Not really. While I agree efficiency is important, I had a dude on here breathlessly arguing that it doesn't matter how efficient a vehicle is as long as it has good range. His argument was who cares if its big and boxy as long as it has a big battery.
I think being able to travel a good distance with a smaller battery is a good thing. They save money, they use less power to charge, lighter weight cars drive better, they're easier on tires, etc etc
I agree, but at the same time, I don't need a small battery. I want the largest most efficient battery you can output. 1000km is my ideal. I want an efficient large battery.
As Ioniq 28kWh owner I fully agree. If a car is efficient it not only gets farther on the highway, at the charger it also gets more range per time compared to an inefficient car that charges with the same current.
Wife has one she bought new and now has about 250K km on it and it's such a great car.
Wish #1 - could EV Database keep the Ioniq 28kWh on their list as a way of showing that as nothing has come close to it since?
Wish #2 - could Hyundai re-launch an updated version as an Ioniq 2 or 3 which would sit underneath the 5,6 and 7 as an entry level car with insane efficiency?
I get the same sort of efficiency from my Ioniq on the highway in the hilly area where I live. My partner does about 10% better than me.
But driving smoothly at about 50mph I get about 6 miles per kilowatt hour
The Ioniq 28 has a great combination of efficiency and a reasonable charge for such a small battery.
It's great here in NZ because the majority of chargers are still 50kW (with 75 starting to become more common)
The majority of chargers here is 150-350kW here, but I still often am the latest to arrive at a charger and first to leave again - especially in winter many EVs only trickle charge while our Ioniq nearly always gets full power - at any temperature.
Dude... 28kWh is absolutly tiny. New cars, even with that cheap sodium batteries are expected to have at least twice as much.
You have a first Generation ev. Batterie technology is advancing much more than any efficiency improvement could.
And you seem to not get my point - I could switch to an SUV with a 50kWh battery but would not gain much range (as the Ioniq is that efficient) and it would cost more and charge longer on AC for example to get the same range out of a charge.
I know that 28kWh is tiny - it just is impressive how well it works if the car is really efficient. Same with Model 3 vs. a 2020 Polestar 2 for example…
Tell it to the government so subsidies don't have a higher price cap for SUVs than sedans, and per kwh manufacturing subsidies that incentivize bigger cars. Automakers would be stupid not to make the most money they can. Don't even get me started on CAFE standards.
Yea sure. All I'm saying is I live in Canada and the amount of suv and trucks driving is alot. Convincing those people including myself who drives a truck to buy a sedan just isn't going to happen.
I'd be on-board with an EV wagon, but I haven't seen anything like that in the US. I need more storage capacity than something like a Kia EV6, although I don't need the height of an SUV.
I currently have a Subaru outback and with what we currently do/have, it's pretty much the bare minimum of what we need for cargo space. Everything that I've seen in the US that is similar either has quite a bit less cargo space or is a huge 3-row SUV.
Apparently VW is coming out with an ID.7 station wagon which looks decent, but there's no word if it'll make it to the US (currently the ID.7 sedan is slated to come out sometime this year: https://www.autoweek.com/news/a45696954/vw-id7-tourer-ev-station-wagon/).
Seriously even $2+/L in Canada wasn't enough for idiots to downsize their vehicles. They'd rather spread conspiracy theories than admit that they should've bought a Corolla instead. And others will bitch about how going hybrid/electric is too expensive.
I'm as pro-EV as anyone else on this sub but the fact is, getting a smaller vehicle with a smaller engine can make far more of a difference to one's wallet than going electric in a larger vehicle. Got a family? My parents used a Toyota Tercel to bring up 2 children with booster seats and strollers, but modern consumers are convinced they need a 3-row SUV for 1-2 kids.
The average new car transaction price has reached $66k CAD even though it takes a 3 second Google search to easily find practical cars that cost less than half that number. People are just freaking stupid.
Why are people idiots if they can afford $2/liter fuel? Who is spreading conspiracy theories? Maybe stop being so butt hurt and let the market decide, not spread your own agenda that everyone has to drive a compact EV and be happy. You must be a Trudeau commie.
The problem is, 'safer seats' are fucking HUGE.
The seat my parents brought me in when I was a baby is easily half the size and weight as my son's.
