Jaguar I-Pace

[smac]

If my exchange calculations of today's exchange rate with the Norwegian Krone are correct, that would be $94,146 for the SE Launch, $101,712 for the HSE Launch and $107,887 for the First Edition (with "Adaptive Dynamics" whatever those are, lol)

The other way to look at it is to compare I-Pace to X prices in various regions.

Here in the UK the I-Pace starts at £64k the X75 £70k. There is also some confusion of grants here. I'm hearing the Jag's price doesn't take into account the £4.5k grant which would bring it in at just under £60k. (Leather being standard on the Jag, but power tailgate of the Tesla...it's not exactly like for like).

It will be very interesting to see what EPA range the I-Pace gets. We are in a bit of confusion here as we've ditched our old (wildly optimistic) NEDC system, in favour of WLTP.

Jaguar are quoting 298 miles on the new WLTP test. Tesla haven't re-rated the Model X75 so we can only go on the 259 miles NEDC, the X100 gets 351 miles NEDC. So it looks like the Jag will sit somewhere between the two... quite how you value that... hard to say.

 

[davidc18]

Will be interested in US pricing.

 

[Saghost]

I figured a slightly higher rate but less than 80 kW average.


The Bolt EV’s average charging rate from 0-62% is probably just above 50 kW (51-52 kW?) on the new generation of CCS hardware. What really matters to drivers, however, is miles added.

The I-Pace has a roughly 50% bigger battery (90 kWh vs 60 kWh) but around the same 240 mile range as the Bolt EV so it would have to average a charge power 50% higher to add the same number of miles during the same charge time period.

So, I figure it was maybe charging just somewhat faster (10-12% faster?) than a Bolt EV in miles added per charging time in that apparent 40 minutes.

However.... the charging time we saw — 62% in just under 40 minutes — does not match the claimed 80% in 45 minutes. Something is not consistent there. Perhaps they didn’t begin charging at the very beginning of the video or perhaps the charging conditions were a little wonky with the car being under the TV lights and the battery cooling system detuned in order to not be making too much noise. The implied charging rate at the 8 minute point, however, did seem closer to 95-100 kW. I dunno.


I skimmed back at your posting history and it looks like you ordered your Model X sometime in late spring or early summer and received it by August of 2016. Just 6 months or so earlier at the beginning of 2016, the Supercharger network looked like this:

View attachment 283842

The first I-Pace deliveries will begin in the “2nd half of 2018” but many folks will probably get theirs in the first half of 2019. If you believe Electrify America’s latest statements on their website, their 150+ kW charging network will look like this by June 2019:

View attachment 283843

That represents about a year’s worth of relative charger installation advantage for Tesla. And, of course, plenty of folks here happily bought their Model S back in 2015 in anticipation of that Supercharger map above.

I don’t think a lack of US ultra-fast DC charging will be a large barrier to potential I-Pace customers who are drawn to the car for other reasons.

No doubt, today’s (or 2019’s) Tesla Supercharger map is much better than what Jaguar owners would get from Electrify America’s June, 2019 highway network. I suspect that EA’s map plus metro DC charging from EA and other providers is “good enough” for many potential buyers given the assumption that charging infrastructure will continue to get better while they own the car.

I generally have a lot of respect for your opinion, Jeff. In this case, I think you're reaching too far.

You're comparing the map from well before I ordered (though admittedly I was watching and thinking and saving by then,) to what Electrify America hopes to have more than a year after I would be deciding.

We know from painful experience here how hard it is to keep to schedule with all the groups and jurisdictions a DCFC installation needs to coordinate.

What's worse, Electrify America is spending a specific amount of court ordered money. Do you really think VW will come up with some extra out of their own pockets of things run late and cost extra?

Before I ordered, I knew that there were Superchargers to take me where I needed to go and a lot of the places I wanted to go.

