Mustang Mach E

[USAFS197]

I dunno. Ford says this is a Mustang. Kinda makes me think that this is indeed a Mustang. Ford is the one that decides what is and isn't a Mustang. You know, since they're the ones that created the model in the first place.

I, for one, am happy that they had the nerve to come out with a vehicle like this knowing damn well that it would receive so much hatred from purists. While I think that they may slowly rip the bandaid off for their Mustang coupe, I believe that they'll be hybrids and eventually full electric vehicles in the future. I suspect that all of our vehicles will be and I welcome it wholeheartedly.

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Based on registrations of C7 Corvettes since they originally went on sale the second half of 2013 until Dec 31, 2020...

So, a couple observations...

• I don't know the full context of Tadge's statement(s) about what MT take rate was, but it is trending downward towards 20% on base Stingrays
• In conversations I've been privy to, Tadge's main reason stated for no MT is the structural integrity of the platform, and the fact that the center tunnel is part of that structure. Adding an MT would compromise the structural integrity because of holes that would have to be placed to accommodate the shifter and cables.
• The volume of MT was significantly reduced from a high of 11,015 in 2014 to 4,437 in 2019. 2020 was only 741, but that was new old stock. 2019 models sold in 2020. GM isn't about to tool up a new MT for 5,000 units. Porsche might. But they operate on a completely different business model.

**Fixed**

Overall take rate for C7s start to finish was still over 26%, with the first year over 35%.

Unless you are terrible at marketing, that's a huge amount of customers to alienate.

I have driven DCTs - AMG, BMW M, Porsche PDK, and been in a C8 as well. DCTs are great, fast shifting, and perform wonderfully.

BUT - they are boring after 5 mins and you don't even bother touching the paddles anymore.

All my sports cars are manuals, and always will be so long as I am physically capable...I've been an ME Corvette advocate longer than anyone I know, being a huge Duntov fan - so GM lost a C8 customer in me when they decided not to option a manual.

The point is not that DCTs are bad, the point is losing options for sports cars is not great for enthusiasts.

As for the center tunnel - incorrect assumptions as no Corvette since C4 has any center or torque tube holes or penetrations for a shifter. The same can be applied to the C8. Cables run under interior trim is simple, as in Porsche, with no need for even the smallest hole in the tunnel.

Footwell excuse was quickly debunked by pedal measurements of the C8 footwell, as well as the availability of a RHD version which places the accelerator further towards the sill on the driver RH side where most said a clutch peddle couldn't go on the LH side.

Last comment is still comparing last year of a Gen sales to first year of sales for C8...that's not apples to apples at all. Corvette manual take rates have historically shown high take rates (especially among base models) in the first year, with a known taper down as the base model ages and the enthusiasts all pine for the Z models (hence their higher manual take rate).

[detamble13]

Originally Posted by USAFS197

I dunno. Ford says this is a Mustang. Kinda makes me think that this is indeed a Mustang. Ford is the one that decides what is and isn't a Mustang. You know, since they're the ones that created the model in the first place.

I, for one, am happy that they had the nerve to come out with a vehicle like this knowing damn well that it would receive so much hatred from purists. While I think that they may slowly rip the bandaid off for their Mustang coupe, I believe that they'll be hybrids and eventually full electric vehicles in the future. I suspect that all of our vehicles will be and I welcome it wholeheartedly.

Of course Ford can, it doesn't mean that they should and it certainly doesn't mean it will be accepted in the Mustang community. The same community that made the nameplate iconic.

They didn't have nerve in calling this a Mustang, the correct word would be capitalistic. They will sell more because it has the name Mustang. This was a compliance vehicle until they called it Mustang and then it had to perform. The Mach E has suckled off the teet of the Mustangs success weakening the nameplate and catering to those who don't really care about cars.

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by detamble13

Of course Ford can, it doesn't mean that they should and it certainly doesn't mean it will be accepted in the Mustang community. The same community that made the nameplate iconic.

They didn't have nerve in calling this a Mustang, the correct word would be capitalistic. They will sell more because it has the name Mustang. This was a compliance vehicle until they called it Mustang and then it had to perform. The Mach E has suckled off the teet of the Mustangs success weakening the nameplate and catering to those who don't really care about cars.

Similar to the 80's Nova, or any FWD Impala or Malibu...absolutely trashing a classic name in the hopes of sales. It will happen because the gen Pop loves anything new and shiny, especially appliance vehicles that can handle most daily duties. Look at the new Blazer...

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Number 3

And considering a DCT (IMHO) is the far better choice (basically an automated manual with better controls than my right arm and left leg), manual penetration would likely drop even further.

Sure, a DCT may well be the far better choice when racing (or driving like you were racing). But that doesn't make a DCT the better transmission choice in an overall sense for everybody.

It's not always just about the performance numbers, y'know . . . I'd really rather have to keep working on getting myself better than have "better" handed to me on a silver platter by taking some of my involvement out of it all. Hell, at 73 I'll settle for having to work hard enough so I don't lose a step.


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

Charge extra for the manual. It's not as crazy as you think. Dodge does it for the Challenger. Manual is V8 only and costs a grand more than the auto. I would still have picked it.

Exactly.

I've been considering the idea of a MT becoming the extra-cost option for at least a dozen years already. The money gets spent just once, but the satisfaction persists for as long as you own the car. A total no-brainer.

I buy the car to drive it myself. No manual, no care, no purchase. Simple as that for me and a few manual fans.

Norm

[Wyzz Kydd]

Originally Posted by USAFS197

I dunno. Ford says this is a Mustang. Kinda makes me think that this is indeed a Mustang. Ford is the one that decides what is and isn't a Mustang. You know, since they're the ones that created the model in the first place.

I, for one, am happy that they had the nerve to come out with a vehicle like this knowing damn well that it would receive so much hatred from purists. While I think that they may slowly rip the bandaid off for their Mustang coupe, I believe that they'll be hybrids and eventually full electric vehicles in the future. I suspect that all of our vehicles will be and I welcome it wholeheartedly.

It's their car, they can call it what they want. Just because someone pisses down my leg and then tells me it's raining doesn't mean I believe that the wetness on my leg is water.

The consumer will decide if this is a Mustang. I for one have zero use for a vehicle like that, though I do like 'real' mustangs. Does the fact that they're debasing the brand make me less likely to buy a real mustang. For sure.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by Number 3

My guess is they are toying with making Mustang a brand not just a model. Same with Bronco.

GM has on and off toyed with doing that with Corvette.

It's all about the $$$

It's pretty much decided already. Mustang and Bronco are brands. If you go on Ford's website, they now have separate sections for Mustang and for Bronco

Originally Posted by 3.8TransAM

I won't argue you there for sure, but they keep selling because of those backdoors and trunk.


GM was stupid as they built the F body for 35 years with a semi-usable rear seat and usable trunk storage for 35 years before abandoning that and now look what is happening....


Everyone wants to justify it, but us V8, ZL1 and 1LE owners aren't the ones who keep the car alive its the masses.

This guy gets it.

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

They have flat out said as much. F150, Mustang, and Bronco are sub brands and will all have multiple variants. They said that there would be a 4 door Mustang. Not sure if this is it or if the rumored 2028 Mustang EV will be a 4-dr.

Remember back in the good ole days when damn near every Oldsmobile model had Cutlass in the name? Cutlass Supreme, Cutlass Classic, Cutlass Calais, Cutlass Ciera, etc.

Sure, calling the Mach E a Mustang has pissed off a lot of Mustang owners. Let me explain why Ford doesn’t or shouldn’t care. Who is the target market for Mach E? It is NOT current Mustang owners. It is not future Mustang coupe owners. It’s people who would love to own a Mustang but can’t because of kids and/or not having discretionary income to spend on an extra vehicle. So, if you can be a vehicle that handles all your gotta do stuff and has a fairly sporty appearance, why not? Worked for Cayenne and Macan. Even for Jaguars utilities.

