Efficiency on mostly flat highways

[SageBrush]

It was not stated whether the Tesla was pre-conditioned

I THOUGHT that I heard the guy say that that the Tesla knew it was coming in for a charge and was therefore pre-conditioning, which would make sense given their connectedness.....

Have a time-stamp ?

 

[user 24513]

My wife is not gonna let me watch it again- the mention about the Tesla was just as they approached the charging station (which, BTW, is amazing! I see mostly oneCCS one CHADeMo at a time.....)

 

[SageBrush]

My wife is not gonna let me watch it again- the mention about the Tesla was just as they approached the charging station

I found the mention at 10:00
Syman said they put the location into the car about 40" before they arrived. He obviously knew about pre-conditioning and 40" would be enough time although I'm not positive that the driver set the location as the destination. They may have done it correctly.

In any case, the Tesla was at 48% SoC upon arrival. That SoC probably explains the 'lowish' charge rate. The other cars arrived with lower SoC and were cold-gating.

I'm hard pressed to find his protocol useful, but I hope he keeps at it in different formats. I understand the desire to to have a standardized test but each EV has its own strengths and weaknesses, so I think it is better to set a destination and let the (informed) drivers do as they see fit, albeit on the same day.

 

[user 24513]

I'm hard pressed to find his protocol useful, but I hope he keeps at it in different formats. I understand the desire to to have a standardized test but each EV has its own strengths and weaknesses, so I think it is better to set a destination and let the (informed) drivers do as they see fit, albeit on the same day.

Agreed, although they were clear that their goal was to see what the non-geek driver would experience, one who does not care about much of anything except how long it is going to take to charge up enough so they can get home. Not exactly satisfying to the geeks in the room, but their spouses perhaps..... And too bad that the Ariya was not present, Nissan has put a lot of eggs in that precarious basket.....

 

[SageBrush]

I'm hard pressed to find his protocol useful, but I hope he keeps at it in different formats. I understand the desire to to have a standardized test but each EV has its own strengths and weaknesses, so I think it is better to set a destination and let the (informed) drivers do as they see fit, albeit on the same day.

Agreed, although they were clear that their goal was to see what the non-geek driver would experience, one who does not care about much of anything except how long it is going to take to charge up enough so they can get home. Not exactly satisfying to the geeks in the room, but their spouses perhaps..... And too bad that the Ariya was not present, Nissan has put a lot of eggs in that precarious basket.....

They did not follow their own intent then.
E.g., all the cars started out at 90% SoC.
In the case of the Tesla, it arrived with 48% SOC so it consumed 42% one-way. They wanted a 10% buffer for the return trip so they should have charged the Tesla up to 52% and called it a day. Instead they called the first time at (IIRC) 76% and then let it continue to charge up to 90%.

I got the impression that Syman was rooting for the Kia/Hyundai EVs, and when they did not shine he soft-pedaled the Tesla via a goofy protocol. Is he a used EV dealer ?

 

[GerryAZ]

I would like to see direct comparisons between cars by starting with full charge, driving test route, and then charging back to full charge with energy from wall measured directly (test cycles with both L2 charging and DCFC). This would allow calculation of Wh/mile or miles/kWh completely independent of the cars' onboard instrumentation. I always see the actual wall-to-wheels efficiency (with 7.2 kW input power L2 EVSE) significantly lower than the dashboard display (all three LEAF's, but 2011 was worst because of 3.3 kW onboard charger). I suspect other manufacturer vehicles would be similar. One advantage to LEAF is no wasted energy for battery thermal management during charging or driving (may impact battery longevity, but 62 kWh in 2019 is doing very well after 27 months and 40,000 miles).

 

[knightmb]

I would like to see direct comparisons between cars by starting with full charge, driving test route, and then charging back to full charge with energy from wall measured directly (test cycles with both L2 charging and DCFC). This would allow calculation of Wh/mile or miles/kWh completely independent of the cars' onboard instrumentation. I always see the actual wall-to-wheels efficiency (with 7.2 kW input power L2 EVSE) significantly lower than the dashboard display (all three LEAF's, but 2011 was worst because of 3.3 kW onboard charger). I suspect other manufacturer vehicles would be similar. One advantage to LEAF is no wasted energy for battery thermal management during charging or driving (may impact battery longevity, but 62 kWh in 2019 is doing very well after 27 months and 40,000 miles).

For that type of experiment, we would need both LeafSpy and TM-Spy. I don't know of many Tesla owners that would allow you take apart the center console to wire in the 16 pin OBDII, maybe a rental? :lol:
It would be a much better experiment than a lot of the "I charged my Leaf/Tesla to 100% and drove this many miles, so the efficiency is indisputable now!" videos online now. :mrgreen:

 

[SageBrush]

I would like to see direct comparisons between cars by starting with full charge, driving test route, and then charging back to full charge with energy from wall measured directly (test cycles with both L2 charging and DCFC). This would allow calculation of Wh/mile or miles/kWh completely independent of the cars' onboard instrumentation. I always see the actual wall-to-wheels efficiency (with 7.2 kW input power L2 EVSE) significantly lower than the dashboard display (all three LEAF's, but 2011 was worst because of 3.3 kW onboard charger). I suspect other manufacturer vehicles would be similar. One advantage to LEAF is no wasted energy for battery thermal management during charging or driving (may impact battery longevity, but 62 kWh in 2019 is doing very well after 27 months and 40,000 miles).

