RDX 0-60 <6 seconds for 2022
03-07-2022, 10:42 AM
#81
03-07-2022, 11:52 AM
#82
Racer
Thread Starter
Remember to factor in the 41°F air temp. That adds about 10-12 hp compared to the 60-70°F air temps the magazines use for their tests. Plus a 1-foot rollout may be less than .3s in the RDX. That is just an estimate and varies from car to car. A 1/10 second here and there add up quickly in a 0-60 mph measurement. For the record, I think it is cool you made this video. Thanks.
Special attention just prior to the 2-3 and 3-4 shifts. Also dude lost 100% boost on the 1-2 shift. Compare those boost gauges...
Maybe my car is just super awesome and maybe Redline's is, too, or maybe Acura did a little tune refinement.
Last edited by Unobtanium; 03-07-2022 at 11:57 AM.
03-08-2022, 05:23 PM
#83
So, I decided to do this myself. iPhone actually has a function when you "Edit" a video to scroll thru the video and you can freeze frame to the hundredth of a second. I spent way too much time trying to get it as precisely as possible ... and now my eyes are strained and my neck hurts, but I think I got results as accurate as humanly possible. So, as much as I'd like to be right, I'll say I was made to eat crow on this one.
I drove the car home from the gym for approximately 20-25mins to a location I knew was flat and fairly desolate, so car was up to operating temps. Traction off, stability control off, auto start/stop off ... that's how the car always is before I ever set off. Tires filled to 36psi on all corners, reading 38psi due to being driven and warm. Ambient air temps at 45*F done shortly after 5pm on dry pavement. The car has just under 19,500mi and the oil is on approximately 4,500mi. Everything on the car is factory original. Only myself in the car weighing in at ~210lbs with nothing more than my gym bag. Octane in the fuel tank is 91+ (if I remember if I filled the tank with 93 the prior fill-up, I'll put 89 in it if it's above half a tank ... if not, I default to 93 ... I don't remember the last time I put 89 in it, so it's honestly probably all 93).
I drove to the spot and found it nicely empty and free of debris. It's fairly freshly paved too ... think they re-did it a year or so ago. As I slow, put the car in Sport+ and switch the transmission to S. Stop, hold the foot on the brake and gas, hit record and let go of the brake ... trying to do it all as quickly as possible so as to heat soak as little as possible. I don't know why, but on the first run the car short shifted the 2-3 shift (verified upon review of the video). I felt the car fall a bit flat and knew it wasn't going to be a good run. That said, after looking at the footage, the run came out to 6.26s.
I put the car back in Sport, let the revs come down, drove it gingerly for approximately a half mile with my foot just barely on the gas to keep the throttle body open to keep IATs down. Popped a u-turn, drove a little bit to a good spot and replicated the same set-up as the first run. This time, the car didn't short shift and ran thru all the gears completely. This run was, as expected, better with a 5.94s sprint to 60.
Knock off 0.3s for a 1ft-rollout at the times would have been 5.96s for the bunk run and 5.64s for the second run.
Foot, meet mouth. =/ Though, not a total loss. It's nice to know the car is faster than expected.
With gas prices being the way they are, I'm going to start filling it with 87. I may just do the same thing with 87 and see what difference it makes. Although I was joking before, maybe someone did fill the tanks with 87 when giving it to the reviewers to test.
I drove the car home from the gym for approximately 20-25mins to a location I knew was flat and fairly desolate, so car was up to operating temps. Traction off, stability control off, auto start/stop off ... that's how the car always is before I ever set off. Tires filled to 36psi on all corners, reading 38psi due to being driven and warm. Ambient air temps at 45*F done shortly after 5pm on dry pavement. The car has just under 19,500mi and the oil is on approximately 4,500mi. Everything on the car is factory original. Only myself in the car weighing in at ~210lbs with nothing more than my gym bag. Octane in the fuel tank is 91+ (if I remember if I filled the tank with 93 the prior fill-up, I'll put 89 in it if it's above half a tank ... if not, I default to 93 ... I don't remember the last time I put 89 in it, so it's honestly probably all 93).
