Mileage for Extended Range Mach-E Models Revealed in EPA Emissions Certifications

[timbop]

@Shayne I agree - I don't think the mustang is the right car for your needs. I suggest you research other BEV winter performance (there was a test in on of the scandanavian countries done in feb/march). Good luck with whatever you end up getting.

Sponsored

 

[timbop]

Wait, what?

He's referring to the preliminary doc from the EPA that started all the consternation over range. It is the irrefutable standard and all the EPA published numbers are fake.

 

[zhackwyatt]

He's referring to the preliminary doc from the EPA that started all the consternation over range. It is the irrefutable standard and all the EPA published numbers are fake.

Ah, ok, thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Shayne]

@Shayne I agree - I don't think the mustang is the right car for your needs. I suggest you research other BEV winter performance (there was a test in on of the scandanavian countries done in feb/march). Good luck with whatever you end up getting.

Don't think you have a clue what suits my needs but thanks, classy guy.

 

[timbop]

Don't think you have a clue what suits my needs but thanks, classy guy.

All I know is what you've said ad nauseum, so unless you were lying to me or yourself the MME doesn't seem to meet your requirements as you've stated them - or at least the capabilities as you are aware of them.

 

[Shayne]

All I know is what you've said ad nauseum, so unless you were lying to me or yourself the MME doesn't seem to meet your requirements as you've stated them - or at least the capabilities as you are aware of them.

Guess you did not comprehend what I said and a reread may be in order. Their is plus and minus with everything you appear to have a problem with anyone discussing the minus. You work for someone?

 

[timbop]

Guess you did not comprehend what I said and a reread may be in order. Their is plus and minus with everything you appear to have a problem with anyone discussing the minus. You work for someone?

Yes, I do have a job. Thanks for asking. If you're trying to insinuate I'm a paid "shill", no I don't work for or with Ford. Just really tired of seeing the same flawed statements over and over, regardless of how many times you've been corrected.

 

[Shayne]

I think it's both. More chargers make many trips possible, but not necessarily preferable. Range does both. If you can make it all 200 miles without stopping, where you just "park it & forget it" plugged into an L2 charger at your destination, that's much easier than having to stop in the middle for 20 minutes to charge.

Range also allows you to go more places off the beaten path that don't have chargers.

Anything more helps, of course, but more chargers are only part of the solution. There's still aspects they don't fix.

Depends on needs and distances. So far it looks like a sweet spot is around the 70 KWh size (Kona, Y). It is a weight efficiency equation I bet. Once solid state I think range will not matter as much as chargers. Always infrastructure. Think we will be around then? Look at where it is going; Ford just fell into the tech business. Leaps and bounds like graphics cards for a while.

 

[Dan G]

FWIW, my Ioniq only resets the efficiency after a charge, but a lot of fast chargers are right off the highway. I have no knowledge of this or any evidence to back it up or anything for the MME, but my Ioniq resets to 0 mi/kwhr.

What does that mean? Well it takes about 30 miles of driving for the efficiency to get back up to what I know it should be. The first few miles read like 1-2 mi/kwhr. Then it'll start to creep up. It takes about 10-15 miles to get somewhat close to what I know it should be. For an accurate reading, it takes about 30 miles.

Again, no evidence that the MME is similar or anything. Just my experience in a different car from a different manufacturer. I just wish he had reset that number leaving Detroit.

 

[kdryden99]

FWIW, my Ioniq only resets the efficiency after a charge, but a lot of fast chargers are right off the highway. I have no knowledge of this or any evidence to back it up or anything for the MME, but my Ioniq resets to 0 mi/kwhr.

What does that mean? Well it takes about 30 miles of driving for the efficiency to get back up to what I know it should be. The first few miles read like 1-2 mi/kwhr. Then it'll start to creep up. It takes about 10-15 miles to get somewhat close to what I know it should be. For an accurate reading, it takes about 30 miles.

Again, no evidence that the MME is similar or anything. Just my experience in a different car from a different manufacturer. I just wish he had reset that number leaving Detroit.

Its the same for an ICE vehicle. I mean your efficiency comes down to an average of trips. 1 day or even 1 week is not enough to determine the efficiency of a BEV or any vehicle. It takes a couple of months for you to know what is the real efficiency and range of the vehicle.

