[HN Gopher] Ford's electric Mach-E outsold the gas-powered Musta...
___________________________________________________________________
Ford's electric Mach-E outsold the gas-powered Mustang in 2024
Author : zfg
Score : 55 points
Date : 2025-01-11 18:31 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (electrek.co)
(TXT) w3m dump (electrek.co)
| thot_experiment wrote:
| The gas car is an impractical vanity car, the electric one is a
| small SUV. Why is this comparison interesting?
| linotype wrote:
| Probably because of how much grief the Mach E got when it was
| first launched. "That's not a mustang", "it's going to flop",
| etc.
| bigfatkitten wrote:
| It's an overall decent car even if Ford gave it a stupid
| name.
| dotancohen wrote:
| They could have called it the GT-64, seeing how it is 64
| inches tall and out-accelerates the GT-40.
| bigstrat2003 wrote:
| I mean... it's _not_ a Mustang. It has absolutely none of the
| Mustang ethos, and it was just an attempt by Ford to bolster
| the marketing of their new product. I think it was perfectly
| reasonable for people to object to that nonsense bit of
| branding.
| RajT88 wrote:
| Yeah see, I do not even desire to have a mustang but
| appreciate the few V6 models I have driven. They do not go
| anywhere particularly fast, but they do so with great noise
| and style.
|
| The idea of an electric mustang is not a non-starter.
| Electric vehicles can be fast as hell, if not terribly
| noisy.
|
| But the fact that the electric mustang looks more like a
| Nissan Rogue than a Mustang car always threw me.
|
| I guess my big take-away hearing that the eMustang sold
| well is that most people do not care much about cars
| compared to car guys.
| timewizard wrote:
| > how much grief
|
| Otherwise known as "market feedback." If only the company
| processed it correctly they might have been able to convince
| people to fork over medium 5 figures to get one.
| linotype wrote:
| I didn't say it was right or wrong. Just explained why it's
| surprising that it's sold more to some people.
| bluedino wrote:
| It flopped
| dralley wrote:
| We're in a thread about how it's outselling the original.
| Regardless of the silliness of the branding, it clearly
| didn't flop.
| bluedino wrote:
| Right, but only recent quarters because of incentives.
| It's been a disaster otherwise.
|
| https://www.macheforum.com/site/threads/slowest-selling-
| ev-i...
|
| _the Ford Mach E is now the slowest selling EV in US and
| 3rd slowest selling vehicle of any kind with a 362 market
| day supply on dealer lots._
|
| https://qz.com/ford-mustang-mach-e-sales-price-cut-
| discount-...
|
| _the increase in Mach-E sales didn't really start until
| late February when it announced price cuts of up to
| $8,100 on leftover 2023 Mach-Es. When the discounts hit,
| demand skyrocketed. Since then sales of the electric
| crossover have nearly tripled._
| jader201 wrote:
| I'm rooting for EV's over ICE cars all the way (I own one), but
| I agree -- I always found it a bit weird/misleading that the
| Mach-E carries the "Mustang" name, when they have so little in
| common.
|
| I feel like it's just marketing to the "cool" demographic,
| similar to how Tesla is (or at least used to be) a big status
| symbol.
|
| These two cars are targeting a completely different demographic
| and should not be compared/considered in competition.
|
| > _Who said Ford's electric crossover SUV wasn't a real
| Mustang? The Mach-E outsold the gas-powered Ford Mustang for
| the first time last year as one of the top-selling EVs in the
| US._
|
| Just because the vehicle carries the name and outsold the
| original Mustang still does not make it a "real Mustang".
|
| Again, I'm glad it's selling well (and also glad it's selling
| better than the Mustang). I just don't think the two vehicles
| can be compared.
| dotancohen wrote:
| Real Mustang owner here, at least if you consider the '69
| Mustang and the '72 Mustang to be Real Mustangs. I don't have
| them anymore, but they are forever burned in my driving
| habits.
|
| What makes a Real Mustang? Head-turning looks? Acceleration?
| The Mach-E has both in spades. It's a new implementation of
| the Mustang formula, but it works. It out-Mustangs any
| parameter that a Real Mustang owner will tell you is the
| essence of his beloved pony car.
| nytesky wrote:
| Pony cars have been dying for decades.
|
| GenZ isnt interested in learning to drive AT ALL. I'm sure most
| young adults are most interested in a comfortable spacious box
| with lots of screens. Hence all cars tending towards SUVs.
|
| Teslas are famous for their torque, which is expected with
| electric engines, but how are their handling and brakes --
| sports car like or more luxury SUV floating on a car? I grew up
| driving a Trans Am (dreamed of a KITT!), and the brakes and the
| grip on the road was awesome. I've never driven a BMW or
| Porsche, but I expect they are even more gripping. But I think
| most drivers today aren't into that, and more interested in
| having the car drive for them.
|
| Hence mustang was a goner no matter what.
| throwaway48476 wrote:
| Pony cars are probably correlated with military recruitment.
| Cumpiler69 wrote:
| _> GenZ isnt interested in learning to drive AT ALL._
|
| Only those in dense urban areas with great public transport.
| timewizard wrote:
| > GenZ isnt interested in learning to drive AT ALL.
|
| The statistics do not bear this out. In 2012 41% of people
| under 19 had a license. In 2022 49% of people under 19 had a
| license. However, it should be noted, that the total number
| of people under 19 has decreased since then, which is a
| normal population phenomenon. Failing to account for this can
| produce false trends in the analysis.
|
| > Hence all cars tending towards SUVs.
|
| I think government regulations and worldwide markets have
| more to do with this than the imputed preferences of a single
| generation in the US.
|
| > But I think most drivers today aren't into that
|
| I think most drivers have never been into that, as I think
| most people see their car as a utility, and not a high
| performance entertainment option.
|
| > Hence mustang was a goner no matter what.
|
| I think producing a 315 horse power 10 speed "EcoBoost"
| compromise to get to a whopping 26mpg was the death knell.
| It's a car that has no practical value in today's market. I
| don't exactly know who it's made for other than ignorant
| first time buyers.
|
| EDIT: Since the site thinks I am "posting too fast."
|
| https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2012/
|
| https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2022/
|
| "Licensed drivers, by sex and percentage in each age group"
| echoangle wrote:
| > The statistics do not bear this out. In 2012 41% of
| people under 19 had a license. In 2022 49% of people under
| 19 had a license.
|
| Maybe not Gen Z specifically but the general trend
| absolutely exists.
|
| ,,The percentage of 19-year-olds with a driver's license
| dropped steadily from 87.3% in 1983 to 68.7% in 2022,
| according to most recent data from the Federal Highway
| Administration." https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/teens-
| drivers-license-car-sale...
|
| This also shows different numbers compared to your comment,
| where did you get those values?
| philjohn wrote:
| Well when you look at the cost of insurance, learning to
| drive, and cars themselves, when housing is more
| expensive than ever, and many jobs accessible to 19 year
| olds don't pay particularly well, is this surprising?
|
| The assertion that it's "Gen Z don't want to learn to
| drive" might be wrong, could it instead be "Gen Z can't
| afford to drive"?
|
| My 17 year old son just passed his test in the UK (in a
| manual, none of that automatic rubbish!) and the costs
| are astronomical, and out of reach to many.
| echoangle wrote:
| Right, I wouldn't agree that they necessarily aren't
| interested, I was just clarifying that something is
| causing them to get less driver licenses, and this is
| reflected in statistics.
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| As a middle of the road millenial I only learned to drive
| recently and drive only as much as I absolutely have to. I
| don't find it enjoyable unless there's practically no traffic
| on my route, which is often not the case.
|
| My preferred type of car is a small, efficient, highly
| practical hatch like the Honda Fit but those largely aren't
| sold in the US anymore.
| dotancohen wrote:
| Then you're clearly not the Mustang demographic.
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| No doubt, but it helps drive home OP's point about the
| Mustang demographic being small and continuing to shrink.
| wakawaka28 wrote:
| How have you been living without a car? Do you live in a
| huge city or something?
| bluedino wrote:
| Yup.
|
| Camaro was canceled last year.
| pkulak wrote:
| Good riddance to people who think they "know how to drive".
| If they did that stuff on private tracks, fine, but in my
| experience they prefer to use the public road network, which
| is obviously built and managed for transportation only.
| nxm wrote:
| In other news, Porsche Mecans and Cayennes vastly outsell 911s
| randcraw wrote:
| The insane price tags on 911s might have something to do with
| that.
| philjohn wrote:
| It's more than to buy one of the super rare models (GT3 RS)
| you need to buy other cars first ... and at the moment, that
| means a Taycan.
|
| They're damn nice cars though, IMHO.
| Drunk_Engineer wrote:
| Ok, but which earns more profit? Ford's EV division overall loses
| $5+ billion per year.
