Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)
Discussion
I can only feel disappointed myself, a friendly sorry for yourself, for it seems the P1 just doesn't do it for you. Which is a real shame considering the not-small amount of money you have spent in acquiring it.
That said, I'm sure you'll get that all back. I feel somehow disappointed too because, I absolutely love the P1 and it'd be the 1 of the 3 I'd take.
Having said all of that, ultimately it's still the F1 I'd rather drive.
Saying I feel somewhat sorry for someone who owns a McLaren P1 does seem daft
That said, I'm sure you'll get that all back. I feel somehow disappointed too because, I absolutely love the P1 and it'd be the 1 of the 3 I'd take.
Having said all of that, ultimately it's still the F1 I'd rather drive.
Saying I feel somewhat sorry for someone who owns a McLaren P1 does seem daft
Peloton25 said:
That rumor is utterly ridiculous and false.
Here's an owner exercising his P1 at the Ring recently - he shared the completion of his lap demonstrating that the car still has plenty of power in reserve to get to 324 KPH before braking to go under the bridge, which on a clear track Chris Goodwin doesn't even need to do given the downforce the car produces.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa08mXthOaQ
That does not prove anything. One guy puts up a 50s clip which tells us pretty much nothing. We have no idea how good this guy is and how committed he was. I would imagine that the difference in electric power use between an 85% lap and a 100% lap is significant - the same would be true in 918 or LaF.Here's an owner exercising his P1 at the Ring recently - he shared the completion of his lap demonstrating that the car still has plenty of power in reserve to get to 324 KPH before braking to go under the bridge, which on a clear track Chris Goodwin doesn't even need to do given the downforce the car produces.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa08mXthOaQ
Show me a lap under, say, 7:10 and it will be worth looking at how much battery is left.
The "amount of battery" left by the end of a N'ring lap is not an issue.
What is an issue is the temperature of that battery, and the amount of "wear" that has occurred to it.
Let me explain:
The P1 has 130kW of electric motor power, and 540kW of engine power. The electric motor is directly coupled to the ICE. So, as soon as the engine speed is above the point where the ICE can produce 130kW (which is about 2800rpm) you can utilise the motor to recharge the battery pack at the same rate you can discharge it if the driver isn't asking for full throttle.
For a road car on road tyres, the amount of a lap spent on full throttle, even at somewhere like the 'ring is only approx 30%, leaving 70% of the time at part throttle and around 30% of that at zero throttle.
As a result, there is enough time to maintain a surprisingly constant SOC in the traction battery. Unfortunately, the issue becomes one of heat rejection. Although the electric powertrain is extremely efficient, at high power levels, the losses generate significant heat, which must be rejected by the cooling systems, systems that will already be heavily loaded by engine heat rejection and radiant energy (from a powertrain getting beasted!) Also, a traction batteries life (energy capacity) pretty much depends on the total energy sourced or sunk into it, so repeatedly smashing 130kW in and out of the traction battery is not good in the long term.
So, what you tend to find is that the system optimisers endup running with a slow rate of SoC reduction, and may limit total power available for transfer when system temperatures become critical. I have it on good authority that the 918 power limit experienced on it's 'ring lap was a thermal limitation and not an energy depletion issue.
In race mode, the P1 is capable of doing repetitive 'ring laps when driven by a top class professional driver until it runs out of fuel. On hot days (~30degC or more), it too will go into thermal limitation eventually, but generally this is actually at a similar time to when it will have run out of fuel.
For a typical owner, the biggest issue is not going to be the hybrid powertrain limiations but keeping out of the barriers and avoiding "mobile chicanes" during your lapping!
What is an issue is the temperature of that battery, and the amount of "wear" that has occurred to it.
Let me explain:
The P1 has 130kW of electric motor power, and 540kW of engine power. The electric motor is directly coupled to the ICE. So, as soon as the engine speed is above the point where the ICE can produce 130kW (which is about 2800rpm) you can utilise the motor to recharge the battery pack at the same rate you can discharge it if the driver isn't asking for full throttle.
For a road car on road tyres, the amount of a lap spent on full throttle, even at somewhere like the 'ring is only approx 30%, leaving 70% of the time at part throttle and around 30% of that at zero throttle.