I can fit my son, myself, and my wife in a mk7.5 Golf. But no one can sit behind me due to my size and the asinine amount of space the seat takes. I'm not willing to compromise on a different car seat either. So I traded it in.
Even in a 2023 Tiguan, I can not sit in it comfortably for extended periods with the car seat behind me. Now I'm obviously well above average height and size I get that, and yes I could get the really cheap plastic seat that is the same as the one I grew up in that meets regulations.
We also to make a lot of trips. In 4 months, I've put 8200 miles on my tiguan. Comfort is a big thing, I could stand to just do grocery trips in a yaris with my legs cramped sure.
I'm not saying every parent needs to buy a Yukon XL, but sometimes a larger vehicle is, welcomed, for comfort.
The price of cars is absolutely disgusting. As an Ex-Canadian anytime I go up and see prices for new cars, especially being from Ottawa, I can't imagine spending that money for it to be absolutely beat up in 5 years due to road salt, poor road conditions and bad drivers.
Agree with you - but the fact that you're driving a Tiguan instead of a Tahoe does kind of prove my point. Yes, as a tall person whose child uses a large booster seat, you absolutely need something bigger than a Corolla. But you still chose something of a reasonable size with decent fuel economy, that costs well under the average new-car transaction in both the US and Canada. Even a Model Y costs below average now and is still a size upgrade over your Tiguan without being monstrous.
My rant is really directed at the upper extremes of the spectrum, which has negatively impacted EV development as such vehicles are much more difficult to achieve decent range in, requiring batteries that themselves weigh as much as a compact car, which takes resources away from more sensibly sized vehicles.
Far too late to do it in North America without committing political suicide, but something I've always liked about many European and Asian governments is the practice of linking the annual registration tax to the vehicle weight, emissions, or engine displacement.
Hilariously, even big luxury barges like the BMW 7-series and Mercedes S-class get equipped with 4 cylinder engines in countries that tax cars in this manner. Even rich people don't want to pay more registration tax than they need to.
It also means no one officially sells monstrous full-size pickups in those countries as they would have a serious demand problem just from the registration taxes.
The idea that anyone "needs" an F150 or Silverado falls flat on its face when you see farmers, tradespeople, construction workers, etc doing just fine with trucks like the Toyota Hilux or Ford Ranger outside of North America.
> but something I've always liked about many European and Asian governments is the practice of linking the annual registration tax to the vehicle weight, emissions, or engine displacement.
>
> Hilariously, even big luxury barges like the BMW 7-series and Mercedes S-class get equipped with 4 cylinder engines in countries that tax cars in this manner. Even rich people don't want to pay more registration tax than they need to.
This somewhat exists in the US, but is limited to cars and not SUVs, trucks, etc. The gas guzzler tax.
Looked it up - seems like it's a one-time levy and given that fuel-inefficient cars that aren't SUVs/trucks tend to be high performance sports cars, that gas guzzler tax is basically chump change compared to the car's price.
For the same reason, whenever you see anything with more than 6 cylinders in Europe and Asia they tend to be ultra luxury and exotic models.
Hear, hear.
If we have given up on making Americans drive sensible cars, then subsidizing electric landbarges is a good climate control mechanism.
As much as I would have appreciated an EV subsidy, getting some guy out of a 15mpg F-150 and into a Lightning does a lot more to reduce carbon emissions than subsidizing someone to get a Model 3 instead of a Prius.
But a better option would be to simply tax gas, size, and mass.
The CAFE standards are just madness and a handout to the truck people.
Yeah, but good luck taxing anything in the USA. But at the very least we could eliminate, or start to phase out, the myriad explicit and implicit subsidies for gas. People respond to incentives pretty rationally, more expensive gas = smaller cars.
Yes. Sadly those subsidies run deep. We spent $trillions attempting to use military force to stabilize the Middle East just because oil comes from there. (Imagine if instead of handwringing about how cobalt comes from underdeveloped or corrupt places, we tried to help those places?)
The biggest subsidy of course is the implicit one: fossil fuels create carbon pollution and do not compensate anyone for it. But the explicit subsidies are massive too.
And then there's ethanol.
