That an interesting question but the curves won't really be that different. If the dynamometer says that an ICE vehicle uses 500 w-h/mile and in the real world you use 750 w-h/mile I'd think this would be similar to an EV using 250 w-h/mile on the test and 375 w-h/mile in the real world. The big issue would be that for an EV ancillary loads are a very big deal, so very cold or hot weather will have pronounced effect on the range of an EV that is much greater as a percentage than you'd see with an ICE.vkruger said:
EPA: Nissan Leaf gets 99 mpg equivalent
- Thread starter MikeD
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
Because BMW wished to ship Mini-e cars from the port, it worked with EPA to develop a sticker format, and EPA testing produced kW·h/mi numbers of 33 and 36 for 100 mi. Dividing by 100 to produce per-mile figures yields 0.33 kW·h/mi-city and 0.36 kWh/mi-highway, including the 30% correction factor. Dividing the mpg equivalent of 33.7 kW·h/gal (based on 33,705 W·h/gal) by 0.33 kW·h/mi-city equals 102 mpg. Dividing 33.7 by 0.36 kW·h/mi-highway equals 94 mpg.Spies said:
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
Funny how we take this new info as "the word" ignoring all the scenarios on range previously discussed at length.
I choose to ignor this new info because its vague and without details as to how the numbers were arrived at and what real life situation it would aplply to
I choose to ignor this new info because its vague and without details as to how the numbers were arrived at and what real life situation it would aplply to
garygid
Well-known member
Sure, Regen recovers energy (tends to slow the car to charge the battery), but UNNECRSSARY Regen slows the EV when it is NOT WANTED, and it takes MORE (than the recovered) energy to accelerate again.
Having experience with an EV, you do not know this?
Maybe you are only considering DESIRED slowing, where Regen DOES help conserve energy? I am ONLY talking about NOT-Desired braking (Regen).
Regen and re-use of the "recovered" energy might be only 50% efficient, 60% if lucky.
Of course, going down a hill and then back up the same hill is not a lossless process.
Having experience with an EV, you do not know this?
Maybe you are only considering DESIRED slowing, where Regen DOES help conserve energy? I am ONLY talking about NOT-Desired braking (Regen).
Regen and re-use of the "recovered" energy might be only 50% efficient, 60% if lucky.
Of course, going down a hill and then back up the same hill is not a lossless process.
The EPA range number is not "new". As Herm mentioned, people have known that the LA4 Cycle is very mild and that to get to the more realistic range the EPA applies a 30% reduction factor. In fact if you look at the Honda press release for the Fit-EV, which Honda issued last week, it explicitly says the range of the Fit-EV will be 100 miles on the LA4 Cycle which will mean it has a 70 mile range on the more real world EPA sticker.DaveinOlyWA said:
Doubtless some drivers will get more range. Some have gotten close to 60 miles when driving the Volt in CD Mode, and some have gotten over 100 miles when driving the Leaf, but the EPA range estimate is realistic for the vast majority of drivers.
The "new" information is that the Volt's sticker, which was released today, says that the Volt has a 35 mile range, or about half the Leaf's range. Since GM has said the Volt's range in the real world will be between 25-50 miles, 25 miles being an absolute worst case, we can assume the Leaf's real world range will be roughly between 50-100 miles (when new) with a worst case of 50 miles. The other new information we now have is that, since we know the Volt uses exactly 10.6 kWh to travel 35 miles at an efficiency rating of 93 MPGE, we now know the Leaf is using 20.8 kWh (21 kWh?) of its battery pack to go 73 miles with an efficiency rating of 99 MPGe.
EVDRIVER
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2010
- Messages
- 6,753
garygid said:
Gary you miss the entire point. I believe you may have driven an EV before but I am certain you have never owned an AC EV with strong, adjustable off-pedal regen. Once you do and drive other than a hypermiler you will understand exactly what I'm talking about. Clearly wasted energy is wasted energy, that's a given and not the premise of my point. If you want to bet on this get your Leaf and I will set up a course and parameters, I'm paying cash for my Leaf and I'll put my pink slip on the line. I suggest you take a pizza bet because I could use a second Leaf and I will win that bet. Respectfully. Although I will likely only end up with a Pizza because I know you are going to orphan your Leaf
planet4ever
Well-known member
This whole debate about regen started with the following:
I won't know for sure until I've driven the car for a while, but I suspect I may leave it in ECO mode all the time, freeways included. However, I still haven't seen anything definitive about whether cruise control and ECO can be used together. Since I do like to use cruise control, I may end up using the Gonewild strategy if ECO mode disables it. (My concern being that "B" mode disables cruise control in the Prius.)