 

[Dan G]

Its the same for an ICE vehicle. I mean your efficiency comes down to an average of trips. 1 day or even 1 week is not enough to determine the efficiency of a BEV or any vehicke. It takes a couple of months for you to know what is the real efficiency and range of the vehicle.

Yes, so I'm not reading too much into a 2.1 mi/kwhr reading after 11 miles. Raining or not.

 

[kdryden99]

Yes, so I'm not reading too much into a 2.1 mi/kwhr reading after 11 miles. Raining or not.

It might have been the efficiency of that trip. Don't forget BEV's are more efficient in city driving due to regen which is the exact opposite of an ICE vehicle. So for example When I drive a hlaf hour on the highway with my Rogue today in -10oC the car gave me a 8.7L/100km but when I drive to the daycare to pick up my kids 5 mins away I got 13.5L/100km. So that 2.1 for 11 miles on highway could also be 3.5 in the city for 11 miles which would work out to an average of 2.8 for 11 miles combined. 11 mile drive is a very small sample to measure efficiency. He also says that it would be the worst case scenario for the US conditions. I think almost every other EV would have close to the same efficiency at similar temp. Other reviews compared range with Etron, the Porsche and Tesla and they were pretty close.

 

[Dan G]

It might have been the efficiency of that trip. Don't forget BEV's are more efficient in city driving due to regen which is the exact opposite of an ICE vehicle. So for example When I drive a hlaf hour on the highway with my Rogue today in -10oC the car gave me a 8.7L/100km but when I drive to the daycare to pick up my kids 5 mins away I got 13.5L/100km. So that 2.1 for 11 miles on highway could also be 3.5 in the city for 11 miles which would work out to an average of 2.8 for 11 miles combined. 11 mile drive is a very small sample to measure efficiency. He also says that it would be the worst case scenario for the US conditions. I think almost every other EV would have close to the same efficiency at similar temp. Other reviews compared range with Etron, the Porsche and Tesla and they were pretty close.

I get what you're saying. And I'm sure if you wanted to drive 11 miles on the highway that day, 2.1 mi/kwhr might have been pretty accurate. Merge that number with all the city driving you're surely doing and you'll have much better efficiency.

Back to my first post though, if you're doing any sort of range, in my current car, it takes about 30 miles of driving for that number to read accurately. It doesn't matter if you're highway driving, city driving, or mixed. Anytime you reset that number, it takes a while for the computer to read the correct efficiency.

Whether that is the same in the MME, I have no idea.

 

[dbsb3233]

Depends on needs and distances. So far it looks like a sweet spot is around the 70 KWh size (Kona, Y). It is a weight efficiency equation I bet. Once solid state I think range will not matter as much as chargers. Always infrastructure. Think we will be around then? Look at where it is going; Ford just fell into the tech business. Leaps and bounds like graphics cards for a while.

Agree that it depends on each situation. But overall range means more than chargers spaced closer, IMO. Not needing a charger stop at all is always better than having to stop, from a function/convenience standpoint.

But it is a trade-off for cost and weight. Until batteries improve so much that the energy density (range) and cost both improve significantly.

Whether solid state will do that is anyone's guess. As is when it can be achieved for mass production. 50-50 chance they'll be the standard for most new BEVs by 2025, perhaps?

 

[dbsb3233]

Its the same for an ICE vehicle. I mean your efficiency comes down to an average of trips. 1 day or even 1 week is not enough to determine the efficiency of a BEV or any vehicle. It takes a couple of months for you to know what is the real efficiency and range of the vehicle.

That depends on what one considers "range". By that, I mean range for what? What you're describing is range for your overall driving pattern. For that, you're right, it needs to record enough of your driving pattern to be representative of your overall driving.

But I'd contend that doesn't really mean much. Other than a curiosity about how much my fuel costs are, I really don't care about my overall average numbers. What I care about is how far I can drive on a road trip at highway speeds. And for that, a week of combined data is worthless.

What's really needed is a snapshot of efficiency of representative high speed driving. And that's what Kyle did when he reset the trip meter while cruising at 70 MPH and ran it steady for about 10 minutes.

Sponsored