Debunking Audi's ‘sustained power beats top power’

[cizUK]

Electrek's recent article says: 'Audi is right. Their approach does offer significant advantages, especially if you are looking to get a full charge out of the charging session.' but then goes on to say about the Tesla advantages. However it doesn't say that these advantages blow the E-Tron out of the water!

The graph below shows that just by holding onto the charging rate later in the cycle doesn't mean it beats V2 Supercharging, let alone V3.
I also added in worst case scenario with the Model S SRD at 120kW, but that has a much smaller battery than the E-Tron.
Why doesn't the E-Tron overtake the S SRD? Because at 80%, just before the E-Tron starts to taper dramatically, the S SRD is at 60% and still has a decent 276mph charge rate vs the E-Tron's 304mph.

Unfortunately the E-tron's dismal efficiency loses Audi the battle, maybe that's where they need to concentrate their efforts.

 

[bhzmark]

However it doesn't say that these advantages blow the E-Tron out of the water!

Elektrek is a sensationalist nonsense blog at this point. Don’t expect anything intelligent from those pages. But good analysis — thanks. .

 

[GolanB]

Yesterday after I read the article I was considering the implications. For me, I’d rather make more frequent stops on road trips, fill up more rapidly while at a lower state of charge, and move on than spend an entire charging session filling to max capacity. We’ve been finding hotels with charging stations in the parking lots, so I prefer to do complete the charging there, overnight.

 

[bhzmark]

I assume the chart starts at zero or extremely low percent? What if you start charging at 50%?

 

[cizUK]

I assume the chart starts at zero or extremely low percent? What if you start charging at 50%?

It is based on charging from 10% which is a good target for arriving at a charger. You should rarely have to charge when you've still got 50%, but I guess some might.

 

[cizUK]

Elektrek is a sensationalist nonsense blog at this point. Don’t expect anything intelligent from those pages. But good analysis — thanks. .

It's not, it's very informative and has even had a slightly more balanced view recently, however maybe this even goes too far and they didn't put things into proper context.
That said, they do have far too much on electric bikes

 

[12Pack]

The "Electrek's take" but is so amateurish that it make the article you've just read sound like it comes from an untrustworthy source.

 

[Candleflame]

it doesnt even matter that the Etron is so much less efficient than the S or 3. The Etron is essentially equivalent to a Model S 85 with only 70 kw available so charging 0-80% gets displayed as 0 to 100%. The old software locked S60 also supercharged from 0 to 100% in 35min.

 

[GolanB]

My personal belief is that the Germans will make meaningful contributions to the EV race; and that there is plenty of room for improvement as we look to the future, AND this is all beneficial to the consumer - and for the first time, to the environment as well. I am also keeping a keen eye towards the developments in the Asian marketplace, particularly in China, where they have strong reasons to transition to electricity. I spent a week in Shanghai recently and was amazed at the rate of infrastructure growth. I learned much during my visit there, and one statistic stood out clearly for me, which is that the Chinese are now contributing more than 50% of all (high quality) scientific papers on Artificial Intelligence. They are working equally hard to develop products for the automotive and smart city initiatives, and I managed to see with my own eyes some of the MDC's being developed by Chinese manufacturers for the auto industry. The sense that I had was that they're still well behind Tesla, but their commitment to innovation and change will accelerate this process. I also got to spend some time at the "NIO House" and play with some of their vehicles. China is also an extremely important market for Tesla. We may be reading more about Chinese EV manufacturers in the next year or two.

 

[Ludalicious]

These are just claims at this point. No proven data on longevity of these batteries has been proven. What we do know forsure Teslas approach seems to work.

So the question that should be asked. Who wants to be a test mule?

 

[Eno Deb]

These are just claims at this point. No proven data on longevity of these batteries has been proven. What we do know forsure Teslas approach seems to work.

So the question that should be asked. Who wants to be a test mule?

If something like this was said about Tesla, the fanboys would call it "FUD". They have the usual 8-year warranty on the battery.

Also, in the comparison above shouldn't the Model X be the benchmark? Can't really compare an SUV to a sedan with its smaller aerodynamic cross section. Generally, I welcome any progress in charging technology regardless where it comes from.

 

[Ludalicious]

If something like this was said about Tesla, the fanboys would call it "FUD". They have the usual 8-year warranty on the battery.

