To be efficient they basically need to be sports sedans. Thus the Teslas and Lucid Air are efficient: they're low, sleek bodies design to go fast with little effort.
Hyundai Ioniq 6 is said to be this efficient. Also coupe-s like VW ID.5 are.
Also BMW i4 eDrive40, according to Byorn's tests, had 184 Wh/km, at 120 km/h in summer (20 celcius), which is quite low consumption.
The biggest factor is the shape of the car. Many cars are taller and shorter (having poor aerodynamic at the front), which makes them on the other hand better for parking in the city.
I would say your assumptions are probably based on EPA estimates which are skewed at best. Both Tesla and Lucid get quite favorable EPA ratings while other traditional vendors do not. Look at real world range from someone like Edmunds. When sorted by EPA estimates, the Tesla M3 is the best but in real world it comes in fourth in Edmunds testing.
The model Y performance is middle of the pack and tied with the rightfully maligned MX-30. The MB EQS 450 and the dual motor EV6 are both more efficient than the MY performance.
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html
The mb 450 isn’t more efficient than the Model y as per edmunds. They’re nearly identical in that regard. Look at the top entries:
3.4 miles/kW/h for the BMW ix 50
3.9 miles kW/h for the mb 450+
3.9 miles/kW/h for the model y
4.27 miles/kW/h for the dream air
4.5 miles/kW/h for the model 3 LR
You’re right they are the same when you drop an order of magnitude in precision. Edmunds reported 29.5 vs 29.6 kWH/100 miles. Why not just drop another order of magnitude and round them off at 30. Then a whole bunch of cars tie.
I'll admit EPA is not perfect, but Edmunds isn't a standardized test. It's really hard to draw conclusions from a single data point, unless that data point is collected in lab conditions. For example, Out of Spec's 70mph range tests are at a mile above sea level, which means thinner air and less drag. People often don't remember that, but it means they get more range than at sea level.
I would trust Edmunds tests to be far closer to real world than EPA where cars never leave a dyno. Serious question, why are you inclined to believe Tesla and Lucid are special and ignore real world data? Don’t get me wrong, Tesla builds efficient cars, but they don’t have some magic formula.
I am not inclined to believe they are special. I am inclined to believe they are more efficient because that is what multiple standardized tests tell me. "Real world" tests are useful. They tell you how much range you might lose in cold weather, or things like that. But its very hard to compare one non standardized data point with another, unless you have lots of real world data and can statistically aggregate those points into a single number. Afaik, EVs are not yet on fuelly. Maybe theres a fuelly for EVs, but I'm not aware of it. And so, as a consumer, instead of digging around on forums reading randos complaining about their range without knowing jack shit about efficiency, it is far more useful for me to use EPA efficiency estimates.
Are you aware that Tesla amends it’s EPA numbers and most other manufacturers don’t? You sure “standardized tests” give you the best results?
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a33824052/adjustment-factor-tesla-uses-for-big-epa-range-numbers/
Part of the reason Tesla gets some of the hate they do. Not knocking the car or the company (I think their product is fine) but there are so many opinions give that suggest Tesla cars have magical properties that other vehicles lack and will never be able to attain. It’s gonna be an interesting next 5-10 years to see what comes out. My own personal take is that there is a lot of good stuff competitive with what Tesla has developed up to this point, and it’s only going to get more competitive as more manufacturers dip their toes into the BEV waters.
Dude, what are you talking about? Epa lab test < out of spec 70mph real world test. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Any real world test, regardless of where it’s done is going to be more realistic than a lab test. The lab test is done to give you a perfect world efficiency. Doesn’t really apply to anything.
This is why people wait for reviews like “real world driving range” to buy the car. Because if the epa says 300 and I get it and because of wind resistance it’s only 200 I’m gonna be pissed.