I'm not sure how Gary got off on unnecessary regen, but these two cases sound necessary to me. Now, the amount of regen in the freeway slow-down case might be excessive (and hence unnecessary) in ECO mode if you took your foot completely off the accelerator, but the answer to that seems trivial to me. Just ease back on the pedal instead (assuming you are not using cruise control).Gonewild said:
I won't know for sure until I've driven the car for a while, but I suspect I may leave it in ECO mode all the time, freeways included. However, I still haven't seen anything definitive about whether cruise control and ECO can be used together. Since I do like to use cruise control, I may end up using the Gonewild strategy if ECO mode disables it. (My concern being that "B" mode disables cruise control in the Prius.)
Spies
Well-known member
Now that the Volt sticker is out and uses 11 cents per kW-hr for computing cost per year the 12 cents per kW-hr on the Leaf sticker must simply be a typo and should be 11 as well. The math on the Leaf sticker works out for the most part using 11 cents.
EVDRIVER
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2010
- Messages
- 6,753
planet4ever said:
Your assumptions above are correct. ANd cruise is a bit silly on an EV with 100 mile range.
The eco mode won't waste any energy and unless you need full AC or heat it is better to leave it in ECO mode if you are in traffic that may have many sudden stops. ECO also help those that are not experienced EV drivers by changing the power delivery curve of the accel pedal. A experienced EV driver on the freeway at a constant speed in "D" will get the same efficiency as a person in "ECO" There is NO ENERGY SAVINGS between the motor and inverter at a constant speed while in ECO mode, it only changes the "feel" of the pedal so one is more aware.
tomsax
Well-known member
SanDust said:
You are mixing the MPGe numbers (wall-to-wheel) with battery-to-wheel numbers. They are aren't the same. You can't calculate the usable capacity of the Leaf's pack without also knowing the charging efficiency of both vehicles with as much accuracy as the other numbers.
Coffee_Slurry
Well-known member
lne937s said:
Nope. Not always. Check the Volt EPA sticker!
tomsax
Well-known member
For comparison, the EPA rating for my 2008 Tesla Roadster to 26 kWh/100 mile city and 29 highway with a range of 244 miles.
I find that if I drive at a steady 55 mph on level freeway, I get energy use consistent with the 244-mile range. My best test of this was in March 2010, when I drove 182 miles at 55 mph and had 60 miles of range showing at the end of the drive. If I drive 70 mph, it's more like 175 miles.
Like the Leaf, the Roadster has two charge modes. Range mode gives you the full usable capacity of the battery pack and the full range. Standard mode gives you access to the middle 80% of the battery pack and about 195 miles at 55 mph.
After about 18 months and 14,000 miles, the range mode capacity has dropped to 234 and standard mode to 183, for a loss of about 5% of the range. Tesla has muddied the waters here by changing the way the firmware calculates the capacity of the battery, in a way that dropped the estimated range shown on the screen, so it's possible the loss in range is not as large as the reported numbers indicate.
In terms of power, I very slightly bested my quarter-mile time from last year, 12.978 seconds July 2010 vs. 12.982 seconds July 2009. I believe I've improved my launch technique, so it's possible the battery pack has lost a little bit of power, but is seems smaller than the loss in energy capacity.
In terms of day-to-day driving in standard mode, if I'm driving under 150 miles I don't even have to think about charge. I can drive however I like without regard to efficiency. For drives this short, the Roadster is completely care-free. Driving 180 miles, even in range mode, requires paying attention to your speed and often going below the posted speed limit on freeways. When driving to maximize range, I've changed my driving to take state highways with speed limits of 60 mph or less instead of 70 mph freeways, and optimize routes for distance. I like driving this way, the routes generally have more varied scenery and less traffic.
