Ford announced this morning that it was slashing prices of all trims of its Ford Mustang Mach-E, while dramatically increasing production.
Tesla’s aggressive price cut at the beginning of this month has caused massive waves within the automotive industry and the car market, as competitors and car sellers alike are forced to battle with the aggressive new pricing. Now, Ford has done just that by rapidly increasing production of its popular Mustang Mach-E EV SUV and subsequently slashing prices.
According to Ford’s press release this morning, the Ford Mustang Mach-E’s price will be cut by as much as $5,900 on the top trim model and $900 off the base model vehicle. Ford did not specify the scale of the upcoming production increase. However, the company noted that it “has secured the batteries and raw material to scale production of [electric vehicles] in 2023.”
| 2023 Mustang Mach-E
|
Former MSRP
|
Updated MSRP
|
Delta
|
||
| Select RWD Standard Range
Select eAWD Standard Range California Route 1 eAWD Extended Range Premium RWD Standard Range Premium eAWD Standard Range GT Extended Range |
$ 46,895
$ 49,595 $ 63,575 $ 54,975 $ 57,675 $ 69,895 |
$45,995
$48,995 $57,995 $50,995 $53,995 $63,995 |
$ 900
$ 600 $5,580 $3,980 $3,680 $5,900 |
||
| Extended Range Battery
Nite Pony Appearance Package GT Performance Package |
$ 8,600
$ 800 $ 6,000 |
$7,000
$ 800 $6,000 |
$1,600
$ 0 $ 0 |
Ford did not specify if a price cut would come to the company’s other incredibly popular EV offerings, including the Ford F-150 Lightning and the E Transit. Still, with production increases already underway for both models, a similar price cut could be possible in the near future. This is only compounded by the fact that Ford is closer than ever to securing its own battery supply through its partnership with SK ON. This partnership could result in reduced battery and (ultimately) vehicle costs.
“We are not going to cede ground to anyone. We are producing more EVs to reduce customer wait times, offering competitive pricing, and working to create an ownership experience that is second to none,” said Marin Gjaja, Chief Customer Officer of Ford Model e. “Our customers are at the center of everything we do – as we continue to build thrilling and exciting electric vehicles, we will continue to push the boundaries to make EVs more accessible for everybody.”
Ford CEO Jim Farley had similarly positive comments on the price cut, noting the goal of making EVs “more accessible.”
At @Ford, we want to make EVs more accessible, so we’re increasing #MustangMachE production & reducing prices across the Mach-E lineup. Scaling will shorten customer wait times. And with higher production, we’re reducing costs, which allows us share these savings with customers.
— Jim Farley (@jimfarley98) January 30, 2023
While this aggressive price cut is great news for consumers and fantastic news for the EV market that looks to overtake gas vehicle sales as soon as possible, perhaps current owners will be most affected by the price cut.
The best example of this externality is already on display in the used Tesla market, where current sellers have found their vehicles undercut by cheaper new offerings from Tesla. This price bubble was bound to burst sometime or another, and sellers have been caught unprepared and may be forced to take a rare loss on their Tesla vehicle.
Looking at Ford Mustang Mach-Es currently on the market, sellers are in for a similarly rude awakening. Some Mach-Es are currently on the used market for as much as $10,000 over sticker, with the average used Mach-E only price equivalent to the new price set by Ford.
As EVs continue to decrease in price over the next couple of months and years, no doubt used EVs will follow as competitive manufacturer prices force the market downward. Hopefully, these combined factors will mean that more and more people can get into electric vehicles sooner than previously anticipated.
What do you think of the article? Do you have any comments, questions, or concerns? Shoot me an email at william@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @WilliamWritin. If you have news tips, email us at tips@teslarati.com!
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
