Real condition winter test Mach-E vs Tesla vs Audi E-Tron

[mkhuffman]

Yep. ABRP's numbers may be good for Teslas, but because there are so few other EVs out there the numbers aren't quite right. For a ER Mach E AWD it wants to use a reference of 2.64 miles per kWh at 65, (232 miles max) that is extremely low. Over 2000 miles on the clock our average has been 3.0 miles per kWh (264 miles max per 88kWh full charge.) On a recent test (to be published soon) we took a Taycan 4S and the Mach E ER AWD on the same route and got 265 out of the Ford and 275 out of the Porsche with average speeds of 72 MPH.

Probably you already know you can change the reference mi/kWh setting. I was playing around with ABRP and used 2.5 because that seems to be a worst case scenario based on the test this thread started and with aggressive driving thrown in there. If I can get 3.0 but plan with 2.5, life will be good because I will spend much less time at the planned charger stops. Or maybe be able to skip one. BTW - I am referring to highway mi/kWh because I am evaluating the regular trips I take - to visit my family and my very long pre-COVID commute.

Sponsored

 

[Mustangcanuck]

Apologies if this is stated in the thread and I missed it.

Does anyone know if all 4 cars had been kept outside overnight prior to the test?

I plan on keeping my MY or MME in our heated garage through the winter which if my 4 year old Volt is any indication will maintain the battery life/range. We still see 110KM in the summer and 70-75KM in the winter!

 

[Rpgonzalez]

No, in the 3 & Y it's a 77.8 kWh pack, 75.2 kWh usable, 3.4 kWh reserve (roughly 71.8 kWh when the UI displays 0%).

Isn’t the reserve thing a problem for the whole test? This tests uses math to extrapolate, but the Model Y’s 20% isn’t really 20%…. So doesn’t that even out the score? Or no because it’s irrelevant to say that someone would drive the Y past 0%? Finally, anyone know if Mach-e employs the same reserve?

 

[Rpgonzalez]

Tesla's are notoriously inefficient but their aerodynamics help compensate for that.

Pretty sure the word notorious implies, famous or well-known. Teslas are not “notoriously” inefficient. I’m not even sure anyone here would agree with you that Teslas are “very inefficient”. Efficiency is just about as well known as anything.

but they are well known for lying. Actually, I shouldn’t say well-known, because the general population believes their EPA numbers and mass hys. That being said, even with the lying, there is no doubt that Teslas are more efficient and this has *partially* to do with aerodynamics. There is plenty of data to suggest that the range and efficiency of a model Y drops considerably with speed, no one is immune to Physics.

the efficiency comes down to a combination of things, which aerodynamics is probably a part of. The other is probably weight. I’m sure it wouldn’t be too hard to shave a couple hundred pounds off the Mach-e, but then it would look and drive and sound more like the model Y. The last thing will be auto manufactures collecting 10 years of data that Tesla already has and of course the revenue stream to execute the changes necessary to increase efficiency.

Thanks to Tesla for paving the way for EV’s. Fortunately/unfortunately, EV geeks (me) supported an EV manufacturer with a closed charging infrastructure, making Tesla uniquely poised to hold a monopoly. That God for those of us supporting other EV’s…

 

[Rpgonzalez]

I'm curious about SR battery. It should lighter and get better efficiency, though less range. Either way it was very reassuring and I think I will be well served with what I will get.

according to a bunch of real world data that I got from users on this forum, it appears that the SR battery gets much better efficiency. however, because of the smaller differences between the all wheel drive and RWD Models, I don’t think it has to do with weight. it might have to do with the availability of more horsepower in the long range battery models.

 

[eleven24]

Man, your gonna make me put you on my ban list. Gaslighting all the time.

The mache was not built for aero. It weighs a lot more than the model y. Of course, it's not going to be the same. What is true though it the mache gets closer to the range listed always when the model y underperforms time after time with its inflated numbers.

So in the summer or even in areas where the heat pump doesn't play a factor then the mache even would do better stack against the model y.

The bottom line it went further. Guess with your booohooo heat pump if ford put one on the mache is just beat that ass even more.

I don't know why people get so heated over facts as if they're opinion. Fact is, the Tesla Model Y is far more energy efficient than a Mach-e. I know, I have a Model Y. I've driving 32k miles in 15 months in it. Most of the driving highway miles at 70mph+. A lot of those miles in sub 40 degree temps. It's a fantastically efficient vehicle... that I'm selling when my Mach-e arrives.

My average in the Tesla on an 800 mile all highway driving trip with an average temp of 29 degrees was 2.9 kWh per mile. That same trip on a 72 degree day I saw 4.2 kWh per mile.

It's an incredibly efficient vehicle, and to argue that is ridiculous.

What it doesn't have, and the reason I'm replacing it with a Mach-e, is solid build quality... and a soul. It is an efficient empty appliance. I'll miss the reliable Supercharger network far more than I will the Tesla.

Oh, and lastly... the Mach-e is actually built for aero and its drag coefficient is not too far from where Tesla Model Y is at 0.28 compared to 0.23. Go check out Sandy Munro's teardown of both vehicles and he gives a pretty good reason why Ford's efficiency currently lags behind Tesla. It also provides a good measure to see how much Ford can easily improve their design to reduce weight and catch Tesla.

Sponsored