As a result, there is enough time to maintain a surprisingly constant SOC in the traction battery. Unfortunately, the issue becomes one of heat rejection. Although the electric powertrain is extremely efficient, at high power levels, the losses generate significant heat, which must be rejected by the cooling systems, systems that will already be heavily loaded by engine heat rejection and radiant energy (from a powertrain getting beasted!) Also, a traction batteries life (energy capacity) pretty much depends on the total energy sourced or sunk into it, so repeatedly smashing 130kW in and out of the traction battery is not good in the long term.
So, what you tend to find is that the system optimisers endup running with a slow rate of SoC reduction, and may limit total power available for transfer when system temperatures become critical. I have it on good authority that the 918 power limit experienced on it's 'ring lap was a thermal limitation and not an energy depletion issue.
In race mode, the P1 is capable of doing repetitive 'ring laps when driven by a top class professional driver until it runs out of fuel. On hot days (~30degC or more), it too will go into thermal limitation eventually, but generally this is actually at a similar time to when it will have run out of fuel.
For a typical owner, the biggest issue is not going to be the hybrid powertrain limiations but keeping out of the barriers and avoiding "mobile chicanes" during your lapping!
Peloton25 said:
That rumor is utterly ridiculous and false.
Here's an owner exercising his P1 at the Ring recently - he shared the completion of his lap demonstrating that the car still has plenty of power in reserve to get to 324 KPH before braking to go under the bridge, which on a clear track Chris Goodwin doesn't even need to do given the downforce the car produces.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa08mXthOaQ
With more than a hint of sarcasm he was asked: "What you mean you didn't run out of batts....?"
And his response: "yeah imagine my surprise... all day long, race mode, no problems.. we did 15 laps in race mode without significant issue.."
>8^)
ER
Blimey. He passed the other cars like they were standing still. Awesome Here's an owner exercising his P1 at the Ring recently - he shared the completion of his lap demonstrating that the car still has plenty of power in reserve to get to 324 KPH before braking to go under the bridge, which on a clear track Chris Goodwin doesn't even need to do given the downforce the car produces.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa08mXthOaQ
With more than a hint of sarcasm he was asked: "What you mean you didn't run out of batts....?"
And his response: "yeah imagine my surprise... all day long, race mode, no problems.. we did 15 laps in race mode without significant issue.."
>8^)
ER
Edited by Peloton25 on Monday 5th January 07:39
Ah that is a shame are taking so long. You would think they would want the reputation of pulling something like this off and be a bit more eager to get it done.
I've always thought the HDF kit looked a little out of place without the lm/gtr sideskirts. The f1 definitely suits the sleek look.
Only 2kg saving for the titanium exhaust says alot for the standard system as I assume the titanium one would do away with the silencer/crash structure.
I've always thought the HDF kit looked a little out of place without the lm/gtr sideskirts. The f1 definitely suits the sleek look.
Only 2kg saving for the titanium exhaust says alot for the standard system as I assume the titanium one would do away with the silencer/crash structure.
flemke said:
I would consider holding onto a car indefinitely only if I loved it, and I don't love this one. Some elements of it are great, but as I said above I expect that within the next couple of years there will be McLaren products that will make the P1 seem less special, such that having a million pounds tied up in it would not make sense.
The F1 was "lucky" in the sense that, during its era, there was nothing else remotely like it, and subsequent eras have not allowed anything like it to go into production. Its future is assured.
We cannot say the same for the P1. I think its future will be akin to the first 20 years of the 959's existence.
There are a couple of things I need to do with the P1, a couple of personal commitments, and then I think I shall kiss it goodbye.
Is your (likely) decision partly influenced by the introduction of the P1 GTR?The F1 was "lucky" in the sense that, during its era, there was nothing else remotely like it, and subsequent eras have not allowed anything like it to go into production. Its future is assured.
We cannot say the same for the P1. I think its future will be akin to the first 20 years of the 959's existence.
There are a couple of things I need to do with the P1, a couple of personal commitments, and then I think I shall kiss it goodbye.
Peloton25 said:
trackdemon said:
As I understand it (albeit from unofficial sources), the laptime will never be released because it doesn't exist, in the conventional sense. The P1 doesn't carry enough electrical capacity to make a full lap of the 'ring at record time speeds, losing the majority of the e-boost around 7 miles in. At that point it was up on the 918, and by stitching together optimum sectors the total elapsed time beats the 918. IIRC the time is something in the 6.49-6.51 range. I guess it'll be left in this hinterland of guessing games for us armchair enthusiasts, unless somebody would like to make do it themselves.... 