I'm assuming the EV range test hasn't changed from when the Roadster was tested in late 2008. From that, I have to assume that it will take some careful driving to get 73 on the freeway. In the 80% mode, it will take careful driving to get 58 miles of range, and 45 miles will be the range you can get in the 80% mode without needing to think about charging.
The most unhappy Roadster owner I know drives 200 miles per day on a regular basis. The only EV1 owner I've ever heard complain about the experience had one of the early lead-acid models with a 75-mile range and drove a 74-mile commute. I think a Leaf driver trying to get over 60 miles without charging on a typical day will be unhappy and anyone trying to get 73 miles regularly will become a vocal EV detractor. If you have Level 2 charging at home and can also charge at work, you can probably push up to 80 (120V charging) or 120 (Level 2 charging) miles.
If you're not sure these range numbers will easily meet your driving needs, I strongly urge you not to be one of the first Leaf owners. Wait until we have lots of real people reporting their actual driving experience so you can determine if the car really meets your needs.
My wife and I are pretty early in the list by order date, so I expect will get ours early in the process. We'll test the car and report what we find to the community.
I find that if I drive at a steady 55 mph on level freeway, I get energy use consistent with the 244-mile range. My best test of this was in March 2010, when I drove 182 miles at 55 mph and had 60 miles of range showing at the end of the drive. If I drive 70 mph, it's more like 175 miles.
Like the Leaf, the Roadster has two charge modes. Range mode gives you the full usable capacity of the battery pack and the full range. Standard mode gives you access to the middle 80% of the battery pack and about 195 miles at 55 mph.
After about 18 months and 14,000 miles, the range mode capacity has dropped to 234 and standard mode to 183, for a loss of about 5% of the range. Tesla has muddied the waters here by changing the way the firmware calculates the capacity of the battery, in a way that dropped the estimated range shown on the screen, so it's possible the loss in range is not as large as the reported numbers indicate.
In terms of power, I very slightly bested my quarter-mile time from last year, 12.978 seconds July 2010 vs. 12.982 seconds July 2009. I believe I've improved my launch technique, so it's possible the battery pack has lost a little bit of power, but is seems smaller than the loss in energy capacity.
In terms of day-to-day driving in standard mode, if I'm driving under 150 miles I don't even have to think about charge. I can drive however I like without regard to efficiency. For drives this short, the Roadster is completely care-free. Driving 180 miles, even in range mode, requires paying attention to your speed and often going below the posted speed limit on freeways. When driving to maximize range, I've changed my driving to take state highways with speed limits of 60 mph or less instead of 70 mph freeways, and optimize routes for distance. I like driving this way, the routes generally have more varied scenery and less traffic.
I'm assuming the EV range test hasn't changed from when the Roadster was tested in late 2008. From that, I have to assume that it will take some careful driving to get 73 on the freeway. In the 80% mode, it will take careful driving to get 58 miles of range, and 45 miles will be the range you can get in the 80% mode without needing to think about charging.
The most unhappy Roadster owner I know drives 200 miles per day on a regular basis. The only EV1 owner I've ever heard complain about the experience had one of the early lead-acid models with a 75-mile range and drove a 74-mile commute. I think a Leaf driver trying to get over 60 miles without charging on a typical day will be unhappy and anyone trying to get 73 miles regularly will become a vocal EV detractor. If you have Level 2 charging at home and can also charge at work, you can probably push up to 80 (120V charging) or 120 (Level 2 charging) miles.
If you're not sure these range numbers will easily meet your driving needs, I strongly urge you not to be one of the first Leaf owners. Wait until we have lots of real people reporting their actual driving experience so you can determine if the car really meets your needs.
My wife and I are pretty early in the list by order date, so I expect will get ours early in the process. We'll test the car and report what we find to the community.
Coffee_Slurry
Well-known member
Excellent real-world info tomsax! 13-second silent 1/4mi runs. Sweet.
I suspect you're right, that those of us who intend to drive the Leaf like a Juke are in for a range surprise. Fortunately, my commute is short and I can charge at work, but still, I will have to think ahead for longer drives.
