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

[RonTCat]

My point was that the Model Y was more efficient than the pre-Heat Pump Model 3 in this test. Are you suggesting the Y is better aero than 3? Is anyone reading my actual post or just getting the knives out?

I'm suggesting your conclusions are based on correlation, not causation. I mean, it's like saying the Mach-E went farther because the driver just got a haircut, and everytime you get a haircut you get better range.

Sponsored

 

[supertramp]

Typo for Model 3. I believe you meant to write 3.36, not 2.36.

Still, the numbers seem strange. Based on those numbers, Mach E has a 88 kWh battery, which is right. But 62 kWh, 66kWh seems too small for the battery size of Model Y and Model 3.

Yeah, I do not understand - why Mach E used whole battery and Model Y used only 62 kWh out of 75? Not sure how the winner was determined then? Also, what was the capacity of Model 3 model that was tested? I see - it was 75kWh...

 

[Badger_Prof]

It's in French but here are the result of a test made last Sunday in Quebec between :
Mach-E First Edition (Extended range AWD)
Audi E-Tron
Tesla Model 3 dual motor long range (2019 without heat pump)
Tesla Model Y dual motor long range (2020 with heat pump)

All cars started with 100% SOC, winter tires correctly inflated, outside temp 19.4F. It was a round trip with one charge in the middle.



The Mach-E won for the total range (but with bigger battery)

For you Yankees, here are the "translation" in miles
Mach-E : 227 miles (2.59 miles / kWh)
Model Y : 221 miles (3.55 miles / kWh)
Model 3 : 221 miles (2.36 miles / kWh)
E-Tron : 179 miles (2.20 miles / kWh)

In short, the range is there for the Mach-E but it still about 30% more thirsty than the Tesla but I'm really happy to see that 2.59 miles / kWh

Enjoy! You can put to subtitles on and translate directly in YouTube

Higher ERA; more wins. Which matters more to you?

 

[Wildthing]

Typo for Model 3. I believe you meant to write 3.36, not 2.36.

Still, the numbers seem strange. Based on those numbers, Mach E has a 88 kWh battery, which is right. But 62 kWh, 66kWh seems too small for the battery size of Model Y and Model 3.

Edited thank you

 

[supertramp]

I think somebody with French language knowledge (auto generated subtitles are kind of broken language, especially when you interested in exact numbers) should check the final numbers - the whole test doesn't make much sense. They travelled the same distance but somehow Mach E travelled more and used the whole battery but Model Y travelled a little less and didn't use almost 20% of its battery. I am confused...

 

[mr_raider]

I think somebody with French language knowledge (auto generated subtitles are kind of broken language, especially when you interested in exact numbers) should check the final numbers - the whole test doesn't make much sense. They travelled the same distance but somehow Mach E travelled more and used the whole battery but Model Y travelled a little less and didn't use almost 20% of its battery. I am confused...

ALl cars were driven 285km. They were fast charged and the amount of energy put back in the battery was measured on the fast charger. From that they calculated consumption per km and extrapolated the range using 100% of the battery.

 

[DaMeatMan]

It's in French but here are the result of a test made last Sunday in Quebec between :
Mach-E First Edition (Extended range AWD)
Audi E-Tron
Tesla Model 3 dual motor long range (2019 without heat pump)
Tesla Model Y dual motor long range (2020 with heat pump)

All cars started with 100% SOC, winter tires correctly inflated, outside temp 19.4F. It was a round trip with one charge in the middle.



The Mach-E won for the total range (but with bigger battery)

For you Yankees, here are the "translation" in miles
Mach-E : 227 miles (2.59 miles / kWh)
Model Y : 221 miles (3.55 miles / kWh)
Model 3 : 221 miles (3.36 miles / kWh)
E-Tron : 179 miles (2.20 miles / kWh)

In short, the range is there for the Mach-E but it still about 30% more thirsty than the Tesla but I'm really happy to see that 2.59 miles / kWh

Enjoy! You can put to subtitles on and translate directly in YouTube

That's incredibly good news, particularly when you consider that the Mach-E has yet to have it's first OTA update, and it's still very early day's when you consider the improvements that are yet to come over time (some of which will almost certainly increase efficiency).

When you think about it, as early adopters of a brand new first year vehicle our vehicles (as they are today) are basically going to be "as bad as it gets" if I can even say that lol... yet even at it's earliest and most unoptimized configuration it is still getting better range than the long range Model Y, which has had quite a few updates already.

I don't care to argue about the fact that the Y came close with less battery, because in my mind that's essentially irrelevant because we are talking about two vehicles that are priced nearly identically, that are both in the same size and class of vehicle. Does the Mach-E have a bigger "tank"? Yes.. does it cost more to charge... a buck or two at best?? So what I care about is real world results, and the fact that my AWD extended range Mach-E (today in it's least optimized form) is getting better results than current leading vehicle in it's class, and it's only going to get better from here!

That my friends is call for celebration! ?

 

[Accord07]

Test course: Trois-Riviéres to Montmagny to Neuville, total distance 285 km

Audi e-tron: they did not let it run through the entire course without recharging because it was cutting too close. Actual distance travelled was 253 km when SOC was 12%. Energy consumption was 28.2 kWh per 100 km (or 2.20 mile/kWh)

Tesla Model Y: SOC was 20% after 285 km, energy consumption was 18.5 kWh per 100 km (or 3.36 mile/kWh)

Tesla Model 3: SOC was 20% after 285 km, energy consumption was 17.5 kWh per 100 km (or 3.55 mile/kWh)

Ford Mach-E: SOC was 22% after 285 km, energy consumption was 24 kWh per 100 km (or 2.59 mile/kWh)

Something is wrong with the SOC at the end of the course for either Model Y or Model 3, they cannot possibly have exactly the same percentage of battery charge left and yet have a 5-6% difference in efficiency, unless their actual usable battery capacities were off by exactly the same amount.