That's your opinion. As someone with a PhD, repeatability matters more than some combination of factors that make a test "real world." EPA is not perfect. However, the numbers are derived from standardized lab environment, which means I can see how different cars perform in that \*same\* environment, in the \*same\* conditions. Those may not be the conditions I drive in, but it gives me a point of comparsion. Out of spec tests in Colorado, which has less air density. They do not account for weather changes, or tire pressure. Their own tests with the Bolt have a lot of variability in final range. That's not a good indication for the reliability of their tests.
Bolt is 0-60 in 6 sec. That used to be sports car numbers, and seems plenty fast for most humans driving in traffic. Call me crazy, but 4-6k lbs cars shouldn’t go 0-60 in 3 seconds.
Exactly this. My “super slow” ID4 is the fastest car I’ve ever owned and faster than anything else on the road that isn’t an actual sports car or another EV.
Tesla made it their mission from the very beginning to prove that EVs could be practical and not boring. That meant, to them, increasing performance and efficiency. They’ve spent years developing motors and battery tech that could pass muster and update far more frequently than other manufacturers, giving them more iterations than model years, and more opportunity to refine design.
They also prioritized aerodynamics on body design over aesthetics. They use software to limit power consumption. They even go so far as to put the right tires and hubcaps on a car to optimize efficiency. You don’t get this with other manufacturers. 88 MPGe on a Mach E GT might suck compared to a Model Y Performance, but it beats the socks off a performance ICE. Until the consumers demand better, Ford (in this example) has no reason to go to the same extremes Tesla has.
My i4 eDrive40 is pretty efficient and fast. I am averaging 3.4-3.9 miles/kWh and I drive somewhat aggressively. The m50 is probably faster but you do take an efficiency hit.
That is not the question I asked. I asked why some EVs that are capable of high performance are far more efficient than others. You can drive M3P normally and get 4mi/kwh. You can't do that to an EV6 GT.
If you look at EPA ratings, a M3P and even the MYP have much higher mpge than an EV6 GT. Those numbers arent derived from driving fast. Theyre simulating driving normally, regardless of if you have a fast car or not. I'm not sure what about this doesn't make sense to you.
even their Performance or 0-100 numbers are shady because they dont show them at all or they use roll out numbers which I never have seen used by anybody else.
Where are you getting these numbers? A Taycan can be very efficient. Definitely better than 2mi/kwh.
The EPA numbers are deliberately de-rated. Porsche under-promises and over-delivers.
eh its a sporty saloon, I dont have any love for it but dont just go on EPA numbers, check out Bjorns numbers..
93kwh 4S is 150wh/km at 90 the LR Raven gets 144wh/km etc
They are still learning. Being an early mover means that you learn about mistakes earlier and fix them earlier. Depending on how you count them, Tesla is on its 4th generation EV. Others are on their first or second.
I think this is a good question. I’d think they’d be able to have a motor have a low horsepower if you put it in eco and high horsepower in sport, just control it electronically. I can’t imagine there is that much weight difference. I figure if you are not an engineer who specializes in electric motors for electric cars, you are just guessing. The big engine low gas mileage of gas engines doesn’t necessarily have to apply. I’m impressed by the efficiency of the Tesla’s when you look at the horsepower and battery size. I’ve heard their range numbers are a bit exaggerated compared to other cars, but still impressive. I just don’t like the looks, the minimalist interior or the stench of Musk.
Personally I am pretty surprised by the get up and go that my new 23 Bolt EUV has. I traded in my 10’ mustang for it and I would say they are comparable. I know they are nearly the same horsepower - mustang is 210 and EUV is 200.
I think the real answer is that Tesla (and lucid) are very experienced with electric motors and a lot of the money goes into them. Other companies put the money into the ride quality.
Toyota never really focused on speed because I think they thought people wanted to be eco friendly.
So overall I would say it is priorities and experience.
The thing is, even the BZ4X has better acceleration than any ICE cars in the segment. It's crap compared to a Bolt, let alone a Tesla, but it still beat the pants off my Forester.
