Discussion
Ask a load of non car people now how many mpg their car does and they won’t have a clue, they’ll probably tell you how long a tenner lasts or similar.
EVs have loads of confusing lingo that most drivers won’t care about and it seems to be encouraged by the geeky data hungry early adopters.
EVs have loads of confusing lingo that most drivers won’t care about and it seems to be encouraged by the geeky data hungry early adopters.
Smiljan said:
Ask a load of non car people now how many mpg their car does and they won’t have a clue, they’ll probably tell you how long a tenner lasts or similar.
EVs have loads of confusing lingo that most drivers won’t care about and it seems to be encouraged by the geeky data hungry early adopters.
There's is little or no interest in ICE range though, it's all about how much you're spending on fuel?EVs have loads of confusing lingo that most drivers won’t care about and it seems to be encouraged by the geeky data hungry early adopters.
The opposite is true with EV, everyone obsessed with range and efficiency whether it's important or not for their expected usage and rarely discuss the cost of charging as relatively insignificant if doing it at home?
Smiljan said:
Ask a load of non car people now how many mpg their car does and they won’t have a clue, they’ll probably tell you how long a tenner lasts or similar.
EVs have loads of confusing lingo that most drivers won’t care about and it seems to be encouraged by the geeky data hungry early adopters.
Fair comment and to be honest, its still the wild west when it comes to facts and figures from the EV makers. Range is useful, but it doesnt tell the whole story and the whole EPA vs WLTP stuff is crazy. I find the EPA numbers for MPG on ICE cars to be fairly accurate for what I have seen - the mix of highway and city driving for an averaged out number is pretty much accurate from what I have seen. But EPA number are all over the place when it comes to EV's!EVs have loads of confusing lingo that most drivers won’t care about and it seems to be encouraged by the geeky data hungry early adopters.
The Porsche Taycan got hit hard with its EPA (tested) range, but that was due to some bizarre calculations and adjustments and a number of independent testers have shown that it can clearly go well above what the EPA says! And Bjorn on YouTube did some testing on the smaller wheels and got some amazing results - again, something that is excluded from calculating ranges for EV's and it clearly makes a massive difference!
And I will pick on Tesla here, but I dont know of a single owner who gets close to their ranges. Dont get me wrong, they are still impressive, but can you really get 322 miles out of a M3 LR? Yeah, nope....
However, the MPGe number from the EPA (again, calculated and somewhat all over the map) is a better number from what I consider though, since it does take into account a number of things. The M3 gets something like 120MPGe while the Jag iPace gets 80MPGe (cant find the figures to hand). Its a massive difference and shows that the Tesla is significantly more efficient and will go further on the same amount of electrons. Why mention this? The BMW i3 gets something like 113MPGe - so not far off the Tesla, so does really well on range with a significantly smaller battery. Is it perfect? Far from it.
Which comes to the miles per kWh as a test of efficiency - our i3 gets an average of 3.7 miles per kWh and with a 33kWh battery (yeah, thanks BMW for using a completely different system called Ah for this) and you get a max of 122 miles on a single charge - which is pretty much exactly what we get!!! I am sure this is where the manufacturers get their range calculations from, but a better comparison of efficiency is good. It will certainly give you a better view of how frequently you will have to charge - since most EV drivers dont run their batteries from 100%-1% that frequently, if at all. Knowing what the efficiency is, gives you a better view.
I don't know what the answer is really. I'd like to see range of EV's advertised as an average range over 90% of the capacity.
It's really no use saying a car can do 100 miles when in fact some of that range is turtle mode and you'd only every get that range in perfect weather conditions using every last % of the battery capacity.
The consumption figures vary so much it's a joke like manufacturers MPG figures.
Thinking about it, does the EPA / WLTP calculate range from the full 100% to 0% of the battery?
It's really no use saying a car can do 100 miles when in fact some of that range is turtle mode and you'd only every get that range in perfect weather conditions using every last % of the battery capacity.
The consumption figures vary so much it's a joke like manufacturers MPG figures.
Thinking about it, does the EPA / WLTP calculate range from the full 100% to 0% of the battery?
Smiljan said:
I don't know what the answer is really. I'd like to see range of EV's advertised as an average range over 90% of the capacity.
The most important range figure for any EV isn't the 'max' range in summer, the figure manufacturers should provide is the 'minimum' range in winter at 0 degrees, no pre warming, on wet roads doing 70mph. No one ever worries about running out of range on a family summer holiday, but having to do an unplanned dash across the country last minute in the middle of winter is a different story.
Ofcourse manufacturer will never give you the 'minimum' range on any EV as it can be as much as 50% less than the max range figure.
Our old Leaf had a minimum range of sub 40 miles if you dared to drive it at 70mph in winter conditions on the Mway. Our current Model X is around 150 miles, even a brand new LR Model S is easily sub 250 miles in those conditions. Honda E will be barely 80 miles I suspect.
But the reality is those minimum range figures is still fine for alot/most people and how they use their cars. Its just for manufacturers telling people the car will do 120 miles makes it easier to sell than telling them it'll do 70-80 miles.
