dbsb3233

Well-Known Member
First Name
TimCO
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Threads
54
Messages
9,299
Reaction score
10,814
Location
Colorado, USA
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E FE, 2023 Bronco Sport OB
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
This shows that Tesla has learned how to game the EPA tests...the other automakers will do so soon as well, just like they have been gaming the EPA mileage tests for years. Tesla, despite teaming the tests, still is the efficiency leader when comparing equally sized vehicles.
Yep. Although honestly, that's EPA's fault for allowing it.

Of course, the EPA numbers are largely crap for BEV range anyway. (And MPGe is downright silly.) BEVs need a whole new and different standardized range test, with upper and lower measurements included. The public needs to be properly informed about the much higher variability in range on BEVs than they're used to with ICE.

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a33825136/evs-deserve-a-new-epa-range-test/
Sponsored

 

DBC

Well-Known Member
First Name
Don
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
1,224
Reaction score
1,428
Location
San Diego
Vehicles
Volt ELR
Country flag
Tesla, despite teaming the tests, still is the efficiency leader when comparing equally sized vehicles.
Since prices reflect the costs to society to produce a good or service, efficiency only matters to the extent it is reflected in costs. At $.09/kWh the efficiency differences we see here are as important as getting 26 MPG rather than 27 MPG. IOW irrelevant.

The larger story is that when the Taycan was released the Tesla fanboys went crazy, opining that only a fool would buy a Taycan rather than the Model S which got so much more range. Now it's morphed into quite the come-down story: Yeah the Taycan goes further and charges faster but the Model S is more efficient. Meh.
 

dbsb3233

Well-Known Member
First Name
TimCO
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Threads
54
Messages
9,299
Reaction score
10,814
Location
Colorado, USA
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E FE, 2023 Bronco Sport OB
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
I can't believe Tesla's argument is that you have to run their cars below 0 miles of range for it to be a "true test." That is just stupid and another ploy by them to try gaming the "system."
Yep. Honestly, we got kind of used to that with ICE vehicles. There was usually a 1-2 gallon reserve after hitting E, and many people would get used to going all the way to E and sometimes a bit beyond. But that was on analog dials and gas tank floats that were less accurate than state-of-the-art electrical power measurements. Gas gauges needed extra buffers because measuring liquid in a large tank sloshing back and forth simply wasn't as accurate.

There's really little excuse for a BEV not to be much more accurate with it's gauges. The fact that Tesla seems to put more of their battery capacity below 0% might suggest they're not quite as confident in how much power is really left, and the bigger buffer is hedging their bets some. OK, fine. Ford is doing that too, just more at the top end (presumably). However, as you said, actually COUNTING that below 0% buffer as needed for their advertised range numbers is crazy.
 

DBC

Well-Known Member
First Name
Don
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
1,224
Reaction score
1,428
Location
San Diego
Vehicles
Volt ELR
Country flag
That's why I liked this pure 65 MPH range test better than anything that includes slow city speeds (like the near-worthless EPA range ratings). And why I like Car and Driver's 70 MPH tests.
The EPA Highway test is far more demanding than either of the tests you're referencing, which is why it reflects a much shorter range than either of these tests will project.
 

DBC

Well-Known Member
First Name
Don
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
1,224
Reaction score
1,428
Location
San Diego
Vehicles
Volt ELR
Country flag
There's really little excuse for a BEV not to be much more accurate with it's gauges.
It's super difficult to estimate SOC. The voltage is flat until it heads steeply downward. This is why the estimate varies after the BEV has sat for a while. (Not the vampire drain).
 


dbsb3233

Well-Known Member
First Name
TimCO
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Threads
54
Messages
9,299
Reaction score
10,814
Location
Colorado, USA
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E FE, 2023 Bronco Sport OB
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
The EPA Highway test is far more demanding than either of the tests you're referencing, which is why it reflects a much shorter range than either of these tests will project.
They may be demanding, but they don't tend to match real world very well in many cases. And real world range is what most people are interested in, and need to know.

The bigger problem though isn't so much inaccuracy, it's the target speed. For most people, range is only an issue on road trips. That's constant high-speed highway driving. Range for that scenario is the one that counts overwhelmingly more than other scenarios.
 
OP
OP
silverelan

silverelan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2019
Threads
117
Messages
3,019
Reaction score
4,298
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E GT
Country flag
I kept waiting for Edmunds to show the 65mph range test results but they didn't. Very strange.
 

J Duce

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jean
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Threads
1
Messages
299
Reaction score
279
Location
Jamaica, NY
Vehicles
2017 Explorer Sport
Country flag
I kept waiting for Edmunds to show the 65mph range test results but they didn't. Very strange.
Am I missing something? In the video, I thought he said each car continued to do the 7 mile loop at a constant 65mph until the car used up it's last available power. All started with the manufacturer suggested settings shown on the door. He said each driver was rotated in each car to make sure each car was driven by on of those drivers. To me, it seems they ran the test for the number of drivers available. Maybe they did the test over an entire day or days and they were not clear about that.
 

Mike16

Well-Known Member
First Name
Michel
Joined
Oct 30, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
288
Reaction score
404
Location
Canada, Quebec
Vehicles
Premium AWD ER Star White
Country flag
So if Ford had go Tesla way, we would have an EPA of 349 miles for the awd ER? 304 miles at 0% but the 10,8kWh buffer would be after 0% so 341 miles but why not add some miles more to that, it is so close people will tell we meet our EPA ;)
 

OttawaGuy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Threads
27
Messages
647
Reaction score
810
Location
Gatineau, Canada
Vehicles
Mach E RWD SR, F150 XLT Special Edition
Occupation
Busy!
Country flag
People are generally happier if the product exceeds estimates vs super optimistic estimates that aren't met.

That's why places like McDonald's will always tell you that your special order will be ready in "X minutes" or fixing an issue will take "X" minutes while they know it will only take half of that time to serve you.... Why

Well when you are told, "it will take 5 minutes" and you actually get it in 3 you are happy. And if they tell "it will take 2 minutes" and you get 6 minutes later, you'll be pissed!
 

theblueone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2020
Threads
7
Messages
84
Reaction score
189
Location
california
Vehicles
2021 Audi e-tron
Country flag
Interesting that the Taycan estimate is so wildly conservative.

...Perhaps they aren't expecting the owners to drive it at a steady 65 mph?
 

Havok

Member
First Name
Jose
Joined
Feb 11, 2021
Threads
1
Messages
12
Reaction score
11
Location
Canary Islands, Spain
Vehicles
Mach-E RWD SR Star White (Shadowfax)
Occupation
IT
Country flag
So if Ford had go Tesla way, we would have an EPA of 349 miles for the awd ER? 304 miles at 0% but the 10,8kWh buffer would be after 0% so 341 miles but why not add some miles more to that, it is so close people will tell we meet our EPA ;)
Actually I think the buffer is both In the upper and lower range of SOC, so as to keep battery life at its best... Lets reallistically halve that extra range...
 
 




Top