Here’s the new Hyundai Ionic (28 kWh) charging to 80% in 19 minutes on a 100 kW CCS charger:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Here’s the new Hyundai Ionic (28 kWh) charging to 80% in 19 minutes on a 100 kW CCS charger:
Yep, real bummer about this bit in the manual though.. "Battery performance and durability can deteriorate if the fast charger is used constantly. Use of fast charge should be minimized in order to help prolong high voltage battery life"
So i should have qualified my statement with "... without damaging the battery life or capacity"
Its a shame, the ioniq was something i was considering since its not a weirdmobile inside or out, but the battery is just too small, and the performance not adequate.
There are some indications the Model 3 will be able to charge at around 200 kW. It's not quite 10-80% in 15 minutes, but it's not that far off. Should be around 10-70% in 15 minutes. Or about 180 miles added range in 15 minutes.
Links? I've seen the 106kW charging @ 49% picture which was impressive, but 200kW is ~2.5C, that is a serious step up.. and twice what Tesla quotes in the press pack. That would mean a model 3 SR would be able to fully utilise the existing 120kW superchargers since 50kWh @ 2.5 = 125kW.
Last edited:
You can read some discussion from here: It's alive! [All spoiler, no speculation]
Electrek also had an article: Tesla could be underselling Model 3’s range and charging capacity, reveals EPA document
It's still unconfirmed, but I remain hopeful, given the lack of improvement on energy density on the Model 3.
Sure, and there are some Tesla owners that had their charging rates go down because of frequent supercharging. But there are a few things to consider:
1. Most people won't use the supercharger constantly. From what i can tell (google), about 5% of the Tesla-miles driven are "super charging" miles. And i'm guessing that this figure will be even lower when the lower priced long-range electric vehicles hits the market.
2. The technology will improve. Seems a bit to pessimistic to say that 15 minutes to 80% is almost impossible if 19 minutes is achievable today, albeit with some caveats.
3. Charging distance/time-unit is the relevant measurement. Prices falls with ~8% / year, even more than that going by the latest statistics. Lower prices/higher densities leads to larger battery packs. Charging a 120 kWh pack to 60% = 72 kWh, charging a 75 kWh to 80% = 60 kWh (math genius).
These make sense to me. I expect the new 21-70 battery to be a significant improvement. Model 3 is the the Tesla Version 3, no matter what Tesla tries to say...
The anti-sell is just a smokescreen IMO to conceal all the improvements it has (new Intel computer, interior camera, more storage, new 21-70 battery and its benefits etc)...
These will become evident once Tesla gets to upgrading the Model S/X...
ElecFan
Member
I'd really consider buying Hyundai Ioniq if only it had more rated range than 124 miles. With a 5% battery degradation within a couple of years and 20-30% reduction in the winter this range is far below what I need.
Isn't the whole point of long range EVs so you can ditch the ICE backup car and be able to take long journeys.. which would increase Supercharger use?
24 minutes is the Hyundai quoted time for 80% charge on a 100kW charger.. But it is also rumoured that the battery is larger than the available capacity, so not a true 80% charge. But yes, its still around 2C, which is impressive, if they can keep degradation/life good. The other question is what is the volumetric energy density (kWh/m^3) and specific energy density(kWh/kg)? If its low density to help increase surface area for heat dissipation and the biggest pack they can fit in the chassis is say 40kWhr that's not so good.
Energy into the pack is what matters, not rated grandma driving range. I don't drive EPA test cycles
. But C rate is a useful metric, higher C rate means more energy faster, or same charge power with a smaller lighter battery pack, and a better handling faster accelerating car as a result.2018 model is supposed to be a member of the 200mile+ club
ElecFan
Member
That would come close to the Model 3. With the increasing fast charging opportunities, I see Ioniq as a real competitor. Even more if it's price tag is comparable or lower.
Isn't the whole point of long range EVs so you can ditch the ICE backup car and be able to take long journeys.. which would increase Supercharger use?
.......
Energy into the pack is what matters, not rated grandma driving range. I don't drive EPA test cycles
Do you drive on a long journey every day? If not @Laban 's point stands.
Energy or miles, either way @Laban's point is the same. C-rate does not matter as much as mph or kW charging rate. The latter increase with pack kWh capacity, while C-rate does not.
GSP
That as longer range Teslas become more common supercharger use (as % of miles travelled) will drop? So cars which are better for longer range travel will decrease road trips?
Sounds a bit like you are saying trading up from a 30kwh leaf to an M3 LR will make you want to road-trip less.. When really only a sadomasochist would want to do a roadtrip in a leaf.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Note a couple of things:
1. The battery starts at 10%. In any case, this is about a 2.3C charge rate
2. Hyundai offers a lifetime battery defect warranty, but so far as I can tell, no warranty against degradation
3. Tesla throttles charge rates in cars that frequently fast charge at rates much lower than 2.3C to protect capacity
Connect the dots
That's not what i'm saying. The miles/year driven will harmonise better with todays fossil-fuel cars when the price comes down and average Joe will start buying electric cars. And the average for fossil-fuel cars are a lot lower then for Teslas current models. So yes, i would expect that the 5% road-trip/supercharging miles for the current Tesla Models will be even lower for the Model 3. And go down even further when $20k models reach the market.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
To put this in perspective and get back on topic. The problem of fast charging is something that is being solved through incremental improvement in batteries an chargers. It's only a matter of time.
OTOH, the problems of H2 inefficiencies are fundamental barriers to widespread use and won't yield to engineering solutions.
OTOH, the problems of H2 inefficiencies are fundamental barriers to widespread use and won't yield to engineering solutions.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Road trips presumably rise to levels currently seen with ICE cars or perhaps more since fuel is cheaper, but extrapolating to Supercharger use is a lot more complicated since range from destination and home charging is longer and the distribution of supercharger use changes. Tesla has capacity problems in and near cities; the superchargers that service 'road trips' are typically *way* under-utilized.
What makes you think that it will "rise to the levels currently seen with ICE cars" ? All data i've seen indicates that it's the opposite, the people with Teslas drives a lot more, including longer/road trips, then the average fossil fuel driver.
This includes my (non-statistically validated) observation of the Tesla drivers in Sweden which seems to drive from Sweden to Germany, Austria, .... every other weekend
mspohr
Well-Known Member
FWIW, we drive our Tesla about three times the miles as we did our old ICE cars.
Similar threads