One thing is clear though: it does not demonstrate that heat pump is the greatest invention in history.

 

[supertramp]

ALl cars were driven 285km. They were fast charged and the amount of energy put back in the battery was measured on the fast charger. From that they calculated consumption per km and extrapolated the range using 100% of the battery.

I am sorry - I am obviously dumb (no surprise for me there , but, here are the numbers from the OP:

Mach-E : 227 miles (2.59 miles / kWh)
Model 3 : 221 miles (3.55 miles / kWh)
Model Y : 221 miles (3.36 miles / kWh)
E-Tron : 179 miles (2.20 miles / kWh)

So, taking efficiency numbers I am getting the following:

Mach-E: 2.59 mi/kWh x 88 kWh = 228 miles
Model Y: 3.55 mi/kWh x 75 kWh = 266 miles
Model 3: 3.36 mi/kWh x 75 kWh = 252 miles
E-Tron: 2.20 mi/kWh x 99 kWh = 218 miles

So, what I am doing wrong with calculations?

 

[mr_raider]

I am sorry - I am obviously dumb (no surprise for me there , but, here are the numbers from the OP:

Mach-E : 227 miles (2.59 miles / kWh)
Model 3 : 221 miles (3.55 miles / kWh)
Model Y : 221 miles (3.36 miles / kWh)
E-Tron : 179 miles (2.20 miles / kWh)

So, taking efficiency numbers I am getting the following:

Mach-E: 2.59 mi/kWh x 88 kWh = 228 miles
Model Y: 3.55 mi/kWh x 75 kWh = 266 miles
Model 3: 3.36 mi/kWh x 75 kWh = 252 miles
E-Tron: 2.20 mi/kWh x 99 kWh = 218 miles

So, what I am doing wrong with calculations?

SO they did not use the actual battery capacity. They used the residual percentage. The Model Y travelled 285km and had 20% left on the battery. So that works out to 355km for 100%. They started all the cars at 100%.

 

[Accord07]

I am sorry - I am obviously dumb (no surprise for me there , but, here are the numbers from the OP:

Mach-E : 227 miles (2.59 miles / kWh)
Model 3 : 221 miles (3.55 miles / kWh)
Model Y : 221 miles (3.36 miles / kWh)
E-Tron : 179 miles (2.20 miles / kWh)

So, taking efficiency numbers I am getting the following:

Mach-E: 2.59 mi/kWh x 88 kWh = 228 miles
Model Y: 3.55 mi/kWh x 75 kWh = 266 miles
Model 3: 3.36 mi/kWh x 75 kWh = 252 miles
E-Tron: 2.20 mi/kWh x 99 kWh = 218 miles

So, what I am doing wrong with calculations?

Range was extrapolated using SOC at the end of the 285-km test course, except e-tron because they might not make it, so they used SOC after 253 km instead.

 

[Wildthing]

I think somebody with French language knowledge (auto generated subtitles are kind of broken language, especially when you interested in exact numbers) should check the final numbers - the whole test doesn't make much sense. They travelled the same distance but somehow Mach E travelled more and used the whole battery but Model Y travelled a little less and didn't use almost 20% of its battery. I am confused...

They travelled the same distance and they show the extrapolated 100% range based on the trip results

 

[DBC]

Sure it went 6 more miles... but used far, far more energy to do it, from those numbers.

Efficiency is the most over rated metric around. If you want efficient get a Chevy Bolt of Kona.

One major reason why efficiency in BEVs matters little is that powering a BEV is so cheap efficiency doesn't register on the cost scale. My rate is $.09/kWh. Do I care if I get 4 miles/kWh and pay $.023/mile or 3 miles/kWh and pay $.03/mile? Of course not. Seven bucks over a thousand miles or seventy bucks over ten thousand miles just doesn't matter.

The only reason it might matter is on a road trip when you DC charge: If the charge rate is the same the more efficient vehicle will charge faster. That's not going to be a big deal for most people or for most of the time. In this regard, note that this test presumably accounts for the famed Tesla heat pump. The efficiency numbers should be closer, and the MME should have more of a range advantage, in places where more BEVs are sold.

Realistically the MME is a beast, and a beast is not going to be as efficient as an econobox. Just reality.

 

[Wildthing]

Test course: Trois-Riviéres to Montmagny to Neuville, total distance 285 km

Audi e-tron: they did not let it run through the entire course without recharging because it was cutting too close. Actual distance travelled was 253 km when SOC was 12%. Energy consumption was 28.2 kWh per 100 km (or 2.20 mile/kWh)

Tesla Model Y: SOC was 20% after 285 km, energy consumption was 18.5 kWh per 100 km (or 3.36 mile/kWh)

Tesla Model 3: SOC was 20% after 285 km, energy consumption was 17.5 kWh per 100 km (or 3.55 mile/kWh)

Ford Mach-E: SOC was 22% after 285 km, energy consumption was 24 kWh per 100 km (or 2.59 mile/kWh)

Something is wrong with the SOC at the end of the course for either Model Y or Model 3, they cannot possibly have exactly the same percentage of battery charge left and yet have a 5-6% difference in efficiency, unless their actual usable battery capacities were off by exactly the same amount.

One thing is clear though: it does not demonstrate that heat pump is the greatest invention in history.

That particular Model 3 shows battery degradation (confirmed by the owner, he made a video or an article about it a few months ago) and they made their calculation based on the real battery capacity remaining.

 

[Accord07]

That particular Model 3 shows battery degradation (confirmed by the owner, he made a video or an article about it a few months ago) and they made their calculation based on the real battery capacity remaining.

Thanks for the context.

Sponsored