500 mile+ ranged EV Confirmed
Discussion
REALIST123 said:
One does wonder just how many times the same argument can be had.......
It’s worth thinking above real range too.If a Tesla has 300 miles range. That could drop to 250 if you’re taking higher speed journeys.
Then consider you generally have 80% (std charge) and want to avoid flattening the battery too much, effectively keeping 20% in reserve.
60% of 250 suddenly makes those journeys you don’t really ever do closer to those longer journeys we all make on occasion.
Witchfinder said:
Mikebentley said:
Forgot to post Witchfinder I do find your posts balanced and informative, the Elon bit was not aimed at you. I am hoping I can go EV next March.
I mustn't be trying hard enough 
. Apologies to Chocolate Frog earlier, I was more than a bit rude.On the subject of EVs in the post-C19 world. I think there'll be some change in driving habits, but not the seismic change that has been predicted. I swapped my V90 lease for a more expensive E-Tron lease, reasoning I'd save £170 per month on fuel. I've barely done 1,000 miles in the past six months.
I expect to be back in the office soon a couple of days per week, and reaping at least some of the benefits. All the signs seem to suggest that most people will go back to their normal places of work fairly soon.
yajeed said:
REALIST123 said:
One does wonder just how many times the same argument can be had.......
It’s worth thinking above real range too.If a Tesla has 300 miles range. That could drop to 250 if you’re taking higher speed journeys.
Then consider you generally have 80% (std charge) and want to avoid flattening the battery too much, effectively keeping 20% in reserve.
60% of 250 suddenly makes those journeys you don’t really ever do closer to those longer journeys we all make on occasion.
Standard charge is 90% rather than 80% + a 10% reserve (20+ miles) is more than enough in my experience. If you're planning a long journey you would also charge to 95% leaving a bit of room for regen.
Mikebentley said:
My situation is similar. Use a leased Transit Connect for work prior to 23/03/20. Not done 20 miles since and supposed to be restarting on 24/08/20 but just learned maybe delayed again. I am 100% self employed with zero basic and lots of costs. Was pre CV19 looking to lease maybe a 208 E for my 120 miles per day and weighed up fuel savings to bring the two different leases together. Transit cost £276pm plus fuel £240pm so was viable. Will have to wait and see. Very excited to try though and the e 208 GT is very nice.
What's an E208 going to cost you a month on a 30k mile a year deal out of interest as that's heavy mileage for a lease?Edited by SWoll on Tuesday 11th August 21:27
ChocolateFrog said:
The cost of electricity isn't wildly cheaper than fuel even now, give it 10 years and it'll probably be more expensive.
Electricity can be much cheaper now, give it ten years and it could be even cheaper.With some photovoltaics and a 150 pound joining bonus to change supplier I have a years free motoring for two EVs.
The price of electricity is similar in the UK and NZ. The bonus here is night rate is from 9pm to 7am (and sometimes all weekend).
(Petrol is around 85 p a litre)
caziques said:
ChocolateFrog said:
The cost of electricity isn't wildly cheaper than fuel even now, give it 10 years and it'll probably be more expensive.
Electricity can be much cheaper now, give it ten years and it could be even cheaper.With some photovoltaics and a 150 pound joining bonus to change supplier I have a years free motoring for two EVs.
The price of electricity is similar in the UK and NZ. The bonus here is night rate is from 9pm to 7am (and sometimes all weekend).
(Petrol is around 85 p a litre)
Mercedes C63 - 470bhp - 1800KG - 24mpg = 20p per mile @ £106.9 per litre
Model 3 P - 480bhp - 1800kg - 275 mile range from 75kWh battery - 3.66 miles per Kw = 4p per mile @ 15p per kW.
Over 12k miles per that's a saving of £2400 - £480 = £1920 or an 80% difference.
And those figures are based on being kind to the C63 on mpg, current cheap UK fuel costs and an above average kW cost without special rates taken into account.
SWoll said:
And those figures are based on being kind to the C63 on mpg, current cheap UK fuel costs and an above average kW cost without special rates taken into account.
It's probably being unduly harsh on the Tesla too. With Octopus Go, you get 5p/kWh at night, and on Agile it can be so low that they pay you to take electricity sometimes.Imagine if you were being paid to fill up with petrol!