I drove to the spot and found it nicely empty and free of debris. It's fairly freshly paved too ... think they re-did it a year or so ago. As I slow, put the car in Sport+ and switch the transmission to S. Stop, hold the foot on the brake and gas, hit record and let go of the brake ... trying to do it all as quickly as possible so as to heat soak as little as possible. I don't know why, but on the first run the car short shifted the 2-3 shift (verified upon review of the video). I felt the car fall a bit flat and knew it wasn't going to be a good run. That said, after looking at the footage, the run came out to 6.26s.
I put the car back in Sport, let the revs come down, drove it gingerly for approximately a half mile with my foot just barely on the gas to keep the throttle body open to keep IATs down. Popped a u-turn, drove a little bit to a good spot and replicated the same set-up as the first run. This time, the car didn't short shift and ran thru all the gears completely. This run was, as expected, better with a 5.94s sprint to 60.
Knock off 0.3s for a 1ft-rollout at the times would have been 5.96s for the bunk run and 5.64s for the second run.
Foot, meet mouth. =/ Though, not a total loss. It's nice to know the car is faster than expected.
With gas prices being the way they are, I'm going to start filling it with 87. I may just do the same thing with 87 and see what difference it makes. Although I was joking before, maybe someone did fill the tanks with 87 when giving it to the reviewers to test.
The following 3 users liked this post by leomio2.0:
03-08-2022, 07:06 PM
#84
Burning Brakes
So, I decided to do this myself. iPhone actually has a function when you "Edit" a video to scroll thru the video and you can freeze frame to the hundredth of a second. I spent way too much time trying to get it as precisely as possible ... and now my eyes are strained and my neck hurts, but I think I got results as accurate as humanly possible. So, as much as I'd like to be right, I'll say I was made to eat crow on this one.
I drove the car home from the gym for approximately 20-25mins to a location I knew was flat and fairly desolate, so car was up to operating temps. Traction off, stability control off, auto start/stop off ... that's how the car always is before I ever set off. Tires filled to 36psi on all corners, reading 38psi due to being driven and warm. Ambient air temps at 45*F done shortly after 5pm on dry pavement. The car has just under 19,500mi and the oil is on approximately 4,500mi. Everything on the car is factory original. Only myself in the car weighing in at ~210lbs with nothing more than my gym bag. Octane in the fuel tank is 91+ (if I remember if I filled the tank with 93 the prior fill-up, I'll put 89 in it if it's above half a tank ... if not, I default to 93 ... I don't remember the last time I put 89 in it, so it's honestly probably all 93).
I drove to the spot and found it nicely empty and free of debris. It's fairly freshly paved too ... think they re-did it a year or so ago. As I slow, put the car in Sport+ and switch the transmission to S. Stop, hold the foot on the brake and gas, hit record and let go of the brake ... trying to do it all as quickly as possible so as to heat soak as little as possible. I don't know why, but on the first run the car short shifted the 2-3 shift (verified upon review of the video). I felt the car fall a bit flat and knew it wasn't going to be a good run. That said, after looking at the footage, the run came out to 6.26s.
I put the car back in Sport, let the revs come down, drove it gingerly for approximately a half mile with my foot just barely on the gas to keep the throttle body open to keep IATs down. Popped a u-turn, drove a little bit to a good spot and replicated the same set-up as the first run. This time, the car didn't short shift and ran thru all the gears completely. This run was, as expected, better with a 5.94s sprint to 60.
Knock off 0.3s for a 1ft-rollout at the times would have been 5.96s for the bunk run and 5.64s for the second run.
Foot, meet mouth. =/ Though, not a total loss. It's nice to know the car is faster than expected.
With gas prices being the way they are, I'm going to start filling it with 87. I may just do the same thing with 87 and see what difference it makes. Although I was joking before, maybe someone did fill the tanks with 87 when giving it to the reviewers to test.
I drove the car home from the gym for approximately 20-25mins to a location I knew was flat and fairly desolate, so car was up to operating temps. Traction off, stability control off, auto start/stop off ... that's how the car always is before I ever set off. Tires filled to 36psi on all corners, reading 38psi due to being driven and warm. Ambient air temps at 45*F done shortly after 5pm on dry pavement. The car has just under 19,500mi and the oil is on approximately 4,500mi. Everything on the car is factory original. Only myself in the car weighing in at ~210lbs with nothing more than my gym bag. Octane in the fuel tank is 91+ (if I remember if I filled the tank with 93 the prior fill-up, I'll put 89 in it if it's above half a tank ... if not, I default to 93 ... I don't remember the last time I put 89 in it, so it's honestly probably all 93).
