EPA range and efficiency of MME

[JCHLi]

Would have to be concerned about long term reliability of a first generation system that is somewhat more complex than a standard air conditioner system and having to run almost 100% of the time. For those keeping a car 10+ years, it could mean service costs.

Agreed, sometimes a simple system is better then the 'more elegant' appearing option. Extra complexity increases components that can break, increases weight and can actually reduce efficiency in many cases.

Sponsored

 

[timbop]

There is literally nothing new in the entire article except this post yesterday to the Mach E Club:
"I heard from a dealer friend that Ford told dealers to look for the official range figure to be increased coming soon. Just like how the power figures ended up increasing, the range figures will be increasing after EPA testing is completed."

Yeah. And someone heard from their dealer they're getting their Mach E in August, too. ?

And now that it's been discussed here, they'll publish that it is "confirmed by another source" tomorrow

 

[ChasingCoral]

Careful, now they will use you as a source for their next article.

However, I'm fairly confident of one thing, I believe EPA testing is either happening right now or has recently been completed.

Only if they can do EPA testing on pre-production units. If they have to use production units (my guess), then they can't start for another month.

 

[MattG]

Only if they can do EPA testing on pre-production units. If they have to use production units (my guess), then they can't start for another month.

Design changes happen over a the years a model is in production. I think this can be viewed the same way. They could do testing on pre-production, then just document any changes and not have to repeat testing if the changes are deemed unrelated to the tests.

 

[EVer]

Only if they can do EPA testing on pre-production units. If they have to use production units (my guess), then they can't start for another month.

Usually pre-production vehicles are tested, per EPA.

https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

 

[ChasingCoral]

Usually pre-production vehicles are tested, per EPA.

https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

That’s great to hear. Thanks.

 

[dbsb3233]

Air conditioning is. Heat is not. One must remember these tests are combustion engine centric. Aside from the fans, heat is free, so they don’t test it. The cold test is about engine efficiency with cold cranking etc.

Using a heat pump in place of a resistive heater may increase efficiency in the real world, but not in the current EPA tests.

Those highways tests still suck for telling us anything about high speed driving. Top speed is irrelevant. 48 MPH average?? Seriously? Have these people never driven an interstate before?

A 200 mile road trip leg @ 75 MPH is 2.666 hours. Even if you throw 5 minutes on each end to get on/off the highway ramps and to refueling stations, that's still a 70.6 MPH average speed.

48 is a joke.

 

[Orangefirefish]

Those highways tests still suck for telling us anything about high speed driving. Top speed is irrelevant. 48 MPH average?? Seriously? Have these people never driven an interstate before?

A 200 mile road trip leg @ 75 MPH is 2.666 hours. Even if you throw 5 minutes on each end to get on/off the highway ramps and to refueling stations, that's still a 70.6 MPH average speed.

48 is a joke.

Enlightening! Do you know if this is used for EV testing also? I wasn’t aware of a highway only rating for EV range. I think the big difference might be- an ICE isn’t that much worse in efficiency between that 48mph vs a typical 70mph. However, at least anecdotally its seems that the drop off in EV efficiency is fairly steep in that range. So while typical efficiency would be fairly close to EPA for an ICE, for an EV there would be vastly different results from driver to driver and drive to drive.

 

[buzznwood]

Enlightening! Do you know if this is used for EV testing also? I wasn’t aware of a highway only rating for EV range. I think the big difference might be- an ICE isn’t that much worse in efficiency between that 48mph vs a typical 70mph. However, at least anecdotally its seems that the drop off in EV efficiency is fairly steep in that range. So while typical efficiency would be fairly close to EPA for an ICE, for an EV there would be vastly different results from driver to driver and drive to drive.

Not sure on the EPA but the WTLP use a class based system for the highway speeds but it based on power to weight so must cars use the higher speed as part of the test while heavy stuff such as vans etc having a lower power to weight so end up testing at a lower top speed, which for me is where it gets iffy with BEVS they all weight so much who knows what class they get lumped in.

