timbop

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
3,185
Reaction score
6,176
Location
New Jersey
First Name
Tim
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E (CA RT1), 2016 Dodge Durango
Occupation
Software Engineer
Country flag
His Model Y range test video was made in 95-degree weather though. Under the same testing conditions I would expect the two to have similar range. In tests done by 3rd parties it has been shown again and again Tesla's EPA ratings are consistently inflated, while others' numbers are conservative. That said, in terms of energy efficiency Tesla sets the benchmark for now.
Sure, but not by a huge margin. Assuming the AWD LR Y with 75kwh and AWD ER E with 88kwh get about the same range in exactly the same conditions, then the difference is only 15%-17% (depending upon which you use as the divisor).

I'll give up that 15% to get a much better looking car from a manufacturer I trust. I also prefer not to be in a personality cult.





Advertisement

 

Woeo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Woeo
Joined
Feb 2, 2020
Messages
474
Reaction score
450
Location
Maryland
First Name
Woeo
Vehicles
Fusion Energi
Country flag
Range and efficiency are two different things. Using the numbers you are quoting, Model Y uses ~300 Wh per mile (assuming 75 kWh capacity, some say usable capacity is slightly lower as the company is not transparent about that), Mach-E uses ~324 Wh per mile (88 kWh for 270-mile range).

Whatever other issues Tesla vehicles may have, they have had a head start on improving efficiency and as a result set the benchmark for now. That may very well change in the future as competitors improve their products.
We don't know how efficient the Tesla drivetrain would be if it was moving a car that weighted ~500 lbs more. Would it manage 3 miles per kw? How close to 324 Wh/m would the Tesla be?

What accounts for the MME being heavier? Some of it...most of it....is battery.

However, what else? Better designed seats? Doors that don't rattle? Windows with frames? Sound deadening and insulation? Roof adhesive? Larger screen?

Alex made 278 miles on the MME with 5 miles range showing...when he spent most of his time talking about how conservative the range prediction seemed to be.

I want to see a brave sole push it to the end...we don't know what this car does when the range shows 0%. Some EVs have more in the tank. Some stop where they are. Do we know if Edmunds' 304 ran it to the absolute bottom?

225 miles Alex actual Tesla range/75 kw = 3 m/kw or 333 Wh/m
283 Alex MME range/88 kw = 3.215 m/kw or 311 Wh/m
250 Alex back of envelope adjusted Tesla range miles/75 kw = 3.33 m/kw or 300 Wh/m
304 Edmunds/88 kw = 3.45 m/kw or 290 Wh/m
 
Last edited:

phidauex

Well-Known Member
First Name
Sam
Joined
Dec 8, 2020
Messages
128
Reaction score
207
Location
Colorado
First Name
Sam
Vehicles
2006 Prius, 1997 Tacoma, 2021 MachE 4EX (someday)
Occupation
Renewable Energy Engineer
Country flag
Glad to see the range numbers hold up under some realistic mixed driving conditions. Conservative is good when predicting capacity.

As for the efficiency topic, as mentioned, the potential difference is in the 15% range to the Model Y - on an ICE vehicle we'd be talking about 22mpg vs 25mpg, which isn't nothing, but you wouldn't see this kind of thread talking about that kind of difference.

I think there are things that Ford could do to improve efficiency right off the bat - lower weight, more aerodynamic wheels, heat pump, improved cooling and heating algorithms in the pack, possibly even firmware changes on the IDMs, etc. I think some of these improvements can be had over time on existing vehicles, and some will wait for the next refresh. I'm not too worried about it. Heat pumps are complex, and most companies haven't wanted to release them on a new vehicle day 1 (Tesla didn't).

Overall you have to take these vehicles as a package - the MachE is slightly less efficient than the Model Y, but that doesn't mean it is a worse car. There are also some long-term elements at play here - larger batteries are heavier to move around, thus lower range, but they also degrade slower due to the large holdbacks. Tesla is playing fast and loose with their degradation numbers, and I'd be willing to bet that if you compare a 10 year old Model Y with a 10 year old Mach E you'd see a big gap in usable range. Now I know we aren't buying our cars today thinking about 10 years from now, but companies that sell a lot of energy storage (like mine) need to think long, which is something younger companies like Tesla aren't always as good at.
 

Mach-E VLOG

Well-Known Member
First Name
Patrick
Joined
Jul 25, 2020
Messages
520
Reaction score
1,738
Location
Denver, Colorado
Website
machevlog.com
First Name
Patrick
Vehicles
Mustang Mach-E - Grabber Blue - First Edition
Country flag
Honest question - have there been any stories of people running out of battery in a tesla due to the inaccurate range forecasting? I'm not in tune with tesla chatter.
I don't think people necessarily get stranded, but there is a lot of talk about range anxiety and that the range estimates can be too optimistic. I didn't dig this video up, but it is one I watched about a month ago with someone that almost did get stranded. Of course, if you watch the whole video, I would blame the driver.
 

Accord07

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
102
Reaction score
163
Location
Pennsylvania
Vehicles
Star White Mach-E Premium AWD ER (ordered)
Country flag
We don't know how efficient the Tesla drivetrain would be if it was moving a car that weighted ~500 lbs more. Would it manage 3 miles per kw? How close to 324 Wh/m would the Tesla be?
Let's take one step back and look at ICE vehicles. Generally when fuel efficiency is compared, it is between vehicles in the same class, i.e., of similar type, size, etc., curb weight of each vehicle certainly has an impact on its mpg ratings but it rarely enters the conversation when people compare the fuel efficiency of two vehicles in the same class.

To me personally range beyond 250 miles is not meaningful as nearly all of our day-trips are within a 100-mile radius and none is beyond a 125-mile radius. For longer road trips I would take the minivan anyway. So I am hardly someone obsessed with the number.
 

timbop

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
3,185
Reaction score
6,176
Location
New Jersey
First Name
Tim
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E (CA RT1), 2016 Dodge Durango
Occupation
Software Engineer
Country flag
Let's take one step back and look at ICE vehicles. Generally when fuel efficiency is compared, it is between vehicles in the same class, i.e., of similar type, size, etc., curb weight of each vehicle certainly has an impact on its mpg ratings but it rarely enters the conversation when people compare the fuel efficiency of two vehicles in the same class.

To me personally range beyond 250 miles is not meaningful as nearly all of our day-trips are within a 100-mile radius and none is beyond a 125-mile radius. For longer road trips I would take the minivan anyway. So I am hardly someone obsessed with the number.
agreed. The key is that they're comparable in range/efficiency, so that isn't really a reason to buy one over the other
 

Mach-E VLOG

Well-Known Member
First Name
Patrick
Joined
Jul 25, 2020
Messages
520
Reaction score
1,738
Location
Denver, Colorado
Website
machevlog.com
First Name
Patrick
Vehicles
Mustang Mach-E - Grabber Blue - First Edition
Country flag
OP

silverelan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2019
Messages
1,504
Reaction score
1,916
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
2015 Subaru Outback
Country flag
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #43
One other point Bjørn is thinking and I also have heard from a few other autotest drivers. They think ford is really only allowing you to use 84kwhmaybe 85kwh of the battery now.

Cold ford increase the 0 to 60 times later? yes
Could they add another 30 miles of range? yes
I don't know if I want to be talked out of my GT reservation or not. The FOMO I am feeling with all the deliveries right now is severe.
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top