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

[RonTCat]

Weight makes less of a difference for an EV than it does for an ICE vehicle. While F=MA applies to both. EVs benefit from negative acceleration though regeneration. (For an ICE vehicle negative acceleration just heats the breaks.) So, while extra weight hurts an EV while accelerating, it helps while decelerating.

Not that the extra weight is a good thing. It is not as bad as in a traditional vehicle.

For a perfectly efficient drivetrain, weight is not relevant. The energy to accelerate a vehicle would be completely recaptured during braking.

The place where energy is lost is labeled parasitic loss. A parasitic loss would be wind resistance, rolling resistance, bearing loss, motor losses, motor drive losses.

Heavier cars generally will have higher rolling resistance.

So Tesla scores a big win against Mach-E in wind resistance, and a small one in rolling resistance. Mach-E has small wins in the other categories.

Wind resistance increases as the square of speed, so the faster you go, the greater the efficiency advantage low wind resistance vehicles have.

Putting this all together, if you design a range or efficiency test where the top speed is less than 50mph and the average speed is lower, the Mach-E will be more efficient than a Tesla. If the average speed is higher, Tesla will use it's aero advantage to come out more efficient.

So why didn't Ford make a really low wind resistance vehicle? Because now you have something that looks like a Tesla. Give the choice between an ugly Tesla and ugly Ford, people choose Tesla. Ford has to differentiate to get BEV customers. Have some edge. This is the edge.

Sponsored

 

[available_username2]

Mach-E won?

Mach-E used 87.64 kWh to go 227 miles. (227/2.59)
Model Y used 62.25 kWh to go 221 miles. (221/3.55)

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

I would still call Model Y the winner here. It's incredible how efficient it is.

Looking at the fact that the Model Y achieved such impressively better real-world consumption than the 3... guess that heat pump works after all.

it won the range test... of course the model y is more efficient. Luckily the mach e has some styling that instead of just optimizing drag

 

[RonTCat]

Not never, but 10.5 years might as well be never based on the age of most drivers here.

Your maths are correct sir. ....other than I only pay 9 cents/kWh. I get the same results.

LOL, at 9 cents you wouldn't even save $50 a year.

 

[Accord07]

Not never, but 10.5 years might as well be never based on the age of most drivers here.

Speak for yourself! ?

 

[mkhuffman]

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?

Sorry if I missed it, but I have not seen anyone explain why they think the actual test did not match what supertramp calculated. I think the Teslas did not go as far as supertramp calculated because of battery desegregation, especially with the Model 3 that is the oldest and has the most mileage. Otherwise, the Teslas should have had a lot more range remaining. Would the Teslas have performed better if they were as new as the Mach-E?

 

[supertramp]

Sorry if I missed it, but I have not seen anyone explain why they think the actual test did not match what supertramp calculated. I think the Teslas did not go as far as supertramp calculated because of battery desegregation, especially with the Model 3 that is the oldest and has the most mileage. Otherwise, the Teslas should have had a lot more range remaining. Would the Teslas have performed better if they were as new as the Mach-E?

According to the tester's info - Model 3 is of year 2019, Model Y is 2020 - what kind of battery degradation we are talking about? Especially for model Y - it's almost a brand new vehicle with almost a brand new battery. I didn't do calcs for Model 3 because it is not a car to be compared with MME, just like we do not compare Chevy Bolt with MME.

 

[pt19713]

According to the tester's info - Model 3 is of year 2019, Model Y is 2020 - what kind of battery degradation we are talking about? Especially for model Y - it's almost a brand new vehicle with almost a brand new battery. I didn't do calcs for Model 3 because it is not a car to be compared with MME, just like we do not compare Chevy Bolt with MME.

The 3 and Y battery tends to have most of the degradation in the first 12k-15k miles. Mine has 4500 miles and has a 4% degradation. It tends to level off after the first ~ 8%.

 

[supertramp]

The 3 and Y battery tends to have most of the degradation in the first 12k-15k miles. Mine has 4500 miles and has a 4% degradation. It tends to level off after the first ~ 8%.

Interesting... I didn't know about that. Then the next question is - do we know if Mach E is expected to follow the same path on degradation as Teslas?

 

[pt19713]

Interesting... I didn't know about that. Then the next question is - do we know if Mach E is expected to follow the same path on degradation as Teslas?

Yes, but that's one reason why they have such a large reserve to prevent warranty claims if there's too much battery degradation within the warranty period.

 

[RonTCat]

Not never, but 10.5 years might as well be never based on the age of most drivers here.

Your maths are correct sir. ....other than I only pay 9 cents/kWh. I get the same results.

Plus at 10 years, you need a new battery...

I think the Teslas did not go as far as supertramp calculated because of battery desegregation, especially with the Model 3 that is the oldest and has the most mileage. Otherwise, the Teslas should have had a lot more range remaining. Would the Teslas have performed better if they were as new as the Mach-E?

The more important takeaway is: If your speculation is correct, why is a one year old Tesla battery already trashed?

 

[theblueone]

But he got there half an hour earlier, because he had to put in 40% less electricity at those two stops.