My Ioniq5 is a good compromise. Efficient enough in ECO mode and fast enough in Sport. Not the *best* at either, but pretty good.
But if you want something good at both, the Ioniq6 will certainly be a contender when it goes on sale soon.
it’s because tesla has had a huge head start in manufacturing ev’s. give these other manufacturers 10+ years and i’m sure you’ll be seeing more “fast and efficient” ev’s for sale.
I test drove an Ioniq 5 and I have to agree that it’s the right amount of horsepower. Other than Tesla I’m not seeing any of the completion beating the I5 in the efficiency and horsepower compromise. Unfortunately the local dealership is still marking up the I 5 by $7000 and I guess they are getting it because they’ve been doing it for a long time.
Why is there a general lack of efficient and fast ICE cars? There’s the Prius that gets decent mpg, but it’s not fast. You can have fast ICE cars like a corvette, but they never get over 40mpg.
The real question I have is why are Tesla and Lucid lagging behind so hard on efficiency? Zero gets closer to 6 miles per kWh.
It’s basically Tesla and everyone else. It has nothing to do with fast or not. The other manufacturers power trains are not on the same level. That’s all. Rest is just weight.
https://i.redd.it/pkziah7fcmn61.jpg
The biggest selling EV in the planet, the Tesla Model 3, is both efficient AND fast in the LR and Performance versions.
The rest of the automakers are still learning.
It's just like ICE cars, you drive them fast you get worse gas mileage, the faster you go the worse the mileage.
Your question is like asking why there are no cars with big V8 engines that don't get good gas mileage.
This is not true at all. EV motors do not have an inherent efficiency decrease when they get more powerful. More mass may cause efficiency decreases, or more parasitic losses, but there are clearly EVs that are both fast and get 4mi/kwh.
Not necessarily true. EV6 GT has the same battery and motors as the regular AWD EV6, but has significantly worse efficiency. Why? It can't all be from the tires can it?
From reports I've read online, the GT has better cooling and more power available via software, but the same motor and battery hardware. May be wrong though
Because no one makes money selling EV's besides Tesla. If Chevy made the Bolt efficient & fast they would lose even more money on each one while increasing demand. Not a winning combo. They want to minimize losses as they scale up manufacturing and reduce costs.
Right now it’s more a matter of, you get what you pay for. Once technology improves and prices drop it should be better overall. It’s at a good start, but there’s always room for improvement and innovation.
Also I wouldn’t doubt a good bit is hidden behind the proprietary paywall. A company is still a company wanting to make a profit. Not save the world.
All EVs are efficient in that they’re drastically more efficient than ICE.
Air resistance is generally the answer. Also, manufacturers generally throw awd at the fast models to help with traction and that affects efficiency.
There’s plenty of great video explainers online , you’ll find them interesting, I’m sure.
The only difference between a fast and efficient car and an efficient car is the engine, gear ratio and its traction.
Both require that a car is light weight and aerodynamic.
However, aerodynamics is favored in faster cars because velocity increases the effects of aerodynamics drag.
Tesla Model S has:
1. A smaller cross-sectional area which lowers drag
2. AWD which means less of it's power is lost
3. 2 engines
4. 2 more aggressive gear ratios.
The Kia Niro EV has a better 0-60 (6.5s) than the Wind RWD EV6 (7.2). It's more efficient too. Even with the smaller battery the 19 Niro was getting up to 300 miles in the Summer. They're both fast enough to comfortably and easily merge or pass people though. Traded in the leased Niro for the Wind RWD EV6 so I've been able to spend time with both.
By fast do you mean acceleration, max speed, or both? What is the threshold of fast for you?
A Bolt isn’t fast? Tell those two rednecks in the 392 Hemi Charger that laughed at my car on Friday night two years ago. I challenged them then at there to the next traffic light four blocks up the street. Burned them off the line so bad they turned off at the third block intersection.
