Hyundai Ioniq 28kWh

BoatMad

BoatMad wrote: »

I dont think there is any resistive heaters in the later Leafs

, in my 30Kwh, the heating whether ice cold outside ( like last week ) or other owes never has any great effect on range, the colder outside temp, might result in a 7Km range effect , and typically this falls quickly to 2-3Km when the cabin reaches temperature

The whole heater/air con issue simply isnt that , an issue , we just use it as we please

Yes it does have a resistive heater, it needs it for fast warm up + when pre heating the leaf does not use the heat pump , so it has to use the resistive heating instead.

kave2

Fiery mutant wrote: »

So finally collected my Ioniq EV today from Murphy and Gunn in Rathgar. Have to say I'm very happy with it, so much fun driving home and checking out all the features.

The drive home was a distance of 64.2km according to the sat nav. This included a stretch on the M50 and N4 from Dundrum to the Kilcock exit. I also stopped off in. Liffey Valley on the way home to get a bite to eat, (and go to the Yankee shop for a car scent).

When leaving Murphy and Gunn, distance on battery was 212km. Driving on the M50 would have been at the 100km average, while probably averaged 110km on the N4, and also done a bit at 120 while overtaking. Turned on the heating for 15 minutes, temp at 21c during that time. Both wipers and lights were on auto, wipers came on a few times due to the sprinkling of rain that came down, and had regen at level 2. Radio was on for 90% of the time I was driving.

When I got home, distance remaining on battery was 139km. According to the usage on th dash, 13.6kw/100km.

So all in all, very happy with how the car and battery performed. Judging by today usage,I'll get 2 full days driving to every charge. The Almere I traded in was costing me anywhere between €280 - €400 per month in petrol.

Congrats on the new car. What colour did you get?

Fiery mutant

Day 2 with the car and decided to trial different routes to work to try compare usage.

On the way in I went the standard route I have always taken, which is a 62km run, fairly open roads where I would have spent plenty of time doing between 80-100kph for a good portion of the distance. Drove the way I normally would, have the heating on at a nice 22c for the duration of the trip, with lights on auto. Regen was set at level 2, and had the radio on. Usage for this trip was 13.6kw/100km, and 65.7km of diminished distance on the battery.

On the way home I took a route I hadn't done before, mainly because it was tighter through small villages etc, narrower roads. Used the sat nav, which told me the distance would be 57.4km. As I would spend more time braking and slowing, I set the regen at level 3, kept heating at 22c as before, lights on auto. Usage for this trip was 13.3kw/100km, and 47km of dismissed distance on the battery.

I was amazed at the distance saving on the battery for the second trip. Tomorrow going to take a 3rd potential route, which is a mix of route 1 and route 2 from today.

Fiery mutant

kave2 wrote: »

Congrats on the new car. What colour did you get?

Went with the white, I'll post up a pic later.

Fiery mutant

Fiery mutant wrote: »

Day 2 with the car and decided to trial different routes to work to try compare usage.

On the way in I went the standard route I have always taken, which is a 62km run, fairly open roads where I would have spent plenty of time doing between 80-100kph for a good portion of the distance. Drove the way I normally would, have the heating on at a nice 22c for the duration of the trip, with lights on auto. Regen was set at level 2, and had the radio on. Usage for this trip was 13.6kw/100km, and 65.7km of diminished distance on the battery.

On the way home I took a route I hadn't done before, mainly because it was tighter through small villages etc, narrower roads. Used the sat nav, which told me the distance would be 57.4km. As I would spend more time braking and slowing, I set the regen at level 3, kept heating at 22c as before, lights on auto. Usage for this trip was 13.3kw/100km, and 47km of dismissed distance on the battery.

I was amazed at the distance saving on the battery for the second trip. Tomorrow going to take a 3rd potential route, which is a mix of route 1 and route 2 from today.

I saw 13.1 Kwh/100 kms on the leaf driving at 100 kms for 65 kms and about 60-80 on the way home once and the other 14.5 Kwh/100 kms with a touch of 100 Kwh driving very gently on back roads home main road to work. So In theory I can make the 135 ish km commute in the 24 Kwh leaf but got home a few times with --- showing. So with work charging I drive 100-130 Kph.

My commute yesterday and today saw about 16.5-17 Kwh/100 kms helped by traffic.

Fiery mutant

Image isn't great, but here it is.

Villain

Fiery mutant wrote: »

Day 2 with the car and decided to trial different routes to work to try compare usage.