That rumor is utterly ridiculous and false.Here's an owner exercising his P1 at the Ring recently - he shared the completion of his lap demonstrating that the car still has plenty of power in reserve to get to 324 KPH before braking to go under the bridge, which on a clear track Chris Goodwin doesn't even need to do given the downforce the car produces.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa08mXthOaQ
With more than a hint of sarcasm he was asked: "What you mean you didn't run out of batts....?"
And his response: "yeah imagine my surprise... all day long, race mode, no problems.. we did 15 laps in race mode without significant issue.."
>8^)
ER
Edited by Peloton25 on Monday 5th January 07:39
Max_Torque said:
The "amount of battery" left by the end of a N'ring lap is not an issue.
What is an issue is the temperature of that battery, and the amount of "wear" that has occurred to it.
Let me explain:
The P1 has 130kW of electric motor power, and 540kW of engine power. The electric motor is directly coupled to the ICE. So, as soon as the engine speed is above the point where the ICE can produce 130kW (which is about 2800rpm) you can utilise the motor to recharge the battery pack at the same rate you can discharge it if the driver isn't asking for full throttle.
For a road car on road tyres, the amount of a lap spent on full throttle, even at somewhere like the 'ring is only approx 30%, leaving 70% of the time at part throttle and around 30% of that at zero throttle.
As a result, there is enough time to maintain a surprisingly constant SOC in the traction battery. Unfortunately, the issue becomes one of heat rejection. Although the electric powertrain is extremely efficient, at high power levels, the losses generate significant heat, which must be rejected by the cooling systems, systems that will already be heavily loaded by engine heat rejection and radiant energy (from a powertrain getting beasted!) Also, a traction batteries life (energy capacity) pretty much depends on the total energy sourced or sunk into it, so repeatedly smashing 130kW in and out of the traction battery is not good in the long term.
So, what you tend to find is that the system optimisers endup running with a slow rate of SoC reduction, and may limit total power available for transfer when system temperatures become critical. I have it on good authority that the 918 power limit experienced on it's 'ring lap was a thermal limitation and not an energy depletion issue.
In race mode, the P1 is capable of doing repetitive 'ring laps when driven by a top class professional driver until it runs out of fuel. On hot days (~30degC or more), it too will go into thermal limitation eventually, but generally this is actually at a similar time to when it will have run out of fuel.
For a typical owner, the biggest issue is not going to be the hybrid powertrain limiations but keeping out of the barriers and avoiding "mobile chicanes" during your lapping!
One of the best technical explanations I have read in a long timeWhat is an issue is the temperature of that battery, and the amount of "wear" that has occurred to it.
Let me explain:
The P1 has 130kW of electric motor power, and 540kW of engine power. The electric motor is directly coupled to the ICE. So, as soon as the engine speed is above the point where the ICE can produce 130kW (which is about 2800rpm) you can utilise the motor to recharge the battery pack at the same rate you can discharge it if the driver isn't asking for full throttle.
For a road car on road tyres, the amount of a lap spent on full throttle, even at somewhere like the 'ring is only approx 30%, leaving 70% of the time at part throttle and around 30% of that at zero throttle.
As a result, there is enough time to maintain a surprisingly constant SOC in the traction battery. Unfortunately, the issue becomes one of heat rejection. Although the electric powertrain is extremely efficient, at high power levels, the losses generate significant heat, which must be rejected by the cooling systems, systems that will already be heavily loaded by engine heat rejection and radiant energy (from a powertrain getting beasted!) Also, a traction batteries life (energy capacity) pretty much depends on the total energy sourced or sunk into it, so repeatedly smashing 130kW in and out of the traction battery is not good in the long term.
So, what you tend to find is that the system optimisers endup running with a slow rate of SoC reduction, and may limit total power available for transfer when system temperatures become critical. I have it on good authority that the 918 power limit experienced on it's 'ring lap was a thermal limitation and not an energy depletion issue.
In race mode, the P1 is capable of doing repetitive 'ring laps when driven by a top class professional driver until it runs out of fuel. On hot days (~30degC or more), it too will go into thermal limitation eventually, but generally this is actually at a similar time to when it will have run out of fuel.