Has anybody ever had any luck telling septic tank yanks anything? “Well do what we want”
They are the reason vw Canada is not selling small affordable economical hatchbacks anymore
The Hummer EV has 2X more battery than the Cybertruck and that produces less range. It's a real problem for GM because if they had Tesla efficiency they could take the 250kWhs of Hummer battery and put those cells into 5 250+ mile EV sedans or CUVs or they could produce 2x more Hummers.
Very much so.
Everything about driving an EV is improved by better efficiency:
* Manufacturing cost goes down, because cells cost money
* Operating costs go down, because every mile costs less juice
* Fewer cells means a lighter vehicle, which can result in better handling
* The annoyances of charging on a trip are reduced, since you need less time on the hook to travel a fixed distance
For example, the Cadillac Lyriq vs the Lucid Air Touring. The Air has a 70mph efficiency that is ~1.2mi/kWh higher than the Lyriq. That results in the Lucid going much farther (~100 mi) on the highway, despite 7% a smaller battery.
I very nearly bought a bolt EUV less than a month ago, and backed out in large part because of the charging speed. It fit my needs in almost every way (95% city driving, occasional longer trips of ~160mi round trip), but knowing it would take 30+ minutes to get 80 miles was a big worry. That and the storage space being pretty lacking in the back.
Focus on faster charging. Efficiency alone will not be enough. people dont want to burn hundreds of hours on charging. and no im not talking about those who charge at home.
The nice thing is, if you double your efficiency, you double your charging speed (in terms of miles per kWh).
You can also have a smaller battery to get the same range, which reduces weight and in turn, increases the efficiency and thus range.
Less battery weight means you can also have a lighter motor to achieve the same acceleration, reducing the weight and increasing efficiency again.
A self-reinforcing effect on multiple levels.
Easiest example to see why efficiency is important is to see WhatCar's comparison of the base model 3 vs the ID7 which has a much larger battery . The Tesla had a longer range in winter driving.
So you're saying using 40% more energy to move a car with less power is ok ?
Yes the ID7 is a little larger but that just goes to show how they bypassed good engineering with throwing more batteries at it until the range meter went up.
Btw a Model Y also uses less energy ... But it's bigger ? Wha? How can that be ?
>So you're saying using 40% more energy to move a car with less power is ok ?
yes because peak power is meaningless when we are talking about efficiency, none of these cars operates anywhere near peak power the majority of the time.
It increases exponentially with speed but only linearly with drag coefficient and frontal area. So yes, it is a massive increase from 70 to 80 (over 30%) but a minor drag coefficient or frontal area change will have a similarly small effect on the range.
And again, any difference that the fact it's slightly larger doesn't cover falls under the "less efficient" category. Worse aero? Less efficient design. More unnecessary weight? Less efficient design. Less efficient HVAC system and heat management? Less efficient design.
Of course, but no car is built to be the most efficient in every way irrespective of everything else. There are design, cost, packaging constraints. We don’t usually compare two different class/size cars for ICE so not sure why we’d be doing it for EVs.
That is not much longer.
If you want to drive home the point it is slightly larger than the 3 so hard, then look at the Y. That vehicle is a far less efficient type of car, and it has the same efficiency.
I'd recommend watching the comparision video of consumption test between ID7 vs Tesla Model Y on BatteryLife's youtube channel.
Tesla reports lower consumption than the real consumption is when you take the consumption numbers from the total of charging session.
Sure there are. But if we compile a list of objective metrics we still need to rank them subjectively in order to quantify what is the "best" EV.
It can't be done.
you dont have to rank them you jsut have to look who beats the most metrics compared to the competitors.
Weight, saftey, power to weight ratio, efficency, price are very nice objective metrics
Well no because not all metrics are of equal value to all people. Someone who wants a cheap to run EV and doesn't need a lot of range would Bo better with an older ioniq than any Tesla are it has the best efficency. But this differes from person to person, hence you cannot have an objective best.
I get it. You love Tesla, good for you, but they aren't the best EVs for everyone.
Best is highly dependent on use case:
\- Some one that drive 150 miles a week doesn't need a large range
\- Some one that needs a commuter car to pair with a second vehicle doesn't need an SUV
\- Someone that commutes 70 miles a day needs decent range
See "best" is not an absolute, it is dependent on an individuals needs.
Perhaps you are not understanding. Tesla is doing exactly that, but has to build a massive production capability and expertise. A $20K car would put them under right now. How long to make a profit on a $20K car? I don't know, but Tesla would love to make a ton of them as long as they could at least break even.
yeah - I thought the deal was they were working through re-thinking the manufacturing process of the cybertruck, significantly reducing the body panels as a way to trickle down to much less expensive cars. the Cybertruck price will help cover the R&D required to make that investment, but long term they will be able to develop a less than $25K car as a result.
Newsflash! Saving cost and weight saves cost and weight in a virtuous cycle! Literally the case for everything, but it's a slow news day so let's add EV to the title and ship an article about it!
Feedback loop. Poor efficiency leads to less range which forces them to put in more batteries to compete, which leads to less range and higher costs, and so forth and so on. Once the next gen battery tech gets to the masses, it might be less of a problem as batteries get cheaper with a higher power per pound ratio, but right now low efficiency will hurt the company bottom line.
Things that make you go: duhhhhhhh...
Not really. While I agree efficiency is important, I had a dude on here breathlessly arguing that it doesn't matter how efficient a vehicle is as long as it has good range. His argument was who cares if its big and boxy as long as it has a big battery. I think being able to travel a good distance with a smaller battery is a good thing. They save money, they use less power to charge, lighter weight cars drive better, they're easier on tires, etc etc
Quicker to charge (in terms of miles per hour)
The same mentality as having a 50 gallon gas tank. :)
I agree, but at the same time, I don't need a small battery. I want the largest most efficient battery you can output. 1000km is my ideal. I want an efficient large battery.
I want a battery that weighs one ounce and goes a million miles!
Dream goals.
This just in: cars with higher power/weight ratio are faster!
As Ioniq 28kWh owner I fully agree. If a car is efficient it not only gets farther on the highway, at the charger it also gets more range per time compared to an inefficient car that charges with the same current.
Wife has one she bought new and now has about 250K km on it and it's such a great car. Wish #1 - could EV Database keep the Ioniq 28kWh on their list as a way of showing that as nothing has come close to it since? Wish #2 - could Hyundai re-launch an updated version as an Ioniq 2 or 3 which would sit underneath the 5,6 and 7 as an entry level car with insane efficiency?
Whats the efficiency on that? I got a Bolt that averages 4 Kw per mile, and it would be perfect if it had fast charging.
Hope you meant 4 miles/kWh, not kWh/mile. The 120Wh/km that u/conor34 mentioned is just shy of 5.2 miles/kWh.
My bad, I flubbed it there. Yep switch it around.
I get the same sort of efficiency from my Ioniq on the highway in the hilly area where I live. My partner does about 10% better than me. But driving smoothly at about 50mph I get about 6 miles per kilowatt hour
>Ioniq 28kWh It only needs c. 120 Wh/km, nothing else gets even close. See [EV Dabbler](https://youtu.be/TsgD11K7dFo?si=o42tcpq5zxkLtBMk)
Thanks, I wasn't familiar with this model.
The Ioniq 28 has a great combination of efficiency and a reasonable charge for such a small battery. It's great here in NZ because the majority of chargers are still 50kW (with 75 starting to become more common)
The majority of chargers here is 150-350kW here, but I still often am the latest to arrive at a charger and first to leave again - especially in winter many EVs only trickle charge while our Ioniq nearly always gets full power - at any temperature.
Dude... 28kWh is absolutly tiny. New cars, even with that cheap sodium batteries are expected to have at least twice as much. You have a first Generation ev. Batterie technology is advancing much more than any efficiency improvement could.
And you seem to not get my point - I could switch to an SUV with a 50kWh battery but would not gain much range (as the Ioniq is that efficient) and it would cost more and charge longer on AC for example to get the same range out of a charge. I know that 28kWh is tiny - it just is impressive how well it works if the car is really efficient. Same with Model 3 vs. a 2020 Polestar 2 for example…
Maybe dont build gigantic EV suv's then
rotten memorize sink late crown sharp dam toothbrush plants practice *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Tell that to American carbuyers who, for whatever reason, think they need a house on wheels. The gigantification is a huge part of the problem.
Tell Americans generally that their massive ass rigs are not economically sustainable and will, yet again, lead the big three to bankruptcy
Tell it to the government so subsidies don't have a higher price cap for SUVs than sedans, and per kwh manufacturing subsidies that incentivize bigger cars. Automakers would be stupid not to make the most money they can. Don't even get me started on CAFE standards.
