Range Finder: 2021 Ford Mustang Mach-E GT Performance

Article content

I may spend much of my time hooning about in outrageously stupid supercars, but, at my core, I remain unbendingly pragmatic. Oh, I do like me some power and g-forces, but four doors are better than two; a large cargo area is preferred over a miniscule trunk; and I would never personally buy anything that consumed more than 10 litres per 100 kilometres. Put simply, space, build quality, and efficiency — not to mention comfort and reliability — will always trump power and tire size. I love the latter; I’m just not willing to sacrifice the former.

Article content

Putting all those primary predilections — not to mention my secondary desires — into one vehicle is difficult. And, as soon as you put a frugal fuel economy or low-emissions qualifier in there, your choices narrow considerably. Indeed, as far as I can see, only one vehicle qualifies right now, and that would be Toyota’s RAV4 Prime PHEV, which, not coincidentally, is the car I’d buy were I shopping a new automobile today.

Of course, I could also go electric — as it turns out, I just drove the EV which, were I to ever buy an EV, would be the one I’d raid the retirement piggy bank for.

It’s Ford’s latest Mustang Mach-E, the GT Performance Edition. Yes, I’m surprised, too.

Article content

Now, first things first: I’m not in the market for an electric vehicle. Indeed, I’m hoping that I can get to my grave before I have no choice other than a BEV. Oh, I’d consider something completely battery-powered if I were a two-car family. But the Booth manse is a resolutely one-car — and soon to be three-motorcycle — household, and I’d rather pay $2.00 a litre— hell, $3.00, if I have to — than spend even 20 minutes waiting for lithium-ions to be recharged when I’m on the open road. Been there, tried that, and found it even more annoying that I thought it would be.

All that said, if I ever did happen to park two cars in my driveway, one of them would be electric. So, here’s all the reasons why I’d choose the Ford Mustang Mach-E GT Performance Edition over what is becoming an ever-increasing choice of zero-emission battery-powered cars.

Article content

I like the looks. Stylish without being stupidly futuristic and with just the right amount of sloped-roof slipperiness that doesn’t sacrifice too much rear-seat headroom, I even like it in this yellow livery, a hue I normally eschew, like movies starring Tom Cruise, and restaurants that boast presentation over portion. By comparison, Tesla’s Model Y looks like it was styled by someone who still chews bubble gum; Audi’s e-tron by somebody who would need denture glue to chew said gum; and who the heck knows what General Motors is doing with the Bolt. I could park the GT — again, this particular colour — in my driveway and open its door every day with pride. It’s one good-looking car, er, crossover, or, uh, whatever it is.

Article content

I like the fact that it’s a quasi-SUV, albeit not one of those gargantuan three-row monstrosities that pretends to be a minivan. The trunk’s decently sized, the interior roomy and, as long as I’m not footing a huge gas bill, I don’t mind the relative inefficiency of the two-box shape (mind you, anyone who thinks Big Hydro isn’t going to soak us after we’ve all converted to electric really needs to read some Milton Friedman).

It’s also got just the right amount of power. Yes, like anyone who loves to drive, I like a little giddy in my up. On the other hand, this race to 1,000-horsepower production street cars is just as stupid as it would be if they were piston-powered. Tesla’s latest Plaid is nothing more than a Dodge Charger Hellcat — too much engine and not nearly enough suspension and brakes — with asynchronous motors. It’s absolutely amazing to me that, in the middle of the greatest revolution in mobility since Karl Benz strapped a 0.75-hp horsepower single-cylinder four-stroke engine to a wooden-seated wagon, we North Americans are still buying one-dimensional muscle cars. Balance in all things, said the Greek poet Hesiod, and I, for one, consider 480 hp, 634 pound-feet of torque, and a 3.7-second sprint to 100 kilometres an hour all the “balance” I need.

Article content

I absolutely love the interior. Just can’t stop beaming about it. Admittedly, this is a purely personal choice that speaks to my preference for understated décor and minimalist digitization. Whatever your taste, the monochromatic black motif — with different levels of gloss, mind you, to break up the monotony — is done as well here, if not better, than many a pricey German luxury car.

Article content

I’m also very much impressed with Ford’s balance of power and simplicity when it comes to the Mach-E’s digital displays. The speedometer and gauge set is relatively sparse and small compared with some of the 12-inch — and larger! — instrument panels seen elsewhere. So what? The Mach-E displays all the information I need and is attractive to boot. Wouldn’t change a thing.

On the other hand, the 15.5-inch infotainment display is, as it should be, huge. Very reminiscent of the portrait layout in some Teslas, the Mustang’s Sync system is far easier to navigate. Fonts are larger for easier reading, the “tiled” submenus — usually a complaint for Yours Truly — are truly intuitive, and I absolute adore Ford for the Mustang’s huge physical radio knob rather than some oh-so-trendy “haptic” slidey thing on the steering wheel. Building said knob right into the actual TFT screen is also a truly classy touch.

Article content

There’re also a few details that speak to engineers and designers who understand real-world consumers. One that stands out is that the Mach-E’s centre console has one USB-C power outlet and one USB-A. That may not sound like a big deal, but pretty much every car I have tested — even when they have multiple ports — have either one or the other, the bozos designing them not understanding that, in any transition, no matter what the technology, both the new and the old must live in harmony. Anyone thinking different, please look at how Apple has had to back off its totalitarian all-ports-are-going-disappear mantra with the latest MacBooks.

