Advertisement



LYTMCQ

Well-Known Member
First Name
Lyt
Joined
Feb 2, 2020
Messages
1,470
Reaction score
685
Location
Portland
First Name
Lyt
Vehicles
Telsa Model 3 LR AWD
Country flag
I'm a bit surprised that the RWD extended range is targetted slower than the standard range battery. Additionnal output don't compensate the additional weight?
I think it is the added grip. Is true with Tesla's also.
 

timbop

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
1,655
Reaction score
2,369
Location
New Jersey
First Name
Tim
Vehicles
2015 Mustang Convertible, 2016 Dodge Durango
Occupation
Software Engineer
Country flag
In the Dutch car configurator the 0-100 km/u is now less than 6 seconds for an extended rwd. (0-100km/h equals 0-62,13mph). That converts to less than 5.8 second for 0-60mph for the extended RWD.
Maybe they made a typo... the Torque is also not measured in Mn (Nm)
Screenshot 2020-10-01 at 13.54.52.png
It is a typo - ER RWD is 6.1 seconds everywhere else
 

JoelOclock

Well-Known Member
First Name
Joel
Joined
Mar 7, 2020
Messages
79
Reaction score
63
Location
Seattle
First Name
Joel
Vehicles
None
Country flag
Do we trust this new number?
compare spec says 4.8 for premium AWD ER
BUTTTTT
the model configurator says 5.1

???
 

KAustin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2020
Messages
347
Reaction score
408
Location
WDC
Vehicles
Kia Telluride
Country flag
Do we trust this new number?
compare spec says 4.8 for premium AWD ER
BUTTTTT
the model configurator says 5.1

???
4.8 sec includes 1ft rollout. Not sure about the 5.1.
 

SashaLondon

Well-Known Member
First Name
Sasha
Joined
Sep 11, 2020
Messages
64
Reaction score
70
Location
London
First Name
Sasha
Vehicles
Porsche Macan S, waiting MME AWD SR
Country flag
Why a rolling start and not from standstill? Isn’t that standard?
 

KAustin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2020
Messages
347
Reaction score
408
Location
WDC
Vehicles
Kia Telluride
Country flag
Why a rolling start and not from standstill? Isn’t that standard?
Depends on who is doing the testing. At least they added the caveat to note how the 4.8 was obtained versus some companies that don't say that.
 

ClaudeMach-E

Well-Known Member
First Name
Claude
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
440
Reaction score
289
Location
Quebec Canada
First Name
Claude
Vehicles
Mustang Mach 3- Tempo- Malibu(3)-Actual Kia Sportage AWD
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
My first car was a used 1963 Plymouth Fury III , in order to make 0-60 you ad to first succesfully start it especially on rainy days or in winter.😀
 

highland58

Well-Known Member
First Name
Dave
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
209
Reaction score
237
Location
Seattle area
First Name
Dave
Vehicles
2018 Honda Clarity PHEV and 2016 Nissan LEAF, MME First Edition on order
Occupation
IT
Country flag
My first vehicle was a Honda 50 motorcycle - downhill I could get to 52MPH max. It was given to me by my father, not what I would have picked but I had no money being still in high school.
On the plus side, gas was 25 cents a gallon.

1601574905453.png
 

DBC

Well-Known Member
First Name
Don
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
70
Reaction score
55
Location
San Diego
First Name
Don
Vehicles
Volt ELR
Country flag
I hope the 21% faster 0-60 time in the ER AWD vs the RWD doesn't translate into 21% less range (advertised as 10% lower now).

Probably not a linear calculation. But it appears the AWD does consume more power.
I wouldn't worry overly much. It likely depends on the drive cycle. Having two motors allows each motor to be run at a more efficient speed. Not a big advantage at lower speeds where drive train losses aren't a big issue. But at higher speeds, where drive train losses are significant, the increase in drive train efficiency should deliver more range.

The drive cycle used to calculate the range is heavily weighted towards lower speeds. Wouldn't be surprising that at 70 MPH the AWD was more efficient than RWD.

Would be interesting to ask.
 

dbsb3233

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Messages
3,478
Reaction score
3,182
Location
Colorado, USA
First Name
Tim
Vehicles
2013 Ford Escape
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
I wouldn't worry overly much. It likely depends on the drive cycle. Having two motors allows each motor to be run at a more efficient speed. Not a big advantage at lower speeds where drive train losses aren't a big issue. But at higher speeds, where drive train losses are significant, the increase in drive train efficiency should deliver more range.

The drive cycle used to calculate the range is heavily weighted towards lower speeds. Wouldn't be surprising that at 70 MPH the AWD was more efficient than RWD.

Would be interesting to ask.
That would sure be a nice bonus (for those of us with the AWD) if the AWD didn't lose efficiency as much as the RWD at highway speeds. Like say, the RWD losing 25% of EPA range at 75 MPH while the AWD only loses 10% (just sample numbers).

I'd be surprised, but pleasantly surprised.
 

buzznwood

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2019
Messages
309
Reaction score
257
Location
california
Vehicles
focus st & rs
Country flag
Why a rolling start and not from standstill? Isn’t that standard?
1ft roll out is quite common in the the USA, nothing like making something look faster than it actually is :( It can reduce the time by up to .3 seconds. Which is why the launch of the GT last week in Europe with a quoted 0-62mph of 3.7 seconds and nothing faster in the class was a bit dubious as a 1ft roll out was used per the small print compared to the expected in Europe which is no roll out :(
 



 









Advertisement


Top