I drove to the spot and found it nicely empty and free of debris. It's fairly freshly paved too ... think they re-did it a year or so ago. As I slow, put the car in Sport+ and switch the transmission to S. Stop, hold the foot on the brake and gas, hit record and let go of the brake ... trying to do it all as quickly as possible so as to heat soak as little as possible. I don't know why, but on the first run the car short shifted the 2-3 shift (verified upon review of the video). I felt the car fall a bit flat and knew it wasn't going to be a good run. That said, after looking at the footage, the run came out to 6.26s.
I put the car back in Sport, let the revs come down, drove it gingerly for approximately a half mile with my foot just barely on the gas to keep the throttle body open to keep IATs down. Popped a u-turn, drove a little bit to a good spot and replicated the same set-up as the first run. This time, the car didn't short shift and ran thru all the gears completely. This run was, as expected, better with a 5.94s sprint to 60.
Knock off 0.3s for a 1ft-rollout at the times would have been 5.96s for the bunk run and 5.64s for the second run.
Foot, meet mouth. =/ Though, not a total loss. It's nice to know the car is faster than expected.
With gas prices being the way they are, I'm going to start filling it with 87. I may just do the same thing with 87 and see what difference it makes. Although I was joking before, maybe someone did fill the tanks with 87 when giving it to the reviewers to test.
03-08-2022, 07:16 PM
#85
Nice and A Ford Mache E GT just blew by you as you were standing still at 3.5 seconds 0~60 and on regular cheep electric energy. That’s my thought after filling up its gas at Costco today at $4.09 a gallon. The RDX is nice, but pales in comparisons to other SUV’s in speed - especially EV’s. Even a regular VW ID 4 AWD will consistently smoke the RDX.
The following 2 users liked this post by bdawwg:
Baldeagle (03-09-2022),
norsairius (03-08-2022)
03-08-2022, 07:31 PM
#86
Nice and A Ford Mache E GT just blew by you as you were standing still at 3.5 seconds 0~60 and on regular cheep electric energy. That’s my thought after filling up its gas at Costco today at $4.09 a gallon. The RDX is nice, but pales in comparisons to other SUV’s in speed - especially EV’s. Even a regular VW ID 4 AWD will consistently smoke the RDX.
The following users liked this post:
norsairius (03-08-2022)
03-08-2022, 07:57 PM
#87
Burning Brakes
Come on now....don't be comparing an electric motor to an ice. They're two totally different animals. It's like comparing a prop plane to a jet plane. I haven't driven an EV yet but I think I'm going to miss the nice induction and exhaust sounds of a performance ice vs just road and wind noise of an EV. Maybe the EV's will add an option that duplicates the feel of shifts, induction & exhaust sound so you don't feel like you're in fast golf cart.
03-08-2022, 07:59 PM
#88
Racer
Thread Starter
Nice and A Ford Mache E GT just blew by you as you were standing still at 3.5 seconds 0~60 and on regular cheep electric energy. That’s my thought after filling up its gas at Costco today at $4.09 a gallon. The RDX is nice, but pales in comparisons to other SUV’s in speed - especially EV’s. Even a regular VW ID 4 AWD will consistently smoke the RDX.
I'm waiting for a company like Acura or Mazda to drop a full PEV, and then Ill buy it 2 to 3 model years in.
Last edited by Unobtanium; 03-08-2022 at 08:09 PM.
03-08-2022, 08:11 PM
#89
Racer
Thread Starter
Fun comparison, just different fuel types and motors. I am old school who grew up on 2-stoke motorcycles and vehicles with all manual transmissions. Go drive an EV, the instant torque will make you giggle when you feel it in your stomach. I will miss the smell and sounds of ICE vehicles and motorcycles - but it’s the wave of the future and progress.
03-08-2022, 10:01 PM
#90
Nice and A Ford Mache E GT just blew by you as you were standing still at 3.5 seconds 0~60 and on regular cheep electric energy. That’s my thought after filling up its gas at Costco today at $4.09 a gallon. The RDX is nice, but pales in comparisons to other SUV’s in speed - especially EV’s. Even a regular VW ID 4 AWD will consistently smoke the RDX.
03-08-2022, 10:35 PM
#91
You don't need the Mach E GT...the Mach E Premium also beats the RDX by a significant margin too (4.8 seconds from 0-60). It can be had for $50k, which is the same price as the RDX.
