SR Battery or ER Battery

ClaudeMach-E

Well-Known Member
First Name
Claude
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
1,030
Reaction score
787
Location
Quebec Canada
Vehicles
Mustang Mach 3- Tempo- Malibu(3)-Actual Kia Sportage AWD
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
Before I get my reservation into an order I had these thoughts about the possibility of changing my Premium SR AWD with the ER option.

It’s always a surprise to read that in North America people won’t buy an EV unless it has a 300 mi/485 km range, when in Europe people are talking more of a 185 mi/300 km. Of course driving a few hours in NA means you are probably not leaving your state or province, but in Europe you might cross a few countries border line, so that might explain this. Will I change my SR for an optional ER? Let’s see.

My daily commute average is around 40 mi/65 km so no, ER is not requested here.

The next most important thing is summer/winter range. Let’s say that in summer the MME will probably gain at least 15% range going from 210 mi/335 km to 240 mi/385 km, in winter it could be losing 35% or more, going from the 210 mi/335 km to 136 mi/219 km. So far so good no ER needed. Also final EPA ratings might be a bit higher. The equivalent WLTP rating is for now 261 mi/420 km.

Now what about road trips? My family visit road trips vary from 150 mi/245 km to 506 mi/815 km., the shortest distance we do regularly, but we always plan a lunch break on route and where we stop they have charging stations. For the other ones, let’s just say that my prostate does not allow me to do more than 2 hours stretch. Using a trip planner like Plugshare helps in viewing charging stops, having a good idea of the charging infrastructure and, yes the MME will have its own trip planner included, but in the meantime Plugshare can show you the charging infrastructure availability on your preferred road trips. I had also checked a vacation one and it’s no problem. No need for ER here.

The gain in range with the ER battery on a Premium AWD would be 60 mi/100 km, but is it worth $7000 dollars in the US or $9000 in Canada, surely not for me, so I will keep my Premium has reserved.

I invite you to watch this Transport Evolved You Tube video, where Nikki Gordon-Bloomfield express her thought about this continues race for more range and bigger batteries.





Advertisement

 

timbop

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
3,694
Reaction score
7,079
Location
New Jersey
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E (CA RT1), 2016 Dodge Durango
Occupation
Software Engineer
Country flag
very good points for most of the world, but I am not sure about American buyers. I suspect that if Chevy continues selling the Bolt at the current steep discount (or discounts it further) it has a chance to "go mainstream" and overtake the Model 3 as the best selling BEV. At its list price it is in the same price bracket as a base Model 3, and it in no way competes favorably to the Tesla. However, $27k - $30k for the current 2020 model's features and appointments would do wonders for sales. At that price point it competes reasonably well with midsize ICEs (especially when oil prices return to normal), and can appeal to the masses.
 

SJ_Okay

Well-Known Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Feb 25, 2020
Messages
558
Reaction score
519
Location
UK
Vehicles
AWD ER Mach-E
Occupation
Film and Music Producer
Country flag
I discovered something quite interesting yesterday... I drive a 2018 Mazda CX-5 (Mid sized SUV, similar dimension to MME). I’ve never bother looking at the range until it pops up when the fuel warning light comes on, normally with around 50 miles predicted left. Yesterday however, when I filled up, I adjusted the driver display to show me the range on a full tank... it was showing me 366 miles! I couldn’t believe that. It’s less than the MME ER WLTP projection of 370. What’s more, within at least half a mile of driving, which involved pulling out of the service station and driving around 40mph, that had adjusted to 364. That was a real eye opener for me.

I’d suggest the majority of ICE drivers would have a similar behaviour to me in so much as they wouldn’t even worry about how much range a full tank gives them... They would just drive until they needed to add more fuel. Yet with EVs now giving comparable ranges on full charges, everyone has range anxiety, which is bonkers... at least in the UK where the charging infrastructure is more than adequate with there being more charge points than petrol stations. I’d even stick my neck out and say that with my driving and journey styles, I’ll get further on a fully charged ER AWD MME than on my current Mazda CX-5. So even the SR AWD which has the lowest projected range, would be more than enough for me. I’m opting for the AWD ER purely out of indulgence, as it’s the first car I’m buying outright, not leasing, and I want as much performance for driving pleasure, as possible.

I realise North America is a different bag all together, however I have family in Atlanta and Vancouver, who I visit often, and I would go so far as to say that even with their driving habits, which are greater distances more often, they would be also fine with a Standard Range MME and a home charger.
 
Last edited:

dbsb3233

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Messages
6,042
Reaction score
6,312
Location
Colorado, USA
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E FE Red, 2013 Escape Titanium
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
I suspect that if Chevy continues selling the Bolt at the current steep discount (or discounts it further) it has a chance to "go mainstream" and overtake the Model 3 as the best selling BEV.
I'm a little surprised the Bolt isn't doing better than it is. It's a decent little vehicle, with good range, at an affordable price (for a BEV). And it's available in all 50 states (unlike competitors like the Kona and the Niro).

This is where the government tax credit game may really be screwing it up (as government picking winners and losers usually does). Even though Chevy is heavily discounting the Bolt to roughly the same as the $7500 federal tax credit, people don't necessarily equate those. It still feels like they're missing out on $7500 of "free money" that buyers of other models get, thus turning some off toward it.

But the other problem is that even though it's affordable for a BEV, it's still like 8-10 grand more than a comparable ICE. You can recover much of that throughout the life of the vehicle in fuel cost savings, but only if you can charge cheaply at home on residential rates. Many people don't have a house and garage for easy home charging.

And even then, up-front purchase price usually trumps next-10-year savings. The still have to get the price of batteries lower so the vehicle price can be more comparable to ICE vehicles.
 

dbsb3233

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Messages
6,042
Reaction score
6,312
Location
Colorado, USA
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E FE Red, 2013 Escape Titanium
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
I’d suggest the majority of ICE drivers would have a similar behaviour to me in so much as they wouldn’t even worry about how much range a full tank gives them
For the most part, they don't. Range is nearly irrelevant in an ICE vehicle because you can do a 2-minute 100% refuel nearly anywhere.

The reason range is a huge issue for BEVs is because on-demand refueling is sooo slow, and often not available where you need it to be.

If we could do 2-minute on-demand 100% refuels on BEVs, they'd already be taking over.
 
Last edited:

SJ_Okay

Well-Known Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Feb 25, 2020
Messages
558
Reaction score
519
Location
UK
Vehicles
AWD ER Mach-E
Occupation
Film and Music Producer
Country flag
Fully aware of all that. I was simply saying that my ICE gives me less range on a full tank than the WLTP range for the MME... thats a fact... and one which surprised me. Additionally, the 366 miles from the ICE is not real world either, so I'm going to stick with my prediction that I will get more range out of my MME than I do out of my ICE. Someone on this forum pointed out that WLTP is a closer match to European driving and EPA is more North American. So whilst WLTP might be way off for you, I suspect it's more applicable to my driving distances, 90% of which are 10 miles or less a day and rarely on a motorway. I'd also imagine that around town an EV is more efficient than an ICE, whereas the opposite on a motorway?
 

dbsb3233

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Messages
6,042
Reaction score
6,312
Location
Colorado, USA
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E FE Red, 2013 Escape Titanium
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
Before I get my reservation into an order I had these thoughts about the possibility of changing my Premium SR AWD with the ER option.

It’s always a surprise to read that in North America people won’t buy an EV unless it has a 300 mi/485 km range, when in Europe people are talking more of a 185 mi/300 km. Of course driving a few hours in NA means you are probably not leaving your state or province, but in Europe you might cross a few countries border line, so that might explain this. Will I change my SR for an optional ER? Let’s see.

My daily commute average is around 40 mi/65 km so no, ER is not requested here.
For the most part I agree with you. The real question, though, is how each potential buyer plans to use the vehicle. ICE vehicles are more flexible, so many of the issues that might impact a potential BEV buyer are a non-issue for ICE buyers. That's why I think the "300 mile" standard is misleading. Yes, people prefer ICE-like range, but it goes way beyond just range.

I agree that as a typical daily commuting vehicle and maybe a few short road trips (in the right locations), 200 mile range is really all that's needed. I came to the same conclusion when deciding to forgo spending the extra $5000 for the ER battery and just get the AWD SR (210 mile range). But I'm in the perfect situation for it. I have a house, with a garage, with 2 vehicles. We'll still have one ICE vehicle for any road trips, so the Mach-e will simply be the home-base car with nearly 100% home charging. Makes it easy.

But many people don't have a house, with a garage, or any other place to securely and dependably charge overnight at cheap residential rates. That takes more compromise. If I had to fill up at a retail charging station all the time (wasting half an hour), I wouldn't get a BEV. If I had to play musical chairs to fight for the few L2 chargers at an apartment building, I wouldn't get a BEV. If I had a very long daily commute (longer than one overnight charge), or took a long of long trips and didn't have an ICE car, I wouldn't get a BEV. If I were borderline on any of that, then I'd want at least 300 miles of range so I didn't have to waste so much time charging as often.

IMO, the #1 benefit of getting a BEV is easy, cheap, dedicated charging at home overnight. Without that, the benefit diminishes significantly. And 200 miles of range probably wouldn't be enough to mitigate it. (Frankly, even 300 may not either.)
 