80% charge, 45 miles of agressive driving.. that could be a surprise.
I suspect you're right, that those of us who intend to drive the Leaf like a Juke are in for a range surprise. Fortunately, my commute is short and I can charge at work, but still, I will have to think ahead for longer drives.
80% charge, 45 miles of agressive driving.. that could be a surprise.
cdub
Well-known member
tomsax said:
It might have changed. According to Tesla's financial outlook (it's publicly traded now):
http://www.dailytech.com/Sales+of+Tesla+Roadsters+Dry+Up+Company+Warns+of+Looming+EPA+Changes/article19365.htm
redLEAF
Well-known member
Yet another debate on what's wrong with the EPA's new numbers; it's going to be hard to keep everyone happy. In the end, the "car" itself does indeed generate zero emissions so I take exception to the writer's last comment, otherwise they should add-in the emissions equivalent to the entire distribution chain (i.e., oil extraction, crude transporation, refining, more trasnport to the gas station) of how gas gets delivered to ICE vehicles that should be included to their EPA stickers which further complicates things but may eventually show an 'apples to apples' that they are trying to make a point on -- the point should be how much does it cost the consumer and of course your mileage may vary so at least it's a start; not 100% accurate as to all costs and emissions but a start!
http://blogs.forbes.com/warrenmeyer/2010/11/24/the-epas-electric-vehicle-mileage-fraud/
http://blogs.forbes.com/warrenmeyer/2010/11/24/the-epas-electric-vehicle-mileage-fraud/
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
great writeup Tom;
as always, you have to consider that speed kills on an EV because of lack of regen (generally) for freeway driving and the huge increase in wind friction.
so what can we gleen from the computer that determined that we will get 73 miles on a charge? well, we already knew that at average freeway speeds, the range estimate w/o climate controls was umm?? 80. so nothing new here.
funny how a very very very small wrinkle in info we already knew causes so much concern.
what about the freeway driving (55 mph average which means most driving at 65 mph+) in hot weather getting 70 miles? Nissan posted that MONTHS ago.
or how about if we were in a Leaf 3 days ago in Seattle? cold weather, heat blasting, stuck in I-5 (if you were lucky enough to make it that far!!) gridlock; 62 miles. but then again that would not have worked. it assumes over 4 hours of being stuck in traffic when many reported 6 hours + to get home.
ya, maybe some of us should rethink our purchase. drop out. wait and see. besides i have a few friends who are now strongly interested in a Leaf but are looking at 12 months + for a car. so if some of you could change your mind...
as always, you have to consider that speed kills on an EV because of lack of regen (generally) for freeway driving and the huge increase in wind friction.
so what can we gleen from the computer that determined that we will get 73 miles on a charge? well, we already knew that at average freeway speeds, the range estimate w/o climate controls was umm?? 80. so nothing new here.
funny how a very very very small wrinkle in info we already knew causes so much concern.
what about the freeway driving (55 mph average which means most driving at 65 mph+) in hot weather getting 70 miles? Nissan posted that MONTHS ago.
or how about if we were in a Leaf 3 days ago in Seattle? cold weather, heat blasting, stuck in I-5 (if you were lucky enough to make it that far!!) gridlock; 62 miles. but then again that would not have worked. it assumes over 4 hours of being stuck in traffic when many reported 6 hours + to get home.
ya, maybe some of us should rethink our purchase. drop out. wait and see. besides i have a few friends who are now strongly interested in a Leaf but are looking at 12 months + for a car. so if some of you could change your mind...
hodad66
Well-known member
There are many at the edge of the envelope (range wise) who
may want to wait. For better infrastructure, better chargers,
better mileage, etc. Those of us who drive little to begin with
can make the transition tomorrow with no noticeable effect.
may want to wait. For better infrastructure, better chargers,
better mileage, etc. Those of us who drive little to begin with
can make the transition tomorrow with no noticeable effect.
LEAFfan
Well-known member
SanDust said:
Worst case for LEAF at 50 miles? I know that I read somewhere that Nissan said the lowest you would get (going 90 mph) was 62 w/o A/C or heater. The best would be 138.
Similar threads