Not only that, but you get a $7500 tax credit, so it can be had for much cheaper than the RDX.
I bought my Mach E GT for $65k which was MSRP (included every option except the Performance edition, and star white paint cost extra) and with the $7500 tax credit as well I'm paying $57.5k. I also got another $1000 incentive for enrolling in the Ford Options plan as well as 1.4% financing. What's neat is that Ford Options plan acts 'like a lease' but you have a balloon payment after 36 or 48 months. However, you can turn in the car and owe nothing, or you can sell it and get back the difference if the value of the car is higher than the final payment. Either way, it means I don't have to keep the car if I don't want to in 3-4 years.
In some states, like NJ, there's no sales tax for EVs, which saves you even more. The range of my Mach E GT when fully charged is around 250 miles. I pay $10 per full charge of the Mach E GT from 0-100%. However, I keep it charged to 90% to preserve battery life.
When I owned the RDX, I only had about 270 miles of range before I needed to fill up.
Last edited by mathnerd88; 03-08-2022 at 10:49 PM.
03-08-2022, 10:51 PM
#92
Racer
Thread Starter
Tuning the RDX to get sub 5 second 0-60 will probably eat your MPG down to like 13 mpg, which is kind of a dumb thing to do when you can buy muscle cars with that performance for cheaper.
You don't need the Mach E GT...the Mach E Premium also beats the RDX by a significant margin too (4.8 seconds from 0-60). It can be had for $50k, which is the same price as the RDX.
Not only that, but you get a $7500 tax credit, so it can be had for much cheaper than the RDX.
I bought my Mach E GT for $65k which was MSRP (included every option except the Performance edition, and star white paint cost extra) and with the $7500 tax credit as well I'm paying $57.5k. I also got another $1000 incentive for enrolling in the Ford Options plan as well as 1.4% financing. What's neat is that Ford Options plan acts 'like a lease' but you have a balloon payment after 36 or 48 months. However, you can turn in the car and owe nothing, or you can sell it and get back the difference if the value of the car is higher than the final payment. Either way, it means I don't have to keep the car if I don't want to in 3-4 years.
In some states, like NJ, there's no sales tax for EVs, which saves you even more. The range of my Mach E GT when fully charged is around 250 miles. I pay $10 per full charge of the Mach E GT from 0-100%. However, I keep it charged to 90% to preserve battery life.
When I owned the RDX, I only had about 270 miles of range before I needed to fill up.
You don't need the Mach E GT...the Mach E Premium also beats the RDX by a significant margin too (4.8 seconds from 0-60). It can be had for $50k, which is the same price as the RDX.
Not only that, but you get a $7500 tax credit, so it can be had for much cheaper than the RDX.
I bought my Mach E GT for $65k which was MSRP (included every option except the Performance edition, and star white paint cost extra) and with the $7500 tax credit as well I'm paying $57.5k. I also got another $1000 incentive for enrolling in the Ford Options plan as well as 1.4% financing. What's neat is that Ford Options plan acts 'like a lease' but you have a balloon payment after 36 or 48 months. However, you can turn in the car and owe nothing, or you can sell it and get back the difference if the value of the car is higher than the final payment. Either way, it means I don't have to keep the car if I don't want to in 3-4 years.
In some states, like NJ, there's no sales tax for EVs, which saves you even more. The range of my Mach E GT when fully charged is around 250 miles. I pay $10 per full charge of the Mach E GT from 0-100%. However, I keep it charged to 90% to preserve battery life.
When I owned the RDX, I only had about 270 miles of range before I needed to fill up.
If you only got 270mi before needing to fill up, you were averaging 18mpg. I am averaging around 23mpg and fill up after around 350 miles with about 2 gallons in the tank to spare (running them out is bad of course). Wild.
Last edited by Unobtanium; 03-08-2022 at 10:54 PM.
03-08-2022, 10:54 PM
#93
Come on now....don't be comparing an electric motor to an ice. They're two totally different animals. It's like comparing a prop plane to a jet plane. I haven't driven an EV yet but I think I'm going to miss the nice induction and exhaust sounds of a performance ice vs just road and wind noise of an EV. Maybe the EV's will add an option that duplicates the feel of shifts, induction & exhaust sound so you don't feel like you're in fast golf cart.
