If the official EPA range is....

[TessP100D]

300 is my line in the sand. I have a once a month 400 mile round-trip day trip with minimal charging support and cold winter weather for part of the year.

This is where it gets rough. You might have to charge twice each trip.

Sponsored

 

[Gshenderson]

As the announcer at WTKO (Ithaca) used to say there are only 3 seasons there: winter, July and August.

In WY we say the 3 seasons are this winter, last winter and next winter…

 

[lefkonj]

Hasn't the EPA range testing been complete garbage?

People with Taycan's are getting in the 270-280 range but the EPA is at 220, where the ETron is given a range of 220 but his getting 190.....

 

[wicked2112]

... disappointing (like 270) does that mean LE reservation holders will:

a) jump ship and order a F-150 Lightning
b) cancel their LE and wait for the Max Pack
c) shrug and be annoyed but keep their LE spot
d) hope Rivian offers to swap their reservation for a newly announced Max Pack LE !!

... disappointing (like 270) does that mean LE reservation holders will:

a) jump ship and order a F-150 Lightning
b) cancel their LE and wait for the Max Pack
c) shrug and be annoyed but keep their LE spot
d) hope Rivian offers to swap their reservation for a newly announced Max Pack LE !!

Where are you getting these figures?????

 

[mkhuffman]

Hasn't the EPA range testing been complete garbage?

People with Taycan's are getting in the 270-280 range but the EPA is at 220, where the ETron is given a range of 220 but his getting 190.....

The biggest complaints I have heard about the EPA testing is that it is not a real world drive cycle. They never test the vehicle at 75 mph steady to determine highway range, for example. But also the manufacturers don't all compile their results the same way, and some are more conservative than others. I think Porche made a mistake low balling their range estimates, but I am sure they had a good reason to do that. Well, at least they think it was a good reason.

My main take-away from all I have read about the EPA range testing is that it is achievable with around town driving, so it is a good benchmark for consumers to use when trying to determine which BEV they want to buy. Personally my biggest interest is the 75 mph highway test, which unfortunately is not completed by the car companies (or at least they don't share it) and I have to wait for real world reviews to get that one.

 

[ajdelange]

Hasn't the EPA range testing been complete garbage?

Te problem is that, apparently it is not really consistent between manufacturers. There is a minimum two test series and then there are three additional tests. Tesla does all five as does, I believe, Audi. The full set tends to produce larger values than the minimum testing. The other problem is that people don't seem to understand that the EPA range is a synthetic number intended to be representative of a mix of typical driving conditions and that actual range will deffier dramatically depending on how much one deviates nor do they seem to appreciate that the deviations will not be the same. Sometjhing like the R1T or CT are going to deviate more than the MX with respect to speed because the latter has less frontal area and lower drag coefficient.

People with Taycan's are getting in the 270-280 range but the EPA is at 220, where the ETron is given a range of 220 but his getting 190.....

The Etron numbers are believable but the Taycan numbers are not. How can one experience less drag at highway speeds than in a mix of low speed highway and in town driving?

As I have driven only Tesla's I can say that based on a sample size of 2, the Tesla EPA range number serves as a good basis for prediction of realized performance under actuall driving conditions. I cannot say the same for any other car(s).

 

[ajdelange]

The biggest complaints I have heard about the EPA testing is that it is not a real world drive cycle.

What is a real world drive cycle?

They never test the vehicle at 75 mph steady to determine highway range, for example.

Is that a real world drive cycle? It may be in some places but on the east coast speed limits are 65 and 55 mph. Some choose to exceed those speed limits by various amounts. Some don't.

But also the manufacturers don't all compile their results the same way, and some are more conservative than others.

You can elect to omit the 2nd set of tests and you can propose different coefficients for the drag polynomial but other than that you don't have much flexibility. And EPA must approve the coefficient set.

I think Porche made a mistake low balling their range estimates, but I am sure they had a good reason to do that.

I don't think Porsche sandbagged there numbers any more than I think Tesla exaggerated theirs. But clearly something is wrong with the Porsche number.

Personally my biggest interest is the 75 mph highway test, which unfortunately is not completed by the car companies (or at least they don't share it) and I have to wait for real world reviews to get that one.

Fiddle around with a 15% increase in consumption for a sedan/SUV and 20% for a truck. Those are WAGs but I don't think they will prove to be too far off.

 

[DucRider]

I don't think Porsche sandbagged there numbers any more than I think Tesla exaggerated theirs. But clearly something is wrong with the Porsche number.

Porsche is by far the bigeest outlier. The Taycan is also the only EV with a 2 speed transmission. Possibly some correlation.

Tesla designs to the test much more than other manufacturers and they are able to publish higher numbers because of it.

The 5 speed cycle doesn't always give a higher result, but does off the opportunity to use a lower derating number than the default 30%. Some Teslas benefit more than others. The Model 3 SR+ has a derating factor of 29.5%, the Model Y Performance gets a bigger boost with just 24.4% off of the test results.

While manufacturers can't really sandbag the tests themselves, they do provide the numbers (aerodynamic drag, tire rolling resistance, and driveline friction) that set the road load on the dyno. Teslas numbers reflect a much lower road load than the Taycan. Tesla seems to be more aggressive in their road load and Porsche much more conservative (Teslas will indeed have lower road load, but probably less than the dyno settings reflect)

Road load is measured through coastdown tests, wherein vehicles coast—hence the name—in neutral from about 80 mph all the way down to 10 mph. The resulting data of how quickly the vehicle slows is used to calculate the three coefficients for a quadratic equation that expresses the pounds of force resisting a vehicle's forward motion at a given speed. Those coefficients define the dyno's resistance during efficiency and range testing.​

​

There are, of course, a number of guidelines in the SAE's 39-page J1263 document around this procedure, including requirements for tire tread depth and vehicle break-in mileage to ensure that the test vehicles are representative of what people actually drive. But automakers can and do try to piece together the best-performing vehicle—one with the slickest bearings and least drag from the brake pads—and run it on the smoothest surface they can find.​

https://www.caranddriver.com/featur...-factor-tesla-uses-for-big-epa-range-numbers/

 

[Mysta]

It's pretty well known that Taycan was tested with 2 cycle EPA test meaning it received around 30% 'correction' in reduction of miles, which is why it's low. Tesla tends to game the system with 5 cycle and does everything to make it a high number.

 

[ajdelange]

It's pretty well known that Taycan was tested with 2 cycle EPA test meaning it received around 30% 'correction' in reduction of miles, which is why it's low. Tesla tends to game the system with 5 cycle and does everything to make it a high number.

Read the article linked in the last post. Although the authors would clearly like to say that Tesla is "gaming" the system the information they present makes it clear that Tesla is not doing that. They are simply following SAE and EPA direction.

 

[Mysta]

Read the article linked in the last post. Although the authors would clearly like to say that Tesla is "gaming" the system the information they present makes it clear that Tesla is not doing that. They are simply following SAE and EPA direction.

Sorry - maybe it comes off bad but they are. They are doing everything within the rules to make their mileage appear higher instead of more accurate. Thus I choose gaming. As someone with 2 Tesla's I'm ok saying it. Especially given it's one of many ways to report your EPA figures. I think Mach-E/Taycan are better examples for hwy speeds. Definitely reason for 2 figures in EV the same as fossil fueled cars.

 

[ajdelange]

Sorry - maybe it comes off bad but they are. They are doing everything within the rules to make their mileage appear higher instead of more accurate.

The article says in so many words that the Tesla numbers are the best in the industry and indeed I find them very reliable predictors of on road performance. If Tesla wanted to produce a lower number to be more consistent with what you think they should be reporting they would have to deviate from the EPA and SAE recommendations. Is this what you want them to do?

Thus I choose gaming. As someone with 2 Tesla's I'm ok saying it.

The fact that you use the term "accurate" with respect to an EPA rated range and the fact that you would say this having driven Teslas makes it clear that you do not know how to interpret the EPA range number.

I think Mach-E/Taycan are better examples for hwy speeds.

And this reinforces my conclusion. If the EPA rating gives an "accurate" range at highway speeds it is clearly flawed as the EPA range is not supposed to reflect highway speeds.

Based on my impressions of Rivian up to this point they will probably execute the full set of tests and will probably execute as well as Tesla does. I expect their EPA numbers to be of as high quality as Tesla's. Those of you who think Tesla is "gaming" will, then, probably think Rivian is gaming too.

 

[Mysta]

The article says in so many words that the Tesla numbers are the best in the industry and indeed I find them very reliable predictors of on road performance. If Tesla wanted to produce a lower number to be more consistent with what you think they should be reporting they would have to deviate from the EPA and SAE recommendations. Is this what you want them to do?

The fact that you use the term "accurate" with respect to an EPA rated range and the fact that you would say this having driven Teslas makes it clear that you do not know how to interpret the EPA range number.

And this reinforces my conclusion. If the EPA rating gives an "accurate" range at highway speeds it is clearly flawed as the EPA range is not supposed to reflect highway speeds.

Based on my impressions of Rivian up to this point they will probably execute the full set of tests and will probably execute as well as Tesla does. I expect their EPA numbers to be of as high quality as Tesla's. Those of you who think Tesla is "gaming" will, then, probably think Rivian is gaming too.

lol, I just don’t agree with their definition of gaming. Sorry, I just disagree with you. The simple fact that people post about their range 1000s of times a day in Tesla communities. Just because the EPA system is bad doesn’t mean Tesla isn’t gaming it, too.

 

[ajdelange]

You are not alone. The thousands of voices you refer to don't understand it either. I suppose that reflects on the worth of the system to musicians and poets. Technical people should have no trouble with it. I guess that the proof of the pudding WRT Tesla is that the EPA rating is the basis for the navigation system which uses the rated consumption to predict how much battery you should have left at the end of a trip. As it knows about terrain and speed limit along the route it can adjust consumption for those. As it cannot know about weather in the future it cannot account for weather events. I am amazed that what I see at the end of a leg is usually within a percent or 2 of the original prediction unless there is a weather event (rain, headwind, tailwind...). So I will ask the same question I asked in my last post in a different way. Would you, knowing that it will reduce the accuracy of these trip estimates, have them corrupt their EPA number in order to give you the feeling that they are being more honest?

Maybe you are just the kind of guy who feels that a student who answers the "extra credit" question on an exam is "gaming the system".

 

[guernsej]

The Etron numbers are believable but the Taycan numbers are not. How can one experience less drag at highway speeds than in a mix of low speed highway and in town driving?.

I've always assumed the Taycan's EPA/actual delta was due to it's two speed gearbox and decoupling rear axle providing significant improvements in real world high speed highway cruising while being less suited to the variable lower speed EPA highway cycle.

Plus VW group more than any other company has a strong incentive to not game the EPA rating.

Sponsored