I decided to try a range test now that my GoM numbers are starting to climb a bit.

JoeDimwit

Well-Known Member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Mar 1, 2021
Threads
67
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
3,239
Location
Waterford
Vehicles
Grabber Blue First Edition
Occupation
Electrician
Country flag
I have been seeing numbers from the GoM and the M/kWh meter that were pointing toward a full charge range in excess of 300 miles for my FE4X, so I decided to go a couple days without charging to see what the range really looks like. I charged to 90% at work Wednesday, reset Trip 1, and drove home. my round trip to work and home is right around 70 miles, and seems like it takes 22-24% of my battery, so I figured Iā€™d be charging back up today at around 20%. Weā€™ll, I pulled in at work today and snapped a picture before plugging in, and it shows I drove 230.6 miles. Then I went to the FordPass hunk of shā€¦ err app and saw that I had 15% charge and 52 miles estimated range left.

I started doing math, because thatā€™s how I see the world, and hereā€™s what I came up with:
90%-15%=75% battery charge, or 66 kWh, used. This is one place that I wish we had better, more detailed data because I seriously doubt I was dead on EXACTLY 15% (13.2 kWh) left, and those rounding errors affect the totals, but Iā€™m gonna go with them because itā€™s the best I have at this point and the car wonā€™t be back to 90% before I leave tonight to go home. [/rant]

Where was I? Oh yeah,
75% (66 kW) used to travel 230.6 milesā€¦
That means 3.4939393939 M/kWh. Multiplying that M/kWh by the 13.2 kWh (15%) remaining gives us 46.12 miles remaining, which when added to the original 230 miles traveled gives us 276.72 miles on a 90% charge. That number is actually making me wonder if they didnā€™t rate the epa range based on 90% rather than 100%, but thatā€™s speculation. Using math, that 3.49393939*88 leads me to believ that in conditions like Iā€™ve driven in the past 3 days, I have a theoretical range of 307.466666 miles on a 100% charge.

All this math means that I am, at this moment, beating Fords stated range by 13.7%. So thatā€™s cool. It also means my brain is tired now, so Iā€™m done. ?

636CACCA-D7F3-4CC2-83DB-6492382C22A9.jpeg


C4674293-FC6B-4FC9-BC5C-734E4A667362.jpeg
 

Carsinmyblood

Well-Known Member
First Name
Mitch
Joined
May 2, 2021
Threads
126
Messages
1,333
Reaction score
1,995
Location
Western NC
Vehicles
'53 XK120, '58 MGA, '66 E-Type, MME Prem, EX, awd
Occupation
Self employed
Country flag
You're showing 4.1 mi/kWh (not 3.49) during that last 230.6 mi trip on the big scoreboard. if you used the total usable battery, 88kWh, you should get 360 miles/charge. Be careful what numbers you trust, everyone.

After a while, long-term Tesla owners put down the calculators and just intuitively know where they can go by glancing at the tally board, just like we know that the leftover in the fridge takes 2 minutes in the microwave.
 

JamieGeek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Threads
82
Messages
3,556
Reaction score
6,746
Location
Southeastern Michigan
Website
spareelectrons.wordpress.com
Vehicles
Mach-E, old: Bolt, C-Max Energi, Focus Electric
Country flag
You're showing 4.1 mi/kWh (not 3.49) during that last 230.6 mi trip on the big scoreboard. if you used the total usable battery, 88kWh, you should get 360 miles/charge. Be careful what numbers you trust, everyone.

After a while, long-term Tesla owners put down the calculators and just intuitively know where they can go by glancing at the tally board, just like we know that the leftover in the fridge takes 2 minutes in the microwave.
Not just Tesla owners but BEV owners in general.

After you've driven your car for a while you just know how far it can go (this coming from a former Focus Electric, C-Max Energi, Chevy Bolt and now Mach-E owner).

In my California Route 1 I'm regularly seeing GOM 100% values of around 350 miles. I often see 305 miles at 90% (which is my car's EPA range).