On the way in I went the standard route I have always taken, which is a 62km run, fairly open roads where I would have spent plenty of time doing between 80-100kph for a good portion of the distance. Drove the way I normally would, have the heating on at a nice 22c for the duration of the trip, with lights on auto. Regen was set at level 2, and had the radio on. Usage for this trip was 13.6kw/100km, and 65.7km of diminished distance on the battery.

On the way home I took a route I hadn't done before, mainly because it was tighter through small villages etc, narrower roads. Used the sat nav, which told me the distance would be 57.4km. As I would spend more time braking and slowing, I set the regen at level 3, kept heating at 22c as before, lights on auto. Usage for this trip was 13.3kw/100km, and 47km of dismissed distance on the battery.

I was amazed at the distance saving on the battery for the second trip. Tomorrow going to take a 3rd potential route, which is a mix of route 1 and route 2 from today.

I notice you mention radio and lights and wipers etc, on the Leaf these all run from 12v battery and don't affect range is it different in Ioniq?

Fiery mutant

No 12v battery in the Ioniq.

Alu

Fiery mutant wrote: »

No 12v battery in the Ioniq.

The manual says there is

Found it linked on another forum - https://carmanuals2.com/get/hyundai-ioniq-electric-2017-owner-s-manual-101276

Fiery mutant

I haven't read it, googled it and couldn't see one.

Edit: just read the manual. 12v supplies power for lights, audio and wipers. Heating done by the main battery.

positron

There is usual car battery in Ioniq. Not only that, it was flat when I went to test drive one at local Hyundai dealer, apparently someone left the boot open over holiday period and drained the battery. He had to jump start the car with a battery pack the old fashioned way, he couldn't even open the boot when the battery was flat and car 'powered down'. It was a bit of spectacle, this brand new unregistered electric car sitting there in the showroom with a flat battery!

Alu

positron wrote: »

There is usual car battery in Ioniq. Not only that, it was flat when I went to test drive one at local Hyundai dealer, apparently someone left the boot open over holiday period and drained the battery. He had to jump start the car with a battery pack the old fashioned way, he couldn't even open the boot when the battery was flat and car 'powered down'. It was a bit of spectacle, this brand new unregistered electric car sitting there in the showroom with a flat battery!

I was reading about something similar on ioniqforum, the owner had to use the key (via covered slot in the door handle) to get in..

http://www.ioniqforum.com/forum/282-2017-hyundai-ioniq-service-maintenance/2737-battery-flat.html

Villain

It seems the hybrid has no 12V battery

n97 mini

I would be very surprised if it didn't. Just as with an ICE if you run out of fuel you still have power for the lights, especially the hazards.

bipedalhumanoid

who_ru wrote: »

The Ioniq is the first EV I've seen that does not look ridiculous. It's the first EV that I would be happy to drive around in, all the rest, excluding tesla which are too expensive, seemed to be styled in a way that discourages rather than encourages purchasing one.

I don't know about the others, but the Leaf was designed in a wind tunnel to improve its range and reduce noise. The shape of the car is a feature in and of itself.

josip

bipedalhumanoid wrote: »

I don't know about the others, but the Leaf was designed in a wind tunnel to improve its range and reduce noise. The shape of the car is a feature in and of itself.

I thought all cars nowadays (apart from Range Rovers) were tested in wind tunnels?

bipedalhumanoid

josip wrote: »

I thought all cars nowadays (apart from Range Rovers) were tested in wind tunnels?

Most cars are not so quiet that that the sound of wind currents brushing against the side-mirrors becomes a significant concern.

Most cars are not so range limited as to make it worthwhile to build their bodies in an unconventional shape to the benefit of making marginal gains in fuel efficiency.

KCross

who_ru wrote: »

The Ioniq is the first EV I've seen that does not look ridiculous. It's the first EV that I would be happy to drive around in, all the rest, excluding tesla which are too expensive, seemed to be styled in a way that discourages rather than encourages purchasing one.

bipedalhumanoid wrote: »

I don't know about the others, but the Leaf was designed in a wind tunnel to improve its range and reduce noise. The shape of the car is a feature in and of itself.

I think the point being made is that wind tunnel or no wind tunnel the Ioniq is an EV the same as the Leaf and doesnt look as odd as the Leaf does and it has a better drag coefficient than the Leaf does.

I guess it was designed several years after the Leaf so maybe design has improved and you no longer need it to look odd to be aerodynamic.

Lights , wipers and radio will have no notable effect on range.