For that type of experiment, we would need both LeafSpy and TM-Spy. I don't know of many Tesla owners that would allow you take apart the center console to wire in the 16 pin OBDII, maybe a rental? :lol:
It would be a much better experiment than a lot of the "I charged my Leaf/Tesla to 100% and drove this many miles, so the efficiency is indisputable now!" videos online now. :mrgreen:

It also offers no value into the question of travel convenience and duration as it relates to charging.
I'm not sure about the Model S/X line, but attaching an OBD2 transceiver to a Model 3/Y is trivial; it just requires a Y adapter cable. I swapped the OBD device between my Tesla Model 3 and my LEAF about once a month. Putting in the Y cable took a minute or three.

 

[GerryAZ]

I would like to see direct comparisons between cars by starting with full charge, driving test route, and then charging back to full charge with energy from wall measured directly (test cycles with both L2 charging and DCFC). This would allow calculation of Wh/mile or miles/kWh completely independent of the cars' onboard instrumentation. I always see the actual wall-to-wheels efficiency (with 7.2 kW input power L2 EVSE) significantly lower than the dashboard display (all three LEAF's, but 2011 was worst because of 3.3 kW onboard charger). I suspect other manufacturer vehicles would be similar. One advantage to LEAF is no wasted energy for battery thermal management during charging or driving (may impact battery longevity, but 62 kWh in 2019 is doing very well after 27 months and 40,000 miles).

For that type of experiment, we would need both LeafSpy and TM-Spy. I don't know of many Tesla owners that would allow you take apart the center console to wire in the 16 pin OBDII, maybe a rental? :lol:
It would be a much better experiment than a lot of the "I charged my Leaf/Tesla to 100% and drove this many miles, so the efficiency is indisputable now!" videos online now. :mrgreen:

It also offers no value into the question of travel convenience and duration as it relates to charging.
I'm not sure about the Model S/X line, but attaching an OBD2 transceiver to a Model 3/Y is trivial; it just requires a Y adapter cable. I swapped the OBD device between my Tesla Model 3 and my LEAF about once a month. Putting in the Y cable took a minute or three.

I am not sure what you mean by using OBDII port, etc. I am suggesting that charging energy be measured at the wall for equal driving to fairly compare the various cars. Actual distance traveled vs. energy consumed from the wall is what I am interested in comparing.

 

[knightmb]

I am not sure what you mean by using OBDII port, etc. I am suggesting that charging energy be measured at the wall for equal driving to fairly compare the various cars. Actual distance traveled vs. energy consumed from the wall is what I am interested in comparing.

Suggesting to compare what the EV measure and what the wall measurements show is what I was referring to.

 

[SageBrush]

Not sure what you mean by using OBDII port, etc.

I was responding to the other poster.

For your purposes, why not just use EPA MPGe ?

 

[user 24513]

We are a bunch of friggin' geeks, most people would be shaking their heads at this conversation.... There will be some, not many, people who stumble on this thread and actually want to participate. Others probably want to simply drive efficiently and without too much air pollution. Someday we need to get all of our EVs together and drive around in circles.....

 

[lutefisk]

Living in Boulder it is assuredly *NOT* flat here, and I've averaged just under 4.5 mi/kWh for the 6+ years I've had the car.

Details on temperature and efficiency are at

https://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=32787&p=613404#p613404

 

[alozzy]

Living in Boulder it is assuredly *NOT* flat here, and I've averaged just under 4.5 mi/kWh for the 6+ years I've had the car.

Less dense air due to altitude definitely helps your car to achieve that level of efficiency. It's extremely difficult to achieve better than 4.2 miles/kWh at sea level when driving highway speeds.

 

[DougWantsALeaf]

If you go to low weight wheels, it's doable.
https://youtu.be/MhxXQCVqsMk

 

[alozzy]

Impressive, but are you claiming you get that level of efficiency right now (i.e. during winter)? If so, that's miraculous.

lutefisk claims to average 4.5 miles/kWh over the course of a year. That is close to impossible at sea level, at least with my 2013 SV located in Vancouver,. Canada.

 

[lorenfb]

Impressive, but are you claiming you get that level of efficiency right now (i.e. during winter)? If so, that's miraculous.

lutefisk claims to average 4.5 miles/kWh over the course of a year. That is close to impossible at sea level, at least with my 2013 SV located in Vancouver,. Canada.

It's all about your average speed! I rarely drive faster than 50-55, i.e. not many locations in SoCal given the traffic where you can,
and I average over 5 miles/kWh where I live near the coast. My 2013 Leaf is close to that efficiency.

 

[alozzy]

It's all about your average speed! I rarely drive faster than 50-55, i.e. not many locations in SoCal given the traffic where you can,
and I average over 5 miles/kWh where I live near the coast. My 2013 Leaf is close to that efficiency.

Obviously, but assuming all other things are equal (same wheels/tires, same tire pressure, same speed, etc), less dense air means there's less aero drag and therefore higher efficiency. Therefore, lutefisk is going to have an easier time getting high efficiency numbers with his Leaf since Denver air is considerably less dense than air at sea level.

Are you claiming that's not the case?

 

[lorenfb]

It's all about your average speed! I rarely drive faster than 50-55, i.e. not many locations in SoCal given the traffic where you can,
and I average over 5 miles/kWh where I live near the coast. My 2013 Leaf is close to that efficiency.

Obviously, but assuming all other things are equal (same wheels/tires, same tire pressure, same speed, etc), less dense air means there's less aero drag and therefore higher efficiency. Therefore, lutefisk is going to have an easier time getting high efficiency numbers with his Leaf since Denver air is considerably less dense than air at sea level.

Are you claiming that's not the case?

Read your post again where you state;

That is close to impossible at sea level,

You know that for absolute certainty, right? My point was that comparative discussions on Leaf efficiencies are a total waste of time!

 

[nlspace]

Air density is proportional to atmospheric pressure, but inversely to temperature and humidity.

So a hot humid day in New Orleans could have an air density like a cold, dry day in Denver.