We know it’s a bad idea, you know it’s a bad idea, and as it turns out, even Ford knows using the legendary Mach 1 name on a “performance” battery electric SUV is a bad idea.
Initially, the rumblings were that Ford would revive the Mach 1 name for some kind of hybrid or full-blown battery electric high-performance Mustang. But it is not. Ford’s executive vice president and president of Global Markets, Jim Farley, quickly clarified to assembled media that the new boxy BEV could certainly be related to the Mustang, but would not be a Mustang.
Instead, the badge might live on the back of a new electric performance SUV coming in 2020. But Ford’s North American Product Communications Manager, Mike Levine, began backpedaling shortly after the announcement, following a groundswell of negative opinions. Levine was adamant the company was only considering using the Mach 1 name, claiming the Blue Oval brand would listen to public reaction before making an actual decision.
That may be Ford’s official public stance, but inside the company, there was at least one true believer who tried to dissuade the brand from turning a hallowed nameplate into a virtue-signaling simulacrum. A highly placed internal source familiar with the matter expressed his displeasure with the decision from the outset.
In October, Ford announced it would invest $11 billion in battery-electric technology with the creation of Team Edison, and in December the brand announced its autonomous and electric vehicle business would move to a newly refurbished factory in Detroit’s historic Corktown district with the goal of transforming Ford into the most trusted mobility company in the world. The proposed Mach 1 BEV project aims to bring together the Mustang’s high-level athleticism with the practicality of an Explorer.
“Taking everything that means to our customers, both on the rational and the emotional level, electrifying that, and coming out with that. So it’s a combination, and that gives you a good idea of what we’re thinking for that vehicle. The issue isn’t that it’s an electric crossover, the issue is the name. I knew this was going to be a problem.”
On the surface, it’s almost as if Ford is deliberately mocking its bread and butter loyalists, amplifying the symbolic dissociation between the brand and its enthusiasts.
Shortly after Ford announced it might bastardize the Mach 1 name, Dan Gurney passed away. It was an eerie coincidence that ethereally sums up the mercantilist jamais vu the industry is trying to shove down the throats of the very people who genuinely love it.
[Image: Corey Lewis/TTAC]
Ford: “And a Mach 1 could be an electric egg!”
Humans: Rabble rabble!
Ford: “Oh crap, sorry.”
I guess Team Westinghouse wouldn’t have worked, the cars would have needed really long extension cords.
I see the whole thing as a soapy, publicity stunt to get attention for the new SUV.
“Team Edison, huh? That’s hitting below the belt, Ford.” – Tesla
Yeah, as much as Henry Ford and Thomas Edison had history, that seems in way poorer taste than the ill-conceived Mach 1 idea.
Next year, Ford will introduce the Leland Liberty EV.
Henry Leland started the two surviving American luxury car companies and he is rarely honored. Lincoln won’t honor him because Henry Ford resented Leland’s role in how The Henry Ford Co. became Cadillac and Cadillac won’t honor him because he left GM to start Lincoln.
Don’t really care one way or the other. If Ford, or for that matter, any manufacturer wishes to do this to hallowed nameplates let ’em. I just don’t see why it’s necessary.
Out of all the other historic names Ford could use. And all the other new names Ford could apply, they choose MACH 1. Personally, I would’ve gone with GT-40 or BOSS 302, but that’s just me.
The reality is that the Mach I was, mostly, an exterior trim package for Mustangs. Unlike the Boss versions, it used the same 351 that anyone could order on a conventional Mustang. It featured vinyl wood on the dash and console, exterior treatment (tape and a chin spoiler on the ’69, honeycomb and raised moldings as well as the optional louvered glass cover on the ’70).
My ’69 wasn’t really all that different from my friend’s non-Mach 1l ’70 fastback.
You’re a bad man, telling the truth of the trim packages like this!
All the more reason for Ford to use the name for an electric crossover!
At this moment, in Bologna, there are hushed voices debating whether or not to use the name Monster for their new line of small electric scooters.
As seemingly odd as that is, it just might work. Let some of the luster of the big brother rub off on the smaller one. That just might work. Call it the mini-monster or something similar.
I vote for Monsteretta.
Ford doesn’t own GT40, I forgot who does but when they introduced the second gen car for their centennial and wanted to call it GT40 the owner of the name put a price tag higher than Ford wanted to pay.
Superformance LLC.
How about Edsel instead of Edison?
A high performance battery electric Mustang would be a bold move, particularly since Marchionne announced that Ferrari is going to be making an electric supercar.
I bet Gurney went down after hearing this blasphemy. My heart barely took it and I’m much younger. What a final image for a true automotive legend to carry with him into the beyond from this mortal coil. Jerks. May he RIP.