Maybe I would have considered an iPace if I was thinking about buying in mid 2019 and Electrify America somehow manages most of their rollout on time. Maybe a lot of other folks are more confident in that schedule or don't plan on many road trips in their EV.

But my statement remains correct: for my single vehicle with my occasional need for longer drives, I wouldn't consider an iPace today because of the lack of charging.

 

[jbcarioca]

Having just read the entire brochure, and had considerable history with the pre-Tata as well as a bit with post-Tata, here is my preliminary view:

1. The I-Pace will convert quite a few Jaguar aficionados;
2. It will seriously enhance the brand halo;
3. Germany, Norway and the UK will be the biggest markets;
4. It really will not compete with Tesla, despite positioning;
5. It will compete effectively against comparable ICE;
6. Lacking OTA and really strong dealer support will be major impediments.

Lastly, if it comes to Brazil before Model 3 does I will probably buy one to use until Model 3 arrives and sell it then.
I'm really happy they are doing this. We all should be. It will expand the market.

 

[purplewalt]

BTW I think EA CCS/CHAdeMO network plus other networks will be "good enough" for most buyers but Supercharger Network will not stop growing. It will be much better at the end of 2018 and better still at the end of 2019.

Crossing the last Frontier: First Supercharger(s) in NORTH DAKOTA

 

[JoaoD]

6. Lacking OTA and really strong dealer support will be major impediments.

Jaguar says in the commercial video (at around 10:15) it will have OTA updates:

I also find the wristband as a key interesting for sports applications.
I don't find it as appealing as a Tesla, but I think it is superior enough to beat the ICE competition here in Europe.

 

[R.S]

The other way to look at it is to compare I-Pace to X prices in various regions.

Here in the UK the I-Pace starts at £64k the X75 £70k. There is also some confusion of grants here. I'm hearing the Jag's price doesn't take into account the £4.5k grant which would bring it in at just under £60k. (Leather being standard on the Jag, but power tailgate of the Tesla...it's not exactly like for like).

It will be very interesting to see what EPA range the I-Pace gets. We are in a bit of confusion here as we've ditched our old (wildly optimistic) NEDC system, in favour of WLTP.

Jaguar are quoting 298 miles on the new WLTP test. Tesla haven't re-rated the Model X75 so we can only go on the 259 miles NEDC, the X100 gets 351 miles NEDC. So it looks like the Jag will sit somewhere between the two... quite how you value that... hard to say.

Does Tesla include the plug in grant in their price? I really couldn't find out from their website.

The EPA and WLTP comparison is weird indeed. From the Nissan Leaf, it looks like the EPA range is about 90% of the WLTP range, which would give the I-Pace 268 miles of EPA range, but they quote 240 miles of EPA range.

Even weirder, the I-Pace now has the same range on the WLTP, as the Model S 75 had on the NEDC, but less range on the EPA test.

I personally trust EPA range more than WLTP, since I have more experience with it. But the website shows:
"Figures shown are Manufacturer's driving range estimates. Actual mileage may vary. EPA estimates not available at time of publication. See your local authorized Jaguar Retailer for updated EPA estimates."

I really hope we get some real world comparisons soon, since that's what really counts. But right now I am pretty confused.

 

[12Pack]

OTA updates in fact supported - FYI from the press kit:"To help improve battery energy control software as well as infotainment technologies, the automaker has enabled over-the-air software updates for the I-Pace, a first for Jaguar"

 

[smac]

Does Tesla include the plug in grant in their price? I really couldn't find out from their website.

I think they are waiting to be put on the official OLEV list

The EPA and WLTP comparison is weird indeed. From the Nissan Leaf, it looks like the EPA range is about 90% of the WLTP range, which would give the I-Pace 268 miles of EPA range, but they quote 240 miles of EPA range.

And if we look at the Bolt vs Ampera-e they are similar... so who knows

The combined figure is also a bit misleading as the US uses more highway mix. So light city cars do better on WLTP, aerodynamic ones better on EPA.

