Great new video of quite scientific UK range test of 6 electric cars here. Long range Model 3 wins - as expected of course! Kia Niro did surprisingly well though. iPace slightly better than e-tron and Merc eqc ~ equal worst.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
-
Tomorrow at 1PM PDT we will be discussing the latest Tesla Shareholder Meeting on the TMC Podcast. You can watch live on YouTube or X and participate in the chat.
Long Range Test - Tesla Wins!
- Thread starter mikemillar
- Start date
Glan gluaisne
Active Member
The other thread seems to have gone off course.
What I found of interest in this test is that they drove each car until it shut down completely. Whilst I would never advise doing that to the batteries in an EV, it answered a question I have had of what happens if you truly run the battery completely to zero. Interesting to see how each car in the test deals with the running to empty scenario...
What I found of interest in this test is that they drove each car until it shut down completely. Whilst I would never advise doing that to the batteries in an EV, it answered a question I have had of what happens if you truly run the battery completely to zero. Interesting to see how each car in the test deals with the running to empty scenario...
Glan gluaisne
Active Member
One thing I noticed when Bjorn ran a Model 3 down to completely flat, was that there was a surprising amount of range left, albeit at low speed, after the battery indicated 0%. I didn't watch through the whole of the video above when it was first posted on the other thread (IMHO it's too long, and could have been edited down a lot), but it did seem that some of the cars appeared to only have a pretty tiny "reserve" after they indicated that there was 0% left.
They covered that right at the start, all of them were using cruise control set to the speed limit to keep the comparison as even as possible.
Yeah I saw that, so why the discrepancy? Shouldn't WLPT be a standard test to get all those ranges?
Unless Tesla battery tech is particularly susceptible to low temperatures.
Or the speed curve is not as efficient if the test is conducted at 30 mph.
This test was nothing like the WLPT test profile though so you really can't hope to see the same scale of result between different vehicles.
Take a look here for a summary of the test components...
Testing Procedure Changes | SEAT
"(tested at 23° C corrected for 14° C)"
That should not matter. Getting lower % than a different test just means the efficiency curve for something in the list of components is different to the other cars in the test.
So some cars perform better at lower temperatures than others due to battery tech used - for example.
The test is also only 30 minutes, so it could mean that, in the first 30 min Tesla is more efficient, hence getting better extrapolated range than others, but later evens out.
Plus no mention of HVAC settings.
The video is a good test to show "real range", my point is that WLPT should be better than this...
That should not matter. Getting lower % than a different test just means the efficiency curve for something in the list of components is different to the other cars in the test.
So some cars perform better at lower temperatures than others due to battery tech used - for example.
The test is also only 30 minutes, so it could mean that, in the first 30 min Tesla is more efficient, hence getting better extrapolated range than others, but later evens out.
Plus no mention of HVAC settings.
The video is a good test to show "real range", my point is that WLPT should be better than this...
To be fair, the Model S and the 3 other 'luxury' cars had similar differences to WLTP range. It's the Kia and Nissan that stand out as being much closer. Puzzling - why would that be?
I'm not sure that much can be drawn from comparing those numbers though.
You could run the same test and 60/50/40/30 mph and get different numbers again or do the same at different temperatures.
Best you could say is that at 70mph on that day, the Nissan and Kia were closer to their rated range than the others.
You could run the same test and 60/50/40/30 mph and get different numbers again or do the same at different temperatures.
Best you could say is that at 70mph on that day, the Nissan and Kia were closer to their rated range than the others.
I think you can get too tied up with the numbers. It seems clear to me that the model 3 was streets ahead of the Merc, e-tron and i-pace on a similar long range journey, which is where max range his important. Maybe the gap between real and WLTP range is due to the fact the the Kia and the Leaf were presumably running much closer to their maximum speeds?
As the reviewer hinted, you wouldn't normally get that close to zero charge and with a well planned journey, Tesla currently is in a different class as far as charging locations is concerned.
As the reviewer hinted, you wouldn't normally get that close to zero charge and with a well planned journey, Tesla currently is in a different class as far as charging locations is concerned.
The WLTP test is pretty useless, though not quite as bad as the NEDC before it. I still find the USA EPA results give the nearest to achievable range.
What the video does bear out is my view (met with scepticism on here) that the Kona/Niro is considerably more efficient than the Model 3. Over the 11 months/15k miles we had the Kona, I was always impressed how close the actual range was to the claimed range, something I’ve not found with the Tesla.
In the Kona I could do a 30 mile round trip and it would actually use near 30 miles of range. In the Model 3 the same journey uses 40 miles of range or more.
Although the Tesla “won” the test in the video, if you were to extrapolate the results based on battery size (64kWh versus 75kWh) then the Niro would have been an easy winner.
All that said, I’m overall much happier with the Tesla than the Kona!
What the video does bear out is my view (met with scepticism on here) that the Kona/Niro is considerably more efficient than the Model 3. Over the 11 months/15k miles we had the Kona, I was always impressed how close the actual range was to the claimed range, something I’ve not found with the Tesla.
In the Kona I could do a 30 mile round trip and it would actually use near 30 miles of range. In the Model 3 the same journey uses 40 miles of range or more.
Although the Tesla “won” the test in the video, if you were to extrapolate the results based on battery size (64kWh versus 75kWh) then the Niro would have been an easy winner.
All that said, I’m overall much happier with the Tesla than the Kona!
MrBadger
Badger out
Forcing the dual motor on the LR was a bit of a double edged sword. When we originally reserved, the LR RWD was our car of choice, but by the time it did its whistle stop tour of UK at Park Royal, it was clear that the LR RWD was unlikely to be an option. It did however take the decision of RWD/AWD from us - a few days a year, AWD will hopefully come into its own.
I suspect the LR RWD would have been pretty close to the SR RWD, so would be interesting to see if some SR efficiency values could be plugged into the LR results of 257Wh/mile.
Thats a pretty good result he obtained for a motorway journey at this time of year imho. Best on a long trip we got was ~280 (car trip) over ~470 miles/2 days but we were just using car normally. More recently, we got 298 (TeslaFi) but I think car trip said a bit more like 305 - that was a 240 mile return trip, again using normally. Both were similar climatic conditions (dry approx 8-9C) and the 240 mile trip was partly over same roads as the 2 day trip.
I suspect the LR RWD would have been pretty close to the SR RWD, so would be interesting to see if some SR efficiency values could be plugged into the LR results of 257Wh/mile.
Thats a pretty good result he obtained for a motorway journey at this time of year imho. Best on a long trip we got was ~280 (car trip) over ~470 miles/2 days but we were just using car normally. More recently, we got 298 (TeslaFi) but I think car trip said a bit more like 305 - that was a 240 mile return trip, again using normally. Both were similar climatic conditions (dry approx 8-9C) and the 240 mile trip was partly over same roads as the 2 day trip.
To be fair to Tesla, the Model 3 LR only declares a range of 306 miles when fully charged (not 348 miles WLTP) so 273 miles travelled is much closer to what they expect.
They also advise not to heat the cabin but to heat the seats instead, which is much more efficient. In the video they fully charged the cars the night before and allowed them to discharge c.5% overnight. All of the cars tested would have benefitted from being charged just before use as the battery would be both fuller and warmer.
They also advise not to heat the cabin but to heat the seats instead, which is much more efficient. In the video they fully charged the cars the night before and allowed them to discharge c.5% overnight. All of the cars tested would have benefitted from being charged just before use as the battery would be both fuller and warmer.
Similar threads
