, losing money, probably be cancelled unless more buy them. You can say Ford better, maybe you own one, but most prefer Tesla and why they own them.
Wow, this clearly demonstrates how Tesla is WAY AHEAD in terms of battery, motor, and software technology. A model Y performance on the 21inch wheels at 89% SOC does the 1/4 mile in 11.9 seconds at 115mph. I already suspected the MachE GT would not be good thermally and for performance, hence the unbridled extend mode. The RU-vid channel "out of spec reviews" tested the MachE GT around the canyon and it instantly overheated after just one jab at the throttle. I am sure ford can improved the performance, but overall it is not good at all. The MachE Premium 4X is a better deal around 55K vs almost 60-70K with the add ons like the panoramic roof and ford autopilot thing that is standard on the MachE premium.
@@heathwirt8919 I mean peeling paint and misaligned body panels applies to Fords as well. Our family has had multiple fords. Now trim pieces I never heard of falling off, but I did hear about a glass roof flying off lol. That was.... insane.
@@Fence82246 I was talking about battery/motor/software technology. But yes, Tesla needs to improve their suspension with adaptive dampers/air suspension. Also make their cars a bit quitter even though they are alright. Lastly, Fremont Teslas don't have the best build quality, but that should improve with the Texas gigafactory. Given how amazing and perfect China built Teslas are, I have every reason to believe Tesla is capable of building a perfect built car.
This car’s 0 to 60 is almost a second slower than my six year old model S performance. If they’re going to compete with the big boys they need to get on the ball. And the model S will run consistent times down to 50% battery charge.
What a dog. Even the base model 3 spanks it. Just wait for the Kia ev6gt. Will cost less and be much quicker and better built. Hell the rivian truck and SUV will smoke it.