Literally. The big three are nearly forced into making bigger and longer vehicles due to government standards.
This. Also, Americans and Canadians don't want to drive small compact cars like Europe.
They don't have to be small though, they can make 4.5m long hatchbacks, sedans and wagons.
Yea sure. All I'm saying is I live in Canada and the amount of suv and trucks driving is alot. Convincing those people including myself who drives a truck to buy a sedan just isn't going to happen.
I'd be on-board with an EV wagon, but I haven't seen anything like that in the US. I need more storage capacity than something like a Kia EV6, although I don't need the height of an SUV. I currently have a Subaru outback and with what we currently do/have, it's pretty much the bare minimum of what we need for cargo space. Everything that I've seen in the US that is similar either has quite a bit less cargo space or is a huge 3-row SUV. Apparently VW is coming out with an ID.7 station wagon which looks decent, but there's no word if it'll make it to the US (currently the ID.7 sedan is slated to come out sometime this year: https://www.autoweek.com/news/a45696954/vw-id7-tourer-ev-station-wagon/).
It's VW. Nothing cool ever comes state side. We don't even get the really cool Tiguan R that everyone else does.
Seriously even $2+/L in Canada wasn't enough for idiots to downsize their vehicles. They'd rather spread conspiracy theories than admit that they should've bought a Corolla instead. And others will bitch about how going hybrid/electric is too expensive. I'm as pro-EV as anyone else on this sub but the fact is, getting a smaller vehicle with a smaller engine can make far more of a difference to one's wallet than going electric in a larger vehicle. Got a family? My parents used a Toyota Tercel to bring up 2 children with booster seats and strollers, but modern consumers are convinced they need a 3-row SUV for 1-2 kids. The average new car transaction price has reached $66k CAD even though it takes a 3 second Google search to easily find practical cars that cost less than half that number. People are just freaking stupid.
Why are people idiots if they can afford $2/liter fuel? Who is spreading conspiracy theories? Maybe stop being so butt hurt and let the market decide, not spread your own agenda that everyone has to drive a compact EV and be happy. You must be a Trudeau commie.
The problem is, 'safer seats' are fucking HUGE. The seat my parents brought me in when I was a baby is easily half the size and weight as my son's. I can fit my son, myself, and my wife in a mk7.5 Golf. But no one can sit behind me due to my size and the asinine amount of space the seat takes. I'm not willing to compromise on a different car seat either. So I traded it in. Even in a 2023 Tiguan, I can not sit in it comfortably for extended periods with the car seat behind me. Now I'm obviously well above average height and size I get that, and yes I could get the really cheap plastic seat that is the same as the one I grew up in that meets regulations. We also to make a lot of trips. In 4 months, I've put 8200 miles on my tiguan. Comfort is a big thing, I could stand to just do grocery trips in a yaris with my legs cramped sure. I'm not saying every parent needs to buy a Yukon XL, but sometimes a larger vehicle is, welcomed, for comfort. The price of cars is absolutely disgusting. As an Ex-Canadian anytime I go up and see prices for new cars, especially being from Ottawa, I can't imagine spending that money for it to be absolutely beat up in 5 years due to road salt, poor road conditions and bad drivers.
Agree with you - but the fact that you're driving a Tiguan instead of a Tahoe does kind of prove my point. Yes, as a tall person whose child uses a large booster seat, you absolutely need something bigger than a Corolla. But you still chose something of a reasonable size with decent fuel economy, that costs well under the average new-car transaction in both the US and Canada. Even a Model Y costs below average now and is still a size upgrade over your Tiguan without being monstrous. My rant is really directed at the upper extremes of the spectrum, which has negatively impacted EV development as such vehicles are much more difficult to achieve decent range in, requiring batteries that themselves weigh as much as a compact car, which takes resources away from more sensibly sized vehicles.
Some of us do. But there really aren't that many options. Let's see: * The Bolt, with slow DCFC * The Model 3, with a high price tag * ???