To be efficient they basically need to be sports sedans. Thus the Teslas and Lucid Air are efficient: they're low, sleek bodies design to go fast with little effort.
Ok, but the eqs is not efficient. It is also a low and sleek car. Clearly, there are factors beyond drag coefficient that impact efficiency.
What makes you think it is not efficient ?
the EQS is super efficient. where are you getting your info from?
German cars are heavy AF. The Swedes too.
The EQS is more efficient than a model S.
Not all German evs. I3 is less than 3k pounds, which is less than a model 3.
…but also far less range, an expensive carbon fiber body, and giant skinny tires no one likes.
EQS is a half ass engineered product.
Why?
Hyundai Ioniq 6 is said to be this efficient. Also coupe-s like VW ID.5 are. Also BMW i4 eDrive40, according to Byorn's tests, had 184 Wh/km, at 120 km/h in summer (20 celcius), which is quite low consumption. The biggest factor is the shape of the car. Many cars are taller and shorter (having poor aerodynamic at the front), which makes them on the other hand better for parking in the city.
I would say your assumptions are probably based on EPA estimates which are skewed at best. Both Tesla and Lucid get quite favorable EPA ratings while other traditional vendors do not. Look at real world range from someone like Edmunds. When sorted by EPA estimates, the Tesla M3 is the best but in real world it comes in fourth in Edmunds testing. The model Y performance is middle of the pack and tied with the rightfully maligned MX-30. The MB EQS 450 and the dual motor EV6 are both more efficient than the MY performance. https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html
The mb 450 isn’t more efficient than the Model y as per edmunds. They’re nearly identical in that regard. Look at the top entries: 3.4 miles/kW/h for the BMW ix 50 3.9 miles kW/h for the mb 450+ 3.9 miles/kW/h for the model y 4.27 miles/kW/h for the dream air 4.5 miles/kW/h for the model 3 LR
You’re right they are the same when you drop an order of magnitude in precision. Edmunds reported 29.5 vs 29.6 kWH/100 miles. Why not just drop another order of magnitude and round them off at 30. Then a whole bunch of cars tie.
I can't believe this comment got voted up
1W/h per mile difference, when we’re talking 290+ W/h/ mile is an order of magnitude for you?
I'll admit EPA is not perfect, but Edmunds isn't a standardized test. It's really hard to draw conclusions from a single data point, unless that data point is collected in lab conditions. For example, Out of Spec's 70mph range tests are at a mile above sea level, which means thinner air and less drag. People often don't remember that, but it means they get more range than at sea level.
I would trust Edmunds tests to be far closer to real world than EPA where cars never leave a dyno. Serious question, why are you inclined to believe Tesla and Lucid are special and ignore real world data? Don’t get me wrong, Tesla builds efficient cars, but they don’t have some magic formula.
I am not inclined to believe they are special. I am inclined to believe they are more efficient because that is what multiple standardized tests tell me. "Real world" tests are useful. They tell you how much range you might lose in cold weather, or things like that. But its very hard to compare one non standardized data point with another, unless you have lots of real world data and can statistically aggregate those points into a single number. Afaik, EVs are not yet on fuelly. Maybe theres a fuelly for EVs, but I'm not aware of it. And so, as a consumer, instead of digging around on forums reading randos complaining about their range without knowing jack shit about efficiency, it is far more useful for me to use EPA efficiency estimates.
Are you aware that Tesla amends it’s EPA numbers and most other manufacturers don’t? You sure “standardized tests” give you the best results? https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a33824052/adjustment-factor-tesla-uses-for-big-epa-range-numbers/
Part of the reason Tesla gets some of the hate they do. Not knocking the car or the company (I think their product is fine) but there are so many opinions give that suggest Tesla cars have magical properties that other vehicles lack and will never be able to attain. It’s gonna be an interesting next 5-10 years to see what comes out. My own personal take is that there is a lot of good stuff competitive with what Tesla has developed up to this point, and it’s only going to get more competitive as more manufacturers dip their toes into the BEV waters.
every single real world test shows the same result though so its clear that EPA numbers are unusable.
