boba
Well-known member
In calculating range I have been using the % charge meter ( (miles/% charge used)x100)) and it seems to work quite well. Until today, the main question was, is the power meter linear? The answer seems to be yes at least down to 30 % or so. Near and below that point the miles per % appears to increase significantly.
The experiment:
1. Drive a fixed route 5 times, recording power used for each, along with miles traveled. (I made a wrong turn during the first drive making the miles a bit longer.)
2. Use my 2015 S leaf, purchased last September that has about 6000 miles on it.
3. Use no air conditioning. Windows closed with the fan running 2 bars. No speed over 55 or more than 5 above the speed limit. Cruise control in use most of the time. (All of these are my normal way of driving locally).
4. The area is mostly rural and all took place on the same morning. All drives started at home which is 600 ft. above sea level. Most of each trip was near sea level. No net power used for about 3-4 miles after the start but that has to be payed back on the climb back home. (Why doesn't congress repeal the second law of thermodynamics?) This all took place near Camden Maine.
Dash Temperature.... 71____70___ 73__ 74__ 77
Charge Start .............. 94___ 77___ 61__ 44__27
Charge End................. 77___ 61___ 44__ 27__ 13
Energy Used for trip.. 17___ 16___ 17__ 17__ 14
Miles............................ 17.2_ 16.4, 16.4, 16.4, 16.4
Range(Mi./Chg)x100). 101__ 103__96___96__ 117
Time trip end.............. 9:24_ 9:56 10:31 11:14
One would expect error from the fact that power is probably accurate to no less than 1%. However the 117 range figure seems well beyond what one would expect from that error alone. Has anyone else noticed a significant increase in power per 1% in the low range of power available?
The experiment:
1. Drive a fixed route 5 times, recording power used for each, along with miles traveled. (I made a wrong turn during the first drive making the miles a bit longer.)
2. Use my 2015 S leaf, purchased last September that has about 6000 miles on it.
3. Use no air conditioning. Windows closed with the fan running 2 bars. No speed over 55 or more than 5 above the speed limit. Cruise control in use most of the time. (All of these are my normal way of driving locally).
4. The area is mostly rural and all took place on the same morning. All drives started at home which is 600 ft. above sea level. Most of each trip was near sea level. No net power used for about 3-4 miles after the start but that has to be payed back on the climb back home. (Why doesn't congress repeal the second law of thermodynamics?) This all took place near Camden Maine.
Dash Temperature.... 71____70___ 73__ 74__ 77
Charge Start .............. 94___ 77___ 61__ 44__27
Charge End................. 77___ 61___ 44__ 27__ 13
Energy Used for trip.. 17___ 16___ 17__ 17__ 14
Miles............................ 17.2_ 16.4, 16.4, 16.4, 16.4
Range(Mi./Chg)x100). 101__ 103__96___96__ 117
Time trip end.............. 9:24_ 9:56 10:31 11:14
One would expect error from the fact that power is probably accurate to no less than 1%. However the 117 range figure seems well beyond what one would expect from that error alone. Has anyone else noticed a significant increase in power per 1% in the low range of power available?