With the Mach E, you do have the propulsion sound option where it can kind of mimic an engine noise, but it is still subtle.
03-08-2022, 10:55 PM
#94
This is true, I could have saved money and gotten the Mach E GT, but it is not something I want to be driving. I bought the RDX because I liked it, not because it was the cheapest car I could find to do 0-60 in flat, lol! 250 miles would leave me stranded. When it gets into the negatives, you can cut that 250mi in half. I'd be on the side of the road waiting for that portable generator on the way home from work someday. Screw. That. EV's aren't there yet. When Acura/Honda/Mazda/Toyota come out with a PEV I like, I'll snag one. Until then, no, I won't have a Ford in my driveway, and I won't have a short range car of any make.
If you only got 270mi before needing to fill up, you were averaging 18mpg. I am averaging around 23mpg and fill up after around 350 miles with about 2 gallons in the tank to spare (running them out is bad of course). Wild.
If you only got 270mi before needing to fill up, you were averaging 18mpg. I am averaging around 23mpg and fill up after around 350 miles with about 2 gallons in the tank to spare (running them out is bad of course). Wild.
Sure, there are always negatives to every car. ICE cars now cost significant amount of money to fill up, for example, and I have to wait about 30 minutes to fill up at Costco given long lines, which is the cheapest near me. I would not take my Mach E for long road trips. I would take it out at max 150 mile road trips. It's a perfect commuter car, not a road trip car. That's why I have an 22 Acura MDX, and am about to trade in my 2020 Rav4 Limited to Rav4 Prime to bridge both worlds.
Either way, I am extremely happy that I got rid of the RDX and got the Mach E GT. It's a massive difference for me. There were too many problems with the RDX, and it really left a sour taste in my mouth. I would find random small dents on the hood on the RDX, and since Acura uses super soft metal, it's easy to get dent from just an acorn dropping from a tree. All my coworkers said wow what an upgrade when they sit in my Mach E GT compared to my RDX. (They've ridden in both.) They were really impressed with the ride quality, smoothness, and the tech. It can parallel park and vertically park into spots on its own, as well as have a much better hands free driving experience on the highway.
Last edited by mathnerd88; 03-08-2022 at 11:10 PM.
03-08-2022, 11:05 PM
#95
Pro
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Minneapolis
Age: 45
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Received 238 Likes
on
143 Posts
Don't forget to factor in the cost of a home charger. When I looked into getting an EV a couple years ago an electrician determined I'd have to upgrade my breaker panel to support a 240v circuit. The estimate was $5k. The panel is also on the opposite side of the house from the garage so it's a long run of wiring. Installation will obviously vary for everyone.
I like the idea of an EV but I'm going to wait. Love the acceleration of the Tesla but not a fan of the appliance-like interior. The Mach E seems cool but I just can't bring myself to spend that much on a Ford product. No offense....
I like the idea of an EV but I'm going to wait. Love the acceleration of the Tesla but not a fan of the appliance-like interior. The Mach E seems cool but I just can't bring myself to spend that much on a Ford product. No offense....
03-08-2022, 11:11 PM
#96
Don't forget to factor in the cost of a home charger. When I looked into getting an EV a couple years ago an electrician determined I'd have to upgrade my breaker panel to support a 240v circuit. The estimate was $5k. The panel is also on the opposite side of the house from the garage so it's a long run of wiring. Installation will obviously vary for everyone.
I like the idea of an EV but I'm going to wait. Love the acceleration of the Tesla but not a fan of the appliance-like interior. The Mach E seems cool but I just can't bring myself to spend that much on a Ford product. No offense....
I like the idea of an EV but I'm going to wait. Love the acceleration of the Tesla but not a fan of the appliance-like interior. The Mach E seems cool but I just can't bring myself to spend that much on a Ford product. No offense....
Also, I used to think Ford sucks, but the Mach E is different. I can't explain it but even Doug Demuro and Redline Reviews have stated that the interior quality is really nice compared to the traditional Ford product.
Last edited by mathnerd88; 03-08-2022 at 11:26 PM.
03-08-2022, 11:30 PM
#97
I'm seeing the base mach e's say 5.8-5.2 0-60. So the tuned RDX is faster there, unless those numbers are fudged. I find SH-AWD to be magical for the price, so IDK how the Mach E compares in handling. But the base Mach E after incentives would come out to like 37k, which is much cheaper than an Aspec/Advanced. But the Bolt, I think, probably beats it with more range for less money; I think the Ioniq 5 is most intriguing to me.