Witchfinder said:
SWoll said:
And those figures are based on being kind to the C63 on mpg, current cheap UK fuel costs and an above average kW cost without special rates taken into account.
It's probably being unduly harsh on the Tesla too. With Octopus Go, you get 5p/kWh at night, and on Agile it can be so low that they pay you to take electricity sometimes.Imagine if you were being paid to fill up with petrol!
Even being completely unfair to the EV it's 80% cheaper to fuel. 90% is far from impossible, especially once petrol prices start to creep back up or you fill up with SU like you probably would with a performance ICE.
yajeed said:
It’s worth thinking above real range too.
If a Tesla has 300 miles range. That could drop to 250 if you’re taking higher speed journeys.
Then consider you generally have 80% (std charge) and want to avoid flattening the battery too much, effectively keeping 20% in reserve.
60% of 250 suddenly makes those journeys you don’t really ever do closer to those longer journeys we all make on occasion.
Yes headline 500/600 mile range is ideal conditions, new, flat to empty, 50 mph 25 deg C, no headwind, no hills.If a Tesla has 300 miles range. That could drop to 250 if you’re taking higher speed journeys.
Then consider you generally have 80% (std charge) and want to avoid flattening the battery too much, effectively keeping 20% in reserve.
60% of 250 suddenly makes those journeys you don’t really ever do closer to those longer journeys we all make on occasion.
Real world means, 80 to 20% to maximise battery life and have some reserve, not regularly fast charging, cold conditions (north USA winter), intermittent un planned random access journeys, degradation with age and cycles....
Suddenly it really is only 200...
SWoll said:
yajeed said:
REALIST123 said:
One does wonder just how many times the same argument can be had.......
It’s worth thinking above real range too.If a Tesla has 300 miles range. That could drop to 250 if you’re taking higher speed journeys.
Then consider you generally have 80% (std charge) and want to avoid flattening the battery too much, effectively keeping 20% in reserve.
60% of 250 suddenly makes those journeys you don’t really ever do closer to those longer journeys we all make on occasion.
Standard charge is 90% rather than 80% + a 10% reserve (20+ miles) is more than enough in my experience. If you're planning a long journey you would also charge to 95% leaving a bit of room for regen.
Mikebentley said:
My situation is similar. Use a leased Transit Connect for work prior to 23/03/20. Not done 20 miles since and supposed to be restarting on 24/08/20 but just learned maybe delayed again. I am 100% self employed with zero basic and lots of costs. Was pre CV19 looking to lease maybe a 208 E for my 120 miles per day and weighed up fuel savings to bring the two different leases together. Transit cost £276pm plus fuel £240pm so was viable. Will have to wait and see. Very excited to try though and the e 208 GT is very nice.
What's an E208 going to cost you a month on a 30k mile a year deal out of interest as that's heavy mileage for a lease?Edited by SWoll on Tuesday 11th August 21:27
ChocolateFrog said:
TLDR The range of your vehicle does not imply you need to take regular trips that match said range.
My van doesn't 'need' a 600 mile range but it's great not to have to even think about it for a few weeks (or months more recently) at a time.
The key difference is that a larger tank costs next to nothing, literally just a bit more metal. A larger battery costs thousands, maybe tens of thousands of Euros. So why would you pay all that money for a tiny bit of convenience if you didn't have to?My van doesn't 'need' a 600 mile range but it's great not to have to even think about it for a few weeks (or months more recently) at a time.
How much more do you think the large battery model will cost? €50,000? To save 20 seconds a week plugging in.
aestetix1 said:
ChocolateFrog said:
TLDR The range of your vehicle does not imply you need to take regular trips that match said range.
My van doesn't 'need' a 600 mile range but it's great not to have to even think about it for a few weeks (or months more recently) at a time.
The key difference is that a larger tank costs next to nothing, literally just a bit more metal. A larger battery costs thousands, maybe tens of thousands of Euros. So why would you pay all that money for a tiny bit of convenience if you didn't have to?My van doesn't 'need' a 600 mile range but it's great not to have to even think about it for a few weeks (or months more recently) at a time.
How much more do you think the large battery model will cost? €50,000? To save 20 seconds a week plugging in.
