2022 Lightning EPA highway + city range / efficiency numbers posted

[Tony Burgh]

Yes. If the manufacturers just gave the numbers battery capacity, range at 70mph, range at 50mph, range at 30mph (cruise control set 100% to 0%) and they gave those numbers at 70 degrees, and 20 degrees then the consumer could plan a trip and properly compare different cars. If it is 0 degrees, knowing to subtract 10 to 20 percent from the 20 degree range and if 110 degrees subtracting 10 percent from the 70 degree range. Don't tell me the mpge that accounts for charging losses (don't charge really slow or really fast. Don't charge to 100 percent and there will be fewer inefficiencies). Just the pack size (useable) and range at specified speeds and temperatures.

But they have to address the least common denominator. You might be surprised how low that number (consumer) is.

Sponsored

 

[LightningShow]

But they have to address the least common denominator. You might be surprised how low that number (consumer) is.

They can still just have the one big headline number (COMBINED RANGE 320 MILES) for the lowest common denominator, but instead of making all of the other numbers try to match up with the ICE stickers they should be publishing numbers that are relevant to EVs.

 

[beatle]

Range testing is complicated because there are so many variables, and the test is trying to be everything to everybody. Consumers almost exclusively care about range, but charging losses are accounted for because that is the real way to create a parity with total energy usage. This is important to those who also care about overall energy usage, and since no rectifier (charger) is 100% efficient, the test accounts for that. IMO they should separate that metric out from the overall test and call it out specifically so we don't have to do our own calculations.

What about cabin insulation, cabin size, or HVAC efficiency? Those can improve range since you'd be using the climate control less, but what temperature do you set the HVAC to? HVAC use is not even included in the test. In reality though, it is the higher air density that creates the biggest difference in long range trips in the cold, not HVAC use. I tested this even with my Model S with a simple resistive heating element. My energy consumption was almost identical with and without the heat running in 35 degree temps.

What about short trips in extreme cold that require the use of the battery heater? Do manufacturers test for a pre-warmed battery on shore power or should they have to heat the battery to optimal temperature? With LFP and NCA batteries providing different capacities at cold temperatures, should the LFPs be penalized for their poorer performance in the cold?

How about energy recovery? While cruising you don't recover anything, but just about every trip requires you to slow down via regenerative braking and put energy back into the battery. This is great, but not all cars are the same. Some are more efficient (aerodynamic, LRR tires, efficient motors) and some are worse (bricks, AT tires, inefficient motors). Should the test should reflect these conditions? How much stop and go do you have on the highway?

Not saying that the test is flawless, but it's basically impossible to predict a vehicle's actual range in all conditions. Making multiple changes to the test can also cause disparity between old and new test data - making older cars appear better or worse than new ones tested with a different algorithm. Plus, every owner will value performance in certain conditions more than others since we use the vehicles in different ways and in different places.

 

[jefro]

Your mileage may vary said beatle.

 

[Roy2001]

Why ER is more efficient? It is heavier and should use more energy.

Sponsored