I find the low 200s mile range to be cutting it a little close for me. 300 sounds good to me. MA has no shortage of infuriatingly stupid rules, you have to spend less than $50k on an EV to get the $2.5k state rebate, so anything over that threshold is leaving that value on the table.
Also anytime buying a car, sucks to get hosed on lost equity, so that gets factored in as a cost as well, and it's often a significant amount, washing out a few years of fuel savings.
Last edited by bdawwg; 03-08-2022 at 11:36 PM.
03-08-2022, 11:48 PM
#98
Racer
Thread Starter
You know I was averaging around 18-19 mpg. I've been posting about that several times now around the forums. So did redline reviews on the youtube video you posted as well as many other forum members on here.
Sure, there are always negatives to every car. ICE cars now cost significant amount of money to fill up, for example, and I have to wait about 30 minutes to fill up at Costco given long lines, which is the cheapest near me. I would not take my Mach E for long road trips. I would take it out at max 150 mile road trips. It's a perfect commuter car, not a road trip car. That's why I have an 22 Acura MDX, and am about to trade in my 2020 Rav4 Limited to Rav4 Prime to bridge both worlds.
Either way, I am extremely happy that I got rid of the RDX and got the Mach E GT. It's a massive difference for me. There were too many problems with the RDX, and it really left a sour taste in my mouth. I would find random small dents on the hood on the RDX, and since Acura uses super soft metal, it's easy to get dent from just an acorn dropping from a tree. All my coworkers said wow what an upgrade when they sit in my Mach E GT compared to my RDX. (They've ridden in both.) They were really impressed with the ride quality, smoothness, and the tech. It can parallel park and vertically park into spots on its own, as well as have a much better hands free driving experience on the highway.
Sure, there are always negatives to every car. ICE cars now cost significant amount of money to fill up, for example, and I have to wait about 30 minutes to fill up at Costco given long lines, which is the cheapest near me. I would not take my Mach E for long road trips. I would take it out at max 150 mile road trips. It's a perfect commuter car, not a road trip car. That's why I have an 22 Acura MDX, and am about to trade in my 2020 Rav4 Limited to Rav4 Prime to bridge both worlds.
Either way, I am extremely happy that I got rid of the RDX and got the Mach E GT. It's a massive difference for me. There were too many problems with the RDX, and it really left a sour taste in my mouth. I would find random small dents on the hood on the RDX, and since Acura uses super soft metal, it's easy to get dent from just an acorn dropping from a tree. All my coworkers said wow what an upgrade when they sit in my Mach E GT compared to my RDX. (They've ridden in both.) They were really impressed with the ride quality, smoothness, and the tech. It can parallel park and vertically park into spots on its own, as well as have a much better hands free driving experience on the highway.
03-09-2022, 05:30 AM
#99
Different strokes for different folks. I am glad you like the Mach E and glad I don't have to drive it, lol! I average 23mpg so far more or less in the RDX. I have an 80mi commute to my typical job location, but it stretches to 100-120mi depending on which healthcare facility needs me to be there, so I need a car that isn't going to strand me in the cold weather. Knowing one of our MD's Teslas almost did that on a similar commute would make the Mach E an automatic No-Go for me even if I did find it enticing. As is, I just can't see what you like about it other than the speed. It's a Ford and the interior looks like a prison sentence to me, but hey, that's why they make more than 1 car, no accounting for taste.
But yes, an EV won’t work for you if you have 120 mi commute each way. That’s fine.
All my posts referenced that this was a much better vehicle for me than the RDX. I suspect it is much better vehicle for quite a few other people as well. The only bad part is that you need an 8 month wait for one.
Last edited by mathnerd88; 03-09-2022 at 05:42 AM.
03-09-2022, 05:53 AM
#100
The couple reports on this forum suggest it might actually slightly increase mpg if you're doing careful highway driving, staying off the boost. Obviously laying down power is going to suck gas. I like to go sport on the turny parts and granny on the straight parts, so get the best of both. You do have to run premium, but switching from 87 isn't the bulk of the gas expense.
Also anytime buying a car, sucks to get hosed on lost equity, so that gets factored in as a cost as well, and it's often a significant amount, washing out a few years of fuel savings.
