EPA estimate rework for EVs proposed

[Blue highway]

My point is that driving a couple of hours on the freeway from one destination to another includes a pile of miles at less than 25 mph; it includes slowdown on the freeway from traffic; it includes stop lights and turns and more than a few minutes at 0 mph. This all brings the average speed down rather quickly.

Example: Driving from the EA charging station in Needles, CA to the EA charging station in Barstow, CA is 142 miles. Assuming a 75 mph average would put you at the Barstow charger in about 114 minutes.

However, leaving the charging station in Needles means crossing the relatively busy J Street and waiting on confused truckers who took the wrong exit to figure out what they're doing. This might mean an extra five minutes, maybe even ten if it's really busy. That's 5 minutes at 0 mph.

The speed limit from the AZ/CA border to Barstow is 70 mph. I typically stay around 73 mph on this stretch, but there are several sections where slow trucks are going uphill and they leave the slow lanes to pass other slow trucks. There are numerous speed traps along this route, so I don't go above 73 mph, and sometimes I have to slow down below that to deal with the slow truck traffic.

There's often traffic from Goff merging onto the freeway, which slows everyone down a bit. Similarly, there's traffic at Ludlow, again for a short period, but it slows us all down just a bit.

Then we get to Barstow. There's a left turn with a traffic light right off the freeway, that often takes up to about five minutes (at 0 mph) to make the turn. There's another traffic light just beyond the overpass. These two traffic lights are not always in sync, so it can be another five minutes of 0 mph here. There's a third light, this one again a left turn crossing traffic, though it seems to be faster, maybe 2 minutes at 0 mph. Then there's the navigating the parking lot, at about 10 mph for a minute or two.

When all is said and done, there can be an extra 15 minutes or so of not actually moving, moving very slowly, or moving below the 75 mph average we wish we had. If it takes 130 minutes to go between the Needles and Barstow EA charging stations, that's a 65 mph average speed, and it's only 16 minutes more than the 75 mph average would have suggested.

In my usual road trips, for some places (Kingman, Goff, Gallup, and ABQ, for example), the charging stations are even farther from the highway and the time driving at low speeds is an even larger percentage of the overall driving time.

My point is that it doesn't take much time at low speeds to dramatically reduce the average speed.

I get it. And then there's traffic. When I lived in ATL, I drove a BMW 5 series. That car would keep track of average speed on a tank of gas. Even though when the traffic was clear I'd generally drive ~80 on the interstates and yet the average speed on a tank of gas was about 35MPH because of traffic and surface streets.

Sponsored

 

[Blue highway]

3 things...

A step forward would be adding the range figure for City and Highway. They already have MPGe (summer, too slow etc... which means its optimistic, but it's there)

I agree with the sentiment that the range you can expect with the cruise set at highway speed is actually what is most useful.

There is a significant (~18%) difference in efficiency across MMEs by model

 

[mkhuffman]

75 mph highway speed range ratings at 32 F, 75 F and 100 F would be excellent information. I am skeptical that an Agency as stupid as the EPA can do it, as simple as it sounds.

 

[MellowJohnny]

I'd like to see a statement like the following:

The above range information is at ideal temperatures of 75 degrees. Please note that driving in winter, or extreme heat, will impact range, noticeably.

Agreed - gas pumps, at least in Canada, say "Volume Corrected To 15c". Sometimes you get more than a litre, sometimes you get less, because, y'know, thermodynamics.

 

[GrabberBlueNitePony]

As much as I would've loved these additional details, I can certainly see the companies keeping that information close to chest for the sake of sales.

I can only speak for myself, I didn't know the impacts of highway speed, weather, drag, etc. and I think knowing there are quite a few significant contributors to range loss would've made me think harder. Obviously ICE car EPA figures are also subject to real world variability, but the EV side faces a bit more unpredictability until you learn how to live with it.

So I would think there would be other buyers that would be deterred by more "real world figures." Just my take though.

 

[Blue highway]

As much as I would've loved these additional details, I can certainly see the companies keeping that information close to chest for the sake of sales.

I can only speak for myself, I didn't know the impacts of highway speed, weather, drag, etc. and I think knowing there are quite a few significant contributors to range loss would've made me think harder. Obviously ICE car EPA figures are also subject to real world variability, but the EV side faces a bit more unpredictability until you learn how to live with it.

So I would think there would be other buyers that would be deterred by more "real world figures." Just my take though.

ok... but once they have the car they will figure this out. So is it better to know what you are getting into in advance or be surprised once you have one? I know what I would pick.

 

[DevSecOps]

So I would think there would be other buyers that would be deterred by more "real world figures." Just my take though.

I just don't get this mentality at all. I just ordered my 3rd EV and I think there's benefits to both EV and ICE vehicles. To say that the only way to sell EVs is to deceive people on range is just wrong. I would much rather EV mfgs work at improving the car to fit the needs of people than by using deceitful tactics to lure people into a trap.

The number 1 reason people leave EVs and go back to ICE is because of range and lack of charging, both of which are 1 in the same. You only need charging when going long range, otherwise you just charge at home. I am willing to bet that a large part of that are people who thought they would be able to go further and charge less, but were tricked into thinking otherwise. Not being honest about it just sews a lingering distaste for many people.

Let's say you want CarPlay and you like a GM EV. Would it be okay if they said "CarPlay coming soon" when they have no intent on providing it? No, that would be wrong. So they said up front, sorry - no CarPlay. Now people have expectations set. Will they lose some buyers, maybe, but at least they are being honest.

Sponsored