Woops looks like I've probably way over estimated the Honda E minimum range. 75 miles in summer and dry roads at 75mph is going to be sub 60 miles range in winter with wet roads at 70mph.
Unless you enjoy range anxiety and counting how close you are to Mways exits don't be taking the E on a Mway cruise over the next few months!!
https://insideevs.com/reviews/432785/honda-e-highw...
Unless you enjoy range anxiety and counting how close you are to Mways exits don't be taking the E on a Mway cruise over the next few months!!
https://insideevs.com/reviews/432785/honda-e-highw...
off_again said:
And I will pick on Tesla here, but I dont know of a single owner who gets close to their ranges. Dont get me wrong, they are still impressive, but can you really get 322 miles out of a M3 LR? Yeah, nope....
Carwow managed 270 miles at 10C and mainly 70mph motorway cruising so 300+ in summer at lower speeds doesn't appear impossible if you were focused on range over everything else? 
The Honda e really isn't suited to longer journeys. You can do them in a pinch but realistically if you need to do them with any regularity it's not the car for you.
The issue is not just that the real range is under 100 miles, it's that it charges slowly too. If you charge when you hit the low battery warning and stop at 80% (when it gets really really slow) you will do about 45-50 miles between charges on the motorway.
If you want more range there are cars in a similar price bracket that are better choices. The Leaf 62 is the obvious one, or a lower spec Kona/eNiro. Oh and the Zoe of course. Or you can save yourself a packet and get a Leaf 40 or MG ZS EV.
The issue is not just that the real range is under 100 miles, it's that it charges slowly too. If you charge when you hit the low battery warning and stop at 80% (when it gets really really slow) you will do about 45-50 miles between charges on the motorway.
If you want more range there are cars in a similar price bracket that are better choices. The Leaf 62 is the obvious one, or a lower spec Kona/eNiro. Oh and the Zoe of course. Or you can save yourself a packet and get a Leaf 40 or MG ZS EV.
off_again said:
And I will pick on Tesla here, but I dont know of a single owner who gets close to their ranges. Dont get me wrong, they are still impressive, but can you really get 322 miles out of a M3 LR? Yeah, nope....
The only ones doing it right with real-world driving seem to be the Koreans. Other than them, it's much like claimed mpg. You could reach it but at the sort of driving that makes you want to kill yourself.ZesPak said:
off_again said:
And I will pick on Tesla here, but I dont know of a single owner who gets close to their ranges. Dont get me wrong, they are still impressive, but can you really get 322 miles out of a M3 LR? Yeah, nope....
The only ones doing it right with real-world driving seem to be the Koreans. Other than them, it's much like claimed mpg. You could reach it but at the sort of driving that makes you want to kill yourself.ZesPak said:
The only ones doing it right with real-world driving seem to be the Koreans. Other than them, it's much like claimed mpg. You could reach it but at the sort of driving that makes you want to kill yourself.
They do a lot of things right. When they say "64kWh battery" they mean 64kWh minimum usable, not gross capacity. Owners report higher available capacity when new.They botched the UK launch of the Kona and eNiro but seem to have sorted most of the issues out now. The biggest complaint I see are that you can't turn off the annoying bong sound when you turn the car on.
SWoll said:
I'd suggest that's because they optimise the drive train purely from an efficiency perspective? Tesla/Audi/Jaguar/Polestar are having to balance that with performance to meet customer expectations so real world results will be far more variable?
That's a good point. Isn't there like a "slow" mode in the TM3? Wonder how that would have done in that test...aestetix1 said:
They do a lot of things right. When they say "64kWh battery" they mean 64kWh minimum usable, not gross capacity. Owners report higher available capacity when new.
I think the advertising rules should be changed so companies can only advertise the usable battery capacity on new EVs. ZesPak said:
SWoll said:
I'd suggest that's because they optimise the drive train purely from an efficiency perspective? Tesla/Audi/Jaguar/Polestar are having to balance that with performance to meet customer expectations so real world results will be far more variable?
That's a good point. Isn't there like a "slow" mode in the TM3? Wonder how that would have done in that test...I've yet to turn it on in mine after 11 months but do know people who leave it on constantly as find their cars 'too fast' otherwise.
Eco/chill mode makes no difference to efficiency. It just reduces the responsiveness of the throttle but you can simply use a lighter touch to achieve the same thing in normal mode.
Some cars have an "Eco+" type mode that restricts the air con power etc. but again you can just turn it down manually.
It helps if you have a lead foot but efficient drivers see no benefit.
Some cars have an "Eco+" type mode that restricts the air con power etc. but again you can just turn it down manually.
It helps if you have a lead foot but efficient drivers see no benefit.
SWoll said:
ZesPak said:
off_again said:
And I will pick on Tesla here, but I dont know of a single owner who gets close to their ranges. Dont get me wrong, they are still impressive, but can you really get 322 miles out of a M3 LR? Yeah, nope....
The only ones doing it right with real-world driving seem to be the Koreans. Other than them, it's much like claimed mpg. You could reach it but at the sort of driving that makes you want to kill yourself.Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff