Is the Mach E a viable long range daily commuter?

[ARK]

Or just order the California Route 1 which already comes with the aero wheel covers.

That would be ideal, but I think if I understood OP correctly, his predicament is that he has a Select coming within a few months’ time.

Sponsored

 

[DBC]

Except practically, most mainstream drivers aren't interested in going without cabin heat, or limping along well below the speed limit, in their fancy new $50,000 car.

If that's what they're gonna have to do just to be able to do lengthy drives in the winter, they'll just buy ICE (or PHEV) instead.

Then those mainstream buyers shouldn't buy a BEV. Seems simple enough. Then again sometimes it takes an unusual intelligent mind to see the obvious solution.

 

[dbsb3233]

Then those mainstream buyers shouldn't buy a BEV. Seems simple enough. Then again sometimes it takes an unusual intelligent mind to see the obvious solution.

Yes, which is why I said "If that's what they're gonna have to do just to be able to do lengthy drives in the winter, they'll just buy ICE (or PHEV) instead."

 

[DBC]

Yes, which is why I said "If that's what they're gonna have to do just to be able to do lengthy drives in the winter, they'll just buy ICE (or PHEV) instead."

And people who need to carry seven people will buy a mini van and people who need a truck will buy a truck. So what if people who need an ICE or PHEV buy an ICE or PHEV? (FWIW a PHEV probably delivers 95% of the benefits of a BEV and you can turn up the cabin heat to whatever temperature you'd like. Maybe there is a Pacifica in your future.)

The whole concern about the "mainstream" buyer is misplaced. Given that there isn't sufficient battery production available to support much more than modest sales of BEVs, it's good that mainstream buyers don't want to buy them. That would simply drive up prices for those who do want them despite the huge sacrifice of possibly needing to turn down the cabin heat. LOL

 

[ArtyMachy]

Here's another angle... If one refuses to freeze their nose off and turns on cabin heat, slowing down means taking longer to get there. Which means more use of cabin heat (which can be a high power drain). Depending on how cold it is outside and how much the heater draws, it's possible it might be better to speed up and get their quicker.

Would be an interesting test to see which uses more power -- increasing speed from 60 to 70 MPH, or using cabin heat for an extra 20 minutes?

I never recorded the numbers but from actual use of my Tesla, I always lose a lot more energy going faster. I keep my cabin around 66ºF and mainly use heated seats (more efficient). Let's be honest, no one really freezes at 66º when it is winter and most likely you are dressed warm anyhow.
But it is a good point, I will run some tests to get actual numbers to prove it.

 

[ArtyMachy]

This. People act as if range is a fixed number. it's not. As you've described, a driver has quite a bit of ability to change the range by slowing down, using the heated seats, or preheating the vehicle.

The range issue also devolves into an impossible hypothetical: "I need to go 250 miles when it's -20F and the headwind is 50 MPH and the trip is all uphill and I have no where to charge". (It's like saying you need to take your ICE vehicle with a range of 350 miles on a round trip of 400 miles when the only gas station along the way has closed). The short answer in these cases is simple: "Don't do it." LOL

As you say, you simply adjust habits. In practice the limitations are more imagined than real, and if this isn't the case there are always other easily accessed alternatives.

I agree, before I bought my first BEV, all I could think about was crazy situation I COULD be in and how having a BEV car would be a hassle. I drive a BEV now for almost a year and none of those situations happened yet ! lol
I think it is a normal human behaviour to always prepare for the worse case scenario.

 

[JamieGeek]

I agree, before I bought my first BEV, all I could think about was crazy situation I COULD be in and how having a BEV car would be a hassle. I drive a BEV now for almost a year and none of those situations happened yet ! lol
I think it is a normal human behaviour to always prepare for the worse case scenario.

Been driving a BEV for 6 of the last 8 years and haven't had any range issues.

I've got them stuck in the snow a couple of times but never any range issues

 

[dbsb3233]

I never recorded the numbers but from actual use of my Tesla, I always lose a lot more energy going faster. I keep my cabin around 66ºF and mainly use heated seats (more efficient). Let's be honest, no one really freezes at 66º when it is winter and most likely you are dressed warm anyhow.
But it is a good point, I will run some tests to get actual numbers to prove it.

Yeah, most likely it's a more nuanced comparison -- people probably rarely turn the cabin heat totally off when it's 30F outside, but some may set it to a chilly setting. So the comparison might be something like how much extra energy is used in 21 minutes set at 70F instead 60F, vs how much extra energy is used driving the 150 miles at 70 MPH instead of 60 MPH (saving 21 minutes of cabin heat).

They may not completely offset each other, but they should be inversely proportionate.

All kinda moot for most people, I suspect. I know it is for me. I plan to drive the speed limit and keep the heat at 70F regardless. If that means the Mach-E won't work for a particular road trip route, I'll just leave it at home and drive the Escape instead. ?

 

[DBC]

I never recorded the numbers but from actual use of my Tesla, I always lose a lot more energy going faster. I keep my cabin around 66ºF and mainly use heated seats (more efficient). Let's be honest, no one really freezes at 66º when it is winter and most likely you are dressed warm anyhow.
But it is a good point, I will run some tests to get actual numbers to prove it.