Back to the Lucid Air, having looked into it in more detail if they can manage to bring in a car with the performance/range suggested with a 100kWh battery, < 2.5 tonne kerb weight and <£100k price tag I'll be very impressed.
I'm expecting at least 120kWh, 2.5 tonnes and £125k+ but hope to be proven wrong as could be a genuine Model S competitor (unlike the Taycan) which can only be a good thing.
I think the main "misunderstanding" here is:
Range is overrated. There's no need for 500 miles of range unless you regularly do that mileage in one day.
You don't need 500 miles, you need to be able to charge daily at least what you use in a day.
- We can agree more range is better.
- With current technology, more range means a lot of compromise (cost, weight, packaging,...)
- We all want more range without compromise, of course. But it's a pipe dream at this moment.
Range is overrated. There's no need for 500 miles of range unless you regularly do that mileage in one day.
You don't need 500 miles, you need to be able to charge daily at least what you use in a day.
SWoll said:
This, and as I say above it will also add a considerable amount of weight to the vehicle and require some level of compromise from a packaging standpoint.
Back to the Lucid Air, having looked into it in more detail if they can manage to bring in a car with the performance/range suggested with a 100kWh battery, < 2.5 tonne kerb weight and <£100k price tag I'll be very impressed.
I'm expecting at least 120kWh, 2.5 tonnes and £125k+ but hope to be proven wrong as could be a genuine Model S competitor (unlike the Taycan) which can only be a good thing.
Lucid claim a drag coefficient of 0.21, this should mean it's 13% more aero efficient than a model S at 60mph.Back to the Lucid Air, having looked into it in more detail if they can manage to bring in a car with the performance/range suggested with a 100kWh battery, < 2.5 tonne kerb weight and <£100k price tag I'll be very impressed.
I'm expecting at least 120kWh, 2.5 tonnes and £125k+ but hope to be proven wrong as could be a genuine Model S competitor (unlike the Taycan) which can only be a good thing.
Therefore should be about to get to 500 miles with a 115kWh battery.
JD said:
SWoll said:
This, and as I say above it will also add a considerable amount of weight to the vehicle and require some level of compromise from a packaging standpoint.
Back to the Lucid Air, having looked into it in more detail if they can manage to bring in a car with the performance/range suggested with a 100kWh battery, < 2.5 tonne kerb weight and <£100k price tag I'll be very impressed.
I'm expecting at least 120kWh, 2.5 tonnes and £125k+ but hope to be proven wrong as could be a genuine Model S competitor (unlike the Taycan) which can only be a good thing.
Lucid claim a drag coefficient of 0.21, this should mean it's 13% more aero efficient than a model S at 60mph.Back to the Lucid Air, having looked into it in more detail if they can manage to bring in a car with the performance/range suggested with a 100kWh battery, < 2.5 tonne kerb weight and <£100k price tag I'll be very impressed.
I'm expecting at least 120kWh, 2.5 tonnes and £125k+ but hope to be proven wrong as could be a genuine Model S competitor (unlike the Taycan) which can only be a good thing.
Therefore should be about to get to 500 miles with a 115kWh battery.
Looking forward to the proper reveal and specs.
ZesPak said:
I think the main "misunderstanding" here is:
Range is overrated. There's no need for 500 miles of range unless you regularly do that mileage in one day.
You don't need 500 miles, you need to be able to charge daily at least what you use in a day.
Yep. After running EV's for 2 years our current car offers 10x the range we need for most days and more than enough to cover 4-5 hours of driving on a longer trip when required.- We can agree more range is better.
- With current technology, more range means a lot of compromise (cost, weight, packaging,...)
- We all want more range without compromise, of course. But it's a pipe dream at this moment.
Range is overrated. There's no need for 500 miles of range unless you regularly do that mileage in one day.
You don't need 500 miles, you need to be able to charge daily at least what you use in a day.
Reducing weight a lot more important than 500 miles of range IMHO, but very difficult to do that with current battery technology so companies have to grab the headlines where they can.
Edited by SWoll on Wednesday 12th August 13:46
SWoll said:
That assumes all other things are equal though? Weight and power output are going to have to factor in and even adding an additional 15% battery would affect weight so the increase in range wouldn't necessarily be linear?
