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. 

Advertisement

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. 

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.

Advertisement

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

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.

Published

on

By

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.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.

The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.

The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Lucid denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”

Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”

Napoli said:

“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.

As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.

We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.

My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.

I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”

It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.

Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.

Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.

The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.

One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.

These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.

To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.

At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.

Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line

By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.

The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.

Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.

The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.

In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.

Continue Reading