Also, in the comparison above shouldn't the Model X be the benchmark? Can really compare an SUV to a sedan with its smaller aerodynamic cross section. Generally, I welcome any progress in charging technology regardless where it comes from.

What about the first Version Nissan Leafs. Those battery degradation's dropped faster than a 80 yr old set of balls. Battery degradation isn't covered by warranty. No Loyalty to Tesla here.

 

[Eno Deb]

What about the first Version Nissan Leafs. Those battery degradation's dropped faster than a 80 yr old set of balls. Battery degradation isn't covered by warranty. No Loyalty to Tesla here.

The Leaf didn't have a thermally controlled battery. The Audi does. And degradation beyond a certain degree (I believe below 70%?) is absolutely covered by the warranty.

I could just as well claim the Model 3/Y battery (which hasn't been around that long) will crap out after 5 years. It would be just as baseless as your claim.

 

[miimura]

This is the chart in question that Audi presented. IMHO, Audi should not be comparing their vehicle to the Model 3, the only Tesla vehicle to support 250kW V3 Supercharging, but rather the Model X.

To see if there was any merit to Audi's claim of faster charging, I used A Better Route Planner to calculate driving and charging times through an area that has 150kW CCS coverage. So, I chose the fatherland, Germany. Here are the results of the Model 3 LR AWD, Model X (2018), and the Model X (2019 Update). I presume the ABRP model for the 2019 update Model X includes the faster charging speed and higher efficiency front motor. This comparison obviously uses existing Supercharger V2 infrastructure.

All of these results use 110% of speed limit and 80mph max. The max speed is important because these routes are on Autobahn with sections that have no limits. Also, the availability and location of charging stations matters, including distance from the highway.

So, in order of total trip time from shortest to longest:
Model 3 LR AWD: 00:59 charging, 07:58 total
Model X (2019): 01:13 charging, 08:12 total
Audi e-Tron (mirrorless): 01:21 charging, 08:24 total
Model X (2018): 01:29 charging, 08:38 total

I also tried the comparison in California, but there are no CCS chargers above 50kW on normally traveled and useful routes. Any comparison that used the two sites with high speed CCS would be completely contrived.

 

[GolanB]

This is the chart in question that Audi presented. IMHO, Audi should not be comparing their vehicle to the Model 3, the only Tesla vehicle to support 250kW V3 Supercharging, but rather the Model X.

To see if there was any merit to Audi's claim of faster charging, I used A Better Route Planner to calculate driving and charging times through an area that has 150kW CCS coverage. So, I chose the fatherland, Germany. Here are the results of the Model 3 LR AWD, Model X (2018), and the Model X (2019 Update). I presume the ABRP model for the 2019 update Model X includes the faster charging speed and higher efficiency front motor. This comparison obviously uses existing Supercharger V2 infrastructure.

View attachment 408461

View attachment 408462

View attachment 408463

View attachment 408464

All of these results use 110% of speed limit and 80mph max. The max speed is important because these routes are on Autobahn with sections that have no limits. Also, the availability and location of charging stations matters, including distance from the highway.

So, in order of total trip time from shortest to longest:
Model 3 LR AWD: 00:59 charging, 07:58 total
Model X (2019): 01:13 charging, 08:12 total
Audi e-Tron (mirrorless): 01:21 charging, 08:24 total
Model X (2018): 01:29 charging, 08:38 total

I also tried the comparison in California, but there are no CCS chargers above 50kW on normally traveled and useful routes. Any comparison that used the two sites with high speed CCS would be completely contrived.

There is one more variable to have in mind, and that is the max power output available at the charging stations. While I haven't gotten specific information concerning European chargers (for which there is a very large variety) here in the US, I have come to learn that not all charging stalls are always available at 100% power output, regardless of the state of charge in the vehicle. Here I am not referring to the A/B shared power source, but to a separate issue that sometimes limits power. I have read about this on the forums, and have experienced some level of this myself. I have not gotten a clear answer to why this is, only that Tesla Support is aware of which stalls are available for use at max power, and which are not - and that some people inquire about this before their charging session. I would imagine that over time, Tesla will need to address the issue - but we should probably account for some margin of error, say plus or minus 10%. Ultimately, the charts you've shared do not show a significant difference, but it is perceptible.

