This guy really loves Tesla and EVs ....
If you take him for what he, he is quite amusing. He doesn't take himself seriouslyGoshdarnit said:What a complete rhymes with sock.
I do think the Tesla "solution" is absolute nonsense and they deserve to be sued for it. But this guy is an idiot.
Sorry I find him amusing. However, I will refrain from posting links on here.Terry60 said:Don't feed his clickbait existence by posting this crap.
Tesla have "relaxed" some things when they found that tolerances were better than expected (or maybe, for sceptical-me!, when there was a marketing need)Chewy said:Jaguar should take heed of this.
Ok but we were promised a 100 KW charging rate and JLR has to deliver it on way or the other , don't you think so ?Chewy said:Jaguar should take heed of this.
There is a rumour put out by a member on the forum that Jaguar are to relax the thermal management on the I-Pace to achieve a gain of 20 to 30 miles in the summer giving a range for most people of 300 miles?
Well, as the norm for drivers on the forum is around 240 to 250 miles, this increase in range would have to be substantially more than that to give 300 miles.
People purchased the I-Pace knowing the range of the car. Jaguar say a realistic range is 230 to 240 miles.
The battery management in the car looks after the battery by putting tight control limits on the temperature range that the battery is allowed to operate at. Tesla uses 18degC up to 55degC as it's acceptable control range. The I-Pace is much tighter than this, though Jaguar has not stated fully what it is. In no way can this control regime be considered "over cooling".
Clearly tighter temperature control of the battery requires more energy to maintain it, and hence a hit on range. The BMS has to work harder if the car is pushed harder, hence the hit on range. My driving style for range has the effect of negating some of the hard work the BMS is put to in trying to maintain a close tolerance battery temperature. Acceleration is one of the biggest killers of range, it consumes vast amounts of energy, and rapidly heats the battery. Keeping your acceleration to a slow rate will negate both these factors and extend range.
For Jaguar to reduce the BMS control could very well open a big can of worms later in the life of the I-Pace.
I would rather stay where I am with the BMS on this issue and accept that the car does what it does.
That's what I try and do too. So far so good, another long trip starting today so we will see.Paul J. said:They have. :roll:
First world problems!
Destination charging is your friend. I spent last week on a tour of the UK and planned my hotels stops at places where there were rapid chargers. No need to charge on the move.
Mentioned before but one of the questionnaires on the Advisory Council asked if you'd prefer greater range for reduced performance. I replied absolutely not (unless you could toggle the setting as the user). It may be that to preserve battery life AND increase range then the other variable that gets hit would be power output.Chewy said:Jaguar should take heed of this.
There is a rumour put out by a member on the forum that Jaguar are to relax the thermal management on the I-Pace to achieve a gain of 20 to 30 miles in the summer giving a range for most people of 300 miles?
Well, as the norm for drivers on the forum is around 240 to 250 miles, this increase in range would have to be substantially more than that to give 300 miles.
People purchased the I-Pace knowing the range of the car. Jaguar say a realistic range is 230 to 240 miles.
The battery management in the car looks after the battery by putting tight control limits on the temperature range that the battery is allowed to operate at. Tesla uses 18degC up to 55degC as it's acceptable control range. The I-Pace is much tighter than this, though Jaguar has not stated fully what it is. In no way can this control regime be considered "over cooling".
Clearly tighter temperature control of the battery requires more energy to maintain it, and hence a hit on range. The BMS has to work harder if the car is pushed harder, hence the hit on range. My driving style for range has the effect of negating some of the hard work the BMS is put to in trying to maintain a close tolerance battery temperature. Acceleration is one of the biggest killers of range, it consumes vast amounts of energy, and rapidly heats the battery. Keeping your acceleration to a slow rate will negate both these factors and extend range.
For Jaguar to reduce the BMS control could very well open a big can of worms later in the life of the I-Pace.
I would rather stay where I am with the BMS on this issue and accept that the car does what it does.
It's all very well for Chewy to advocate a reduction in range but he is capable of achieving 300 miles, what about us mear mortals who can only get 230? I like the idea of a toggle so that on the very few occasions when I need the maximum possible range I could do so.alex_haddock said:Mentioned before but one of the questionnaires on the Advisory Council asked if you'd prefer greater range for reduced performance. I replied absolutely not (unless you could toggle the setting as the user). It may be that to preserve battery life AND increase range then the other variable that gets hit would be power output.Chewy said:Jaguar should take heed of this.
There is a rumour put out by a member on the forum that Jaguar are to relax the thermal management on the I-Pace to achieve a gain of 20 to 30 miles in the summer giving a range for most people of 300 miles?
