Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Electric cars range at 130km/h

Options
  • 24-03-2022 9:38am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 6,660 ✭✭✭


    German "Auto Bild" did test of electric cars range @ 130 km/h


    28. Mazda MX-30 (35,5 kWh): 140 km

    27. Peugeot e-Rifter (50 kWh): 164 km

    26. Opel Combo e-Life (50 kWh): 171 km

    25. Mercedes EQB 350 (66,5 kWh): 200 km

    24. VW ID.3 Pro 150 kW (58 kWh): 216 km

    23. Mercedes EQA 250 (66 kWh): 222 km

    22. Cupra Born 170 kW (77 kWh): 226 km

    21. Volvo XC-40 Recharge (69 kWh): 227 km

    20. Opel Zafira (75 kWh): 250 km

    19. Polestar 2 LR Single Motor (75 kWh): 254 km

    18. Polestar 2 LR Dual Motor (75 kWh): 258 km

    17. Hyundai IONIQ 5 (72,6 kWh): 261 km

    16. Mercedes EQV (90 kWh): 273 km

    15. Kia e-Soul (64 kWh): 280 km

    14. Hyundai IONIQ 5 AWD (72,6 kWh): 290 km

    13. BMW i4 M50 (80,7 kWh): 299 km

    12. Tesla Model Y LR (75 kWh): 304 km

    11. Kia EV6 (72,6 kWh): 305 km

    10. Škoda Enyaq iV80 (77 kWh): 316 km

    9. Audi Q4 e-tron 40 (76,6 kWh): 326 km

    8. VW ID.4 Pro (77 kWh): 328 km

    7. VW ID.4 GTX (77 kWh): 332 km

    6. Tesla Model 3 Performance (75 kWh): 337 km

    5. Porsche Taycan 4S Plus (83,7 kWh): 352 km

    4. Audi RS e-tron GT (85 kWh): 367 km

    3. Ford Mach-E GT (88 kWh): 367 km

    2. BMW iX xDrive 50 (105,2 kWh): 434 km

    1. Mercedes EQS (107,8 kWh): 444 km


    I see no mention of temperature, wind or rain, but it's a good comparison showing big battery is not only factor in real world range. Funny the dual motor models seem to get further range, while on wltp they normally have less than equivalent single motor car. The soul looks to be best range for battery size


    Linky https://www.autobild.de/artikel/e-auto-autobahn-reichweite-test-tempo-130-km-h-20977681.html



«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 21,792 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    Interesting, but no mention of model S or X, combined with the germans in top spot makes me suspicious. Why leave out a likely competitor? The refresh S, X and Lucid would all have a good shot of beating the EQS.



  • Moderators Posts: 12,371 ✭✭✭✭Black_Knight


    17. Hyundai IONIQ 5 (72,6 kWh): 261 km

    That's pretty disappointing vs the EV6.

    Nice to see that table as a km per kWh @130km/h



  • Moderators Posts: 12,371 ✭✭✭✭Black_Knight


    Sorted by Efficiency.

    22. Cupra Born 170 kW (77 kWh): 226 km 2.93km/kWh 28

    25. Mercedes EQB 350 (66,5 kWh): 200 km 3.01km/kWh 27

    16. Mercedes EQV (90 kWh): 273 km 3.03km/kWh 26

    21. Volvo XC-40 Recharge (69 kWh): 227 km 3.28km/kWh 25

    27. Peugeot e-Rifter (50 kWh): 164 km 3.28km/kWh 24

    20. Opel Zafira (75 kWh): 250 km 3.33km/kWh 23

    19. Polestar 2 LR Single Motor (75 kWh): 254 km 3.38km/kWh 22

    26. Opel Combo e-Life (50 kWh): 171 km 3.42km/kWh 21

    18. Polestar 2 LR Dual Motor (75 kWh): 258 km 3.44km/kWh 20

    23. Mercedes EQA 250 (66 kWh): 222 km 3.51km/kWh 19

    17. Hyundai IONIQ 5 (72,6 kWh): 261 km 3.59km/kWh 18

    13. BMW i4 M50 (80,7 kWh): 299 km 3.70km/kWh 17

    24. VW ID.3 Pro 150 kW (58 kWh): 216 km 3.72km/kWh 16

    28. Mazda MX-30 (35,5 kWh): 140 km. 3.94km/kWh 15

    14. Hyundai IONIQ 5 AWD (72,6 kWh): 290 km 3.99km/kWh 14

    12. Tesla Model Y LR (75 kWh): 304 km 4.06km/kWh 13

    10. Škoda Enyaq iV80 (77 kWh): 316 km 4.10km/kWh 12

    1. Mercedes EQS (107,8 kWh): 444 km 4.11km/kWh 11

    2. BMW iX xDrive 50 (105,2 kWh): 434 km 4.12km/kWh 10

    3. Ford Mach-E GT (88 kWh): 367 km 4.17km/kWh 9

    11. Kia EV6 (72,6 kWh): 305 km 4.20km/kWh 8

    5. Porsche Taycan 4S Plus (83,7 kWh): 352 km 4.20km/kWh 7

    8. VW ID.4 Pro (77 kWh): 328 km 4.25km/kWh 6

    9. Audi Q4 e-tron 40 (76,6 kWh): 326 km 4.25km/kWh 5

    4. Audi RS e-tron GT (85 kWh): 367 km 4.31km/kWh 4

    7. VW ID.4 GTX (77 kWh): 332 km 4.31km/kWh 3

    15. Kia e-Soul (64 kWh): 280 km 4.37km/kWh 2

    6. Tesla Model 3 Performance (75 kWh): 337 km 4.49km/kWh 1

    Bravo to the Kia eSoul, but take everything with a pinch of salt. ID4 GTX as more range than Pro? It's heavier because its 4WD, so that doesn't make huge sense. Mazda MX-30 is another surprise to me. Cupra born can't be that inefficient too!



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,477 ✭✭✭eagerv


    Doesn't the Kia EV6 have a 77kWh battery?



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,227 ✭✭✭ongarite


    EV6 has bigger battery.

    Ioniq5 with same battery size will be available late this year.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭sh81722


    Would be interesting to see what the latest Model 3 RWD's range is seen as the Performance already tops up the efficiency chart and, at least at the lower speeds, the RWD is way more efficient. It might be a touch and go between the Perf and RWD. 222 Wh/km is pretty high for a Model 3. It's interesting that they selected the least efficient Model 3 for the test but more than 1 each of the Ioniq etc.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 18,873 Mod ✭✭✭✭slave1


    I would not assume the RWD is way more efficient, with dual motors comes dual regen and Tesla use over 30% of their range in regen power. The kicker with the P is no 18" Aeros

    My stuff for sale on Adverts inc. outdoor furniture, roof box and EDDI

    Public Profile active ads for slave1 (adverts.ie)



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭sh81722


    More interesting results are Cupra Born vs ID.3 efficiency and the fact that ID.4/Enyaq have so much better efficiency than ID.3.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 18,873 Mod ✭✭✭✭slave1


    It's hard to figure ID4 and Enyaq having better efficiency versus body shape of the ID3 unless the former are dual motors and greater regen

    My stuff for sale on Adverts inc. outdoor furniture, roof box and EDDI

    Public Profile active ads for slave1 (adverts.ie)



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭Old diesel


    This type of test is potentially useful in a space where the ICE drivers who will move to EVs will want 120 km/hr speed on the motorway.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭sh81722


    Better regen should not play a role at constant high speeds unless there were sudden slowdowns needed due to high traffic. The biggest factors are the wheels/tyres (as you mention), other aerodynamics like presence/lack of rear spoiler and the ride height, and the motor/inverter efficiency and the battery internal resistance at medium RPM but at lowish load. As the latest RWD motor has been claimed to be even more efficient than the previous designs from Tesla, while also having a battery pack with lower internal resistance, it would have been cool to see RWD model in this comparison.

    The only reason choosing the performance would make sense here is if it is the best selling variant of Model 3 in Germany (which is may well be).



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,127 ✭✭✭innrain


    By choosing Model3 Performance over LR when Polestar has 2 LR models in the test tells me is a test with the results known before the start. There is a 55km difference on the WLTP cycle or 69km on the EPA from Model3 Performance to LR. Considering this, by adding anything more than 30 km to Performance range model LR would be on 3rd place overtaking cars with bateries with more than 10kWh greater. Polestar LR has the same battery but 100 km less range. Probably is there to look bad. We don't want Tesla to be on the podium.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 18,873 Mod ✭✭✭✭slave1


    You would think that but I was surprised, in my Model S ownership of two years Regen was around 34% of power used, on a road trip to Scotland last year it was 24% Regen and that was 1,500kms of mostly motorway speeds. I use Scanmytesla so unless that is incorrect....

    My stuff for sale on Adverts inc. outdoor furniture, roof box and EDDI

    Public Profile active ads for slave1 (adverts.ie)



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭sh81722


    I have seen that also now that you mention it on our 3. And the percentage did look suspiciously high. I need to do some research on that sometime soon.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,009 ✭✭✭Mr Q


    A Cupra Born with the same battery as an ID.4 goes more than 100km less? The car must have been the 58kWh version and not 77kWh as listed.

    Seen an iX in the flesh for the first time yesterday, in black. Much nicer than expected



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,030 ✭✭✭Casati


    That makes sense - driving a petrol or diesel at constant speed on motorway sees economy move dramatically even without traffic- a simple hill / downhill will do that, so presumably this is where regent kicks in on these super efficient cars. Ive heard many times that dual motor cars are better at high speeds so a lot of result align with that- though I dont understand the physics.

    I personally really welcome this report - for sure you could ask why they didn't test every power / battery option from each EV available but taking at face value its a very useful chart for somebody like me who makes 200km + 100km N road journeys quite often



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,030 ✭✭✭Casati


    They tested 28 cars, a decent selection across different price points. I wouldn't discredit the report just because it doesnt have every single make/ EV motor/ drivetrain/ battery option available on the market. Like all other magazines, I'm sure they are using press cars so likely used what was available and used two of the most popular Tesla's. Personally I'd like to have seen the i4 40

    If they were German biased do you think they would show the Soul in such a high place versus the ID3's or have an American Mustang way up?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,127 ✭✭✭innrain


    They put Soul which is the least efficient of the Korean triples and EV6 GT with the smaller battery and least efficient of the EV6 lineup. Probably to fall behind Id.4. No bias just happenstance.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 18,873 Mod ✭✭✭✭slave1


    28 cars tested and some principle EVs missing, we've come a long way in the last 2/3 years

    My stuff for sale on Adverts inc. outdoor furniture, roof box and EDDI

    Public Profile active ads for slave1 (adverts.ie)



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭embraer170


    It would be interesting to know the outside air temperature and any heating used.

    The reality is that long distance motorway driving in most EVs is probably best done at 95-100km/h.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,327 ✭✭✭✭fits


    That Cupra born figure doesn’t make sense. Can they even be got in the bigger battery? Not in ireland anyway.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,133 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    would have been interesting to see them repeat the tests at 100km/h and 110km/h. the air resistance difference between 100km/h and 120km/h is nearly one and a half times as much, so would be curious if there'd be a similarly conspicuous increase in range.



  • Posts: 864 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    They can, but not yet. The 77kW battery is coming later in the year here. It may be available in Germany though. I do however suspect that it was actually a 58kW battery version that was tested as it pretty much did exactly the same as it's cousin id 3



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭JC 3.14159


    Same thing but ordered by best to worst kWh/100km




  • Registered Users Posts: 2,127 ✭✭✭innrain


    Thank you for that. Now we can look at efficiency and compare.

    Yes the result for Cupra is skewed and most likely because it got 10km more that id.3. No way it is less efficient than a van.

    So the least efficient of the Model3 variants tops the chart. :)) followed by the least efficient, 2018 tech, Korean triplet.

    Then if we consider the issue Bjorn was talking about

    some engineers have to go back to the drawing board.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,133 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    would be interesting to see those ranked against drag coefficient too; i.e. how much of any gain or loss would be due to air resistance vs. drivetrain efficiency.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,111 ✭✭✭✭KCross


    There is something fundamentally wrong with those stats.

    How can the ID.4 (23.5) significantly beat the ID.3(26.9). They have the exact same drivetrain but the ID.4 is heavier(bigger battery, bigger car) and less aero dynamic. It makes no sense, all other things being equal, that the ID.4 would significantly beat the ID.3.


    Clearly there are other variables at play that the testers didnt control and it has given a skewed result.... signficiantly skewed at that, so you would have to question the validaity of the whole thing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 791 ✭✭✭CreadanLady


    This experiment could be misleading and flawed. Are they measuring 130km/hr on a continuous run, or are they measuring it in a real world scenario with mostly 130km/hr sprints interspersed with occasional accelaration, breaking, overtaking, stopping, restarting, occasion slowdown-speedup-stop-start driving at interchanges and the like?

    Unless they can clarify the above I'd take it with a pinch of salt and knock 25-30% off of all those ranges.

    The MFV Creadan Lady is a mussel dredger from Dunmore East.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,912 ✭✭✭kanuseeme


    I had the thought that the range was low enough without knocking 25% off. 😁😁😁



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 2,799 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Theres also german in 4 of the worst, is that also conspiracy?



Advertisement