Mach-E Inefficiency a...good thing?

Badgeringweasel

Active Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2019
Messages
31
Reaction score
16
Location
Wisconsin
Vehicles
2016 Camry Hybrid
Country flag
So obviously EPA estimates aren't out yet, but assuming a minimum EPA range of 300 mi, I think we're in good shape. Tesla model Y has an estimated 315 mi range with what I believe to be about ~75 kWh battery. I know throughout the years Telsa has been able to increase the range of their vehicles simply through software updates. Since the Mach-E ER is starting with a ~98 kWh battery, I'm hoping they have a lot of room for improvement with OTA. I'm hopeful that Ford will start catching up with Telsa software-wise and we'll be seeing range improvements the first years of ownership. I mean, if they were starting with a 75 kWh battery I'd be less hopeful, but I'm hoping a battery with about 33% higher capacity will eventually lead to better range with more experience from Ford.

Maybe someone with better knowledge of drag coefficient and weight comparisons can weigh in, but I'm hoping if Tesla can add range through software, so can Ford.
 

Billyk24

Well-Known Member
First Name
William
Joined
Nov 29, 2019
Messages
371
Reaction score
127
Location
PA
First Name
William
Vehicles
Ford C-Max Energi, Premium Mach-E ordered
Country flag
Ford walls off more (20%) of the battery than Tesla does. This enhances Tesla range numbers. Don't tie tested range numbers with real world results or efficiency.
 
OP

Badgeringweasel

Active Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2019
Messages
31
Reaction score
16
Location
Wisconsin
Vehicles
2016 Camry Hybrid
Country flag
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #3
Very good point. I was more pointing to the fact that I think the larger battery means that Ford has more to work with and also that Tesla has been able to eek more range out of the same hardware, so I hope Ford can do the same.
 

silverelan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2019
Messages
450
Reaction score
380
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
2015 Subaru Outback
Country flag
Ford walls off more (20%) of the battery than Tesla does. This enhances Tesla range numbers. Don't tie tested range numbers with real world results or efficiency.
I don't think it's that high. One of the EV reviewers who went to the November reveal and attended the MME Tech exposition said Ford estimated around 10% of the battery would be reserved.

With the weight being revealed at around 4900 lbs, I think we'll be seeing Model S/X-like efficiency numbers.
 

Billyk24

Well-Known Member
First Name
William
Joined
Nov 29, 2019
Messages
371
Reaction score
127
Location
PA
First Name
William
Vehicles
Ford C-Max Energi, Premium Mach-E ordered
Country flag
My Ford CMax has a 7.0 kWh hvb but only 5.6 kWh at new to utilize. The Mach E could and should be different.
 

JamieGeek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Messages
248
Reaction score
198
Location
Southeastern Michigan
Website
spareelectrons.wordpress.com
Vehicles
Bolt EV, Thor Axis, former C-Max Energi, former Focus Electric
Country flag
Note that with larger batteries you'll have a smaller percentage buffer space. If Ford used the same buffer as the C-Max Energi mentioned above: 7kWh batter with 5.6kWh usable. That is a 1.4kWh buffer or 20% buffer.

On a 99kWh battery, however, a 1.4kWh buffer is only about 1.4% for the same amount of buffer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UW2

theothertom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2019
Messages
48
Reaction score
16
Location
USA
Vehicles
2019 Chevy Bolt
Country flag
@Badgeringweasel: "I know throughout the years Telsa has been able to increase the range of their vehicles simply through software updates." Well, the range was there to begin with. Tesla just unlocked it with a software update. I guess that's what you meant?
 

zhackwyatt

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2019
Messages
133
Reaction score
119
Location
Arizona
Vehicles
'13 C-Max
Country flag
Note that with larger batteries you'll have a smaller percentage buffer space. If Ford used the same buffer as the C-Max Energi mentioned above: 7kWh batter with 5.6kWh usable. That is a 1.4kWh buffer or 20% buffer.

On a 99kWh battery, however, a 1.4kWh buffer is only about 1.4% for the same amount of buffer.
The buffer doesn't matter for the battery, it matters for the cells in the battery. Which I'm guessing reserving 1.4kWh would leave a lot of cells completely full.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UW2

LYTMCQ

Well-Known Member
First Name
Lyt
Joined
Feb 2, 2020
Messages
575
Reaction score
277
Location
Portland
First Name
Lyt
Vehicles
Telsa Model 3 LR AWD
Country flag
Ford gets 220 miles out of a 75kWh battery while Tesla gets 322. Tesla is 30% more efficient. Thats a big advantage in every metric including cost. Model Y has 25kwh less battery, 25% less cost in the most expensive component vs. MachE’s 98 kWh.