You already have the answer. The power needed to go faster will always outweigh the power drain of the heater, at least at these speeds.

Let's say you use 15 kW maintaining a steady 65 MPH on a flat. Increasing that speed to 75 MPH will increase the power needed by 40% to 21 kW. The heater draw will be less than 40% so the answer is apparent. But to put some numbers on it, let's assume the heater draws 2 kW (high for an average but it won't matter). So going 65 MPH for an hour will cover 65 miles and use 17 kWh for an average of 3.8255 miles/kWh. Going 75 MPH for an hour will cover 75 miles and use 23 kWh for an average of 3.2609 miles/kWh. Since 3.8255 > 3.2609 you use less energy per mile, so for the same number of miles you use less energy total.

 

[Dan G]

Here's another angle... If one refuses to freeze their nose off and turns on cabin heat, slowing down means taking longer to get there. Which means more use of cabin heat (which can be a high power drain). Depending on how cold it is outside and how much the heater draws, it's possible it might be better to speed up and get their quicker.

Would be an interesting test to see which uses more power -- increasing speed from 60 to 70 MPH, or using cabin heat for an extra 20 minutes?

I've seen this on the forum a few times. I don't think people are really understanding the logic behind it. My car has an EPA range of 124 miles. In the summer I can get more like 140, and in the winter closer to 110. (Also only an 80% drop, not 60%.)

I live in Detroit area. I've driven it to Chicago, Columbus and the west side of Michigan. In the winter. You just have to do a bit of planning. Slowing down or turning the heat down are options you have to extend your range if you miscalculated or a new variable entered the equation. You don't plan on driving with the heat off. If you need the range, you turn it down a few degrees. Not completely off. But you can turn it off if you'll be 2 or so miles short. And you'll only know that closer to the charger. So the time you would actually spend with the heat off would be a much shorter time then your drive between chargers. It's simply another option.

Also, I don't have exact numbers, but my heater running at 72 degrees during the winter draws about 3 kW. I can almost assure you slowing down is the more efficient way to increase range. I'll get exact numbers one day this week.

As far as OP is concerned. I think you'll be fine. As people have mentioned, you can charge to full if you feel you need it. That 60% you see for range is in extreme cold. It sounds like you live in Michigan. Which I do too and see closer to 80% range in the winter. The key is to make sure you precondition the battery while you're still plugged in. This lets the cabin get warm without using the battery. It's easier to keep a cabin warm then it is to warm a cabin up.

 

[dbsb3233]

Let's say you use 15 kW maintaining a steady 65 MPH on a flat. Increasing that speed to 75 MPH will increase the power needed by 40% to 21 kW.

Where are you getting the "40% more energy used to drive 75 MPH vs 65 MPH"? That's a much bigger increase than I've seen estimated.

 

[ArtyMachy]

Look at the table below to see how you can increase range by slowing down. But if you absolutely have to drive at 75 mph even those few weeks a year that it is really cold than I guess BEV is not for you.

 

[DBC]

Where are you getting the "40% more energy used to drive 75 MPH vs 65 MPH"? That's a much bigger increase than I've seen estimated.

The 40% is pretty standard. Unsurprising if you think about it. At these speeds power lost is mostly due to drag. Since the power needed to overcome drag goes up with the cube of the velocity, increasing the velocity by 15%, which is the difference between 65 MPH and 75 MPH, increases the power needed by more than 150%.

A search should give you many examples. Tesla used to have a very nice graph. Not sure that one is still available, but this one should do: https://www.wired.com/2011/04/what-will-an-85-mph-speed-limit-do-to-your-mileage/ If the math is overwhelming just look at the graph at the end.

 

[DBC]

Look at the table below to see how you can increase range by slowing down.

Keep in mind this table will greatly underestimate the hit you'll take from increasing your speed. For a constant high speed on a flat it's all about aero and efficiency is quite high. The EPA drive cycles introduces a lot of other factors -- accelerations, stops, and so forth -- which reduce the relative importance of speed in the mileage estimate (for example rolling resistance is important at 20 MPH but not at 60 MPH). Speed still matters for the EPA drive cycles but not like it does at a constant high speed.

 

[dbsb3233]

The 40% is pretty standard. Unsurprising if you think about it. At these speeds power lost is mostly due to drag. Since the power needed to overcome drag goes up with the cube of the velocity, increasing the velocity by 15%, which is the difference between 65 MPH and 75 MPH, increases the power needed by more than 150%.

A search should give you many examples. Tesla used to have a very nice graph. Not sure that one is still available, but this one should do: https://www.wired.com/2011/04/what-will-an-85-mph-speed-limit-do-to-your-mileage/ If the math is overwhelming just look at the graph at the end.

That's on ICE. While BEVs have drag too, the power distribution isn't the same as ICE. They also tend to build BEVs with more aerodynamic bodies than the typical ICE.

Here's one analysis on a Chevy Bolt. It shows about 25% less range at 75 vs 65 MPH, and I've seen others closer to 15-20%.

Still significant, of course. Hopefully they can improve that loss some since 75 MPH is a pretty typical interstate road trip speed in the US. Although better batteries in the future will improve that range too and make the loss less of a problem.

Sponsored