Ford Explorer vs Ford Mustang Mach-E
Biggest differences: Charging 10–80% — Ford Explorer 28 min, Ford Mustang Mach-E 36 min · Consumption — Ford Explorer 14.5 kWh/100 km, Ford Mustang Mach-E 17.5 kWh/100 km · Battery — Ford Explorer 77 kWh, Ford Mustang Mach-E 91 kWh.
Ford Explorer
The Ford Explorer is an SUV in the D-segment, offering three versions with electric powertrains, one of which, the Extended Range model, provides a range exceeding 560 kilometers.
Ford Mustang Mach-E
The Ford Mustang Mach-E is a D-segment SUV offering four different powertrain and battery configurations with WLTP ranges from 470 to 600 km.
Profile against the market: Ford Explorer vs Ford Mustang Mach-E
Ford ExplorerExtended Range RWD- Ford Mustang Mach-EExtended Range RWD
Ford Explorer or Ford Mustang Mach-E — who wins where
Ford Explorer leads 5 to 4
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmFord Explorer +2 km
- Battery kWhFord Mustang Mach-E +14 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmFord Explorer −3 kWh/100 km
- Power PSFord Mustang Mach-E +8 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sFord Mustang Mach-E −0.2 s
- Top speed km/hNo difference
- DC charging kWFord Mustang Mach-E +15 kW
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Charging ↓ minFord Explorer −8 min
- Weight ↓ kgFord Explorer −114 kg
- Boot lFord Explorer +68 l
Technical data: Ford Explorer vs Ford Mustang Mach-E
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Ford Explorer Extended Range RWD | Ford Mustang Mach-E Extended Range RWD | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 602 km | 600 km | Ford +2 km |
| Battery | 77 kWh | 91 kWh | Ford +14 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 14.5 kWh/100 km | 17.5 kWh/100 km | Ford −3 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 135 kW | 150 kW | Ford +15 kW |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 28 min | 36 min | Ford −8 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 15.1 km/min | 11.7 km/min | Ford +3.4 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | 400 V | No difference |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 286 PS | 294 PS | Ford +8 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 6.4 s | 6.2 s | Ford −0.2 s |
| Top speed | 180 km/h | 180 km/h | No difference |
| Drivetrain | RWD | RWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 2015 kg | 2129 kg | Ford −114 kg |
| Boot | 470 l | 402 l | Ford +68 l |
| Length | 4468 mm | 4713 mm | Ford +245 mm |
| Width | 1872 mm | 1881 mm | Ford +9 mm |
| Height | 1630 mm | 1597 mm | Ford +33 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2767 mm | 2984 mm | Ford +217 mm |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Ford Explorer
Ford Mustang Mach-E
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Ford Explorer
Ford Mustang Mach-E
Other comparisons in this class: SUV, segment D
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Why does the Ford Mustang Mach-E have a bigger battery but a shorter range than the Ford Explorer?
The Ford Mustang Mach-E carries 91 kWh and covers 600 km, while the Ford Explorer with its 77 kWh battery does 602 km. Energy use decides it: 17.5 against 14.5 kWh/100 km.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Ford Explorer takes more: 470 l against 402 l in the Ford Mustang Mach-E. The difference is 68 l.
Which charges faster?
The Ford Explorer accepts up to 135 kW DC, the Ford Mustang Mach-E up to 150 kW. Charging from 10 to 80% takes 28 and 36 min respectively.
Which is cheaper to run?
The Ford Explorer uses less electricity: 14.5 kWh/100 km against 17.5 kWh/100 km in the Ford Mustang Mach-E. Over 15000 km a year that is a difference of 450 kWh — the calculator on this page turns it into money.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.