For a typical owner, the biggest issue is not going to be the hybrid powertrain limiations but keeping out of the barriers and avoiding "mobile chicanes" during your lapping!
thegreenhell said:
In his interview with Chris Harris, Chris Goodwin says quite categorically that the P1 will do a full lap of the Nordschleife with full e-boost, discussing the subject in some depth here:
http://youtu.be/VXRA_34eZrk?t=18m23s
Obviously I could not personally say whether any "charge" (or whatever one wants to call) it is still available at the end of the straight. Even if it were available to me, I would not be driving the car as hard as a Marc Lieb or Chris Goodwin would do, and the result might be different.http://youtu.be/VXRA_34eZrk?t=18m23s
What I would say is that there are two battery-related gauges amongst the instruments, one for battery temp and one for % of charge available, so one can monitor easily how quickly or slowly charge is consumed and replenished. I was surprised that the system took as long as it did to replenish (to 80%, which is the default running limit).
Looking at it another way, supposedly a total battery charge will propel the car for 6 miles at what (I presume) would be fairly moderate speeds - certainly nothing like the 180+ rate at which one would be pelting down the Dottinger Hohe on a 'Ring reference lap. If the assumption were that, in order to achieve that max battery-only distance of 6 miles, one was traveling at an average of 40 mph, and we relate that to 180mph, I believe that that 350% increase from 40 to 180 would require about 90 times as much bhp. This is not apples-to-apples, as I do not know how much of total available electric power is being consumed at 40 mph, but we do know that it is not 100%
My question would be, if total charge life at (the assumed) 40 mph is 6 miles, what is the charge life (in distance) going to be at 180 mph?
Also, bear in mind that, although that final 1+ mile stretch of the NS is straight, it is not flat. It is distinctly uphill, requiring more power usage for a given speed.
Joe911 said:
Peloton25 said:
That rumor is utterly ridiculous and false.
Here's an owner exercising his P1 at the Ring recently - he shared the completion of his lap demonstrating that the car still has plenty of power in reserve to get to 324 KPH before braking to go under the bridge, which on a clear track Chris Goodwin doesn't even need to do given the downforce the car produces.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa08mXthOaQ
That does not prove anything. One guy puts up a 50s clip which tells us pretty much nothing. We have no idea how good this guy is and how committed he was. I would imagine that the difference in electric power use between an 85% lap and a 100% lap is significant - the same would be true in 918 or LaF.Here's an owner exercising his P1 at the Ring recently - he shared the completion of his lap demonstrating that the car still has plenty of power in reserve to get to 324 KPH before braking to go under the bridge, which on a clear track Chris Goodwin doesn't even need to do given the downforce the car produces.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa08mXthOaQ
Show me a lap under, say, 7:10 and it will be worth looking at how much battery is left.
Yes, there are some P1 owners who know how to drive on a circuit. Some. There are also some who haven't a clue.
Edited by flemke on Monday 5th January 15:57
E65Ross said:
I can only feel disappointed myself, a friendly sorry for yourself, for it seems the P1 just doesn't do it for you. Which is a real shame considering the not-small amount of money you have spent in acquiring it.
That said, I'm sure you'll get that all back. I feel somehow disappointed too because, I absolutely love the P1 and it'd be the 1 of the 3 I'd take.
Having said all of that, ultimately it's still the F1 I'd rather drive.
Saying I feel somewhat sorry for someone who owns a McLaren P1 does seem daft
Not sure what to think about the 3 (P1, Laffer, 918). Laffer has the best concept (NA engine, KERS, lightest weight), but its problems are that it is ugly as 5hit and that it's a Ferrari.That said, I'm sure you'll get that all back. I feel somehow disappointed too because, I absolutely love the P1 and it'd be the 1 of the 3 I'd take.
Having said all of that, ultimately it's still the F1 I'd rather drive.
Saying I feel somewhat sorry for someone who owns a McLaren P1 does seem daft
918 has best engineering but of course it is the heaviest, and they produced more 918s than they did of the other 2 combined.
P1 is supposed to be "best driver's car", and maybe it is, although I am sure that it would be a better driver's car if they had not bothered with the electric crap and instead spent their development money on weight savings and a great NA engine.
If I lived in the middle of the desert, I might feel differently, but in my world the P1 is IMO too big, and the electric stuff belongs on train sets, not on cars.
Mjunkie said:
Ah that is a shame are taking so long. You would think they would want the reputation of pulling something like this off and be a bit more eager to get it done.
I've always thought the HDF kit looked a little out of place without the lm/gtr sideskirts. The f1 definitely suits the sleek look.