Balance in all things, said the Greek poet Hesiod, and I, for one, consider 480-hp and a 3.7-second sprint to 100 km/h all the “balance” I need

On the other hand, one of my other favourite features is probably not going to find a lot of fans. In fact, I suspect that Ford may have to modify it after they get complaints from dunderheads unable to show discretion in their own behavior. To wit: the Mustang’s seat heaters can get pretty toasty. As in seriously scalding. Like really, really hot. Jack up the (quite convenient) digital toggle to the max and Mach-E’s seat back starts scorching like a heated blanket on nuclear.

Article content

I love it! Twenty minutes on “roast” on the way to the gym and my 64-year-old lumbars are half-way to being warmed up. That’s my stretching time cut in half. Bonus! No doubt, some chowderhead will eventually claim this is a safety hazard and a legal beagle will force Dearborn to attenuate the heat. But, until then, the Mustang Mach-E has my favourite climate control in the business.

Now that I’ve raved about all the reasons I like Ford’s top-of-the-line EV, here’s the one thing that might, should, or will give you pause: The range-to-recharging-speed equation just sucks. As in it’s really bad, the worst I’ve tested since I started the Range Finder column.

To start with, at 318 km in our Range Finder highway test, the GT’s range isn’t great. Loyal readers might remember that the Extended Range version of the Mach-E AWD eked out 332 kilometres on a battery charge when driven at a steady 125 kilometres an hour . That of course didn’t match Ford’s claimed 435 kilometres, but then neither did the Tesla Model D, which only managed 355 kilometres against a claimed range of 539 km . Indeed, virtually all the big-batteried EVs I’ve tested previously operate within a narrow range of 332 to 355 kilometres of steady highway cruising at a buck-twenty-five.

Article content

Officially, the GT Performance’s range is 418 kilometres, down slightly from the best of  the all-wheel-drive Mach-Es. I have not investigated the reasons for this reduction, but it is reflected in the fact that this most powerful of Mach-Es could only eke out those 318 kilometres on a full charge, this despite actually having a few extra kilowatt-hours in the “tank.”

No, Ford didn’t slip a bigger battery under the floor; the Extended Range battery in all Mach-Es is still rated at 98.7 kilowatt-hours. Like all EV-makers, however, Ford, in the interested of longevity, keeps a few of the GT’s kilowatt-hours in reserve, lest the battery go permanently flat if it’s run to the bottom of its charge. So, where the previous Extended Range Mach-E had access to only to 88 of those 98.7 kWh, efficiency improvements — actually developing enough trust in their battery’s chemistry to believe it wouldn’t turn into a “brick” if they pushed it a little harder — mean the GT Performance has license to use 91 kWh. One can only assume its maximum range would be even worse without that extra three kilowatt-hours over the original Mach-E I tested a year ago.

Article content

Now a real-world deficit of 37 kilometres to something like a Model S 100D is hardly worth getting bothered about. Neither figure is as exemplary as promised, and both are frankly far worse than an equivalent ICE.

Article content

What makes that paucity of range truly bothersome, however, is Ford’s lethargic charging. Maximum charging is rated for 150 kilowatts, almost half of the Taycan’s 270 kW. That, according to Ford’s reckoning, allows the GT to charge to 80 per cent in 45 minutes. Two important notes about that claim. First, a 45-minute charge is going to render the GT’ed Mustang Mach-E useless to all but the most patient of highway flyers. Secondly, when Ford says its quickest — but hardly quick — charging is limited to 80 per cent of the battery’s available charging, it’s not joking.

From 10 per cent to the 80 mark, the GT Performance chugged along, gaining a little more than a percentage point of charge every minute. But, when it reached Ford’s aforementioned 80-per-cent tipping point, it slowed so dramatically that I got out of the car to see if the charging cable had somehow become disconnected. I’m not sure what the exact charging capacity above that 80-per-cent mark might be because it was simply too slow to sit around and observe.

Article content

Now understand the ramifications of this. If you’re taking a trip longer than 600 klicks, you’ll have to stop for at least one 45-minute charge and still require another top-up to get home, because that 45-minute charge only bought you about 250 klicks. Put another way, if you’re sticking to Ford’s proscribed quick-charge routine — 45 minutes and off you go with the battery a little more than three-quarters full — you’ll probably be looking for a charging station in less than two hours. Anyone wondering why consumers still have range anxiety need look no further than the Mach-E.

So why would I, the most critical of EV pessimists, want one? Well, remember I — and I suspect a fair number of other consumers — would never buy a pure electric as my only mode of transportation. Been there, charged that, and have no time for it in the future.

Article content

But, with a fossil-fueled backup — drive fast, drive far — in the garage, the Mustang Mach-E GT would be an ideal EV, at least for those monied enough to afford $82,995 for their zero-emissions second car.

Like I said, I am as surprised as anyone. When Ford announced it was going to sully the Mustang name with an electric vehicle — an SUV, no less — I was as askance as the most ardent enthusiast. Range anxiety aside, I was wrong. It’s done a marvelous job putting together an attractive, well-built, and alluring ZEV. I’d love to have one in my driveway—

As long as I had something with pistons in the other parking spot.