Page 4 of 4

Re: Guess the Monroney contest: Tesla 3 and LEAF 2 efficiency ratings

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:00 pm
by LeftieBiker
From what I've read the above isn't quite correct. The hydraulic brakes are applied both to bring the car to a full stop and to hold it on hills. How efficient this is will depend on how aggressively it applies the friction brakes. The lack of real coasting would seem to me to be a problem, efficiency-wise.

Re: Guess the Monroney contest: Tesla 3 and LEAF 2 efficiency ratings

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:07 pm
by DaveinOlyWA
LeftieBiker wrote:From what I've read the above isn't quite correct. The hydraulic brakes are applied both the bring the car to a full stop and to hold it on hills. How efficient this is will depend on how aggressively it applies the friction brakes. The lack of real coasting would seem to me to be a problem, efficiency-wise.


Not what we were told. In the previous LEAF, regen cuts out at 7-8 mph and its 100% friction braking but new LEAF regen runs to zero mph. That was a surprise to me so asked a few others and they all said the same thing. Hill holding is probably friction braking but there is no creep in one pedal.

This was verified by the engineer (the ONLY one who had any technical knowledge in Vegas) so this I believe. Its funny because one review comparing LEAF, T3 and Bolt gave high marks for LEAF one pedal having the "most seamless transition and smoothest stop" of the 3... Guessing it would feel seamless if there is only one mechanism in play. :)

Re: Guess the Monroney contest: Tesla 3 and LEAF 2 efficiency ratings

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:49 pm
by LeftieBiker
I guess the usual journalistic slop is at play, and we'll know for sure after we get our cars.

Re: Guess the Monroney contest: Tesla 3 and LEAF 2 efficiency ratings

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:32 am
by RegGuheert
This review gave the 40-kWh MY2018 LEAF a "real-world range" of only 108 miles while giving the 41-kWh Renault Zoe a "real-world range" of 131 miles.

Of course the Zoe is smaller, but that's a big difference.

108 miles. That's not great, especially if you factor in the rapid degradation that may occur with this battery.

Re: Guess the Monroney contest: Tesla 3 and LEAF 2 efficiency ratings

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:41 am
by SageBrush
RegGuheert wrote:This review gave the 40-kWh MY2018 LEAF a "real-world range" of only 108 miles while giving the 41-kWh Renault Zoe a "real-world range" of 131 miles.

Of course the Zoe is smaller, but that's a big difference.

108 miles. That's not great, especially if you factor in the rapid degradation that may occur with this battery.

Perhaps a typo since it would require about 370 Wh/mile on the road. The NEDC between the cars is quite close.

As for battery degradation .... yeah

Re: Guess the Monroney contest: Tesla 3 and LEAF 2 efficiency ratings

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:57 am
by palmermd
It is possible that they are just hiding 10% of the battery capacity in the software. They know full well it will lose capacity fairly quickly, and by publishing and exposing 110 miles instead of 121 miles, then as the battery degrades it will continue to show 110 miles during the first 10% of the degradation.

Re: Guess the Monroney contest: Tesla 3 and LEAF 2 efficiency ratings

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:08 pm
by edatoakrun
RegGuheert wrote:This review gave the 40-kWh MY2018 LEAF a "real-world range" of only 108 miles while giving the 41-kWh Renault Zoe a "real-world range" of 131 miles...

Insideevs has a habit of stealing and reguritating the work of other publications.

Go to the source of the (mis)quoted review, here:


...Our test route included a simulated mix of town, rural and motorway driving with the three cars in convoy, and we swapped drivers and running order after every circuit (about eight miles) to keep things as fair as possible. The temperature during the test was 3-5deg C – far from ideal for battery performance – and all three cars were tested with their headlights on, the air conditioning set to 21deg C and normal (rather than eco) driving modes selected. The fact that the e-Golf managed just 93 miles on a full charge is a bit disappointing. The Leaf gave up the ghost next after 108 miles, while the little Zoe kept whirring along for 131 miles...

LEAF rated first, overall:

Our verdict
In our group tests, there are usually clear winners and losers, but this one’s a bit different, because the best car depends entirely on your viewpoint.

The e-Golf is the best all-rounder; it’s the nicest to drive, the smartest inside and the most practical. Meanwhile, the Zoe makes the most financial sense and will get you the farthest (by far) between charges – arguably the two most important things an electric car needs to do well.

But while the e-Golf is let down by its limited range and high price, and the Zoe by its driving position, safety provisions and cramped interior, it’s actually the new Leaf that emerges from this battle with the fewest scars. Yes, it’s a pity that the steering wheel doesn’t have more adjustment and the interior isn’t plusher, but neither of these issues is a deal-breaker. And when you factor in the excellent performance, generous kit and low running costs, the Leaf actually makes the most sense to the most electric car buyers.

1st – Nissan Leaf...

https://www.whatcar.com/news/nissan-lea ... en-e-golf/

Re: Guess the Monroney contest: Tesla 3 and LEAF 2 efficiency ratings

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 2:07 pm
by RegGuheert
edatoakrun wrote:Go to the source of the (mis)quoted review, here:
What was misquoted? Certainly not the "real-world range".