I don't think the EPA number is for 90%, however, because I think that also has baked into it non-perfect weather (in perfect weather you are not using the heater nor the A/C so the vast majority of the battery power is going to the wheels).

For the summer weather we're having here in Michigan I'm rarely using the heater or the A/C and thus my miles/kwh has been very high (just today going down the highway at 70 mph it was still showing 4+ miles/kwh).
 
OP
OP
JoeDimwit

JoeDimwit

Well-Known Member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Mar 1, 2021
Threads
67
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
3,239
Location
Waterford
Vehicles
Grabber Blue First Edition
Occupation
Electrician
Country flag
You're showing 4.1 mi/kWh (not 3.49) during that last 230.6 mi trip on the big scoreboard. if you used the total usable battery, 88kWh, you should get 360 miles/charge. Be careful what numbers you trust, everyone.

After a while, long-term Tesla owners put down the calculators and just intuitively know where they can go by glancing at the tally board, just like we know that the leftover in the fridge takes 2 minutes in the microwave.
This is going to come off as combative, but I really donā€™t careā€¦ I couldnā€™t care less what Tesla drivers do. Like, not at all.
 

timbop

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Threads
63
Messages
6,729
Reaction score
13,758
Location
New Jersey
Vehicles
Solar powered 2021 MME ER RWD & 2022 Corsair PHEV
Occupation
Software Engineer
Country flag
You're showing 4.1 mi/kWh (not 3.49) during that last 230.6 mi trip on the big scoreboard.
You can't necessarily trust the displayed mi/kwh, because it doesn't always actually reset when you press the "reset" button. It took me a while with the car to realize it, but if you hit reset and the mi/kwh doesn't go to 99.9 then it has "frozen" the currently displayed value and it will never change.

His math (230 mi/ 66kwh) does come out to 3.49 mi - which is much more trustworthy.

Fundamentally the EPA "basic" testing method is too conservative as many cars that do the basic 2 cycle test seem to beat their EPA estimates. On the flip side, the 5 cycle test is too generous (as evidenced by the only manufacturer who uses it) since it consistently over reports the efficiency of those cars.
 


OP
OP
JoeDimwit

JoeDimwit

Well-Known Member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Mar 1, 2021
Threads
67
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
3,239
Location
Waterford
Vehicles
Grabber Blue First Edition
Occupation
Electrician
Country flag
You can't necessarily trust the displayed mi/kwh, because it doesn't always actually reset when you press the "reset" button. It took me a while with the car to realize it, but if you hit reset and the mi/kwh doesn't go to 99.9 then it has "frozen" the currently displayed value and it will never change.

His math (230 mi/ 66kwh) does come out to 3.49 mi - which is much more trustworthy.

Fundamentally the EPA "basic" testing method is too conservative as many cars that do the basic 2 cycle test seem to beat their EPA estimates. On the flip side, the 5 cycle test is too generous (as evidenced by the only manufacturer who uses it) since it consistently over reports the efficiency of those cars.
I did make sure the m/kWh did reset when I charged the car on Wednesday. I wish they would give us kWh in the battery and kWh consumed, that would give a much better picture of whatā€˜s going on than obscuring everything behind percentages.
 

Colorider

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kristian
Joined
Nov 24, 2020
Threads
17
Messages
96
Reaction score
200
Location
Colorado Springs
Vehicles
Standard AWD
Country flag
I like your analytical approach. I was playing around with my Trip 2 which had 1,082 miles at 4.1 m/kWh and compared that to the charge data from my ChargePoint. Turns out 4.1 is really 3.6 in my car so about 12% off. That is a little more ā€œoffā€ than my Mariner Hybrid which read 30 mpg but got 28.

Now that I know how to drive it pretty well, Iā€™m excited to dive into the numbers a little more. I wish the real time data displayed was more robust. Hopefully us geeks will get an OTA update at some point! ?


