The self-driving works very well though in a purposely limited capacity.
After driving that car and researching the economics of owning an EV, I'm squarely convinced that I'll never buy another gas-powered car again.
All MachEs were just recalled for being unfit for use, even if some body panels were misaligned on Teslas (they aren't any different from every other brand, panels gaps issue is a myth), who in this story is delivering vehicles with worse quality?
I have noticed a terrible amount of "model churn". I was looking for a used EV and there's quite a few where the manufacturer only made that range for a couple of years and then stopped.
Companies like Nissan, GM, and BMW have very mature EV tech and EV experience.
I wouldn’t jump to generalizing. I’d rather stick with the tried and true “Ford makes shitty cars.”
BMW: No
BYD: No
Ford: No
GM: Yes
Honda: Maybe
Hyundai: Yes
Merc: Maybe
Rivian: Maybe
Tata: Maybe
Toyota: No
Tesla: Yes
VAG: Yes
I'm also sensitive to loud noises and I hate it when someone rev's their engine or blasts the full bass stereo in my neighborhood. So, I get what you're saying.
However, back in the day I had a Mercury Cougar and I loved the sound of that thing. The growl it made without even pressing the gas was oddly satisfying. I can understand the appeal of loud bikes and cars even though I don't appreciate when they overdo it.
For cars it's part of the experience, not to mention that traditionally the roar level translated to performance.
it's a multi-sensory experience, like "ohm", you feel it as much as you hear it, you're made one with the machine, its power an extension of yours. it's fun, try it sometime.
For those on the other side, I agree that “all press is good press”.
The Mach E is fast enough that I kind of get it now that I've driven one. Mustangs historically are straight line cars that didn't necessarily blow your mind when cornering. Essentially all electric cars fit that mold.
And anyway the Mach E is very heavy compared to most mustangs historically, but it's suspension design is better than what most Mustangs had historically so it might be more competitive down a curvy road than expected. Most Mustangs until fairly recently had a pretty hard time dealing with mid-corner bumps and road imperfections. And the Mach E accelerates harder than the vast majority of V8 Mustangs ever built.
In the tech world we would have artificially limited the power throughput, providing no information or remedy to the customer. This seems like the right move.
While you can argue that Ford should have specced the bar correctly to start out with, I'm happy to see that this is the response. Get it back to a technician, and swap out the part, at no cost to the customer.
Just seems like shit design process to me, it sure, let’s pat them in the back for doing a mea culpa
It is possible that they did test it, but there were late software changes to reduce the power restrictions for marketing reasons. And maybe things weren't retested as much as they should be?
It could be as simple as them doing the engineering analysis, finding the potential problem, and then being overridden because someone thought it wouldn't happen in the real world.
This isn't unique to EVs either. You will find no shortage of people telling you to never buy the first model year of any vehicle if you value high reliability.
Engineering to factory is a very complex path fraught with noise from the process, and very subtle and seemingly insignificant tweaks often add up to significant problems in complex designs.
That there was a flaw in the process is not the least bit surprising or even disappointing, every single new vehicle design brought to market will have numerous tweaks and modifications or recalls over the first few years of fielding the design.
That the flaw was safety critical is unfortunate, but that a major automaker that typically handles things responsibly (with some notable historical exceptions) responded in an appropriate way is the system functioning nominally as it should.
That new companies with a more “tech” oriented approach would probably have silently pushed a performance degrading software update instead of fixing the problem is a harsh indictment of a deeply flawed engineering culture.
I wonder if the "fix" will be to sharply reduce maximum power draw and reduce charge rates, instead of replacing the under-spec'd part. That would make for a lot of unhappy customers, but they likely wouldn't have a lot of recourse.
> Another concern is just how swamped Ford's techs might be with replacing the HVBJBs in nearly 35,000 cars. The part itself is located inside of the sealed battery pack, meaning that in order to replace just the part, the 1,300-pound battery pack must be dropped from the car and opened on order to access the HVBJB. According to another user on Mach-E Forums, a high voltage battery swap takes approximately 25 hours on a warranty replacement.
They already tried the software fix. The solution will almost certainly be just replacing it with the new part that has been going into Mach-Es for the last year.
The battery is fine. The issue is the part responsible for connecting/disconnecting the high voltage battery from the rest of the car when it’s off.
The relays can overheat from high current and weld open or closed. This is more prevalent in the higher performance models. Higher external temperatures, flooring it, and DC fast charging can all be part of the equation. Hit the wrong combo at the wrong time and… you lose the lottery.
This has been known for quite a while. Ford had a new part that fixes it which all the new vehicles had. But older cars weren’t given it until it failed (like mine). This has been a very sore spot with owners.
This recall fixes that. And it’s good they’re doing it, though way later than they should have.
There was a software update to “fix” the issue but it didn’t work. I think what it really did was try to help ensure the cars could limp to a dealer if it happened instead of just refusing to start. I’m not clear, but it’s well known in the community it didn’t fix it.
And it's on them for having such a design that takes 25 hours to replace the actual connector.