Yes, but in the absence of all the other data it should be close enough.The weight will make little difference to the range, I reckon ~700kg Battery pack.
JD said:
SWoll said:
That assumes all other things are equal though? Weight and power output are going to have to factor in and even adding an additional 15% battery would affect weight so the increase in range wouldn't necessarily be linear?
Yes, but in the absence of all the other data it should be close enough.The weight will make little difference to the range, I reckon ~700kg Battery pack.
TheRainMaker said:
If you had an EV that had a range of 600 miles, I can’t see one draw back.
Charging up every night sounds very dull.
Absolutely. The longer the range, the longer the charge time. On a level 1 charger, you'll get around 3 miles per hour charging (110/120v) which is pretty useless if you are doing more than 20 miles a day. You can top up charging, but you will never really fully charge any vehicle if you are doing more than that. On a level 2 charger, you should see a 20-30 miles per hour charging rate. You can get more, but that will need a 48A or 60A charger, which will usually require specialist install and equipment to use, so lets use a mid value of 25 miles per hour charging on a 30A level 2 charger. That will require A DAY to charge 600 miles, assuming you get a uniform charging rate (which you wont). Charging up every night sounds very dull.
Could you really use 500-600 mile range EV and rely on home charging? Maybe, but its going to be tough. As others have mentioned, massive range like this is broadly pointless. 200-300 mile range with available fast charging en-route is the way to do this. You can top-up at home with an L2, but if you are going to drive 200+ miles a day you can go from 20%-80% quickly and move on. 600 mile range without fast charging? Thats going to be a challenge and its going to be very narrow set of people who this fits for.
Oh, and one thing to note - most EV drivers never charge to 100%, which is great. Its not a phone that requires regular charging. Bigger the range the less charging you need, BUT, if you are still looking at 10+ hours to get a full charge at home, it does somewhat limit the real-world usage of it.
It's worth remembering to take "we have increased the efficiency" claims with a suitable pinch of salt!
The WORST passenger car electric motor i have ever tested (and i've tested a fair few) was 93% efficient.
The BEST electric motor i've ever tested (and Formula 1 hybrid system motor) was 97% efficient
that's 4 %.
Even if somehow someone found a magic way to make a motor 100% efficient, that's just a 7% improvement in range, and actually, because most people drive places where they have to heat the cabin for at least some of the year, as you add motor efficiency, in the real world, all you do is add hotel loads in its place!
There are much,much bigger savings to be had in reducing the road load, ie making the vehicle require the least possible power to push itself along. Unfortunately, there are practical limits to what is both possible, and acceptable to customers. The BMW i3 for example takes this probably to the Nth degree in terms of rolling resistance (v narrow tall tyres) and some EVs have attempted to get a low CdA to lower highway consumption, but ultimate, for a certain sized car, the loads re generally very similar.
Science may well suggest cars can look like this:
but to date, customers have not been convinced.
The WORST passenger car electric motor i have ever tested (and i've tested a fair few) was 93% efficient.
The BEST electric motor i've ever tested (and Formula 1 hybrid system motor) was 97% efficient
that's 4 %.
Even if somehow someone found a magic way to make a motor 100% efficient, that's just a 7% improvement in range, and actually, because most people drive places where they have to heat the cabin for at least some of the year, as you add motor efficiency, in the real world, all you do is add hotel loads in its place!
There are much,much bigger savings to be had in reducing the road load, ie making the vehicle require the least possible power to push itself along. Unfortunately, there are practical limits to what is both possible, and acceptable to customers. The BMW i3 for example takes this probably to the Nth degree in terms of rolling resistance (v narrow tall tyres) and some EVs have attempted to get a low CdA to lower highway consumption, but ultimate, for a certain sized car, the loads re generally very similar.
Science may well suggest cars can look like this:
but to date, customers have not been convinced.
SWoll said:
What's an E208 going to cost you a month on a 30k mile a year deal out of interest as that's heavy mileage for a lease?
The default (on the app that I’m looking at) is 80% and that’s the speed at which charging begins to slow down, and the default at busy supercharging stations.Edited by SWoll on Tuesday 11th August 21:27
My point was, in most cases the numbers you have in the real world are not what the headlines say. That car won’t typically do 600 miles and mine won’t do 300.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff