Where's my range Ford?

[ShadowCVL]

Okay I read half the thread, these threads man.

So the EPA test is never above 60, usually at 55, with no wind and 65 degree temps. Anything over 55 and your efficiency decreases, anything over 70 degrees f and your efficiency decreases any headwind and you guessed it, the efficiency decreases.

2.7 at 70mph and 90 degree temps, you did pretty good! At 50-60 degrees here I get about 3.5kwh in town and 2.9 on the innerstate, the difference being going above 60.

You know how electronics use more and more electricity as they get hotter, then shut down? that applies here directly, except the battery has active cooling which draws power...

You math is fine, your line of thinking is not.

Sponsored

 

[EELinneman]

I understand, less worried about a few kilowatt hours I'm more worried about not getting closer to the 247 mile number I'm pretty far off in the 180s and 190s. 247 would be around 3.3 miles per kwh and I seem to only be able to get 2.7 on average. I think I drive average I don't think I push it hard. Next few days I'll go out of my way to drive like a grandma and see if I can get closer.

I think you need to also have some warmer weather. Chemistry and physics are not your friend in cold weather. We've had a warm spell - 76 - here in Colorado and my GOM went from 175 to 195 based on that. Of course, now that we had a taste of spring, snow tonight.

 

[Murse-In-Airy]

Hats off to OP for actually doing a 100-0% drive to find his real world range. Way more effort than most anyone on here. Deserves some respect.
I think the root of all these threads can be seen in the two graphs from the article that @mkhuffman shared.

So the EPA “highway” test never goes above 60MPH and shows an average speed of 48.3MPH. Then you have to account for 50% “Urban driving” which spends most of its time below 30MPH and averages 19.59MPH.

This is how you get EPA range. Anything else and you shouldn’t expect EPA numbers. Also worth noting, these are done on a dyno so there is no drag / air resistance factored in. With that fact, we should never expect to hit these numbers. Ford actually did us a favor by derating their EPA numbers so with decent conditions and speeds around 60MPH most of us can hit the EPA target if we’re careful. But at 70 MPH, that’s going to be damn hard to do.

 

[Crazypostman]

What is happening is that we’re not allowed to fully discharge the 76 kWh pack to 0 percent and we’re not actually allowed to full charge it to 100 percent either. Using your rough numbers:

5% x 76 kWh= 3.8 kWh
95% x 76 kWh = 72.2 kWh
3.8 + 72.2 = 76
72.2 - 3.8 = 68.4.

The actual percentages are a little different, so the 68.4 number is a lot closer to 69.5-70, but you get the picture. Point is, we never fully charge or discharge the 76 kWh pack, but we do have full use of the 70 kWh we are allowed to access. That ~3.3 kWh below 0 is the low end buffer. And the ~3.8 kWh that we never finish putting into the battery becomes the top end buffer.

I'll keep testing in different ways but I've only been able to pull out 66 kwh from 100% to 0%.

 

[Crazypostman]

Okay I read half the thread, these threads man.

So the EPA test is never above 60, usually at 55, with no wind and 65 degree temps. Anything over 55 and your efficiency decreases, anything over 70 degrees f and your efficiency decreases any headwind and you guessed it, the efficiency decreases.

2.7 at 70mph and 90 degree temps, you did pretty good! At 50-60 degrees here I get about 3.5kwh in town and 2.9 on the innerstate, the difference being going above 60.

You know how electronics use more and more electricity as they get hotter, then shut down? that applies here directly, except the battery has active cooling which draws power...

You math is fine, your line of thinking is not.

The 70 mph range test I did was between 48 and 70° that was a couple weeks before this post.. I didn't use any HVAC except for a few miles at the end I needed some AC, about 15 minutes worth. I think maybe I'll go out and rerun a constant 60 MPH test and see how much better it is that might be interesting. Seeing that EPA test is kind of disappointing especially the highway they really should get a little bit higher average mph to be accurate for highway. Now that I see the 247 is based on fairy tail numbers I don't think I'm ever going to get there ?

 

[Crazypostman]

Sorry, I am not mad, just a little frustrated. You are doing much, much more than the average person to figure out your efficiency and range, so I should be more patient. Most people who post here complaining about range are only looking at the GOM, so kudos to you for doing much more than that.

I have never tried running my car to 0% to verify actual range either, so well done for giving it a shot! BTW - you can drive it beyond 0% per some reviews I have read. Tesla uses that below 0% range to justify the EPA range of their cars.

Anyway, I think most everyone else has hit on the areas that are impacting your range. Driving 70 mph on the highway with 12 mph winds (with probably higher gusts) could be equivalent to driving 85 mph if you are driving into the wind. (Great point @Mach-Lee!) Nobody is going to get anywhere close to EPA range driving 85 mph. The only exception might be the Tycan, that tests much better on the highway presumably because of the two speed transmission.

Edit: and don't worry about thumbs down from me either. I avoid YouTube at all costs, and would not thumb you down just because of a post in this forum anyway. I hope your channel is a success!

Yeah I never actually looked up the epa's method now that I've seen the post describing it above that's fairy tale numbers with highway average speeds so low of course they got great efficiency. I'm going to rerun my test at 60 MPH just for grins. Another thing I've learned part of the 70kwh usable that Ford says is available is below zero I don't think that's fair to count that but nobody asked me LOL. Because I can use only 66kwh between 100 and 0 I've repeated that multiple times testing out the range... the rest of the "usable" 70 is below 0

 

[Mach1E]

The 70 mph range test I did was between 48 and 70° that was a couple weeks before this post.. I didn't use any HVAC except for a few miles at the end I needed some AC, about 15 minutes worth. I think maybe I'll go out and rerun a constant 60 MPH test and see how much better it is that might be interesting. Seeing that EPA test is kind of disappointing especially the highway they really should get a little bit higher average mph to be accurate for highway. Now that I see the 247 is based on fairy tail numbers I don't think I'm ever going to get there ?

If you think driving in the city then driving 48 mph average elsewhere only exists in “fairy tales,” that may be your problem.

 

[timbop]

Hats off to OP for actually doing a 100-0% drive to find his real world range. Way more effort than most anyone on here. Deserves some respect.
I think the root of all these threads can be seen in the two graphs from the article that @mkhuffman shared.

So the EPA “highway” test never goes above 60MPH and shows an average speed of 48.3MPH. Then you have to account for 50% “Urban driving” which spends most of its time below 30MPH and averages 19.59MPH.

This is how you get EPA range. Anything else and you shouldn’t expect EPA numbers. Also worth noting, these are done on a dyno so there is no drag / air resistance factored in. With that fact, we should never expect to hit these numbers. Ford actually did us a favor by derating their EPA numbers so with decent conditions and speeds around 60MPH most of us can hit the EPA target if we’re careful. But at 70 MPH, that’s going to be damn hard to do.

Actually, they DO try to factor those things in as well. Manufacturers have the option of running 5 cycles (versions of the test) or just 2; if they run the 2 cycle test then a .7 fudge factor is also applied to come to a single idealized number that experienced drivers know is not exact but a "ballpark estimate". Tesla runs the extra 3 cycles to get better EPA numbers than the .7 fudge factor Ford and many others use, which is one reason why Tesla's numbers are even more unrealistic. So yes, running at constant 70 mph is not going to give you the same range as the combined city/highway number used for the published range of the car.

You'd think this might have been discussed before?

 

[Awmustang]

Interesting! This is the first useful response I've gotten thank you. Maybe I'll redo my test at 60 just for grins this weekend.

Sorry if this was already said, but couldn't wade through all the responses. While the EPA test never goes above 60. It's also isn't a constant run at 60. Also, the 247 figured is the combined range. Part on the hwy and part in the city. I don't know the exact split though.
So even if you do your test sitting at 60mph till you run out of battery, 247 may still not be achievable.
I've long said that EPA should include several range factors so people can better understand the effect of different driving types on range.

 

[EVmodeler]

Hats off to OP for actually doing a 100-0% drive to find his real world range. Way more effort than most anyone on here. Deserves some respect.
I think the root of all these threads can be seen in the two graphs from the article that @mkhuffman shared.

So the EPA “highway” test never goes above 60MPH and shows an average speed of 48.3MPH. Then you have to account for 50% “Urban driving” which spends most of its time below 30MPH and averages 19.59MPH.

This is how you get EPA range. Anything else and you shouldn’t expect EPA numbers. Also worth noting, these are done on a dyno so there is no drag / air resistance factored in. With that fact, we should never expect to hit these numbers. Ford actually did us a favor by derating their EPA numbers so with decent conditions and speeds around 60MPH most of us can hit the EPA target if we’re careful. But at 70 MPH, that’s going to be damn hard to do.

As a reminder, the Label is Adjusted from these tests, just like for ICE vehicles. So the adjusted highway (lower than the combined label, and only the combined range is given on the label) consumption and range do correspond to about 70 mph.
See https://www.macheforum.com/site/thr...nge-estimates-from-window-sticker-label.2268/
https://www.macheforum.com/site/threads/new-epa-data-posted-for-mach-e-models.2461/post-76635

 

[Kevin P]

Car and Driver does a test where they run at steady-state 75MPH. Results are here, though they don't appear to test a SR model.
https://www.caranddriver.com/shopping-advice/a32603216/ev-range-explained/

 

[Crazypostman]

Actually, they DO try to factor those things in as well. Manufacturers have the option of running 5 cycles (versions of the test) or just 2; if they run the 2 cycle test then a .7 fudge factor is also applied to come to a single idealized number that experienced drivers know is not exact but a "ballpark estimate". Tesla runs the extra 3 cycles to get better EPA numbers than the .7 fudge factor Ford and many others use, which is one reason why Tesla's numbers are even more unrealistic. So yes, running at constant 70 mph is not going to give you the same range as the combined city/highway number used for the published range of the car.

You'd think this might have been discussed before?

So driving my Tesla it's supposed to get 310 miles of range at 70 I got 268 MI in my test that's 42 difference.
the Ford that's supposed to get 247 I got 192 that's 55 miles different... Looks like Tesla was closer than Ford in the real world at 70 anyway.

 

[Crazypostman]

Sorry if this was already said, but couldn't wade through all the responses. While the EPA test never goes above 60. It's also isn't a constant run at 60. Also, the 247 figured is the combined range. Part on the hwy and part in the city. I don't know the exact split though.
So even if you do your test sitting at 60mph till you run out of battery, 247 may still not be achievable.
I've long said that EPA should include several range factors so people can better understand the effect of different driving types on range.

Yeah I've learned some things since I posted this I didn't realize the EPA was so lenient on their numbers. Maybe they should do something like, a low a mid and a high estimate listing the average speeds with each. Something like the bolt does where it gives you a range of what is possible. Yeah before this I didn't realize the average speed of that 247 number was so low.

 

[Skelton]

So driving my Tesla it's supposed to get 310 miles of range at 70 I got 268 MI in my test that's 42 difference.
the Ford that's supposed to get 247 I got 192 that's 55 miles different... Looks like Tesla was closer than Ford in the real world at 70 anyway.

Now this thread makes more sense.

 

[ProfitOfTruth]

I think it is worth mentioning (I apologize if someone has already stated this) that even repeating your test at 60mph is still going to be disappointing (especially in Whisper Mode) as you would be getting minimal regenerative energy back from braking. Personally I think you have the data you need and all this extra testing is really just a waste of time.

Sponsored