forkee
Member
That is what my. 2016 MX has after 95k miles.
my 2016 X P90DL goes to 219 mi at 100% (56k miles)
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That is what my. 2016 MX has after 95k miles.
That has to be one of the best stats.... how much of it was down hill?I just completed a trip to Sedona and I got crazy good efficiency in our 2016 P90d with 20's! I highly recommend taking 89 south from Flagstaff to Sedona, it's one of the most beautiful drives I've ever taken especially in an X. The X got under 200 Wh/mi for the 40 mile trip and our lifetime dropped to 380 Wh/mi. Not sure what the record is for a 30 mile trip efficiency, but this had to be close with a projected range of over 700 miles! lol
View attachment 545938View attachment 545939
That has to be one of the best stats.... how much of it was down hill?
Do the figures in that image show usage of just the driving or it includes other consumption like aircon etc?
it was mostly downhill and flat. on the way home I had to drive uphill and got over 400 Wh/mi. lol. not sure if it includes just driving in consumption or everything else.
X 100D late 2019 with 20 inch wheels :
266 Wh/km over 13,000 km with winter tires and mostly highways
Last 800 km are down at 230 Wh/km with summer tires (mostly urban drive with some autobahn).
Seemed also high to me reading the thread. I am based in Luxembourg and used to do a daily 130 km ride to Bastogne during winter mainly uphill and with temperatures between -5 and +8-10 Celsius.So that means ~425 kWh/mile? Seems a little high to me. I see numbers like that in the winter here, but 300-320 kWh/mile in summer is more typical.
What do you mean "overall efficiency"? Are you calculating from something other than the tripmeters? The tripmeters only calculate during trips, and nothing that causes phantom drain would be off during trips to begin with.that does sound satisfying. Just waiting now for the Phantom Drain issue to be resolved as loosing too much power daily and it is messing with the car's overall efficiency.
I do not charge the car overnight every night. Just when the need be. My method is the same old school way taking 1kWh as 1litre of fuel. I know how much fuel I feed it and I know how many kms it did. Thus when the power is lost every night by the car it gets captured. So the real world true efficiency (and cost effectiveness) that I presently get from my 2019MX is 4.17kms/kWh. Which calculates to about 1/3rd cheaper than an ICE. Used to be half as cheap but the fuel prices dropped big time recently.What do you mean "overall efficiency"? Are you calculating from something other than the tripmeters? The tripmeters only calculate during trips, and nothing that causes phantom drain would be off during trips to begin with.
Few days later.
Smoother driving, average value got quickly down to 214 Wh/km and heading down to 200.
My last 200 km were average 190 Wh.
Satisfying!
I see. Since it sounds like you're noticing a change, perhaps this thread might shed some light on it? Also, while using that methodology makes sense, I doubt it is relevant to the EPA estimates. I mean, I am guessing that the EPA estimate tests are based only on a drive and not having the vehicle sitting in the off condition for any significant period of time.I do not charge the car overnight every night. Just when the need be. My method is the same old school way taking 1kWh as 1litre of fuel. I know how much fuel I feed it and I know how many kms it did. Thus when the power is lost every night by the car it gets captured. So the real world true efficiency (and cost effectiveness) that I presently get from my 2019MX is 4.17kms/kWh. Which calculates to about 1/3rd cheaper than an ICE. Used to be half as cheap but the fuel prices dropped big time recently.
Thanks for the thread, I am following it as I had started itI see. Since it sounds like you're noticing a change, perhaps this thread might shed some light on it? Also, while using that methodology makes sense, I doubt it is relevant to the EPA estimates. I mean, I am guessing that the EPA estimate tests are based only on a drive and not having the vehicle sitting in the off condition for any significant period of time.