Also anytime buying a car, sucks to get hosed on lost equity, so that gets factored in as a cost as well, and it's often a significant amount, washing out a few years of fuel savings.
You’re right, but that happens to any car you buy. As of right now, EV’s seem to depreciate less given the demand of them right now as well as the chip shortage. That federal tax credit does offset a significant chunk of it as well.
For me, my monthly payment is about $100 less for the Mach E GT than the RDX and that’s not including the $7500 tax credit. I have the option to turn it in after 4 years. For me, the Mach E is cheaper than a lease.
03-09-2022, 09:07 AM
#101
I think in MA, EVs make slightly less sense than other states between our stupid rules and expensive electricity. But they still make sense, and I do kind of wish I looked harder at the options given where gas is! But hopefully this is near a higher bound for gas!
03-09-2022, 09:43 AM
#102
Racer
Thread Starter
Have you been in one? The difference is I actually been in both cars so for you to knock one without trying is a little shortsighted.
But yes, an EV won’t work for you if you have 120 mi commute each way. That’s fine.
All my posts referenced that this was a much better vehicle for me than the RDX. I suspect it is much better vehicle for quite a few other people as well. The only bad part is that you need an 8 month wait for one.
But yes, an EV won’t work for you if you have 120 mi commute each way. That’s fine.
All my posts referenced that this was a much better vehicle for me than the RDX. I suspect it is much better vehicle for quite a few other people as well. The only bad part is that you need an 8 month wait for one.
03-09-2022, 09:44 AM
#103
Racer
Thread Starter
What’s the point of tuning it if you can’t use the boost? That defeats the purpose.
You’re right, but that happens to any car you buy. As of right now, EV’s seem to depreciate less given the demand of them right now as well as the chip shortage. That federal tax credit does offset a significant chunk of it as well.
For me, my monthly payment is about $100 less for the Mach E GT than the RDX and that’s not including the $7500 tax credit. I have the option to turn it in after 4 years. For me, the Mach E is cheaper than a lease.
You’re right, but that happens to any car you buy. As of right now, EV’s seem to depreciate less given the demand of them right now as well as the chip shortage. That federal tax credit does offset a significant chunk of it as well.
For me, my monthly payment is about $100 less for the Mach E GT than the RDX and that’s not including the $7500 tax credit. I have the option to turn it in after 4 years. For me, the Mach E is cheaper than a lease.
03-09-2022, 09:45 AM
#104
Totally my tinfoil hat talking, as I'm aging, but the fact that I can imagine a malicious country hacking autopilot systems gives me pause. I don't know if it would even be possible, but would like confirmation of that before using it.
03-09-2022, 09:48 AM
#105
Racer
Thread Starter
Not even that. It phantom activates the brakes, runs into poles it doesn't see in parkinglots, complex situations where road rage swerves etc. can be involved. It's just not capable of the predictive abilities and complex reasoning of a human driver with their head on straight. Is it better than a distracted driver messing with their makeup? You betcha! But overall, I am not a fan of it, nor do I want it in my car as it's not free, and I don't want to pay for stuff I don't want. So literally the only thing the Mach E does that I like is 0-60 (runs out of steam after that), and cheap to operate...at the cost of not having enough range to even get me to work and then home safely when its winter.
03-09-2022, 10:24 AM
#106
Different strokes for different folks. I am glad you like the Mach E and glad I don't have to drive it, lol! I average 23mpg so far more or less in the RDX. I have an 80mi commute to my typical job location, but it stretches to 100-120mi depending on which healthcare facility needs me to be there, so I need a car that isn't going to strand me in the cold weather. Knowing one of our MD's Teslas almost did that on a similar commute would make the Mach E an automatic No-Go for me even if I did find it enticing. As is, I just can't see what you like about it other than the speed. It's a Ford and the interior looks like a prison sentence to me, but hey, that's why they make more than 1 car, no accounting for taste.
I do remember you saying you were out in the middle of nowhere, though, and don't even have a Costco nearby. For that reason, EV's are probably not in your future for a while.
03-09-2022, 10:46 AM
#107
Racer
Thread Starter
You work in healthcare and they don't have EV chargers at the facilities? Here, they all have them, so your concern wouldn't be an issue.
I do remember you saying you were out in the middle of nowhere, though, and don't even have a Costco nearby. For that reason, EV's are probably not in your future for a while.