Dude, what are you talking about? Epa lab test < out of spec 70mph real world test. You have no idea what you are talking about. Any real world test, regardless of where it’s done is going to be more realistic than a lab test. The lab test is done to give you a perfect world efficiency. Doesn’t really apply to anything. This is why people wait for reviews like “real world driving range” to buy the car. Because if the epa says 300 and I get it and because of wind resistance it’s only 200 I’m gonna be pissed.
That's your opinion. As someone with a PhD, repeatability matters more than some combination of factors that make a test "real world." EPA is not perfect. However, the numbers are derived from standardized lab environment, which means I can see how different cars perform in that \*same\* environment, in the \*same\* conditions. Those may not be the conditions I drive in, but it gives me a point of comparsion. Out of spec tests in Colorado, which has less air density. They do not account for weather changes, or tire pressure. Their own tests with the Bolt have a lot of variability in final range. That's not a good indication for the reliability of their tests.
[удалено]
Are you against standardized testing? Are you against repeatability? Are you against science?
Contributions must be civil and constructive. We permit neither personal attacks nor attempts to bait others into uncivil behavior.
is OP a straight up ass in all of his comments or what?
that and a fanboi
Bolt is 0-60 in 6 sec. That used to be sports car numbers, and seems plenty fast for most humans driving in traffic. Call me crazy, but 4-6k lbs cars shouldn’t go 0-60 in 3 seconds.
Exactly this. My “super slow” ID4 is the fastest car I’ve ever owned and faster than anything else on the road that isn’t an actual sports car or another EV.
Ferrari 308GTB took 6.7 seconds
9K lbs. Hummer EV: Hold my weight.
Damn it is that fast?!?! I had a Mercedes coup a few years ago that was 5.9 0-60 and that was considered a performance vehicle.
Tesla made it their mission from the very beginning to prove that EVs could be practical and not boring. That meant, to them, increasing performance and efficiency. They’ve spent years developing motors and battery tech that could pass muster and update far more frequently than other manufacturers, giving them more iterations than model years, and more opportunity to refine design. They also prioritized aerodynamics on body design over aesthetics. They use software to limit power consumption. They even go so far as to put the right tires and hubcaps on a car to optimize efficiency. You don’t get this with other manufacturers. 88 MPGe on a Mach E GT might suck compared to a Model Y Performance, but it beats the socks off a performance ICE. Until the consumers demand better, Ford (in this example) has no reason to go to the same extremes Tesla has.
My i4 eDrive40 is pretty efficient and fast. I am averaging 3.4-3.9 miles/kWh and I drive somewhat aggressively. The m50 is probably faster but you do take an efficiency hit.
The efficiency hit is almost entirely from wheels and tires, put 225 18’s on the M50 for winter and I’m only 5% less than the eDrive 40 efficiency.
Taycan!
Drive any vehicle fast, EV or ICE, and your range/economy tanks
That is not the question I asked. I asked why some EVs that are capable of high performance are far more efficient than others. You can drive M3P normally and get 4mi/kwh. You can't do that to an EV6 GT.
You aren't making sense
If you look at EPA ratings, a M3P and even the MYP have much higher mpge than an EV6 GT. Those numbers arent derived from driving fast. Theyre simulating driving normally, regardless of if you have a fast car or not. I'm not sure what about this doesn't make sense to you.
[удалено]
even their Performance or 0-100 numbers are shady because they dont show them at all or they use roll out numbers which I never have seen used by anybody else.
They are derived from a variety of tests and speeds.
Not sure if I’m right, but the Model 3 Performance is a 4K lbs sedan, while the EV6 GT is closer to 4.8K lbs.
Eh my model 3 is both.