Well, as the norm for drivers on the forum is around 240 to 250 miles, this increase in range would have to be substantially more than that to give 300 miles.
People purchased the I-Pace knowing the range of the car. Jaguar say a realistic range is 230 to 240 miles.
The battery management in the car looks after the battery by putting tight control limits on the temperature range that the battery is allowed to operate at. Tesla uses 18degC up to 55degC as it's acceptable control range. The I-Pace is much tighter than this, though Jaguar has not stated fully what it is. In no way can this control regime be considered "over cooling".
Clearly tighter temperature control of the battery requires more energy to maintain it, and hence a hit on range. The BMS has to work harder if the car is pushed harder, hence the hit on range. My driving style for range has the effect of negating some of the hard work the BMS is put to in trying to maintain a close tolerance battery temperature. Acceleration is one of the biggest killers of range, it consumes vast amounts of energy, and rapidly heats the battery. Keeping your acceleration to a slow rate will negate both these factors and extend range.
For Jaguar to reduce the BMS control could very well open a big can of worms later in the life of the I-Pace.
I would rather stay where I am with the BMS on this issue and accept that the car does what it does.
Fully with you on that one. The I-Pace is quite capable of adding 20 to 30 miles to its range simply by the way the car is driven. There would be no need to alter the way the battery is managed, just better management of the way the power is put down.alex_haddock said:Mentioned before but one of the questionnaires on the Advisory Council asked if you'd prefer greater range for reduced performance. I replied absolutely not (unless you could toggle the setting as the user). It may be that to preserve battery life AND increase range then the other variable that gets hit would be power output.
Ah, your post popped up before mine aboveThincat said:It's all very well for Chewy to advocate a reduction in range but he is capable of achieving 300 miles, what about us mear mortals who can only get 230? I like the idea of a toggle so that on the very few occasions when I need the maximum possible range I could do so.
Its a nice place, enjoy!nipri said:I am off to Bath this weekend. The hotel I will be staying called Bailbrook House has a Polar Plus Rapid Charge which is perfect.
Wasn't that the old Air Traffic Control College I a previous life? If so, it's a lovely building! Have fun.nipri said:I am off to Bath this weekend. The hotel I will be staying called Bailbrook House has a Polar Plus Rapid Charge which is perfect.
Isn't that Eco mode ?Chewy said:Ah, your post popped up before mine aboveThincat said:It's all very well for Chewy to advocate a reduction in range but he is capable of achieving 300 miles, what about us mear mortals who can only get 230? I like the idea of a toggle so that on the very few occasions when I need the maximum possible range I could do so.
I am all for the toggle idea of giving range rather than performance, similar to that provided by Tesla. What I am not so confident about is allowing the battery temperature control have a wider band to achieve it.
No, ECO mode is not the same.Terry60 said:Isn't that Eco mode ?
It's always possible with a future SOTA that JLR could copy what Mercedes are doing, and use 2WD most of the time when the need for power and 4WD is absent.
According to FullyChargedShow that's how they get better MpkWh than the i-Pace in an equivalent car.
Jaguar could probably improve on this. Range Mode only makes a tangible difference on Teslas that have dual motors (of different sizes). The Big Motor can be turned off to cruise, more efficiently, on smaller motor at 70-ish MPH. (I know you know that Chewy so this just by way of "background")Chewy said:My Tesla had the option of setting "Range Mode"
When i was in short trousers sub-10s 0-60 was "awesome" and the stuff of wall posters !! Now even the most lowly EV can do that easily ...it also had another mode that calmed the performance of the car, where acceleration was slowed to 8 seconds for 0~60mph
You'd think it would be simple arithmetic; mass of car, speed, rolling resistance, aceleration, etc, but in that case, similar cars would be equally efficient.Chewy said:No, ECO mode is not the same.Terry60 said:Isn't that Eco mode ?
It's always possible with a future SOTA that JLR could copy what Mercedes are doing, and use 2WD most of the time when the need for power and 4WD is absent.
According to FullyChargedShow that's how they get better MpkWh than the i-Pace in an equivalent car.
Why do you think 2WD will give better range than 4WD?
The I-Pace has two highly efficient PM motors fitted. These give better than 95% efficiency from 18mph up to 85mph [or thereabouts]. The car still requires the same force to move it whether it comes from one or two equally efficient motors, so no gain in turning one off. Don't believe everything that "fully charged" tells you. Tesla turn one motor off when cruising because they have a less efficient motors and get better efficiency by transferring all the load to a single motor where they can be more efficiency under higher loading. With the newer tm3 and up and coming Raven version of the MS and MX, they have one PM motor and one Asynchronous motor. They can turn off the less efficient motor when it's power is not needed to improve range, but they are still using the same energy to move the car.