This is where I will repeatedly promote www.abetterrouteplanner.com

Here are the numbers that they give me for an arbitrary 1140 mile* trip from the middle of Seattle to the middle of Los Angeles. If you don't like the specifics, feel free to replace the vehicles with years/trims that you think are more representative. (*The tesla trip is only 1140 miles, I think maybe their superchargers are marginally closer to the freeway)

MME (AWD, extended battery)
Total: 22h 17m
Drive: 18h 19m
Charge: 3h 58m

Tesla model 3 (2021 performance)
Total: 20h 5m
Drive: 18h 17m
Charge: 1 h 48m

Tesla Model Y (long range AWD)
Total: 20h 46m
Drive: 18h 30m
Charge: 2h 16m

Audi E-tron (2021 premium plus)
Total: 21h 46m
Drive: 18h 21m
Charge: 3h 24 min

Maybe not what I wanted to see as a new Audi owner, but them's the facts. I road trip with a spouse and a dog these days, so I still think that any day where you have to charge more than once is a pretty brutal haul.

I'm pretty comfortable with range anxiety in terms of the point-to-point infrastructure, and I doubt that I'd ever be taking any of these cars far enough in a single day that charging becomes the limiting factor.

 

[available_username2]

This is where I will repeatedly promote www.abetterrouteplanner.com

Here are the numbers that they give me for an arbitrary 1140 mile* trip from the middle of Seattle to the middle of Los Angeles. If you don't like the specifics, feel free to replace the vehicles with years/trims that you think are more representative. (*The tesla trip is only 1140 miles, I think maybe their superchargers are marginally closer to the freeway)

MME (AWD, extended battery)
Total: 22h 17m
Drive: 18h 19m
Charge: 3h 58m

Tesla model 3 (2021 performance)
Total: 20h 5m
Drive: 18h 17m
Charge: 1 h 48m

Tesla Model Y (long range AWD)
Total: 20h 46m
Drive: 18h 30m
Charge: 2h 16m

Audi E-tron (2021 premium plus)
Total: 21h 46m
Drive: 18h 21m
Charge: 3h 24 min

Maybe not what I wanted to see as a new Audi owner, but them's the facts. I road trip with a spouse and a dog these days, so I still think that any day where you have to charge more than once is a pretty brutal haul.

I'm pretty comfortable with range anxiety in terms of the point-to-point infrastructure, and I doubt that I'd ever be taking any of these cars far enough in a single day that charging becomes the limiting factor.

except if you watch @AoA s video on driving from sf to la and back a better route planner underestimated the efficiency and overestimated charge times. So that is as estimate, but not accurate yet

 

[ARK]

One thing I haven’t seen mentioned in this thread is that the Mach-E is able to recycle heat from elsewhere in the car to heat the cabin. You can even go so far as to disable the electric heater to preserve battery so that the Mach-E relies entirely on this other system, though I don’t know what the name of it is. Frankly I’m surprised it isn’t publicized a bit more by Ford since this heat pump thing comes up as often as it does.

I don’t know how this system compares to a heat pump, but I suspect many of us have spent far more time reading and debating this ‘issue’ here on this forum than we will ever spend on the road at a charger, waiting for the charger to make up the difference in lost efficiency for the lack of heat pump.

If Ford ever does add it, I hope it is only an option and not standard where it will then get built into the price of the Mach-E for everyone. Most car manufacturers seem to charge a few hundred dollars for a heat pump as an option on vehicles where it is available and for me at least in Southern California, I wouldn’t see myself recouping the cost this decade (or any decade?) in energy savings, to say nothing of the extra weight the vehicle would permanently be saddled with.

 

[RedStallion]

This is where I will repeatedly promote www.abetterrouteplanner.com

Here are the numbers that they give me for an arbitrary 1140 mile* trip from the middle of Seattle to the middle of Los Angeles. If you don't like the specifics, feel free to replace the vehicles with years/trims that you think are more representative. (*The tesla trip is only 1140 miles, I think maybe their superchargers are marginally closer to the freeway)

MME (AWD, extended battery)
Total: 22h 17m
Drive: 18h 19m
Charge: 3h 58m

Tesla model 3 (2021 performance)
Total: 20h 5m
Drive: 18h 17m
Charge: 1 h 48m

Tesla Model Y (long range AWD)
Total: 20h 46m
Drive: 18h 30m
Charge: 2h 16m

Audi E-tron (2021 premium plus)
Total: 21h 46m
Drive: 18h 21m
Charge: 3h 24 min

Maybe not what I wanted to see as a new Audi owner, but them's the facts. I road trip with a spouse and a dog these days, so I still think that any day where you have to charge more than once is a pretty brutal haul.

I'm pretty comfortable with range anxiety in terms of the point-to-point infrastructure, and I doubt that I'd ever be taking any of these cars far enough in a single day that charging becomes the limiting factor.

They don't have real data on the new cars or chargers, so it's mostly a guesswork. The major factor that will effect those numbers is the charging speed. The information is very patchy so far, some report great numbers, others report dismal numbers.
Another thing worth noting is that people don't tend to sit in the cars waiting for 18 mins to charge and then immediately take off to optimize their trip time. People plan stops to take a break, get a coffee, visit a shop. When you have many stops in a long trip the timings become more randomized due to factors other than charging and in the end won't likely be different for all those different cars.
I personally knew a guy who drove from Seattle to LA in one day. I wouldn't do that, it's no fun. When I drove from the East coast to the West I planned for no more than 500 miles a day to have time for other things.

 

[AoA]

except if you watch @AoA s video on driving from sf to la and back a better route planner underestimated the efficiency and overestimated charge times. So that is as estimate, but not accurate yet

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.

Sponsored