The hope is that Ford is not that inefficient but is being very cautious. Releasing lower number than car actually achieved so that new EV owners don’t have the range shocks of speeds over 60 and temps under 60 and no charging over 85%. If Ford, Mercedes, VW are that much less efficient than Tesla, that is a huge advantage to Tesla. Electric motors are not exactly new tech so not sure what the tech advantage would be.
 
OP

Badgeringweasel

Active Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2019
Messages
31
Reaction score
16
Location
Wisconsin
Vehicles
2016 Camry Hybrid
Country flag
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #10
@Badgeringweasel: "I know throughout the years Telsa has been able to increase the range of their vehicles simply through software updates." Well, the range was there to begin with. Tesla just unlocked it with a software update. I guess that's what you meant?
I think some of it was unlocking battery capacity, but I also thought some of it was software changes that actually helped the vehicle become more efficient. In an interview, Musk said "We do find ways over time and have done this many times in the past where we are able to improve the efficiency of say the drive inverter or the motor or we get a bit more comfortable with how much energy you can extract safely from the battery pack without causing it long term harm.”

So I guess it's a combination of unlocking more of the battery and using the battery more efficiently. I started this thread kind of hoping that Ford will get more range from the latter, using their experience with these cars on the road to find ways to improve how the car uses the battery it has.
 

timbop

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
409
Reaction score
361
Location
New Jersey
First Name
Tim
Vehicles
2015 Mustang Convertible, 2016 Dodge Durango
Occupation
Software Engineer
Country flag
My suspicion is that Tesla reports the usable battery size (54kwhr in case of standard range model Y), and Ford has so far been referencing overall battery size including the buffer. The C-Max may have reserved a 20% buffer, but I would guess (based on no data) that Ford will likely use a 10%-15% buffer. Additionally, Ford is probably sandbagging the range numbers right now to underpromise and overdeliver, and the range might creep up to say 250mi on the RWD SR. The result is that the E will be less efficient, possibly coming in somewhere around 3.7 - 3.9 mi/kwhr as compared to the Tesla reporting that they get around 4.2 mi/kwhr. In practical terms that is virtually no difference - particularly since how/where/when you drive can change range by up to 50%. The initial difference of about 10% means almost nothing.
 

Billyk24

Well-Known Member
First Name
William
Joined
Nov 29, 2019
Messages
371
Reaction score
127
Location
PA
First Name
William
Vehicles
Ford C-Max Energi, Premium Mach-E ordered
Country flag
Ford stated the CMax EV range approximately 21 miles. The CMax Energi has a usable 5.6kWh capacity at new. Yet owners have gotten 5.5 miles per kW (I posted such photo) with this vehicle. Which leads to one believing Ford sandbags their numbers. Why wouldn't the Mach E get and exceed 4 miles per kW when the CMax does?
 

Whatstreet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2019
Messages
194
Reaction score
103
Location
Fremont, CA
Vehicles
Chevrolet Volt, Ford Expedition, Toyota Prius
Occupation
Electronics Engineer
Country flag
When I opened this thread I thought I was going to read about tire selection, weight and air resistance.

They may have chosen some of these design considerations to make the car more fun. Then maybe inefficiency could be a good thing.

As to sand bagging to avoid warranty issues and false performance claim litigation, only time will tell.
 

silverelan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2019
Messages
450
Reaction score
380
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
2015 Subaru Outback
Country flag
When I opened this thread I thought I was going to read about tire selection, weight and air resistance.
I am wondering about tire width. The demo units they've got are on 225mm wide tires. At 4900 lbs, I wonder if that's a wide enough contact patch to quickly stop so much mass.
 

Scufflegrit

Member
First Name
Ryan
Joined
Jan 8, 2020
Messages
23
Reaction score
18
Location
Georgia
First Name
Ryan
Vehicles
'14 BMW X1, '15 BMW 328d, '18 F150
Occupation
Engineer
Country flag
I am wondering about tire width. The demo units they've got are on 225mm wide tires. At 4900 lbs, I wonder if that's a wide enough contact patch to quickly stop so much mass.
Those same tires stop minivans everyday which are about the same curb weight and can carry a lot more passengers. I just hope they don't stick us with some awful eco tread to eke out a couple miles of range.

I'm curious how the driving modes will be represented in the EPA ranges. The city range should be best when set to the highest amount of regen, but I'm curious which mode the EPA range will be based on. I think the Model 3 has 2 regenerative brake settings, but the max regen is "standard." Is the Model 3 EPA range then based on their max regen setting? Of course it won't make much of difference on the highway when you need the range. I suppose it's all a bit of specmanship.
 
Top