Jaguar I-Pace

[Jeff N]

Keep in mind these are from August testing.

Interesting but I’d rather see numbers from longer driving segments. The reported temperatures are modest but I’m guessing they are outside temps. If the car was parked outside in the sun the interior temps would be much higher. So, much of this energy consumption could be going towards full-blast A/C plus the self-reported aggressive acceleration during these short drives.

I don’t know how these numbers are collected, but some rounding errors could be sneaking in as well and some data could be reported with or without charging overhead.

Overall, I would not draw much of a conclusion yet from this one report and without knowing more about how the data was collected.

 

[RubberToe]

Science geek got read ended today, so no updates coming from him anytime soon. No one was hurt, thankfully, but the other car was pretty bad off. Maybe others will track this data now.

RT

 

[mhan00]

Ah, the TMC fanboyism is through the roof, I see. No surprise.

The I-Pace not doing well is not good news for anybody who is interested in any brand of BEVs. We need compelling BEVs on the road of all types to get more people interested so the overall market is expanded.

 

[FlatSix911]

For your Sunday afternoon reading pleasure, here is week two of the I-Pace horror story saga...

Ran across something interesting in the Off Topic section of the I-Pace forum. Note that the Off Topic area is for topics not related to the I-Pace EV. Similar to Teslas off topic forum where you can keep up to date on your beekeeping hobby, which is most definitely not Tesla or Jaguar related:

So we come across this interesting story about someone leaving the "club". I imagined that they were moving off the website for some reason, but lo and behold, it turned out that the owner was having so many issues that JLR bought the car back from him...

I don't know, but having your I-Pace EV bought back by the company sure smacks of being at least somewhat On Topic, but what do I know. I'm just a Tesla fan boy who hasn't sold my Model 3 back to Tesla...

And for a free sneak preview of what may end up being an entire franchise worth of horror flicks (think Friday the 13th Part CXXIV), I give you a bonafide science geek starting to take a close look at the I-Pace actual delivered range versus their projected range:

And the numbers:

Keep in mind these are from August testing. And as sure as the fact that the Model 3 is outselling the I-Pace by 70-1, we know that Fall follows Summer, and then Winter follows Fall. Hard core EV enthusiasts know what Winter brings...

So my Jaguar I-Page loving friends, Winter Is Coming...

RT

Wow, the energy consumption stats are shocking... any error above 50% is bordering on criminally negligent.

 

[Big Earl]

Wow, the energy consumption stats are shocking... any error above 50% is bordering on criminally negligent.

Looks to me like the person conducting that “test” is preconditioning the cabin and including that energy in their driving stats. If JLR is like Tesla, they don’t include energy used during preconditioning in the trip stats, which could explain the reporting errors.

 

[daktari]

2 separate Norwegian drivers reported 400 km range at 90 km/h stable speed at a FaceBook group, one of them round trip similar to youtuber TeslaBjørn consumption procedure. Puts the car in between the X75 /X90 territory. Seems like this summer's Sota has done the I-pace good.

 

[mspohr]

2 separate Norwegian drivers reported 400 km range at 90 km/h stable speed at a FaceBook group, one of them round trip similar to youtuber TeslaBjørn consumption procedure. Puts the car in between the X75 /X90 territory. Seems like this summer's Sota has done the I-pace good.

All EVs get good mileage at 90 km/hr (56 mph) but nobody drives that speed.

 

[daktari]

All EVs get good mileage at 90 km/hr (56 mph) but nobody drives that speed.

And that suggest that 400 km range is bad or good? I calculate almost 4.5 hours of driving at that speed. Longer in slower speeds, shorter in higher speeds.

 

[mspohr]

And that suggest that 400 km range is bad or good? I calculate almost 4.5 hours of driving at that speed. Longer in slower speeds, shorter in higher speeds.

That's a reasonable range. Not great but not bad.
I think people are disappointed that all of the "Tesla killers" we have been hearing all of the hype about are just mediocre cars. My five year old S85D has better performance and features than these new cars. We all want to see lots of good options and so far, it's disappointing.

 

[daktari]

That's a reasonable range. Not great but not bad.
I think people are disappointed that all of the "Tesla killers" we have been hearing all of the hype about are just mediocre cars. My five year old S85D has better performance and features than these new cars. We all want to see lots of good options and so far, it's disappointing.

Yes, they are same but different, not killers. Tesla has something special. I don`t need a killer.

 

[RubberToe]

I'll be traveling to Vegas tomorrow, but didn't want to miss out on the weekly episode of the I-Pace horror show. This edition comes from a screen capture I took one morning at the coffee shop. The active topics titles speak for themselves

The funniest this about this is that the most active topic after the 4 you see is "TSLA in trouble", with 497 posts no less. Yea, looking at the topics being discussed below, it sure looks like Tesla is in trouble. Can you say cognitive dissonance...

 

[FlatSix911]

Remember the Jaguar tagline... Grace, Space and Pace!

 

[daktari]

I'll be traveling to Vegas tomorrow, but didn't want to miss out on the weekly episode of the I-Pace horror show. This edition comes from a screen capture I took one morning at the coffee shop. The active topics titles speak for themselves

The funniest this about this is that the most active topic after the 4 you see is "TSLA in trouble", with 497 posts no less. Yea, looking at the topics being discussed below, it sure looks like Tesla is in trouble. Can you say cognitive dissonance...

I don't really understand what you are trying to accomplish, bashing Jaguar this way, other than destroy your own reputation. The I-pace is by no means a perfect car, but I would claim believe Tesla has some cleaning up to do also on both mechanical quality, software, deliver-as-promised, service logistics problem and delivery logistics problems.
There are definetly place in the market for more than one brand of electric cars, so how about attacking som ICE-only manufacturers instead, and help Tesla even better by solving their own pretty annoying problems?

 

[RubberToe]

I don't really understand what you are trying to accomplish.../QUOTE]

I am pointing out discussions on an alternate forum for one of the first longer range EVs from a major auto maker that is supposedly competing against Tesla.

Since the first day Tesla started selling the Model S in volume, the "story" from every media outlet was that as soon as any major legacy automaker started making EVs that Tesla was doomed. Tesla was treated as an insignificant distraction that didn't know what they were doing. Every time a Model S experienced any issue, it was front page news.

So now we have one of the Tesla killers main discussion boards turning into an information exchange, by private message no less, on the best way to get JLR to buy their cars back. But since JLR is a big advertising buyer, I'm not seeing a lot of stories about how many people are forcing the company to buy their cars back.

Can't hurt to shine a little light on the competition and show what is really going on. Some might even begin to consider the possibility that Tesla does indeed know what they are doing, and that legacy automakers can't just build large numbers of functioning EVs at scale simply because they build ICE cars.

If JLR can't manufacturer EVs at scale that can compete with Tesla, it's a data point that indicates other legacy automakers may face the same problem.

RT

P.S. Either that or I'm just trolling JLR. Either way, it's all good!

 

[Merrill]

Remember the Jaguar tagline... Grace, Space and Pace!

Yes I had one of these, a 1967 I purchased new in 1970.

 

[Lokolo]

I'll be traveling to Vegas tomorrow, but didn't want to miss out on the weekly episode of the I-Pace horror show. This edition comes from a screen capture I took one morning at the coffee shop. The active topics titles speak for themselves

The funniest this about this is that the most active topic after the 4 you see is "TSLA in trouble", with 497 posts no less. Yea, looking at the topics being discussed below, it sure looks like Tesla is in trouble. Can you say cognitive dissonance...

Not sure if I am reading the screenshot correctly... but those multiple topics are just ... one person repeatedly complaining....

 

[RubberToe]

For your early weekend pleasure, charging cost using the EA network...

That works out to $0.72 per kWh, the Supercharger network in California costs $0.28kWh.

Assuming your Model 3 and I-Pace both get 4 miles/kWh, all power from highway charging, a 300 mile trip to Vegas and back will cost you:

Model 3: $42
Prius: $49
I-Pace: $108

That $66 in savings will cover several minutes of video poker in Sin City. Just sayin. And I don't think the I-Pace is getting 4 miles/kWh, but go check the I-Pace discussion boards if you want to enter that morass.

Good thing that EA charger in Baker isn't open yet, the I-Pace owners are saving a lot of money enjoying the sights in SoCal within their driving range.

 

[RubberToe]

160 units moved in August. Lowest monthly total this year.

 

[Jeff N]

Assuming your Model 3 and I-Pace both get 4 miles/kWh, all power from highway charging, a 300 mile trip to Vegas and back will cost you:

Model 3: $42
Prius: $49
I-Pace: $108

It’s seems likely that the I-PACE driver would sign up for an EA Pass+ account which gets rid of the session fee and lowers the per-minute price from $.69 to $.50. Or, in other words, around 12.5 cents per mile given your other assumptions around efficiency and average charging rate.

That would drop the price from $108 down to $75 plus the $4 monthly subscription fee. They might also choose to charge from 15% to ~55% instead of to 80% in order to minimize charging rate rampdown and thus perhaps speed overall charging time and reduce their effective per-kWh price. But first there need to be additional EA sites opened along the route to shorten the distance between charging sites...

Obviously a Model 3 still wins the comparison.

 

[FlatSix911]

160 units moved in August. Lowest monthly total this year.

Another Tesla Killer...