Connect with us

News

Ford’s Mustang Mach E is a valuable Tesla Model Y ally in the crossover segment

(Credit: Ford Motor Company and Tesla Inc.)

Published

on

With Ford’s release of the Mustang Mach E all-electric crossover, it seems like Tesla is not alone anymore in its efforts at transitioning the mainstream auto market towards sustainability. The Mach E’s combination of price, performance, and range, not only makes it a legitimate and honest effort on Ford’s part, but it also makes the EV a serious threat to mainstream crossover SUVs. 

The Ford Mustang Mach E is an all-electric vehicle that will place it in the same segment as the upcoming Tesla Model Y. The two vehicles are priced in pretty much the same ballpark, with the Mach E’s standard range RWD version starting at around $43,900 in comparison to the Standard Range RWD Model Y’s $39,000. That’s a $4,900 difference, but Ford still has the full $7,500 tax credit, which makes the Mach E actually less expensive than the Model Y. 

Looking at the price and performance figures of the Mustang Mach E, it is evident that the vehicle is meant to be competitive. The entry-level “Select” variant, for one, will be offered at both RWD and AWD versions, and both will be equipped with a 75.7kWh “standard range” battery pack. The RWD variant will have a range of 230 miles and a 0-60 mph time of about 6-7 seconds, while the AWD version will have a range of 210 miles and be about a second quicker from 0-60. The Mach E Select variants will be shipping in Spring 2021

https://twitter.com/Ford/status/1196257548896071680?s=20

Following the Select variants is the “Premium” trim, which starts at $50,600 and ships late 2020, just a few months later than the Model Y’s estimated Summer 2020 release. Premium Mach Es can be equipped with either a standard range pack or an extended range battery, and RWD or AWD. With this, a Premium Mach E could have a range anywhere between 210 miles per charge for the standard range AWD trim, all the way to 300 miles per charge for the extended range with RWD. AWD versions of the Mach E Premium trim can hit 60 mph in the over 5 seconds, while the RWD versions will hit highway speeds in the mid-6s. 

While this may seem like a lot of options already, there is still more. The “California Route 1” Mustang Mach E will be arriving in early 2021 for $52,400. This configuration is designed for long travel. As such, it is equipped with an extended range battery pack and 300 miles of range. A “First Edition” Mach E will also be offered in late 2020 with AWD and an extended range battery pack, which gives the vehicle 270 miles of range per charge. Finally, there’s the range-topping Mach E GT, which starts at $60,500, feature AWD, bigger motors, 235 miles of range, and a 0-60 mph time in the mid-3s. 

While comparisons to the Model Y will be unavoidable, it should be noted that the Ford Mustang Mach E is every bit more of a traditional crossover rival than it is a competitor for Tesla’s seven-seater. Both vehicles are aimed at the crossover SUV segment, after all, and that is a market that is so vast right now, it is practically impossible for a single automaker to dominate on its own. There is no question that the Model Y will sell in larger numbers than any of Tesla’s other cars — Elon Musk has said as much. But there is also no question that the Mach E, provided that Ford dealers do not nip the market’s enthusiasm in the bud, will be a huge success as well. 

Advertisement
-

This is something that Tesla CEO Elon Musk highlighted in a tweet following Ford’s reveal of the Mach E. While the American automaker was mum about Tesla’s contribution to electric vehicle design and innovation, Musk nevertheless credited the carmaker for its efforts at bringing about sustainable transportation. Ford, at least in its response to Musk, seemed eager to be on board the EV transition.

And this is really the crux of the matter. The Mach E, at least specs-wise, is a serious electric car that is designed for serious users. Its Mustang name may be debated for years to come, but there is little doubt that Ford put a lot of effort into its all-electric crossover, and the results of these are far beyond that of any other legacy automaker so far. It could even be said that with the Mach E in the picture, more expensive, similar-sized all-electric EVs from other veteran automakers such as the Jaguar I-PACE are in for some tough competition. Companies with all-electric cars that are under-utilized and under-promoted like GM and its Chevy Bolt are also at risk of being considered as the final compliance cars of a bygone era.

Ford has played its hand, and it did so with a strong statement in support of all-electric vehicles. With the Mach E, Tesla is no longer alone in the electric assault on the crossover segment. The question now is, will other automakers follow suit with similarly priced and specced vehicles? The next few years will definitely be very interesting.

More information about the Ford Mustang Mach E could be accessed here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0F9Uktpgtk

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court

Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.

Published

on

By

SpaceX Terafab rendering

Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.

The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.

What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.

Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry

By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.

TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.

Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.

The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.

Continue Reading

News

NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way

NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.

Published

on

By

Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.

The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.

Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.

The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.

Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla uber bull Ron Baron says ‘the time to buy the stock is now’

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.

Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:

“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”

The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.

Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.

His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.

Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.

That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.

Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.

Continue Reading