Only 2kg saving for the titanium exhaust says alot for the standard system as I assume the titanium one would do away with the silencer/crash structure.
Although all the standard road cars came with the Ti silencer box to which you refer, the LMs came instead with individual, much smaller silencers. I've always thought the HDF kit looked a little out of place without the lm/gtr sideskirts. The f1 definitely suits the sleek look.
Only 2kg saving for the titanium exhaust says alot for the standard system as I assume the titanium one would do away with the silencer/crash structure.
At some point the factory started offering that less elegant but lighter weight and better sounding LM system as a retrofit option, and I had that done to my car many years ago. It is that optional system from which this Ti thing provides only a 2 kg reduction in weight.
Animal said:
flemke said:
I would consider holding onto a car indefinitely only if I loved it, and I don't love this one. Some elements of it are great, but as I said above I expect that within the next couple of years there will be McLaren products that will make the P1 seem less special, such that having a million pounds tied up in it would not make sense.
The F1 was "lucky" in the sense that, during its era, there was nothing else remotely like it, and subsequent eras have not allowed anything like it to go into production. Its future is assured.
We cannot say the same for the P1. I think its future will be akin to the first 20 years of the 959's existence.
There are a couple of things I need to do with the P1, a couple of personal commitments, and then I think I shall kiss it goodbye.
Is your (likely) decision partly influenced by the introduction of the P1 GTR?The F1 was "lucky" in the sense that, during its era, there was nothing else remotely like it, and subsequent eras have not allowed anything like it to go into production. Its future is assured.
We cannot say the same for the P1. I think its future will be akin to the first 20 years of the 959's existence.
There are a couple of things I need to do with the P1, a couple of personal commitments, and then I think I shall kiss it goodbye.
flemke said:
Obviously I could not personally say whether any "charge" (or whatever one wants to call) it is still available at the end of the straight. Even if it were available to me, I would not be driving the car as hard as a Marc Lieb or Chris Goodwin would do, and the result might be different.
What I would say is that there are two battery-related gauges amongst the instruments, one for battery temp and one for % of charge available, so one can monitor easily how quickly or slowly charge is consumed and replenished. I was surprised that the system took as long as it did to replenish (to 80%, which is the default running limit).
Looking at it another way, supposedly a total battery charge will propel the car for 6 miles at what (I presume) would be fairly moderate speeds - certainly nothing like the 180+ rate at which one would be pelting down the Dottinger Hohe on a 'Ring reference lap. If the assumption were that, in order to achieve that max battery-only distance of 6 miles, one was traveling at an average of 40 mph, and we relate that to 180mph, I believe that that 350% increase from 40 to 180 would require about 90 times as much bhp. This is not apples-to-apples, as I do not know how much of total available electric power is being consumed at 40 mph, but we do know that it is not 100%
My question would be, if total charge life at (the assumed) 40 mph is 6 miles, what is the charge life (in distance) going to be at 180 mph?
Also, bear in mind that, although that final 1+ mile stretch of the NS is straight, it is not flat. It is distinctly uphill, requiring more power usage for a given speed.
But it's not the battery alone propelling it at 180mph though is it, the engine will be doing a lot of that. I can't imagine the engine being drained more going flat out at 200mph+ than flooring it at 50mph...What I would say is that there are two battery-related gauges amongst the instruments, one for battery temp and one for % of charge available, so one can monitor easily how quickly or slowly charge is consumed and replenished. I was surprised that the system took as long as it did to replenish (to 80%, which is the default running limit).
Looking at it another way, supposedly a total battery charge will propel the car for 6 miles at what (I presume) would be fairly moderate speeds - certainly nothing like the 180+ rate at which one would be pelting down the Dottinger Hohe on a 'Ring reference lap. If the assumption were that, in order to achieve that max battery-only distance of 6 miles, one was traveling at an average of 40 mph, and we relate that to 180mph, I believe that that 350% increase from 40 to 180 would require about 90 times as much bhp. This is not apples-to-apples, as I do not know how much of total available electric power is being consumed at 40 mph, but we do know that it is not 100%
My question would be, if total charge life at (the assumed) 40 mph is 6 miles, what is the charge life (in distance) going to be at 180 mph?
Also, bear in mind that, although that final 1+ mile stretch of the NS is straight, it is not flat. It is distinctly uphill, requiring more power usage for a given speed.