|
| https://www.automotivedive.com/news/fords-ev-losses-q2-earni...
| thebruce87m wrote:
| https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/04/24/business/ford-earnings-ev...
|
| > The losses go far beyond the cost of building and selling
| those 10,000 cars, according to Ford. Instead the losses
| include hundreds of millions being spent on research and
| development of the next generation of EVs for Ford. Those
| investments are years away from paying off.
|
| So the "loss" includes R&D.
| passwordoops wrote:
| I'm looking forward to the day when share buybacks are also
| counted as losses
| umeshunni wrote:
| What do you mean? They're already expenses on the balance
| sheet.
| linotype wrote:
| I've given up on explaining this to people. They know that's
| why there are "losses", they're just being disingenuous.
| zdragnar wrote:
| That's missing the forest for the trees. They're losing money
| on every vehicle they sell. There needs to be a lot more R&D
| to get the vehicles to a price point that consumers will
| purchase them and they can actually make a profit. Thus far,
| their R&D has been a net loss for the company.
|
| I'm sure at least a good portion of it will pay off
| eventually, but there's no guarantee of how much, or how long
| it will take.
| thebruce87m wrote:
| > They're losing money on every vehicle they sell.
|
| Unless I'm missing it, neither article shows the
| profit/loss of manufacturing the vehicle vs sales revenue
| of the vehicle itself, so we can't know that. Even if it's
| true, it's not unusual when bringing up a new product as
| you optimise for scale.
|
| > There needs to be a lot more R&D to get the vehicles to a
| price point that consumers will purchase them and they can
| actually make a profit.
|
| Does there? Maybe all of the retooling and new assembly
| lines are done, all the designs are finished? Maybe not and
| they still have R&D budget left? They are also not
| operating in isolation - If another company comes out with
| a cheaper battery then Ford can just buy it with minimal
| R&D, they don't have to invent everything themselves.
|
| > Thus far, their R&D has been a net loss for the company.
|
| I mean, that's R&D? It's an investment. The alternative is
| to do nothing and end up like Nokia. Even if they are
| losing money on every vehicle, "shipping fast" is better
| than not shipping at all and they can control the numbers.
| Most people want the 2nd or 3rd gen when all of the bugs
| have been worked out, so having units on the road lets you
| learn what doesn't work.
| jacoblambda wrote:
| I'm not sure if that's necessarily a fair assessment as
| Ford's laid out plan to get from the current 40% loss to 8%
| profit is pretty reasonable.
|
| Of that 40 percentage points, 20 of them are directly
| attributable to economies of scale. As they sell additional
| units those costs will amortize out. i.e. the more they
| sell the less they lose.
|
| They expect to pick up another 15 points via engineering
| changes that will unify a lot of parts between the
| different product lines. They apparently initially just
| focused on shipping the vehicles so each model has a lot of
| bespoke parts that could semi-trivially be reworked to de-
| duplicate them between product lines.
|
| That gets you down to 5% losses. The bulk of the remaining
| 13 points they expect to pick up via battery design
| improvements and cost reductions in their supply chain.
|
| And their stated deadline for this is the end of 2026 so
| it's not exactly like they intend this to take ages. Rather
| they expect to achieve this within a handful of model
| revisions.
| mulmen wrote:
| Hard to say. Profit per sale doesn't tell the whole story. Mach
| E and F150 Lightning help Ford offset the CAFE contribution of
| their high margin gas guzzling cars and trucks. How much would
| they be making on Mustangs if they had to pay CAFE penalties?
|
| I'd be interested to know the profit/CAFE for each Ford model
| and how much are they spending on R&D for EV vs ICE.
| bluedino wrote:
| Only because of the massive discounts and incentives. People were
| able to get 8-11k off and 0% financing.
|
| Easy way to send sales up 30%
| Temporary_31337 wrote:
| Weird comparison as all they share is a name but still
| interesting to see how uneducated the car buyers are. EV Mustang
| is in my honest opinion the worst EV I have driven and I include
| golf carts and mobility scooters in this category. Yet it still
| outsells and ICE car which says something.
| rhelz wrote:
| // EV Mustang is in my honest opinion the worst EV I have
| driven //
|
| I don't doubt it but that just makes its sales all the more
| impressive. (One of?) the worst electric vehicle on the market
| _still_ was better than a classic mustang.
| rqtwteye wrote:
| I never understood why the Mach-E is called Mustang. They are
| totally different cars for different use.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-01-11 23:00 UTC)