Skip to main content

Ford Mustang Mach-E Leaked (post #7)

Ford Mustang Mach-E Leaked (post #7)





Hoovey thanks for all the info. I have to think Ford has a winner here. I'm not thrilled by the huge video screen ala Tesla. In fact, if I didn't know better I'd think the interior is from a Tesla. I saw in another post the door handles are quite unique. They are hidden on the top of the door. I think the Tesla interior is way better than a Mustangs. I worry about the Ford software though as they haven't proven they can build good infotainment. Maybe they should have designed something a little less polarizing than the Tesla interior though. I think this will sell way better than the E-Tron and ID cross given its price points and performance. Very disappointing they are whoring the legendary Mustang name. This is no Mustang, not even in the slightest sense. It's a jacked up Tesla fighter, and a nice one at that.





Just leave the damn Mustang history out of it. Weak marketing decisions show a level of desperateness. Very disappointing they are whoring the legendary Mustang name. This is no Mustang, not even in the slightest sense. It's a jacked up Tesla fighter, and a nice one at that. Just leave the damn Mustang history out of it. Weak marketing decisions show a level of desperateness. Agreed. And why does Ford think the Mustang name will attract EV buyers? I just dont understand the move. Looks a lot better with bigger wheels. I think it's a somewhat odd choice to use the Mustang name, though I get it. I think this looks pretty good. Very disappointing they are whoring the legendary Mustang name. This is no Mustang, not even in the slightest sense. It's a jacked up Tesla fighter, and a nice one at that. Just leave the damn Mustang history out of it. Weak marketing decisions show a level of desperateness. Those protruding screens look stupid as heck why are auto makers doing this? I would prefer it was designed properly like the Model S or how Audi does it although I'm not a fan of 3 or more screens. But at least it looks integrated and clean.





It's pretty simple; if they think the car won't be ready until mid/late 2020, it just may not be ready for the '19 LA Show, even if some customers are antsy to see the actual car revealed. Rushing the car out for introduction is a much worse mistake than delaying to get it right. I see your point. There is definitely something holding back the Bronco. If it is supposedly built off the Ranger platform, then it should easier to put together. Taking this long seems to be at odds as the SUV market is hit right now. How long they have been working on it, I dont know but if it was three years, then it should probably be released. Maybe this new Bronco was slated for Mexican production and Ford has had to rethink that. No, just no. It is very simplistic to come to that conclusion, because the P375N USDM Ranger as it is, has little to no bearing on the U725 Bronco itself. On quite a few Bronco oriented discussions I've had to point this out. The T6 architecture has been heavily modified to accommodate the U725 and upcoming P703 2022/2023 Ranger, plus other products.





It has not been easy to put together like you are trying to claim. Genuine plans for a new Bronco date back 5 years. Not only did it require a totally new tophat, but also a practically all new T6. Mexican production has never been a consideration so I don't know where that theory came from, unlike the case with the smaller C2-bases CX430 (Escape relation). Nothing holding it back. Ford is dotting i's and crossing t's. Just because it borrows on the Ranger's platform doesn't mean it's easy. The Bronco will be a unique BOF SUV with excellent off-roading prowess. The fact they are entering the Bronco R prototype in the Baja 1000 means they are calibrating suspension and lessons learned that will translate into the production model. Ford has already announced a Spring unveiling, so folks need to hold tight nbd. December. I can PM you with more details, but not so much in public view.(Debate Forum would favor such privacy as well) You got mostly right, but the P375 is old news in general.





2023 Ranger has been frozen for production now, but you won't see it for awhile. It will launch in 2 years, borrowing from U725 heavily. Sorry, I don't agree with your logic. It's easy for Ford to slap a crude Bronco "body" on a baja vehicle, and use it for marketing purposes to get fans like yourself excited about the product. But if I were a Ford designer, I'd want the consumer version as close to perfect before the camo comes off. You got it Tex, but the design department has nothing to do with U725 core development anymore. That ended last year of course, with only small "support" aspects much of this year. From final styling approval to early 2021 launch, will come just under 3 years. Are key people trying to rush it in some ways? Yes, but quality must win out with this one. The new 2020 Explorer was a 2015-2016 design, from small clays and CADs, into 1:1 FAA stage mockup approved in 2016 under Mark Fields. Problems still happened anyway with first units built from May 6th on. These have to be done very well. Last edited by Carmaker1; 11-08-19 at 02:17 PM. Excellent informative posts Carmaker1. Thank you for brining clarity to any misinformation I posted.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Integrated Control Panel (FCDIM)

Integrated Control Panel (FCDIM) Diagnostic Trouble Code (DTC) Index Integrated Control Panel (FCDIM) CAUTION: Diagnosis by substitution from a donor vehicle is NOT acceptable. Substitution of control modules does not guarantee confirmation of a fault and may also cause additional faults in the vehicle being checked and/or the donor vehicle. CAUTION: When probing connectors to take measurements in the course of the pinpoint tests, use the adaptor kit, part number 3548-1358-00. 2012 Jaguar XJ (X351) V8-5.0L SC   284 NOTE: If the control module or a component is suspect and the vehicle remains under manufacturer warranty, refer to the Warranty Policy and Procedures manual (section B1.2), or determine if any prior approval programme is in operation, prior to the installation of a new module/component. NOTE: Generic scan tools may not read the codes listed, or may read only 5-digit codes. Match the 5 digits from the scan tool to the first 5 digits of the 7-digit code listed

Adaptive Damping Module (SUMB)

Adaptive Damping Module (SUMB) Diagnostic Trouble Code (DTC) Index Adaptive Damping Module (SUMB) CAUTION: Diagnosis by substitution from a donor vehicle is NOT acceptable. Substitution of control modules does not guarantee confirmation of a fault and may also cause additional faults in the vehicle being checked and/or the donor vehicle. CAUTION: When probing connectors to take measurements in the course of the pinpoint tests, use the adaptor kit, part number 3548-1358-00. NOTE: If the control module or a component is suspect and the vehicle remains under manufacturer warranty, refer to the Warranty Policy and Procedures manual (section B1.2), or determine if any prior approval programme is in operation, prior to the installation of a new module/component. NOTE: Generic scan tools may not read the codes listed, or may read only 5-digit codes. Match the 5 digits from the scan tool to the first 5 digits of the 7-digit code listed to identify the fault (the last 2 digits give extra