The difference there is they didn't call the Cayenne a 911. They were smart enough to use all of the styling but not the name. I think that's what ford should have done, just used the styling and just call it Mach-E without the Mustang part. Now as long as they still offer the traditional mustang it's not as big of a deal but I understand why people are upset. they are worried that the traditional Mustang will disappear because of the Mach-E. As long as there is a Mustang Coupe/Convertible Mustang sub brand doesn't bother me that much

Originally Posted by Number 3

What is your take rate number if you take out Z06 and ZR1?

Also, I realize it's the internet but it sounds like a LOT of people went to a LOT of trouble to prove Tadge was wrong. Not sure why.

Even IF it is 29% (which my guess is you cook the books to get your answer and not the guy who actually tried to get a manual), that's way too low when a DCT is far better for performance, you just give up moving your right arm.

I am reading into your earlier comment that it was Stingray only so that means to get YOUR number you are adding Z06 and ZR1, which were likely higher.

Regardless, if I give you your number you now need to prove that Tadge must therefore have lied about not getting a supplier willing to develop a new manual transmission for that volume.

And with the number of manuals dropping across the board year over year, Tadge is responsible for managing the business in 2024 and beyond. With transmission suppliers knowing it's going to continue to drop, do you think they are willing to pay to develop a transmission with ever dropping penetration? Probably no to that.

Anyway, I've worked Tadge and trust his statement, even if you can spin it with context. In the end, the statement is more that they couldn't find anyone to work with at the projected volume not what he said the volume was. In my business we call that getting "no quoted", or worse, "I'll quote but here is my price to do it". Both stop a business case in it's tracks.

total sidebar to this whole argument I just find it funny that whenever Al O spoke of anything he walked on water here but when Tadge says something people here go crazy and don't believe a word of it lol

And to who ever brought up the CT4/5 Blackwings getting manuals why couldn't the C8. I am pretty sure those use the TR6060 a transmission that they could pull of the shelf

[90503]

3 speed manual on the column, standard...4 on the floor or automatic, optional...lol

The new Cadillac Blackwings have a traditional (?) manual as standard, automatic is optional...

What about the Mach-E? Does it even have a transmission?...lol

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 90503

3 speed manual on the column, standard...4 on the floor or automatic, optional...lol

The new Cadillac Blackwings have a traditional (?) manual as standard, automatic is optional...

What about the Mach-E? Does it even have a transmission?...lol

I believe the Porsche and Audi (same architecture) have 2 speed transmissions. The rest are just running an electric motor.

[90503]

I wouldn't give up on the idea of a manual C8 just yet. What if a vendor does show up that is willing to build one? Then what? Problem solved?

At some point, it should become a viable option to have a manual in a Vette. Pretty sad they are gone regardless of the take rate. Look at the enthusiasm and hype Cadillac manuals got for the Blackwing-V. Everyone was pleasantly surprised. And thats for a Cadillac.

Imagine the attention announcing a manual for the C8 Vette would get. The pent up demand for a true manual will only increase over time. The forbidden fruit ploy, so to speak. I don't think it's something gm would want to just let go and have never happen...My $.02.

As for the Mustang Mach-E it doesn't matter what column they put it in on their web-site, they still call it a Mustang and associate it with all the heritage of the current and past Mustangs. Nothing could be farther from the truth. There has never been any EV, SUV heritage in the Mustang that created the pony car class of cars. It is total sham labeling.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

**Fixed**

...
As for the center tunnel - incorrect assumptions as no Corvette since C4 has any center or torque tube holes or penetrations for a shifter. The same can be applied to the C8. Cables run under interior trim is simple, as in Porsche, with no need for even the smallest hole in the tunnel.

Not sure what this has to do with anything. C8 is its own platform design and draws nothing from C1-7 in terms of the elements of its platform design. If Tadge and Ed tell me the tunnel under the center console is structural, I’m gonna believe it’s structural. They have both told me that directly. No need for me to argue otherwise.

...

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

**Fixed**

Last comment is still comparing last year of a Gen sales to first year of sales for C8...that's not apples to apples at all. Corvette manual take rates have historically shown high take rates (especially among base models) in the first year, with a known taper down as the base model ages and the enthusiasts all pine for the Z models (hence their higher manual take rate).

Just to be clear, these are C7 volumes only. It’s registration data, so the numbers that appear in 2020 are 2019 models purchased and registered in 2020.