What I'd really like to see is an Autobild style head to head again. The EPA figures are a bit skewed for Europe as there is an exemption for the cold and AC cycles, and they just use a 0.7 factor. The Bolt really suffered as a result running at 5c ambient with AC set to 21c getting nowhere near it's EPA. The heat pump cars like the Ioniq and eGolf got much closer.

I'm not really interested in average range over the year, rather what I can reasonably expect in the winter months.

 

[jbcarioca]

Jaguar says in the commercial video (at around 10:15) it will have OTA updates:

I also find the wristband as a key interesting for sports applications.
I don't find it as appealing as a Tesla, but I think it is superior enough to beat the ICE competition here in Europe.

OTA updates in fact supported - FYI from the press kit:"To help improve battery energy control software as well as infotainment technologies, the automaker has enabled over-the-air software updates for the I-Pace, a first for Jaguar"

Oops! I read too quickly. Good for them!

 

[R.S]

I think they are waiting to be put on the official OLEV list

Tesla is waiting, or Jaguar?

And if we look at the Bolt vs Ampera-e they are similar... so who knows

The combined figure is also a bit misleading as the US uses more highway mix. So light city cars do better on WLTP, aerodynamic ones better on EPA.

What I'd really like to see is an Autobild style head to head again. The EPA figures are a bit skewed for Europe as there is an exemption for the cold and AC cycles, and they just use a 0.7 factor. The Bolt really suffered as a result running at 5c ambient with AC set to 21c getting nowhere near it's EPA. The heat pump cars like the Ioniq and eGolf got much closer.

I'm not really interested in average range over the year, rather what I can reasonably expect in the winter months.

But the Bolt really isn't that aerodynamic, actually it's pretty bad. And the Leaf is pretty close in Cd, but surely a good bit lighter. Therefore the WLTP to EPA comparison should at least be similar, right? So yea, I don't really know what to think. To me it's a 240 mile EV for now, not great, but acceptable.

I guess I will have to wait for a comparison, or wait even longer until Jaguar gives me a test car for a weekend.

 

[smac]

@R.S. Jaguar are waiting. Tesla' price is after the grant ha been deducted.

 

[J1mbo]

I just wish that they had done a head to head with a Q5 (or a Qashqai!). That would have been a more meaningful comparison than the MX.

Still wondering why the hell they shipped 2 UK-spec cars to Mexico. Because it's a Formula E track? We have those (much) closer to home. Knowing JLR, I'll bet they'll have used air-freight as well.

Anyway, looks like a nice car, would be perfect for most of my needs if it was backed up by reliable 100kw+ charging networks in the UK and EU which don't need pre-registration, and have at least the same coverage as the superchargers. Probably be an awesome second-hand bargain for some in a few years time.

 

[R.S]

I just wish that they had done a head to head with a Q5 (or a Qashqai!). That would have been a more meaningful comparison than the MX.

I think it's great they picked an EV. This will cement the idea that EVs are quick.

And to be honest, this is how you do such a comparison. GM often does similar commercials, but they always focus on the bad things of the competitors, like an aluminum bed is bad, or being stuck in an elevator is bad.

And they show very litte of the competitor. But Jaguar showed some really detailed and nice shots of the X and they focused on something the Tesla is really good in, 0-60. They just showed that they are better, while even mentioning the P100D might (it will) beat them.

Very classy IMO. They could have done way worse. And wit will generate a lot of buzz for both cars. Basically a win win.

 

[R.S]

Another interesting thing, while I was looking through the I-Pace configuratior, On site 2, you can select one single powertrain, called EV400, probably because it's an EV with 400hp.

So maybe they will add more configurations in the future? Like an S version, rivaling the Tesla P versions, or a cheaper EV300, more expensive EV500?

Since they don't call it EV90, I don't think they are planning for different battery versions, unless they also have a different hp rating.

Edit: The E-Pace in Germany has the same web layout, but you can select from P (petrol) and D(dirty) versions, like a D240 with 240 hp, or a P300 with 300 hp.