 

[miimura]

There is one more variable to have in mind, and that is the max power output available at the charging stations. While I haven't gotten specific information concerning European chargers (for which there is a very large variety) here in the US, I have come to learn that not all charging stalls are always available at 100% power output, regardless of the state of charge in the vehicle. Here I am not referring to the A/B shared power source, but to a separate issue that sometimes limits power. I have read about this on the forums, and have experienced some level of this myself. I have not gotten a clear answer to why this is, only that Tesla Support is aware of which stalls are available for use at max power, and which are not - and that some people inquire about this before their charging session. I would imagine that over time, Tesla will need to address the issue - but we should probably account for some margin of error, say plus or minus 10%. Ultimately, the charts you've shared do not show a significant difference, but it is perceptible.

This issue has existed for a long time, especially at high traffic Supercharger sites. This is my speculation about the issue: The contacts in the cable where it connects to the vehicle charging port get worn and create a higher contact resistance. The temperature sensors in the handle detect the heat generated by this contact resistance and the Supercharger throttles the current, leading to a slower charging session. It is possible that cleaning your charge port or cleaning the Supercharger handle could speed up the charging, but in any case, Tesla periodically replaces the cables to address this issue. At high traffic Supercharger sites, they just aren't replacing the cables frequently enough.

 

[GolanB]

This issue has existed for a long time, especially at high traffic Supercharger sites. This is my speculation about the issue: The contacts in the cable where it connects to the vehicle charging port get worn and create a higher contact resistance. The temperature sensors in the handle detect the heat generated by this contact resistance and the Supercharger throttles the current, leading to a slower charging session. It is possible that cleaning your charge port or cleaning the Supercharger handle could speed up the charging, but in any case, Tesla periodically replaces the cables to address this issue. At high traffic Supercharger sites, they just aren't replacing the cables frequently enough.

It is interesting that you mention this; early in my ownership of a Model-X, I took it upstate here in NY and was shocked by the temperature of the charging cable (it was almost too hot to touch in some regions of the cable - particularly around its sharper bends). Since that time I never experienced a similar event, although I'm more commonly hitting Urban Super Chargers with a considerably lower charge rate. At the time, I was charging at 115kW, and I'd estimate that the cable was somewhere around 125 (F). See:

 

[Zoomit]

There is one more variable to have in mind, and that is the max power output available at the charging stations. While I haven't gotten specific information concerning European chargers (for which there is a very large variety) here in the US, I have come to learn that not all charging stalls are always available at 100% power output, regardless of the state of charge in the vehicle. Here I am not referring to the A/B shared power source, but to a separate issue that sometimes limits power. I have read about this on the forums, and have experienced some level of this myself. I have not gotten a clear answer to why this is, only that Tesla Support is aware of which stalls are available for use at max power, and which are not - and that some people inquire about this before their charging session. I would imagine that over time, Tesla will need to address the issue - but we should probably account for some margin of error, say plus or minus 10%. Ultimately, the charts you've shared do not show a significant difference, but it is perceptible.

I attribute A LOT of the perceived Supercharger stall issues in the community with low battery temperature. Tesla battery chemistry seems very finicky to temperature. The On-Route Battery Warmup feature new in 19.12.1 will help mitigate much of this, I hope, especially in winter. I don't know if the e-tron battery has the same temperature sensitivity or if they have a similar warming feature. I have heard the M-B EQC does warm the battery, like Tesla, when a charger is selected in the Nav destination.

 

[GregD60]

If something like this was said about Tesla, the fanboys would call it "FUD". They have the usual 8-year warranty on the battery.

Also, in the comparison above shouldn't the Model X be the benchmark? Can't really compare an SUV to a sedan with its smaller aerodynamic cross section. Generally, I welcome any progress in charging technology regardless where it comes from.

A Model 3 has almost as much interior space as the Etron, and the Model S has substantially more. The Etron seems to be as inefficient in its space utilization as it is in its energy usage relative to the Teslas. On the exterior dimensions, the Model S is close to the Etron, being 3" longer and 1" wider, but 9" less height. The Model X is really in a different league from the Etron when it comes to interior space.

 

[Eno Deb]

A Model 3 has almost as much interior space as the Etron, and the Model S has substantially more.

What data is this based on? Having sat on the rear seat of a Model S as well as the Etron, and having seen both their luggage compartments, I doubt that.