Joe911 said:
That does not prove anything. One guy puts up a 50s clip which tells us pretty much nothing. We have no idea how good this guy is and how committed he was. I would imagine that the difference in electric power use between an 85% lap and a 100% lap is significant - the same would be true in 918 or LaF.
Show me a lap under, say, 7:10 and it will be worth looking at how much battery is left.
I won't argue with what you have said - I'm just offering evidence to dispel the myth that the battery is flat at half a lap as some have claimed, rendering the P1 incapable of completing a full lap at speed. That is simply untrue no matter who is driving the car or at what rate. Their engineering team knew that full performance at the 'Ring was a potential task the P1 would need to function at from the moment the project started.Show me a lap under, say, 7:10 and it will be worth looking at how much battery is left.
Michael didn't offer up his lap times, but he's a pretty handy guy behind the wheel and is certainly one of the more experienced P1 owners when it comes to track time behind the wheel of the car. He's no Ring-meister of course, but he wasn't putzing around saving it for the final stretch, you can be sure.
PGNCerbera said:
so why did they not release a lap time Peloton......I feel a little bit embarrassed on their behalf because I want them to be awesome but between Ron and their PR team they have come across poorly, almost foolishly.
I haven't taken anyone to task over the decision as they don't owe me any explanation, but I will say that in my own opinion and generally speaking: Nurburgring lap times are pointlessly incomparable marketing exercises, often done using vehicles less than representative of their production counterparts in ways you can't see without very close examination. I am comfortable with McLaren's decision to say "we reached our goal and then some" and be done with it. I never doubted they could, nor am I among the camp of people who would prefer they do poorly either.>8^)
ER
Edited by Peloton25 on Monday 5th January 20:08
E65Ross said:
flemke said:
Obviously I could not personally say whether any "charge" (or whatever one wants to call) it is still available at the end of the straight. Even if it were available to me, I would not be driving the car as hard as a Marc Lieb or Chris Goodwin would do, and the result might be different.
What I would say is that there are two battery-related gauges amongst the instruments, one for battery temp and one for % of charge available, so one can monitor easily how quickly or slowly charge is consumed and replenished. I was surprised that the system took as long as it did to replenish (to 80%, which is the default running limit).
Looking at it another way, supposedly a total battery charge will propel the car for 6 miles at what (I presume) would be fairly moderate speeds - certainly nothing like the 180+ rate at which one would be pelting down the Dottinger Hohe on a 'Ring reference lap. If the assumption were that, in order to achieve that max battery-only distance of 6 miles, one was traveling at an average of 40 mph, and we relate that to 180mph, I believe that that 350% increase from 40 to 180 would require about 90 times as much bhp. This is not apples-to-apples, as I do not know how much of total available electric power is being consumed at 40 mph, but we do know that it is not 100%
My question would be, if total charge life at (the assumed) 40 mph is 6 miles, what is the charge life (in distance) going to be at 180 mph?
Also, bear in mind that, although that final 1+ mile stretch of the NS is straight, it is not flat. It is distinctly uphill, requiring more power usage for a given speed.
But it's not the battery alone propelling it at 180mph though is it, the engine will be doing a lot of that. I can't imagine the engine being drained more going flat out at 200mph+ than flooring it at 50mph...What I would say is that there are two battery-related gauges amongst the instruments, one for battery temp and one for % of charge available, so one can monitor easily how quickly or slowly charge is consumed and replenished. I was surprised that the system took as long as it did to replenish (to 80%, which is the default running limit).
Looking at it another way, supposedly a total battery charge will propel the car for 6 miles at what (I presume) would be fairly moderate speeds - certainly nothing like the 180+ rate at which one would be pelting down the Dottinger Hohe on a 'Ring reference lap. If the assumption were that, in order to achieve that max battery-only distance of 6 miles, one was traveling at an average of 40 mph, and we relate that to 180mph, I believe that that 350% increase from 40 to 180 would require about 90 times as much bhp. This is not apples-to-apples, as I do not know how much of total available electric power is being consumed at 40 mph, but we do know that it is not 100%
My question would be, if total charge life at (the assumed) 40 mph is 6 miles, what is the charge life (in distance) going to be at 180 mph?
Also, bear in mind that, although that final 1+ mile stretch of the NS is straight, it is not flat. It is distinctly uphill, requiring more power usage for a given speed.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff