The gas mustang earns 5-10% profit margins, whereas Ford’s EV division loses $5 billion per year.
A family SUV with a 7500 credit outsold a 2+2 rwd sports coupe?
I’m SHOCKED! FLABBERGASTED! BAMBOOZLED!
Holy shit what rage bait 🤣
It’s bizarre to me that the thing is called a Mustang. Just name it something else and put the same ev transaxle in the regular Mustang.
They wanted awareness.
They got awareness.
Nobody is skipping the mustang because it shares a nameplate.
Mission 100% successful.
I mean, if I had the money, I would skip both and buy the transaxle as a crate engine and put it in something that’s actually interesting.
Some people like a warranty on their dailies. Myself including.
I also race a Saturn sw2 with an ecboost. There is room for both.
Ok, another point. You have absolutely no way of knowing if the mustang name has had anything to do with it’s success. People shopping for an ev suv probably don’t care that much about a muscle car lineage. Saying that this discussion proves it does work is just marketing nonsense.
I mean wasn’t it one of the best bang for buck EVs at one point?
My own problem with it isn’t even that it’s an electric Mustang. It’s that it’s a crossover (I wouldn’t even call it an SUV) Mustang.
I own one, and I bought it because I needed AWD and wanted an EV. The pony badge made zero impact on my decision, and I would have preferred a smaller vehicle if it had been an option. It very literally was the best bang for my buck.
The news to me was that the credit was still available. Turns out the selling spree was because the $7500 credit was expiring September 30th. So the credit is now gone, another master stroke from the stroke master
[…] another master stroke from the stroke master
I’m gonna borrow that from you, because I find it hilarious!
Use it to your hearts content 🥂
Sales were likely inflated never of the ended credit as well. Lord of ev sales this month.
Welcome to Jalopnik
Because it’s an electric SUV and not a pony car. It’s an entirely different vehicle, apart from the name slapped on it.
I don’t know why they compare them, it’s like comparing the Porsche 911 to cayenne, I bet they sell more of the latter
They do. But Porsche didn’t call their SUV the Porsche 911 Cayenne. They called it the Porsche Cayenne. So you don’t go in expecting a sports car. You still get a very sporty SUV that, at least in first gen, truly was the best SUV you could get if you wanted to go fast and still be comfortable and in the second gen, even the small 3.0 diesel version is plenty fun on the track, let alone the V8 diesel or the turbo petrol V8 version. But they never called it a 911.
The whole Mustang Mach-E thing is stupid. Just call it a Ford Mach-E and it’ll sell the same. Don’t ruin the Mustang badge with a crossover.
Or the Escape Mach-E. They already have a compact SUV line.
It’s almost like the market for SUVs is much broader than for two seater sports cars (because ain’t nobody riding comfortably in the back of a pony Mustang).
Rage bait. The article and @sunshine just want you engaged.
I love the idea of the Mach-E. It’s a very sleek and sporty looking crossover SUV and I’d love to have one. I just wish they’d have named it something other than a Mustang.
In my opinion, it’s like Ford took a giant shit on what the Mustang used to represent. Of course some of the other models they released under the mustang brand also did the same thing so…
Case in point: 1974–1978 Mustang II. God that thing was an antithesis to something like the ‘69 Mach 1
at the end of the day, it’s another crossover, not a wagon, and so I don’t care about it
Ford Europe are doing this too, Puma has become a Fiesta SUV and Capri is a mid size SUV, just use a new name ffs, I’m not going to nostalgically buy a car based on the name that bears no resemblance to the car that’s giving me nostalgia.
They’ve all been doing that for several years now. Ford with the Lightning and Mustang. Mercedes’ AMG. BMW’s M. Cadillac’s V. Dodge Dart being an econo car. They all just love to shit all over their own prestige they’ve built.
Ford named a truck Maverick, too.
The Ford Maverick car was kind of a cool-looking car in the late 70s. But they turned it into the most generic vehicle possible.
I could probably go on for a while if I tried. Ford seems to be exceptionally bad.
AMG has been the high performance division of Mercedes since 1993, after having built race engines since 1967.
BMW M is the same kind of subsidiary, having started in 1976.
Cadillac’s V-series is a high performance designation for those vehicles, tuned by the General Motors Performance division, today referred to as Chevrolet Performance. That division began as General Motors Performance Parts in 1967.
The Dodge Dart is a vehicle nameplate that started in the 1960 model year as a “lower priced full size model” - while being the smallest full size Dodge - then changing to mid size in 1962, then “compact” (for the time) from 1963 to 1976. A great deal of the history of the Dodge Dart is as an economy car. Of course, the 1960s and 70s had V8s available, with the 1968 L023 with a 426 Hemi as a standout, but the slant 6 was the bread and butter of the Dart through its entire early production run.
The Ford F-150 Lightning is a nameplate for the EV F-150 introduced in mid 2021.
At least you were right about the Mustang, though.
…I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. I know what all of these are.
The only thing in your list that’s accurate as “shit[ting] all over their own prestige they’ve built” for “the last several years now” is putting the Mustang badge on an electric SUV.
“Lightning” is a brand new badge for Ford; its use is not shitting on anything. Everything else you’ve mentioned has been going on for literal decades and is the source of a fair amount of that prestige, or in the case of the Dodge Dart badge being used on an economy car … that’s what the old Darts already were.
Nothing you said is accurate. You must never have seen the Fast and Furious or you would know there was a Lightning in the 90s. It is not new.
Other brands started shitting on their own branding in the late 00s, early 10s.
Fair on the 1990s Lightning, and no, I don’t get my automotive history from bad movies.
Cadillac shat on its branding in the 80s with the Cimarron. Mercedes did a bad job with the ML320 in the late 80s. Ford’s malaise era Thunderbird was extra malaisey. BMW has always been kind of hit or miss, they’ve always tried to be closer to the bleeding edge of technology, and that doesn’t always work out. Chrsyler K cars were so famously disposable that you can’t even find them anymore, but none of their cars have really been super reliable since the 70s.
My point still stands. Your understanding of automotive history is bad, and you should feel bad.
Was there a Cimarron V I’m unaware of? ML320 AMG? I’m still not sure what you’re trying to say but whatever it is you’re being an unnecessary giant dick about it so you can get fucked and blocked. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
I’ve labelled it a hatchback… Reminiscent of…
And we can’t even downvote this nonsense