Either way the current highways test are currently lacking when it comes to BEV's and highway speeds, we all know that they are going to do well in stop and go traffic as you are not wasting electrons idling and will gain a portion back with regen, apart from on congested commuter routes and during peak travel holiday seasons, most highway driving in the USA consists of turning cruise control on and occasionally turning the steering wheel while watching the scenery go by at anywhere between 65 to 85 mph if you people are legally sticking the various state speed limits.

So any test really needs to be done at the average of that @75mph to give people an idea of how far they can go as chances are there won't be any interruptions to that speed apart from the point you have to twiddle thumbs sitting at a charge station for 40 minutes but of course the problem is how far can you get before that point which with the current tests is a rather optimistic distance.

 

[JamieGeek]

I think the intent of the EPA rating wasn't to judge range but to judge the relative efficiency between various vehicles. Since they all are tested using the same methodolgy a rated range (or efficiency) can be compared to a different vehicle from a different manufacturer.

Granted it would be nice if you could use the values for both comparisons between vehicles and a reasonable estimate of the range you'd get on the highway.

 

[SnBGC]

Enlightening! Do you know if this is used for EV testing also? I wasn’t aware of a highway only rating for EV range. I think the big difference might be- an ICE isn’t that much worse in efficiency between that 48mph vs a typical 70mph. However, at least anecdotally its seems that the drop off in EV efficiency is fairly steep in that range. So while typical efficiency would be fairly close to EPA for an ICE, for an EV there would be vastly different results from driver to driver and drive to drive.

The delta is there in an ICE vehicle as well. But since an ICE has a thermal efficiency around 25%, the difference in range at highway speeds is less apparent because there is so much fuel stored on board.

A 100kWh battery is equal to about 3 gallons of gasoline. Fill an SUV with only 3 gallons of fuel and then drive at 80 mph and see how far it lasts.

 

[EVer]

Those highways tests still suck for telling us anything about high speed driving. Top speed is irrelevant. 48 MPH average?? Seriously? Have these people never driven an interstate before?

A 200 mile road trip leg @ 75 MPH is 2.666 hours. Even if you throw 5 minutes on each end to get on/off the highway ramps and to refueling stations, that's still a 70.6 MPH average speed.

48 is a joke.

Agreed. The whole thing should be revamped. It’s fine as an apple to apples basis but doesn’t reflect reality.

 

[EVer]

Enlightening! Do you know if this is used for EV testing also? I wasn’t aware of a highway only rating for EV range. I think the big difference might be- an ICE isn’t that much worse in efficiency between that 48mph vs a typical 70mph. However, at least anecdotally its seems that the drop off in EV efficiency is fairly steep in that range. So while typical efficiency would be fairly close to EPA for an ICE, for an EV there would be vastly different results from driver to driver and drive to drive.

Yes the same cycles are used for BEV and ICE vehicle.

 

[dbsb3233]

I think the intent of the EPA rating wasn't to judge range but to judge the relative efficiency between various vehicles. Since they all are tested using the same methodolgy a rated range (or efficiency) can be compared to a different vehicle from a different manufacturer.

Granted it would be nice if you could use the values for both comparisons between vehicles and a reasonable estimate of the range you'd get on the highway.

Yes, that's true. Which shows how nearly useless they are for BEVs.

For ICE driving, range is a virtual non-issue. Drivers' main interest in MPG is simply in regards to cost (how much fuel they'll be buying).

But for BEV driving, it's not nearly as much about fuel costs as it is about range. Specifically, high speed road trip range. Because road trip recharges are such a slow PITA, people want to avoid as many of them as they can. And that means range between refuels.

I don't even care what miles/kWh and range is around home, as long as it's more than enough for a regular day (and it is). I'll just plug it in overnight at home and not even worry about that. Efficiency and range only matters on road trips where I have to babysit the car at a public charger for 30-40 minutes at stop after stop.

Sponsored