New EPA data posted for Mach-E models

[EVmodeler]

EPA has updated the test car list data for 2021 models, https://www.epa.gov/compliance-and-fuel-economy-data/data-cars-used-testing-fuel-economy
and now lists each of the RWD, AWD, SR and ER including the Cali Rt 1 model. This data has the unadjusted MPGe for city (UDDS) and HwFET cycles, and the target road load coefficients and test mass for each model. From this data, we can compare road load as a function of speed (haven't done it yet), and see what adjustment is used for the label values. Note that there are no extra cycles other than UDDS and HwFET listed.

There are also now emissions certification summaries and applications for the SR RWD and AWD models at
https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/

Sponsored

 

[macchiaz-o]

EPA has updated the test car list data for 2021 models, https://www.epa.gov/compliance-and-fuel-economy-data/data-cars-used-testing-fuel-economy
and now lists each of the RWD, AWD, SR and ER including the Cali Rt 1 model. This data has the unadjusted MPGe for city (UDDS) and HwFET cycles, and the target road load coefficients and test mass for each model. From this data, we can compare road load as a function of speed (haven't done it yet), and see what adjustment is used for the label values. Note that there are no extra cycles other than UDDS and HwFET listed.

There are also now emissions certification summaries and applications for the SR RWD and AWD models at
https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/

Thanks for the heads up!

Interesting that they show California Route 1 as an AWD model.

 

[EVmodeler]

Thanks for the heads up!

Interesting that they show California Route 1 as an AWD model.

There are often small (and sometimes big) inconsistencies in the data; much of the data, and also errors come from the manufacturers.

 

[ajmartineau]

MME AWD
84 - Charge Depleting Highway 338.9
81 - Charge Depleting UDDS 371.5

Are these the same numbers as before?

 

[mkhuffman]

The EPA Highway test cycle is ridiculous. No real person would drive on a highway that way. How about a top speed of 80 mph and an average speed of 75? That is realistic.

 

[EVmodeler]

The EPA Highway test cycle is ridiculous. No real person would drive on a highway that way. How about a top speed of 80 mph and an average speed of 75? That is realistic.

See the Highway portion of the US06 posted in another thread, or adjust the energy consumption up by 1/.7 or the range down by 0.7 (the approx label adjustment).
The drive cycles used for EPA testing and also CAFE corporate average fuel economy are in the CFR code of fed regs - EPA can’t just decide to change them, Congress has to.

 

[DBC]

The drive cycles used for EPA testing and also CAFE corporate average fuel economy are in the CFR code of fed regs - EPA can’t just decide to change them

The difficulty in changing them is that you remove the baseline. IOW if Congress votes to improve MPG by 10% there has to be a baseline to measure that 10%. The EPA has, however, added to these cycles, which is why the CAFE 50 MPG target isn't a real world 50 MPG.

In this regard the Highway number on the sticker is more influenced by US06 than by the "Highway" cycle. Confusing for sure.

 

[06VistaGT]

MME AWD
84 - Charge Depleting Highway 338.9
81 - Charge Depleting UDDS 371.5

Are these the same numbers as before?

They look to be the same:
https://www.macheforum.com/site/thr...evealed-in-epa-emissions-certifications.1961/

 

[EVmodeler]

The difficulty in changing them is that you remove the baseline. IOW if Congress votes to improve MPG by 10% there has to be a baseline to measure that 10%. The EPA has, however, added to these cycles, which is why the CAFE 50 MPG target isn't a real world 50 MPG.

In this regard the Highway number on the sticker is more influenced by US06 than by the "Highway" cycle. Confusing for sure.

Agreeing with you - CAFE has always been and still is based on unadjusted FTP city and HwFET.
EPA (and more properly DOT/NHTSA) have updated the label adjustments.
EPA introduced Tier 2 emissions standards around 2000 with the US06 (more aggressive/higher speeds), the SC03 95F A/C test, and the FTP 20F cold CO. These cycles were then used in a rather complex data fit to update the "5 cycle" label adjustments for 2008, to use the existing emissions cycles rather than require new fuel economy cycles just for label adjustments.

Testing of long range BEVs with full 5 cycle testing can be done (and Tesla has for some models - you can see the results in the EPA test car list data), but the standard method is to use a simpler 0.7 factor for label adjustments. Thus the label values are not true HwFET cycle (but are adjusted from it) nor are they actually US06 cycle results. As you say - confusing to many people. And as they also say - YMMV (your mileage may vary). Label values are to give you a pretty good idea of what to expect, and for comparison with other vehicles. BEVs are high efficiency, and also somewhat more sensitive to in-use factors (speed, heating, A/C, as has been discussed in several threads).

 

[EVmodeler]

I realized I never posted this comparison of different MME models with the Tesla MY

Maybe more info than you wanted?
The road load power plot helps explain most of the consumption and range differences.

The original AWD ER that I estimated 250 mi combined range from the EPA CSI data back in October is still also in the EPA test car list data, but is not reflected in any of the models on fueleconomy.gov
The main difference between the two AWD ER vehicles (both in tcl, but only one in csi) appears to be mostly tires (and so road load). Wheels and tires will make a difference in consumption and range, as is well known. Note that the road load ABCs are a curve fit to coast down data, so are all related to each other somewhat, even though I tried to isolate tires from A and drag from C in the table above. (B still matters...) EPA quotes the road load (in hp) at 50 mph.

Does anyone know where Inside EVs gets their "EPA" info?
Like: Additional info: "Combined range voluntarily lowered from 276 miles"
The calculated standard label range I come up with is generally lower (but not always) than the actual label range, not higher as implied by Inside EVs.

 

[RonTCat]

I realized I never posted this comparison of different MME models with the Tesla MY

Maybe more info than you wanted?
The road load power plot helps explain most of the consumption and range differences.

The original AWD ER that I estimated 250 mi combined range from the EPA CSI data back in October is still also in the EPA test car list data, but is not reflected in any of the models on fueleconomy.gov
The main difference between the two AWD ER vehicles (both in tcl, but only one in csi) appears to be mostly tires (and so road load). Wheels and tires will make a difference in consumption and range, as is well known. Note that the road load ABCs are a curve fit to coast down data, so are all related to each other somewhat, even though I tried to isolate tires from A and drag from C in the table above. (B still matters...) EPA quotes the road load (in hp) at 50 mph.

Does anyone know where Inside EVs gets their "EPA" info?
Like: Additional info: "Combined range voluntarily lowered from 276 miles"
The calculated standard label range I come up with is generally lower (but not always) than the actual label range, not higher as implied by Inside EVs.

https://www.epa.gov/compliance-and-...ification-data-vehicles-engines-and-equipment

 

[EVmodeler]

https://www.epa.gov/compliance-and-...ification-data-vehicles-engines-and-equipment

But how does Inside EVs get "Select" vs "Premium" or Combined range voluntarily lower to x?

 

[ChasingCoral]

I realized I never posted this comparison of different MME models with the Tesla MY

Maybe more info than you wanted?
The road load power plot helps explain most of the consumption and range differences.

The original AWD ER that I estimated 250 mi combined range from the EPA CSI data back in October is still also in the EPA test car list data, but is not reflected in any of the models on fueleconomy.gov
The main difference between the two AWD ER vehicles (both in tcl, but only one in csi) appears to be mostly tires (and so road load). Wheels and tires will make a difference in consumption and range, as is well known. Note that the road load ABCs are a curve fit to coast down data, so are all related to each other somewhat, even though I tried to isolate tires from A and drag from C in the table above. (B still matters...) EPA quotes the road load (in hp) at 50 mph.

Does anyone know where Inside EVs gets their "EPA" info?
Like: Additional info: "Combined range voluntarily lowered from 276 miles"
The calculated standard label range I come up with is generally lower (but not always) than the actual label range, not higher as implied by Inside EVs.

Nice. Did you plan to provide separate curves for the RWD ER vs the Ca Rt 1? I recall there is a bit of difference.

 

[EVmodeler]

Nice. Did you plan to provide separate curves for the RWD ER vs the Ca Rt 1? I recall there is a bit of difference.

The RWD ER falls right between the Rt 1 (also RWD ER) and the RWD SR, and would basically fill in the space between the lines on the plot, so I left it off. It’s basically in the noise level. And I am a big fan of appropriate significant figures. The data is there in the table; you can plot it if it is of special interest.

Or, maybe you literally mean just the Rt 1 and RWD ER on a plot by them selves? I can do that if you are interested, but they are close!

 

[ChasingCoral]

The RWD ER falls right between the Rt 1 (also RWD ER) and the RWD SR, and would basically fill in the space between the lines on the plot, so I left it off. It’s basically in the noise level. And I am a big fan of appropriate significant figures. The data is there in the table; you can plot it if it is of special interest.

Or, maybe you literally mean just the Rt 1 and RWD ER on a plot by them selves? I can do that if you are interested, but they are close!

No need then but your answer is exactly what I expected. Maybe make that a footnote in the next version?

Sponsored