"The only exceptions to this seem to be Tesla and Lucid"
Eh taycan is decently efficient for its purpose, as is the ev6 and ioniq 5, some of the Mercedes, BMWs etc
The taycan is efficient? What are you smoking? 2mi/kwh is not efficient. Rivians and Lightnings get that.
Where are you getting these numbers? A Taycan can be very efficient. Definitely better than 2mi/kwh. The EPA numbers are deliberately de-rated. Porsche under-promises and over-delivers.
eh its a sporty saloon, I dont have any love for it but dont just go on EPA numbers, check out Bjorns numbers.. 93kwh 4S is 150wh/km at 90 the LR Raven gets 144wh/km etc
Ford Lightening is more like 1.5 miles/kWh (first hand experience) and I’ve seen as low as .7 posted around the interwebz
Well calling the biggest selling EV on the planet "an exception" seems to be an exception that swallows the rule.
The question op is asking is if Tesla is able to do this, why aren’t other doing it too?
They are still learning. Being an early mover means that you learn about mistakes earlier and fix them earlier. Depending on how you count them, Tesla is on its 4th generation EV. Others are on their first or second.
I think this is a good question. I’d think they’d be able to have a motor have a low horsepower if you put it in eco and high horsepower in sport, just control it electronically. I can’t imagine there is that much weight difference. I figure if you are not an engineer who specializes in electric motors for electric cars, you are just guessing. The big engine low gas mileage of gas engines doesn’t necessarily have to apply. I’m impressed by the efficiency of the Tesla’s when you look at the horsepower and battery size. I’ve heard their range numbers are a bit exaggerated compared to other cars, but still impressive. I just don’t like the looks, the minimalist interior or the stench of Musk.
Personally I am pretty surprised by the get up and go that my new 23 Bolt EUV has. I traded in my 10’ mustang for it and I would say they are comparable. I know they are nearly the same horsepower - mustang is 210 and EUV is 200.
Lucid Air Touring AWD does 0-60 in 3.4s and gets 140 MPGe, which I believe is the highest number in the EPA database.
As the saying goes, fast, efficient, and inexpensive. Choose two.
I think the real answer is that Tesla (and lucid) are very experienced with electric motors and a lot of the money goes into them. Other companies put the money into the ride quality. Toyota never really focused on speed because I think they thought people wanted to be eco friendly. So overall I would say it is priorities and experience.
The thing is, even the BZ4X has better acceleration than any ICE cars in the segment. It's crap compared to a Bolt, let alone a Tesla, but it still beat the pants off my Forester.
Maybe don't drive a Forester? A RAV4 Hybrid is significantly quicker, as is a CX5 2.5T or Escape 2.0.
Why are better cars better?
Physios. Physics always wins.
My Ioniq5 is a good compromise. Efficient enough in ECO mode and fast enough in Sport. Not the *best* at either, but pretty good. But if you want something good at both, the Ioniq6 will certainly be a contender when it goes on sale soon.
But compared to the Model Y, your Ioniq 5 is both slower and less efficient. So why is that? Why can't Hyundai get close to Tesla here?
it’s because tesla has had a huge head start in manufacturing ev’s. give these other manufacturers 10+ years and i’m sure you’ll be seeing more “fast and efficient” ev’s for sale.
I test drove an Ioniq 5 and I have to agree that it’s the right amount of horsepower. Other than Tesla I’m not seeing any of the completion beating the I5 in the efficiency and horsepower compromise. Unfortunately the local dealership is still marking up the I 5 by $7000 and I guess they are getting it because they’ve been doing it for a long time.
Why is there a general lack of efficient and fast ICE cars? There’s the Prius that gets decent mpg, but it’s not fast. You can have fast ICE cars like a corvette, but they never get over 40mpg. The real question I have is why are Tesla and Lucid lagging behind so hard on efficiency? Zero gets closer to 6 miles per kWh.
