Mustang Mach-F Renderings Imagine A Five-Door Electric Pony

Ford tossed out over 50 years of Mustang heritage to add two doors to the Mach-E, creating Dearborn’s first four-door Mustang. It’s opened the possibilities for the Mustang brand, for better or worse, and that has some imaginations running wild. The latest rumination comes from Emre Husmen on Behance.net, where the artist adds a fifth door to the venerable pony car, turning the Mustang Mach-E into a liftback called the Mach-F.

The Mustang Mach-F’s design falls somewhere between the crossover-like Mach-E and the Mustang coupe that’s available today, blending the two into a sleek five-door offering. The Mach-F has a lower, sleeker profile than the Mach-E, better retaining the two-door Mustang’s fastback silhouette. The hood is longer, too, pushing the base of the windshield further away from the front axle. The Mach-F sports dimensions similar to that of BMW M8 Gran Coupe, according to the artist, who’d position it against the Porsche Taycan and Tesla Model S. Those are some heavy hitters in the EV arena.

The Mach-F features the Mach-E’s closed-off front-end, and a light-up running pony emblem. The tri-bar headlight motif and signature taillight design are present as well. Inside, tech gets a substantial boost with three steering-wheel-mounted LCD screens, one of which is capable of registering the driver’s fingerprint to start the vehicle. It’s a cool concept, and one we could soon see in real life as automakers infuse more technology into cars.

Gallery: Mustang Mach-F Renderings

To some, the Mach-E is too much like a crossover for the Mustang name and running pony emblem, and production hasn’t even started yet. The all-electric powertrain is a first for the Mustang brand, though it’s likely not the last time. The Mustang built its fan base with sport coupes at affordable prices, and we don’t know what Ford has planned. But if the Mustang has to appeal to a broad audience, then the sleek Mach-F could be a happy middle ground.

Source: motor1

Leave a Reply