Advertisement



A Better Route Planner "Reference Consumption"

FredT

Well-Known Member
First Name
Fred
Joined
Feb 1, 2020
Messages
319
Reaction score
236
Location
California
First Name
Fred
Vehicles
1999 Mercedes 320E. 2003 Passat Wagon, just finished lease of 2017 Audi A3 Enron
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
I've been playing around with A Better Route Planner to see what I might expect with different Mach E configurations. One changeable variable is Reference Consumption. Obviously they are using estimates/guesses for this right now, but the number they are using seems awfully low to me. For example, for the extended AWD version they use 2.65. For comparison they use 3.6 for Tesla Model 3, 3.4 for Model Y, and 2.56 for Audi e-tron. What do you think, should I use a different number, does it really matter?
 

JamieGeek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Messages
1,314
Reaction score
1,736
Location
Southeastern Michigan
Website
spareelectrons.wordpress.com
Vehicles
Bolt EV, Thor Axis, former C-Max Energi, former Focus Electric
Country flag
extended AWD version: 98.8kWh battery with targeted range of 270 miles is about 2.7 miles/kWh.

Thus 2.65 seems like a reasonable assumption given some battery reserve.
 
OP

FredT

Well-Known Member
First Name
Fred
Joined
Feb 1, 2020
Messages
319
Reaction score
236
Location
California
First Name
Fred
Vehicles
1999 Mercedes 320E. 2003 Passat Wagon, just finished lease of 2017 Audi A3 Enron
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #3
extended AWD version: 98.8kWh battery with targeted range of 270 miles is about 2.7 miles/kWh.

Thus 2.65 seems like a reasonable assumption given some battery reserve.
If reserve is 10%, useable battery 90 kWh, consumption would be 3.0. But if Better Route Planner is using 98.8, then I guess the planning result is going to be the same.
 



 









Advertisement


Top