Ford Mustang Mach-E I decided to try a range test now that my GoM numbers are starting to climb a bit. 00127CEA-1C3F-4E59-9D1E-C9B9114857F6
 
OP
OP
JoeDimwit

JoeDimwit

Well-Known Member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Mar 1, 2021
Threads
67
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
3,239
Location
Waterford
Vehicles
Grabber Blue First Edition
Occupation
Electrician
Country flag
I like your analytical approach. I was playing around with my Trip 2 which had 1,082 miles at 4.1 m/kWh and compared that to the charge data from my ChargePoint. Turns out 4.1 is really 3.6 in my car so about 12% off. That is a little more ā€œoffā€ than my Mariner Hybrid which read 30 mpg but got 28.

Now that I know how to drive it pretty well, Iā€™m excited to dive into the numbers a little more. I wish the real time data displayed was more robust. Hopefully us geeks will get an OTA update at some point! ?


Ford Mustang Mach-E I decided to try a range test now that my GoM numbers are starting to climb a bit. 00127CEA-1C3F-4E59-9D1E-C9B9114857F6
Once I did the math, I decided to make the post because there is a significant difference between 4.1 m/kWh and 3.5 m/kWh over the scope of an 88 kWh charge. That potential difference is almost 53 miles on a full charge, and almost 48 miles on a 90% charge.

I also thought people waiting on their Mach-E and asking about range would like to see real numbers rather than the obviously erroneous fluff the car gives us.
 

AZBill

Well-Known Member
First Name
Bill
Joined
May 26, 2021
Threads
12
Messages
1,476
Reaction score
1,734
Location
Arizona
Vehicles
Rivian R1T, Hummer EV SUT, MME CA Route 1
Occupation
Engineer
Country flag
I have had my Mach E less than a week now, Route 1 model, and only care about highway range. Could care less about around town, it is meaningless. Will probably take a day trip around Arizona soon to see what I get. I have not been to the Grand Canyon in a while, so thinking that might be a good trip to take from Phoenix.
 

Colorider

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kristian
Joined
Nov 24, 2020
Threads
17
Messages
96
Reaction score
200
Location
Colorado Springs
Vehicles
Standard AWD
Country flag
Yes, but Iā€™m not concerned with 3.6 (with a pretty light foot)ā€”that is better than I expected to be honest based on some posts Iā€™ve read.

What I think is really cool is those 1,082 miles cost me $32 to drive at $0.108/kWh, not the $116 that it would have cost in my Mariner at 28mpg and $3.00/G! And the MME is 10X more fun to drive than the MMH!
 
OP
OP
JoeDimwit

JoeDimwit

Well-Known Member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Mar 1, 2021
Threads
67
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
3,239
Location
Waterford
Vehicles
Grabber Blue First Edition
Occupation
Electrician
Country flag
Yes, but Iā€™m not concerned with 3.6 (with a pretty light foot)ā€”that is better than I expected to be honest based on some posts Iā€™ve read.

What I think is really cool is those 1,082 miles cost me $32 to drive at $0.108/kWh, not the $116 that it would have cost in my Mariner at 28mpg and $3.00/G! And the MME is 10X more fun to drive than the MMH!
I still havenā€™t paid a single penny for electricity for the Smurfmobile. Iā€™m one of the lucky ones that has access to free charging at work.
 

JamieGeek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Threads
82
Messages
3,556
Reaction score
6,746
Location
Southeastern Michigan
Website
spareelectrons.wordpress.com
Vehicles
Mach-E, old: Bolt, C-Max Energi, Focus Electric
Country flag
I have had my Mach E less than a week now, Route 1 model, and only care about highway range. Could care less about around town, it is meaningless. Will probably take a day trip around Arizona soon to see what I get. I have not been to the Grand Canyon in a while, so thinking that might be a good trip to take from Phoenix.
I think you'll be quite pleased with the range you get out of the CA Rt1 model.

I have been.
Sponsored

 
 




Top