Stickboy46
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2020
- Threads
- 0
- Messages
- 209
- Reaction score
- 229
- Location
- Kansas
- Vehicles
- 2020 Tesla Model 3 AWD LR
Second this... What's the car wash issue?@LYTMCQ what’s this with the car wash?
Sponsored
Second this... What's the car wash issue?@LYTMCQ what’s this with the car wash?
WLTP range of Mach E is promising 373 miles. Model 3 under same WLTP test gets 332 miles. Should be a 306-330 mile EPA car.
It should, but how's the Audi etron doing with a much bigger battery?honestly, with a significantly larger battery, the mach-e really should get more range than the Y even if it's slightly heavier/less aero/less efficient.
I think you're getting a bit carried away.WLTP range of Mach E is promising 373 miles. Model 3 under same WLTP test gets 332 miles. Should be a 306-330 mile EPA car.
That would be great, but I'd also be very surprised. Depends on which speed one considers "highway speed" though. Huge difference in BEV efficiency between 55 MPH and 75 MPH.but that means real world range probably closer to 300 at highway speeds and much better road trip car.
You need more kool-aidI feel like I must be missing something here.
The Jaguar I-Pace has a worse drag Coef. I believe the WLTP is done at a slower speed than EPA, so the numbers don't correlate to very big and bulky SUV's. It also depends on how the gear ratio and motors are tuned.I think you're getting a bit carried away.
WLTP range for the Jaguar I-PACE is like 290+ miles but EPA 234mi. With the recent range bump Jaguar released last month, I'd guess that RW range is about the EPA range now.
To avoid disappointment, anticipate Ford actually hitting the target range. Insert some mild optimism and a 5% bump would be nice. 10% would be on my wildly optimistic side. Maybe the California Route 1 Edition might get an extra 2-5% over the Premium RWD? Aero wheel covers make a measurable difference which would give the CA Rt. 1 a slight boost.
I think the Cd is about the same for both the I-PACE and Mach-E. It's a bit of dark magic to me though since there's more to air resistance than just the Cd.The Jaguar I-Pace has a worse drag Coef. I believe the WLTP is done at a slower speed than EPA, so the numbers don't correlate to very big and bulky SUV's. It also depends on how the gear ratio and motors are tuned.
The Mach E appears to be very a very efficient design. I would again say that WLTP range of 373 should translate to no more than 50-60 miles lost in EPA test. That would again put it at 303-330 miles EPA. Maybe the AWD version will hit the 300 miles EPA and the RWD will hit 315-330.
We can only speculate, but look at how the Model 3 did on WLTP testing. It lost only 20 miles. Agree with you on the efficient wheels
I think there's way too much faith being put into both EPA and WLTP numbers, particularly when they are "targeted" numbers.The Jaguar I-Pace has a worse drag Coef. I believe the WLTP is done at a slower speed than EPA, so the numbers don't correlate to very big and bulky SUV's. It also depends on how the gear ratio and motors are tuned.
The Mach E appears to be very a very efficient design. I would again say that WLTP range of 373 should translate to no more than 50-60 miles lost in EPA test. That would again put it at 303-330 miles EPA. Maybe the AWD version will hit the 300 miles EPA and the RWD will hit 315-330.
We can only speculate, but look at how the Model 3 did on WLTP testing. It lost only 20 miles. Agree with you on the efficient wheels
I hope you're right.EPA is all we really got and it's what the mfg can put on the Monroney sticker. How realistic the EPA number is a completely different story. Just look at the Porsche Taycan.
Regardless, Ford can do some things in the next few months to optimize efficiencies with the motors, BMS and environmental systems. My guess is we'll see a slight bump in EPA range estimates. Furthermore, there's marginal gains to be made after we've been driving the car around for awhile as Ford learns more about the vehicle's performance over time.
It has been stated the Drag Coef of the Mach E is below .3. The Model 3 is .23. So what do we know?I think the Cd is about the same for both the I-PACE and Mach-E. It's a bit of dark magic to me though since there's more to air resistance than just the Cd.
If you figure the WLTP is 15% optimistic compared to the EPA then you're looking at around 290mi and 320mi EPA range for the AWD and RWD variants, respectively. But again, we're looking at target numbers released to the public for purposes of the product unveiling rather than the production specs. Since Tesla upped the ante on range, I fully expect Ford to respond in some fashion. I'm happy to admit that 290mi of EPA range for the AWD would be awesome.