When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
so something i'd like cleared up is it seems tesla defines range as the drivable distance using 100% of the battery (full to empty) while other manufacturers do not, they seem to keep some charge in 'reserve' no matter what and don't factor that into the available range.
according to alex on autos for example, ford says the new mach-e has 88kWh usable battery, but in fact the car has a 98.9kWh battery (which is yuuuge).
he does a test showing he could easily get the claimed 270 mi range.
it's impressive that tesla gets that range with a considerably smaller battery, but i have a feeling ford is just being UBER cautious on range claims. tesla has never been cautious, always bragging about every theoretical additional mile that no one in real life seems to get. does this bother anyone else?
likewise, the kia niro is spec'ed as having a 64kWh battery, but that's USABLE capacity, this article says the battery is obviously a good bit bigger. there's lots of articles showing the niro ev gets BETTER results than it claims. Kia Niro EV Extended 900-Mile Road Test Review (insideevs.com)
thoughts on bragging (unrealistic?) claims by tesla vs cautious (realistic/pessimistic) claims by others?
it's just something that's bothered me for a while.
Tesla uses the most aggressive technique in getting their EPA numbers which is misleading. You won't get their EPA rate numbers unless you go at 60mph on a highway and there isn't a headwind and 50% of your driving will be on city streets at 40mph. Most Teslas that get 300 miles of range will only get about 250 miles if you drive normally....expect about 80% of the advertised EPA numbers for most Teslas. I can barely get 200 miles out of mine but I floor it everywhere I go.
Other manufacturers are much more conservative and better about it like Porsche. Taycan is rated at 210 miles but seems most people get about 250 miles easily. The Mach E seems to actually get the EPS rated range consistently which is impressive. GM and Kia will get you about 90% of the EPA rated range on some of the tests i've seen but you've found a Kia that gets more.
I think the test requirements for this are all flawed. They really need to have one consistent way of measuring this and it has to be standardized. At this point, its just a marketing tool to be manipulated.
What matters is watt hours per mile this determines how far the car can go versus the battery pack size, aerodynamics, weight etc.
it's certainly a measure of efficiency (power needed to move a vehicle, also expressed as miles per kwh), but i just wish tesla was more honest like their bogus claims about "full self driving" (which isn't) for 'only' $10K.
judging by alex's video, the ford mach e is a REALLY impressive vehicle, even if its efficiency doesn't match tesla's.
I'm starting to see why people have soured on Alex Dykes. In that video he comes across as doing a test trying to prove something he wants to be true. Also his test is not very useful unless he does the exact same driving loop in different vehicles. And in similar weather. I will once again give props to Bjørn Nyland on YT he does this all the time, and puts the data into spreadsheets for comparison. If I recall his test showed the IONIQ very close to the best Tesla in efficiency.
For comparison from the link in the OP:
Mach E: 197 Wh/km
Model Y: 172 Wh/km (fixed, I think, number taken from different source)
I'm starting to see why people have soured on Alex Dykes. In that video he comes across as doing a test trying to prove something he wants to be true. Also his test is not very useful unless he does the exact same driving loop in different vehicles.
i agree on alex... the videos have become sloppier and less useful. in that video he claims it 'could' have gone well beyond the car's gauge indicated range, but he ends up bailing and going for a "25 mile" charge right at the end, and he doesn't say how long that took.
partly understandable his video wasn't great because he's excited about his new car (which he bought in some kind of convoluted lease/balloon financing deal ford has), but still.
For comparison from the link in the OP:
Mach E: 197 Wh/km
Model Y: 152 Wh/km
That is a huge difference.
indeed. i give credit to ford for putting in a huge battery though.
edit: actually, i don't see 152 for model y, i see 152 for model 3
model y lr on the ev db is 171.
edit: actually, i don't see 152 for model y, i see 152 for model 3
model y lr on the ev db is 171.
You're right, my mistake. I found several sources that say 172 Wh/km for the Model Y. That means the Mustang's efficiency is quite good, not great but good enough.
BTW I'm not seeing how Tesla is lying about range they use the EPA numbers (pretty sure that is legally all they can claim) so how is Tesla lying?
thoughts on bragging (unrealistic?) claims by tesla vs cautious (realistic/pessimistic) claims by others?
With anything new such as EV's there tends to be a lot of questions/scrutiny by folks who are curious about EV's or curious about anything new, period.
Range estimates by Tesla are not realistic for a "normal" driver
- driving with the traffic flow,
- driving an EV to enjoy the performance (the effortless acceleration often) etc.
I don't have any documented proof (video or otherwise), so take my word for it (or not). I have deliberately tested my car's range multiple times by trying to mimic (as reasonably as possible - but not being ****/scientifically accurate about it) the ideal conditions that Tesla uses for it's range estimates (and I'm making an assumption on what Tesla's criteria is)
My criteria was as follows:
- accelerate gently
- drive at the speed limit of 62 mph on the highway
- 70/30 highway/city driving
- ambient temps - 68 F (20 C)
My results were almost exactly what my car's official stated range is - 249 miles. I have been able to replicate this multiple times without trying too hard - just sticking to the above criteria.
Clearly nobody usually drives like the above, hence why people get "upset" with Tesla's "bragging (unrealistic?) claims"
I think Porsche's criteria for stating the range with the Taycan is much better as it's a lot more "realistic" for the "average" driver's way of driving.
I think Porsche's criteria for stating the range with the Taycan is much better as it's a lot more "realistic" for the "average" driver's way of driving.
They take a more conservative approach to EPA testing. If they chose the 5 cycle method that Tesla uses, their numbers would be far better. Good for Porsche.
Don't have the patience to watch the video by Alex, but it is to be expected that EV manufacturers manipulate data when it comes to battery capacity and range. Auto manufacturers have done this for decades when it comes to gas mileage, emissions, and power ratings. Take their claims with common sense, reasonable expectations, and a healthy dose of scepticism.
Don't have the patience to watch the video by Alex, but it is to be expected that EV manufacturers manipulate data when it comes to battery capacity and range. Auto manufacturers have done this for decades when it comes to gas mileage, emissions, and power ratings. Take their claims with common sense, reasonable expectations, and a healthy dose of scepticism.
Exactly, it is no different - EV manufacturers vs. legacy ICE manufacturers. When I had my 4Runner, I could easily get the stated EPA range by driving in a certain 'optimal' manner and just as easily not meet the range by a wild variance if my right foot is heavy.
They take a more conservative approach to EPA testing. If they chose the 5 cycle method that Tesla uses, their numbers would be far better. Good for Porsche.
Is it? Good in the sense that you will probably get better than rated but from a marketing perspective not so sure.
Is it? Good in the sense that you will probably get better than rated but from a marketing perspective not so sure.
Honestly, not quite sure that they don't. Range anxiety with a Tesla is non existent. I easily get 200 miles driving fast and a 15-20 min Supercharge will get me 150 real miles and they are pretty abundant. 99% of my charging is at home though and it's completely free so I'm saving $3k in fuel per year. I bet if the Tesla had a two gear transmission, it would net even higher efficiency. These numbers will only continue to get better for everyone.
02-19-21, 08:23 AM
EV battery sizes, ranges, and Tesla exaggerations
Range anxiety with a Tesla is non existent. I easily get 200 miles driving fast and a 15-20 min Supercharge will get me 150 real miles and they are pretty abundant. 99% of my charging is at home though and it's completely free so I'm saving $3k in fuel per year. I bet if the Tesla had a two gear transmission, it would net even higher efficiency. These numbers will only continue to get better for everyone.