Consider basic 55 watt halogens x 2 110 watts = 110 Watt hrs over an hour, even if the wipers consumed 110 watt hrs over an hour that would be 220 watt hrs over 1 hr. Throw in the radio, probably 20 watts max average at normal listening levels = 240 watt hrs.

josip

bipedalhumanoid wrote: »

Most cars are not so quiet that that the sound of wind currents brushing against the side-mirrors becomes a significant concern.

Accepted, good point.

bipedalhumanoid wrote: »

Most cars are not so range limited as to make it worthwhile to build their bodies in an unconventional shape to the benefit of making marginal gains in fuel efficiency.

But did it make any gains? A 1988 Fiat Tipo has a better drag coefficient.

bk

KCross wrote: »

I guess it was designed several years after the Leaf so maybe design has improved and you no longer need it to look odd to be aerodynamic.

I don't believe the leaf was particularly designed to be aerodynamic, just look at it, it is far from aerodynamic shape.

Prius, Ioniq, Tesla S, all are far more aerodynamic.

From this article:
https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/blog_attachments/the-slipperiest-car-on-the-road.pdf

Drag Co-effecient:
TeslaS 0.24
Prius 0.26
Volt 0.28
Leaf 0.32

From elsewhere I believe the Ioniq is also 0.24.

I don't know why Nissan designed the leaf the way they did, but it certainly wasn't for aerodynamics. I suspect they just went for the simplest option possible and simply stuck batteries on a slightly modified existing Pulsar chassis and body, rather then designing a completely new one from the ground up.

Aerodynamic doesn't have to mean odd looking, in fact it usually means sleek and sporty looking, as you will see with almost any car with low drag co-efficient.

Alu

KCross wrote: »

I think the point being made is that wind tunnel or no wind tunnel the Ioniq is an EV the same as the Leaf and doesnt look as odd as the Leaf does and it has a better drag coefficient than the Leaf does.

I guess it was designed several years after the Leaf so maybe design has improved and you no longer need it to look odd to be aerodynamic.

Maybe we've gotten used to 'odd' designs - the Ioniq takes quite a few design ques from the Prius, a car regarded by most auto reviewers as fugly

isnottheword

bk wrote: »

Aerodynamic doesn't have to mean odd looking, in fact it usually means sleek and sporty looking, as you will see with almost any car with low drag co-efficient.

Each to their own but I couldn't give a fiddlers how the Leaf looks....unless it's a case of all other things being equal. At the end of the day, it's a utility - a means of getting from A to B. Whatever can achieve that economically (relative to what you get for your money) is all that I'll take into account.
I know we are all sold on a car being a luxury item - but it's just a means to an end. I wouldn't bother having one unless I had a need.

I don't think the leaf is that bad, the front is a bit ugly alright but the rest of it is fine, I spend most of my time inside anyway and far less time looking at it from outside.

isnottheword

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think the leaf is that bad, the front is a bit ugly alright but the rest of it is fine, I spend most of my time inside anyway and far less time looking at it from outside.

Agreed - and the upside of the design is that it's got more internal space than people imagine it to have.

kave2

Deleted User wrote: »

Lights , wipers and radio will have no notable effect on range.

Consider basic 55 watt halogens x 2 110 watts = 110 Watt hrs over an hour, even if the wipers consumed 110 watt hrs over an hour that would be 220 watt hrs over 1 hr. Throw in the radio, probably 20 watts max average at normal listening levels = 240 watt hrs.

LED on the Ionic.

Alu wrote: »

Maybe we've gotten used to 'odd' designs - the Ioniq takes quite a few design ques from the Prius, a car regarded by most auto reviewers as fugly

Yet significantly nicer.

bk

isnottheword wrote: »

Each to their own but I couldn't give a fiddlers how the Leaf looks....unless it's a case of all other things being equal. At the end of the day, it's a utility - a means of getting from A to B. Whatever can achieve that economically (relative to what you get for your money) is all that I'll take into account.
I know we are all sold on a car being a luxury item - but it's just a means to an end. I wouldn't bother having one unless I had a need.

Wait a second, I'm not saying it is ugly! But the Leaf is unarguably "odd looking".

As to your point, well the Leaf's odd looks mean it is less efficient at getting you from a to b then less "odd looking" cars like the Ionig and Tesla S.

Alu

kave2 wrote: »

LED on the Ionic.



Yet significantly nicer.

Without doubt but that Prius design above is 7 years old. If Toyota had been a bit more conservative with the Prius 4 design it wouldn't have been too far off the Ioniq.

unkel

Deleted User wrote: »

Lights , wipers and radio will have no notable effect on range.

Consider basic 55 watt halogens

Halogens? The Ioniq has LED lights, brighter, lasting longer and using a lot less power. Welcome to 2017