Last edited:

portlandg

Well-Known Member
First Name
grahame
Joined
Mar 17, 2020
Messages
1,784
Reaction score
2,180
Location
uk
Vehicles
kuga st line x RWD ER MACH E on order
Occupation
Cabinet maker
Country flag
The only reason I chose an ER RWD over the SR RWD was because of the spec sheet. Although it was £10,000 more, the quoted level of tech and comfort meant more to me than the extra range. My daily commute is about 30 miles, my longest journey is about 600 miles round trip which I usually do once a year. I do about 400 round trip to the airport once a year for holiday and that's about it. It means that I won't have to charge it so often. My current Kuga has a range reading but I very rarely look at it. I usually fill up when it gets to 3/4 empty so I dont see any reason why that should change with an EV. Like ClaudeMach-e says above, my bladder also doesn't like it if I go more than 2 hours without a stop.
 

SJ_Okay

Well-Known Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Feb 25, 2020
Messages
558
Reaction score
519
Location
UK
Vehicles
AWD ER Mach-E
Occupation
Film and Music Producer
Country flag
Real world how? My ICE can’t predict my journey topography, how heavy footed I’m going to be on the accelerator or what fuel type I put in? That indicator it gives you when the tank is full is an estimate. Nothing real world about it. There is no fixed magic number of miles per gallon... but you know that, you just can’t help being contrarian. I could drive the car in whatever style and conditions the manufacturer did to get that range estimate and end up empty at 366 or do the opposite and be empty at 280, just the same as I could get a WLTP range out of a MME if I wanted to. It’s all estimates. Real world is not predetermined by the manufacturer, it’s determined by individual drivers. Therefore my ICE 366 mile range is not real world. I can tell you what the real world will be, for me, when the tank is empty and I look at the tripometer.
 

dbsb3233

Well-Known Member
First Name
Tim
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Messages
6,042
Reaction score
6,312
Location
Colorado, USA
Vehicles
2021 Mustang Mach-E FE Red, 2013 Escape Titanium
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
I do about 400 round trip to the airport once a year for holiday
I'm trying to figure how much earlier I'd be leaving for the airport (and returning) if driving 200 miles each way to the airport. I guess it depends in part on what charging options there are along the way, if there's backups, and how dependable it all is. 200 miles at high speed is probably more than one safe home charge. Plus you don't want to leave a BEV parked for days/weeks on near empty anyway, as it slowly drains power. So you'd need to do a charge along the way. Probably want to do a near full one too (30-40 minutes) as few people want to be leaving the airport to drive home starting from near empty.

At highway speeds, that's probably a 3-3.5 hour drive each way. Figure 45 mins-1 hr for a charge stop (with a little buffer in there in case the first place doesn't have an available charger). And 2-3 hour arrival before the flight (depending on domestic or intl). So leaving home potentially 7 hours prior to flight time?

Might be a "stay the night at an airport hotel" scenario (especially if they have an overnight charger).
 

SJ_Okay

Well-Known Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Feb 25, 2020
Messages
558
Reaction score
519
Location
UK
Vehicles
AWD ER Mach-E
Occupation
Film and Music Producer
Country flag
For the most part, they don't. Range is nearly irrelevant in an ICE vehicle because you can do a 2-minute 100% refuel nearly anywhere.

The reason range is a huge issue for BEVs is because on-demand refueling is sooo slow, and often not available where you need it to be.

If we could do 2-minute on-demand 100% refuels on BEVs, they'd already be taking over.
Which do you think is the bigger issue for potential buyers? The slow charge times or the not being able to charge nearly anywhere? I know it’s a combination, but which do you think is the bigger deterrent?
 

symos

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
38
Location
Eswatini
Vehicles
Lotus Esprit
Real world how? My ICE can’t predict my journey topography, how heavy footed I’m going to be on the accelerator or what fuel type I put in? That indicator it gives you when the tank is full is an estimate. Nothing real world about it. There is no fixed magic number of miles per gallon... but you know that, you just can’t help being contrarian. I could drive the car in whatever style and conditions the manufacturer did to get that range estimate and end up empty at 366 or do the opposite and be empty at 280, just the same as I could get a WLTP range out of a MME if I wanted to. It’s all estimates. Real world is not predetermined by the manufacturer, it’s determined by individual drivers. Therefore my ICE 366 mile range is not real world. I can tell you what the real world will be, for me, when the tank is empty and I look at the tripometer.
That's not accurate though.

First of all, the estimate the car is showing you is not based on a manufacturer rating, it's based on (real) past data. So yes, if you suddenly decide to switch your driving style or the trip in question is much different than your average, the resulting mpg will be off. However, that estimate is much more "real world" than WLTP. The equivalent to WLTP would be dividing the number of liters your tank can hold with the combined consumption your manufacturer has rated the car with. If you do that, I'm sure you'll end up with a much higher number than the 366 miles the trip computer was giving you.

Secondly, it doesn't matter if by putting your foot down you will get less range than the Mach E's WLTP. What matters is, will you get more range with the ICE or with the Mach E if you do the exact same trip in the exact same driving style? Otherwise any comparison is totally irrelevant.
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top