[Big Lebowski]

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

**Fixed**

Overall take rate for C7s start to finish was still over 26%, with the first year over 35%.

Unless you are terrible at marketing, that's a huge amount of customers to alienate.

I have driven DCTs - AMG, BMW M, Porsche PDK, and been in a C8 as well. DCTs are great, fast shifting, and perform wonderfully.

BUT - they are boring after 5 mins and you don't even bother touching the paddles anymore.

All my sports cars are manuals, and always will be so long as I am physically capable...I've been an ME Corvette advocate longer than anyone I know, being a huge Duntov fan - so GM lost a C8 customer in me when they decided not to option a manual.

The point is not that DCTs are bad, the point is losing options for sports cars is not great for enthusiasts.

As for the center tunnel - incorrect assumptions as no Corvette since C4 has any center or torque tube holes or penetrations for a shifter. The same can be applied to the C8. Cables run under interior trim is simple, as in Porsche, with no need for even the smallest hole in the tunnel.

Footwell excuse was quickly debunked by pedal measurements of the C8 footwell, as well as the availability of a RHD version which places the accelerator further towards the sill on the driver RH side where most said a clutch peddle couldn't go on the LH side.

Last comment is still comparing last year of a Gen sales to first year of sales for C8...that's not apples to apples at all. Corvette manual take rates have historically shown high take rates (especially among base models) in the first year, with a known taper down as the base model ages and the enthusiasts all pine for the Z models (hence their higher manual take rate).

Agree!

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Based on registrations of C7 Corvettes since they originally went on sale the second half of 2013 until Dec 31, 2020...

So, a couple observations...

• I don't know the full context of Tadge's statement(s) about what MT take rate was, but it is trending downward towards 15%
• In conversations I've been privy to, Tadge's main reason stated for no MT is the structural integrity of the platform, and the fact that the center tunnel is part of that structure. Adding an MT would compromise the structural integrity because of holes that would have to be placed to accommodate the shifter and cables.
• The volume of MT was significantly reduced from a high of 11,015 in 2014 to 4,437 in 2019. 2020 was only 741, but that was new old stock. 2019 models sold in 2020. GM isn't about to tool up a new MT for 5,000 units. Porsche might. But they operate on a completely different business model.

The numbers are what they are. 26% or 29% over the LIFE of the C7 is nothing to sneeze at regardless of trending. I could argue that the trend was influenced due to a higher % of later C7 model years were dealer ordered, as opposed to consumer/owner built which would explain the downward trajectory ...but I won't go there.

My point is Tadge repeatedly used a 15% manual transmission take rate on the C7 as justification for the elimination of the Manual trans on the C8. Not 26 or 29%. Why? Because doing so fit the narrative. This is flatly wrong and intentionally misleading, and I'm still not sure why.

Quote the correct take rate and say a manual doesn't fit where we are taking the brand. Done.

Originally Posted by Number 3

So your 29% is “over the life of”? You have to look at the trend and where it would be to develop the business case. You are coming across as all that matters is yo7 can prove Tadge wrong. No idea where the value is in that.

Skipping completely by the point NO ONE WANTED TO WORK WITH GM AT THE LOW VOLUMES TO DEVELOP A MANUAL TRANSMISSION FOR THE C8.

Oh and is anyone in the world offering a manual with a hybrid and EV propulsion system? Asking for a friend.

Yes, my argument has been "over the life" of the C7. I never said otherwise. I'm not skipping anything or trying to build a "business case" for anything. Again, you are regurgitating GM talking points that do not change my original point; Tadge intentionally misquoted the C7 manual trans take rate.

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Cost of a Porsche vs cost of the Corvette?

It seems like every other manufacturer is capable of doing what it wants but GM can’t.

5.2 FPC V8, DCT and 760 horsepower in Mustangs.

High performance full size trucks.

Bringing back their historic nameplates and actually honoring their history.

Multiple engines making 700+ horsepower across the lineup.

Offering transmission options people actually want.


Meanwhile, GM is building what bland, generic cross overs and investing in Cadillac no one buys. Thankfully, the Corvette has been isolated from their decision making, for the most part.