I do remember you saying you were out in the middle of nowhere, though, and don't even have a Costco nearby. For that reason, EV's are probably not in your future for a while.
03-09-2022, 05:11 PM
#108
03-09-2022, 05:37 PM
#109
I thought this way too, which is why I resisted EV's for so long, but now that I own a Mach E GT, I actually really prefer the sound to ICE engines. It truly is a sleeper car, and the motor whirring does sound very futuristic and the ride is super smooth with literally no NVH.
With the Mach E, you do have the propulsion sound option where it can kind of mimic an engine noise, but it is still subtle.
With the Mach E, you do have the propulsion sound option where it can kind of mimic an engine noise, but it is still subtle.
03-10-2022, 12:59 AM
#110
Racer
Thread Starter
03-10-2022, 10:15 AM
#112
03-10-2022, 10:45 AM
#113
I’m learning from these EV discussions. Price to purchase, 0-60 times, cost to operate, compromises about limited range. As for our RDXs, while it is nice to know our cars may be actually be closer to 6.0s to 60, at least in cold air, that does not make me like mine more. I’ve always felt it pulled “hard enough” from 20 mph to 80 mph. I don’t drag race and don’t need a hard launch off the line.
03-10-2022, 03:20 PM
#114
I’m learning from these EV discussions. Price to purchase, 0-60 times, cost to operate, compromises about limited range. As for our RDXs, while it is nice to know our cars may be actually be closer to 6.0s to 60, at least in cold air, that does not make me like mine more. I’ve always felt it pulled “hard enough” from 20 mph to 80 mph. I don’t drag race and don’t need a hard launch off the line.
If you have any thoughts on getting an EV right now is the best time to do it.
03-10-2022, 09:05 PM
#115
Racer
Thread Starter
Sadly the tech isnt mature right now, but financially, yes.
03-10-2022, 09:58 PM
#116
Burning Brakes
Yes, lots of new EV options that qualify for the $7500 tax credit. Some also come with free charging time at Electrify America (VW, Porsche, Audi, Kia and Hyundai to name a few). If the 2nd part of the bill on the floor ever passes or the go green electric portion…more EV’s will quality for the tax credit.
03-10-2022, 10:02 PM
#117
My wife just a-ok’d giving her TLX to her dad and buying an EV. The Mach E looks like a great option but they’re going for so much over sticker right now. How much did you pay relative to sticker, if you don’t mind sharing? We’ll probably end up with a Polestar 2 or maybe the XC40 Recharge just to avoid the huge headache of trying to avoid markups.
This might also put a kibosh on my Bronco plans, but with all their production woes that won’t be a decision i’ll have to make until 2024…
This might also put a kibosh on my Bronco plans, but with all their production woes that won’t be a decision i’ll have to make until 2024…
03-11-2022, 05:08 AM
#118
My wife just a-ok’d giving her TLX to her dad and buying an EV. The Mach E looks like a great option but they’re going for so much over sticker right now. How much did you pay relative to sticker, if you don’t mind sharing? We’ll probably end up with a Polestar 2 or maybe the XC40 Recharge just to avoid the huge headache of trying to avoid markups.
This might also put a kibosh on my Bronco plans, but with all their production woes that won’t be a decision i’ll have to make until 2024…
This might also put a kibosh on my Bronco plans, but with all their production woes that won’t be a decision i’ll have to make until 2024…
Some dealers were trying to sell at $10k above sticker.
Last edited by mathnerd88; 03-11-2022 at 05:10 AM.
03-11-2022, 08:41 AM
#119
The dealer local to me sold mine at sticker price, plus $1000 off for Ford options plan incentive and at 1.4% financing. If you just call around you can eventually find one, don't even bother trying to negotiate with dealers that aren't selling at sticker price. You can find use the Ford inventory search for a Mach E to see if dealers near you have it. I recommend a 2021 model over 2022 as it was cheaper MSRP and it included the tailgate kick sensor and acoustic glass compared to 2022 models. However, the 2022 model does have slightly more range although they use the same battery. My hope is that they push a software update to make the 2021 models get that increased usable battery (like 7 miles more range.)
Some dealers were trying to sell at $10k above sticker.
Some dealers were trying to sell at $10k above sticker.
03-11-2022, 12:28 PM
#120