Jaguar I-Pace Forum banner

Real world range of EVs

8K views 24 replies 14 participants last post by  ***** 
#1 ·
#2 ·
Koreans have done well. Etron a complete brick. And not tested EQC probably much the same. iPace looks remarkably aerodynamic in comparison.
 
#3 ·
I did 2 real world efficiency highway test at 104km/h and 94km/h on the speedometer - both were done on quiet highways, ACC set, exact same route (triangle highway route so constant speed see the only 0.1kW regeneration), only 2 sharper turns (speed approx 70km/h for less than 1km), outside temperature 17-18 degrees, Eco mode, air off and just me in the car.

See below the results - 3% should be added to distance as my car registers less km than actual driven. So 10km/h lower speed gave approx 10% better efficiency.
The achieved results are minimal 10% better than my previous best efficiency for these average speeds.

  • 104km test - avg speed 101km/h (=63mph) - 216wh/km (=348wh/mile) so with 82kW usable 380km (=236 mile) range
  • 94km test - avg speed 91km/h (=57mph) - 195wh/km (=314wh/mile) so with 82kW usable 421km (=261 mile) range
Map World Slope Terrestrial plant Font
 

Attachments

#4 ·
Jelle v/d Meer said:
I did 2 real world efficiency highway test at 104km/h and 94km/h on the speedometer - both were done on quiet highways, ACC set, exact same route (triangle highway route so constant speed see the only 0.1kW regeneration), only 2 sharper turns (speed approx 70km/h for less than 1km), outside temperature 17-18 degrees, Eco mode, air off and just me in the car.
Hi Jelle. Very interesting as it shows clearly the effect of speed on the range. I also wonder how realistic it is in real life. As you mention, your driving was very constant thanks to quiet traffic conditions, airco turned off, etc...

Now, from your activity on the forum I guess you have been keeping tabs on your consumption quite diligently, so I was wondering if you could present a figure after 1 year ownership and talk a little bit about your usual driving style.
 
#6 ·
ricardon said:
Hi Jelle. Very interesting as it shows clearly the effect of speed on the range. I also wonder how realistic it is in real life. As you mention, your driving was very constant thanks to quiet traffic conditions, airco turned off, etc...

Now, from your activity on the forum I guess you have been keeping tabs on your consumption quite diligently, so I was wondering if you could present a figure after 1 year ownership and talk a little bit about your usual driving style.
I have for majority a Jaggg driving style (not caring about range as not needed) on longer trips I prefer speed over range (faster to drive quickly and charge more often/longer than drive slower to max range) - majority of trips are less than 10km. Made 2 long holiday trips (1900km and 3000km roundtrip) enjoying the Autobahn (160-180km/h on ACC) and Austrian country roads (traffic jams on highway).

So far did 17,200km in about 8 months with an overall average of 292wh/km where in winter months it was around 310wh/km, last month 275wh/km and so far this month 263wh/km.
 
#7 ·
Jelle v/d Meer said:
I have for majority a Jaggg driving style (not caring about range as not needed) on longer trips I prefer speed over range (faster to drive quickly and charge more often/longer than drive slower to max range) - majority of trips are less than 10km. Made 2 long holiday trips (1900km and 3000km roundtrip) enjoying the Autobahn (160-180km/h on ACC) and Austrian country roads (traffic jams on highway).

So far did 17,200km in about 8 months with an overall average of 292wh/km where in winter months it was around 310wh/km, last month 275wh/km and so far this month 263wh/km.
Hi Jelle. We share the same driving styles :).
My daily commute to and from Brussels is about 70KM with 75% of highway speeds. As I leave early in the morning, those speeds are somewhat above the legal limit.
I've owned my car for about 2 months now and driven a total of about 3000KM. My average is 258wh/km and I can see a small evolution downwards (probably I'm not doing the warp-speed departures as much as in the beginning).

Overall it seems the I-Pace matches my expectations of consumption between 250 and 270 wh/km under average conditions.
 
#8 ·
Jelle v/d Meer said:
  • 104km test - avg speed 101km/h (=63mph) - 216wh/km (=348wh/mile) so with 82kW usable 380km (=236 mile) range
  • 94km test - avg speed 91km/h (=57mph) - 195wh/km (=314wh/mile) so with 82kW usable 421km (=261 mile) range
Efficiency Test.jpg
Your constant speed consumption is exactly 5% better than mine when it was 10 degrees C, Jelle. We have the same spec. and wheels so I'm guessing it was slightly warmer for your test?

Your overall average is about 20% worse than mine but I've never got anywhere near to doing 160-180km/h! Doubt I ever will in the UK. Half of my mileage is done by the wife pottering to work at 40-50mph (65-80km/h) so that probably explains the difference.

My overall average for 4000 miles since February has been 380Wh/mile (236Wh/km) for a total average range of 215 miles.
 
#9 ·
Getting back to the original post, the What Car text methodology seems a bit strange. They discharged to zero, then measured the energy taken to fully recharge. Then they drove just 39 miles, and then measured the energy to recharge to 100%.
IMHO, a valid method of measuring efficiency (miles per KW-Hr IN), but a rather dubious method of measuring "real world range". Rather sensitive to charging efficiency, battery management system losses, charge rate, etc. Why didn't they just keep driving until the battery was flat?

I think we'd all agree that the result for the I-Pace was a bit flattering - 253 miles at 10-15degC, climate on at 21degC, headlights on, normal mode? Even on 18" tyres, that sounds optimistic. The average speed isn't given, but it does say a mix of urban, rural & motorway.

I'm still hoping for more than 200 miles one day soon!
 
#10 ·
I'm still debating wether to get iPace over a Model 3 performance, it's a close race but my heart says iPace. I had an iPace for the weekend in picked the car up with 97% battery and drove 89mi + 27mi + 79mi being a of total 195mi with reasonably cold weather and mostly very wet roads. Coming back from Middlesbrough to Kendal it was predicting I'd be 10 miles short of home, so I stopped at scotch corner services for a 50kw charger. I was able to add 27.7kwh in 48min. I recon a 100% battery would have just got me home. Still it afforded me the scenic route after the charge and I made the the most of the awesome acceleration and handling. Still I recon 210-220 miles is a reasonable expectation, sound right?
 
#11 ·
ProjectZ said:
I'm still debating wether to get iPace over a Model 3 performance, it's a close race but my heart says iPace. I had an iPace for the weekend in picked the car up with 97% battery and drove 89mi + 27mi + 79mi being a of total 195mi with reasonably cold weather and mostly very wet roads. Coming back from Middlesbrough to Kendal it was predicting I'd be 10 miles short of home, so I stopped at scotch corner services for a 50kw charger. I was able to add 27.7kwh in 48min. I recon a 100% battery would have just got me home. Still it afforded me the scenic route after the charge and I made the the most of the awesome acceleration and handling. Still I recon 210-220 miles is a reasonable expectation, sound right?
Outside of winter, that sounds about right for 22" wheels. You should get more on smaller wheels. In winter I'd say you'll get a bit less than that even on 18" wheels. Maybe around 200, less again in bigger wheels. Obviously this will vary with terrain, winds, weather and driving style, but as a ball park, I'm getting around 220-230 in summer on 22" wheels.
 
#12 ·
ProjectZ said:
I'm still debating wether to get iPace over a Model 3 performance
If Range is the deciding point then I would suggest:

Use A Better Route Planner (choose the model ... you can thus compare iPace, Tesla or any other EV) and try out the range-challenged journeys you actually make. ABRP has a good reputation for providing sufficiently accurate journey times / energy requirements.

How often a month would that actually occur? Once or twice a month, to locations where you can reasonably easily manage the charging, is one thing ... "every day", particularly if you do not have off-street parking where you can install a home-charger, is something else altogether and only for the highly-committed.

For me: On out-of-range days I want range enough for business meetings to get to Client AND back to suitable charger. I don't want unpredictable charging on the Outbound leg. For leisure trips I don't care, allocate a bit more time, have the benefit of an enforced rest for the driver every couple of hours (but that is just a longer-journey for any passengers - although children and pet loo breaks likely match charging times :) )

I am confident that your range-challenged journeys will be your most frugal. Steady speed on motorway, some enforced slow stretches for traffic / roadworks will regain some range too. If desperate you can just slow down or draft a truck (even at safe follow-distance that makes a difference AND will force you to drive at 56 MPH :) ) Unless your regular long journeys are cantering over empty mountain roads ...

Whilst charging you can sit and do emails. If that would be something you would have to do once you got back then it is just time shifted - time-neutral. With an ICE you have to stand-and-pump and then queue-to-pay. 5-10 minutes a week is 8 hours a year! With Home Charger you will leave home every day with a full tank of fuel, and all EV owners will tell you what a huge upside that is.

If you are travelling-salesman watch out in Winter. Stop-and-Park for an hour allows the battery to get cold and you therefore have the "set off energy penalty" each time (unless you can plug in, 13 AMP would probably do, to pre-condition car / keep battery warm)

Biggest problem with charging iPace (or a Tesla at 3rd party charger) is that it is almost universally dreadful :( Tesla Supercharger experience is literally plug-in walk-away. the other players need to achieve that too (and new players like Ionity looks like they are going to be doing just that). Bit of chicken-and-egg in terms of timing therefore, so your call on how much lifestyle-change you are prepared to accept in the short term. But if you are only out-of-range a coupe of days a month, and those routes have good charging infrastructure, then it may not matter.
 
#14 ·
TeslaDriver said:
ProjectZ said:
I'm still debating wether to get iPace over a Model 3 performance
Biggest problem with charging iPace (or a Tesla at 3rd party charger) is that it is almost universally dreadful :( Tesla Supercharger experience is literally plug-in walk-away. the other players need to achieve that too (and new players like Ionity looks like they are going to be doing just that). Bit of chicken-and-egg in terms of timing therefore, so your call on how much lifestyle-change you are prepared to accept in the short term. But if you are only out-of-range a coupe of days a month, and those routes have good charging infrastructure, then it may not matter.
Thanks for the info, yeah you're absolutely right, my average long ish journey round trip is around 170mi. Wether it's our friends near Burnley or a trip to the Trafford centre. I probably do that kind of trip every other weekend. So I should be good for 170mi round trip without needing a charge.
 
#15 ·
In winter you'll probably need a quick top up of some sort. But only a fairly short charge. If there's an InstaVolt or Polar en route you should be good with a quick 15 minute stop. Or a charge when you get to Burnley if there's a facility for that, even via the granny charger if you're there for a few hours.
 
#16 ·
The ability to do a 170 mile trip without a charge might come down to wheel / tyre choice. And how cold / wet / windy a winter's day we're talking about.

I would be confident of making 170 miles at anything above zero degrees C, sticking to the speed limits. Real world range with an average long journey speed of c.55mph, at 5 - 10C (most 'winter' days here) for me was about 180-190 miles.

Would probably be 20 miles less on 22" wheels.
 
#18 ·
DougTheMac said:
Paul J. said:
Getting back to the original post, the What Car text methodology seems a bit strange. They discharged to zero, then measured the energy taken to fully recharge. Then they drove just 39 miles, and then measured the energy to recharge to 100%.
IMHO, a valid method of measuring efficiency (miles per KW-Hr IN), but a rather dubious method of measuring "real world range". Rather sensitive to charging efficiency, battery management system losses, charge rate, etc. Why didn't they just keep driving until the battery was flat?

I think we'd all agree that the result for the I-Pace was a bit flattering - 253 miles at 10-15degC, climate on at 21degC, headlights on, normal mode? Even on 18" tyres, that sounds optimistic. The average speed isn't given, but it does say a mix of urban, rural & motorway.

I'm still hoping for more than 200 miles one day soon!
Actually, this method should be quite good. If you use X out of Y kWh to go 39 miles, then the range if you use the full Y kWh is 39*(Y/X). The only error here would be if the charger loss is not constant for a particular car. I think the assumption of constant loss is OK as long as you are using a slow charger. With a rapid charger you will start heating the battery and a lot of stuff might happen, which will influence how much charge you can put on the battery.

The only problem I see with this test is that they seem to test the cars at different times. You can't really get exactly the same condition so you will definitely have an error when comparing cars. I think I-Pace was a bit lucky with its day and the Model X 100D was probably a bit unlucky.

There is a reason why EPA and WLTP test is done in house using a consumption model which is calibrated using input from towing data.
 
#19 ·
ghost said:
If you use X out of Y kWh to go 39 miles, then the range if you use the full Y kWh is 39*(Y/X).
I have no problem with the maths :) but rather that any "set off energy penalty" such as warming the battery and HVAC for cabin (or, indeed, "set off bonus" if car had just been rapid charged and battery was more optimum than normal driving) is averaged out over so few miles ... hence I prefer a figure based on a decent journey-leg length - e.g. at least 75% of battery capability.
 
#21 ·
Chewy said:
Just had a test ride in the new Kia eNero.

Range wise, this car will easily do 300 miles :)

E3432B6B-3985-47C5-833D-B3CB85DAFE3C.jpeg
What was it like? your impressions?
 
#22 ·
ChrisMc said:
Chewy said:
Just had a test ride in the new Kia eNero.

Range wise, this car will easily do 300 miles :)

E3432B6B-3985-47C5-833D-B3CB85DAFE3C.jpeg
What was it like? your impressions?
Far better than the 2018 Leaf, which is a lot more expensive.

It drives well and only comes in one spec which has everything you need. Very stable at motorway speeds, and not too noisy either. Around town it is easy to drive and the steering is not too heavy.

Adaptive cruise control and "Lane Keep Assist" very much like the I-Pace. It also turns off with no warning.

The software is faultless. It has the major features that the I-Pace is missing. You can set individual maximum charge levels for AC and DC charging.

Timed charging is spot on. You can set start and stop times. You can tell it when cheap rate electric is available at home and tell it to use that for charging. Will detect from GPS that you are at home so knows when to use it.

Apple CarPlay with iOS 13 Beta was flawless. Didn't matter how many times I tried to plug in or unplug, it always fired up straight away. (falls over on many occasions on my I-Pace).

The entire infotainment system is just so much faster to use with no lag of any sort. It fires up lightning quick as well with no missing icons on the screen.

The reversing camera has no lag.

The 64kWh battery is the available capacity that is used, the battery is actually larger than that. On a 40 mile test run, which included 10miles of MWay at indicates 75mph, it reported 5miles/kWh consumption. I was not even trying to be economical, so even at that rate 5 x 64 = 320 miles range. If I couldn't get around 360 miles out of that car on a full battery I would be very surprised.

If I was in the market for a low(ish) cost EV, then yes, I would buy one. Only fly in the ointment.....

There is a 12 month waiting list. £500.00 refundable deposit books a build slot.

The I-Pace as a car is far superior. As an EV, the eNero wins.
 
#23 ·
Painfully honest review there Chewy! I'd still rather have the Jag of course but the software really should be better. Still, at least with SOTA we can cling to the possibility that it might improve. Not something that would have been a possibility in the past.
 
#24 ·
Wow! good review Chewy, sounds like Kia have got things sorted* with that one then at less than half price of my I Pace. They do say 282 mile range on their site but I guess for Chewy its well over 300 :)

*Just imagine if Jaguar could get the software working perfectly, how much better the user experience of the I Pace would be, not much would compete with it, even at its premium price.
 
#25 ·
ChrisMc said:
They do say 282 mile range on their site but I guess for Chewy its well over 300.
Interestingly (or not), I looked at what the car had averaged over it's short life of around 2300 miles. It has averaged 4.4miles/kWh. That makes it pretty much spot on for 282 miles range as advertised.

Also forgot to mention, the regen has 3 settings which are easily adjusted using the flappy paddles on the steering wheel while driving. I would say the the highest level feels a bit more than the low level on the I-Pace, but nowhere near as much as the high level on the I-Pace.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top