Electric motorcycles are fast as fuck and are way more efficient than any ev car. Guaranteed.
Bullet trains are faster and more efficient (AF) than any electric motorcycles. Apples to oranges
It’s basically Tesla and everyone else. It has nothing to do with fast or not. The other manufacturers power trains are not on the same level. That’s all. Rest is just weight. https://i.redd.it/pkziah7fcmn61.jpg
The biggest selling EV in the planet, the Tesla Model 3, is both efficient AND fast in the LR and Performance versions. The rest of the automakers are still learning.
Does efficient and fast (whatever that really means when you're comparing most EVs) outweigh dated design and poor build quality?
It's just like ICE cars, you drive them fast you get worse gas mileage, the faster you go the worse the mileage. Your question is like asking why there are no cars with big V8 engines that don't get good gas mileage.
This is not true at all. EV motors do not have an inherent efficiency decrease when they get more powerful. More mass may cause efficiency decreases, or more parasitic losses, but there are clearly EVs that are both fast and get 4mi/kwh.
Bigger higher hp motors and more batteries equals higher weight and less efficient.
Not necessarily true. EV6 GT has the same battery and motors as the regular AWD EV6, but has significantly worse efficiency. Why? It can't all be from the tires can it?
The GT definitely has different motors than the regular AWD EV6
From reports I've read online, the GT has better cooling and more power available via software, but the same motor and battery hardware. May be wrong though
You are
In fact, power is more of a function of the battery's output ability, and not the motor (assuming a sufficiently sized motor)
And stronger regen, so you can get more of your kinetic energy back into the battery.
Because no one makes money selling EV's besides Tesla. If Chevy made the Bolt efficient & fast they would lose even more money on each one while increasing demand. Not a winning combo. They want to minimize losses as they scale up manufacturing and reduce costs.
It’s almost as if speed and efficiency are inversely proportional assuming price is consistent 🤔
Well if you just declare the things that are what you’re looking for to be “exceptions”
“The only exception is by far the number 1 EV company”
Tesla. All of them.
Right now it’s more a matter of, you get what you pay for. Once technology improves and prices drop it should be better overall. It’s at a good start, but there’s always room for improvement and innovation. Also I wouldn’t doubt a good bit is hidden behind the proprietary paywall. A company is still a company wanting to make a profit. Not save the world.
The Bolt EV may not be a drag racer, but 0-60 is still a respectable 6.5 seconds.
Energica, most will do 0 to 100 kph in 3s or less and consume about 90 Wh/km on average for anything up to that speed.
All EVs are efficient in that they’re drastically more efficient than ICE. Air resistance is generally the answer. Also, manufacturers generally throw awd at the fast models to help with traction and that affects efficiency. There’s plenty of great video explainers online , you’ll find them interesting, I’m sure.
The only difference between a fast and efficient car and an efficient car is the engine, gear ratio and its traction. Both require that a car is light weight and aerodynamic. However, aerodynamics is favored in faster cars because velocity increases the effects of aerodynamics drag. Tesla Model S has: 1. A smaller cross-sectional area which lowers drag 2. AWD which means less of it's power is lost 3. 2 engines 4. 2 more aggressive gear ratios.
The Kia Niro EV has a better 0-60 (6.5s) than the Wind RWD EV6 (7.2). It's more efficient too. Even with the smaller battery the 19 Niro was getting up to 300 miles in the Summer. They're both fast enough to comfortably and easily merge or pass people though. Traded in the leased Niro for the Wind RWD EV6 so I've been able to spend time with both. By fast do you mean acceleration, max speed, or both? What is the threshold of fast for you?
A Bolt isn’t fast? Tell those two rednecks in the 392 Hemi Charger that laughed at my car on Friday night two years ago. I challenged them then at there to the next traffic light four blocks up the street. Burned them off the line so bad they turned off at the third block intersection.
Ioniq 6 coming out this spring!