 

[voyager]

There's gonna be e-trophy racing with the i-Pace, JLR says. I wonder what's behind the grille...

 

[Jeff N]

Maybe I would have considered an iPace if I was thinking about buying in mid 2019 and Electrify America somehow manages most of their rollout on time. Maybe a lot of other folks are more confident in that schedule or don't plan on many road trips in their EV.

Sure, that was my premise.

I said “if you believe Electrify America’s latest statements on their website...”.

We will have a better sense of how EA is holding to their schedule by spring of next year.

There are a couple of key things here:

1. Believing Electrify America (VW)

2. Regardless of the developer, the jarring transition from no non-Tesla 150 kW coast-to-coast highway charging network in the US to having one next summer

It’s hard for folks to believe this will really happen on schedule. I think it’s a very aggressive plan.

It doesn’t help that most major EV news sites like InsideEVs, Electrek, GreenCarReports, etc. still haven’t highlighted EA’s new highway route map even though it’s been available for weeks now. Electrek went so far as to write an article focused on a new European charging network being partially funded by VW Group and used an image of that planned European route map from VW Group that included a version of an EA US route map along side of it to illustrate their story but did not mention anything about the US network in the article....

I think this is mostly because EA is not yet actively flogging the map in a press release and most coverage is driven by press releases.

 

[smac]

@R.S. It does seem likely a different power rating will be available at some point.

If the videos on Jaguar's YouTube channel are correct that the motors are also used in Jaguar's Formula e-car, those are good for 270hp on qualifying, so they probably have headroom for an SVR version.

Personally I think they are leaving the door open for a lower power spec. It's all very well offering these performance levels, but here in the UK sales to company fleets are half of new car sales. It's low insurance premiums and low monthly lease rates that are needed, not 1/4 mile slips.

My guess is 2020 we will see a big push, because that's when some very beneficial tax changes for EV's given as perks to employees kicks in here.

 

[smac]

I think this is mostly because EA is not yet actively flogging the map in a press release yet and most coverage is driven by press releases.

My take FWIW is down to vehicle timing. For right or wrong the cars capable of taking > 50kW seem to have a head start in being delivered into the EU. (Excl. Tesla of course).

It's the chicken and egg problem. No chargers = low demand for cars, no cars = no demand for chargers.

Though speaking personally this was also true when I bought my Model S, so I'm comfortable using home charging and 50kW exclusively. Hence the I-Pace very much being under consideration, where for others lack of the SuC equivalent is a deal breaker.

From a charging provider's perspective, it's more clear cut. Until the cars are on sale they would have zero demand.

With the Audi / Jag both likely to go on sale in Europe over the next 6-8 moths, the landscape might change quickly.... I guess time will tell.

 

[techmaven]

The 240 miles of EPA range as estimated by Jaguar is abysmal out of a 90 kWh pack. The much bigger and heavier Model X gets that kind of range out of a 75 kWh pack. The usable capacity is 85 kWh versus 73 kWh for the same range (240 versus 237).

WLTP correction factor looks like it is closer to 15%, so based on 292 WLTP, that’s 248 EPA.

Also, what is which the underspec on-board AC charger? 32 amps for a 90 kWh pack, 10 hours for 80% means you can’t pull into a hotel near empty and leave the next morning with a full charge in 10 hours. Full charge is listed at almost 13 hours. This is an odd cheap out for such an expensive vehicle.

Charging to 80% in 45 minutes (official specs from the brochure) means slower charging c-rate than a Model 3. On a miles charged per hour basis, the I-Pace is particularly horrid due to the low efficiency, especially since the I-Pace has less passenger room than a Model 3.

Biggest unknown at this point is liquid thermal management. There I could not find any mention of such in the brochure or other literature released yesterday. Jaguar writes about advanced thermal management but provides no details. The cut away diagrams also don’t show it, nor did I see it in videos showing the pack and cells.