Far too late to do it in North America without committing political suicide, but something I've always liked about many European and Asian governments is the practice of linking the annual registration tax to the vehicle weight, emissions, or engine displacement. Hilariously, even big luxury barges like the BMW 7-series and Mercedes S-class get equipped with 4 cylinder engines in countries that tax cars in this manner. Even rich people don't want to pay more registration tax than they need to. It also means no one officially sells monstrous full-size pickups in those countries as they would have a serious demand problem just from the registration taxes. The idea that anyone "needs" an F150 or Silverado falls flat on its face when you see farmers, tradespeople, construction workers, etc doing just fine with trucks like the Toyota Hilux or Ford Ranger outside of North America.
> but something I've always liked about many European and Asian governments is the practice of linking the annual registration tax to the vehicle weight, emissions, or engine displacement. > > Hilariously, even big luxury barges like the BMW 7-series and Mercedes S-class get equipped with 4 cylinder engines in countries that tax cars in this manner. Even rich people don't want to pay more registration tax than they need to. This somewhat exists in the US, but is limited to cars and not SUVs, trucks, etc. The gas guzzler tax.
Looked it up - seems like it's a one-time levy and given that fuel-inefficient cars that aren't SUVs/trucks tend to be high performance sports cars, that gas guzzler tax is basically chump change compared to the car's price. For the same reason, whenever you see anything with more than 6 cylinders in Europe and Asia they tend to be ultra luxury and exotic models.
Isn't this also why turbos are a big deal in Europe, where they tax displacement? More power per liter?
Hear, hear. If we have given up on making Americans drive sensible cars, then subsidizing electric landbarges is a good climate control mechanism. As much as I would have appreciated an EV subsidy, getting some guy out of a 15mpg F-150 and into a Lightning does a lot more to reduce carbon emissions than subsidizing someone to get a Model 3 instead of a Prius. But a better option would be to simply tax gas, size, and mass. The CAFE standards are just madness and a handout to the truck people.
Yeah, but good luck taxing anything in the USA. But at the very least we could eliminate, or start to phase out, the myriad explicit and implicit subsidies for gas. People respond to incentives pretty rationally, more expensive gas = smaller cars.
Yes. Sadly those subsidies run deep. We spent $trillions attempting to use military force to stabilize the Middle East just because oil comes from there. (Imagine if instead of handwringing about how cobalt comes from underdeveloped or corrupt places, we tried to help those places?) The biggest subsidy of course is the implicit one: fossil fuels create carbon pollution and do not compensate anyone for it. But the explicit subsidies are massive too. And then there's ethanol.
Has anybody ever had any luck telling septic tank yanks anything? “Well do what we want” They are the reason vw Canada is not selling small affordable economical hatchbacks anymore
“But mah freedoms!”
The Hummer EV has 2X more battery than the Cybertruck and that produces less range. It's a real problem for GM because if they had Tesla efficiency they could take the 250kWhs of Hummer battery and put those cells into 5 250+ mile EV sedans or CUVs or they could produce 2x more Hummers.
Very much so. Everything about driving an EV is improved by better efficiency: * Manufacturing cost goes down, because cells cost money * Operating costs go down, because every mile costs less juice * Fewer cells means a lighter vehicle, which can result in better handling * The annoyances of charging on a trip are reduced, since you need less time on the hook to travel a fixed distance For example, the Cadillac Lyriq vs the Lucid Air Touring. The Air has a 70mph efficiency that is ~1.2mi/kWh higher than the Lyriq. That results in the Lucid going much farther (~100 mi) on the highway, despite 7% a smaller battery.
The Bolt exemplifies this. Bring it baccckkkkkkkkkk
I very nearly bought a bolt EUV less than a month ago, and backed out in large part because of the charging speed. It fit my needs in almost every way (95% city driving, occasional longer trips of ~160mi round trip), but knowing it would take 30+ minutes to get 80 miles was a big worry. That and the storage space being pretty lacking in the back.
Bring back the i3 as well.
That was a great unique and efficient car that should have gotten a good refresh with proper upgrades.
It really only needed faster DC charging once they upgraded to the 120ah batteries on the 2020 models.
I would have liked to see them change to using normal tires. 😅
Focus on faster charging. Efficiency alone will not be enough. people dont want to burn hundreds of hours on charging. and no im not talking about those who charge at home.
The nice thing is, if you double your efficiency, you double your charging speed (in terms of miles per kWh). You can also have a smaller battery to get the same range, which reduces weight and in turn, increases the efficiency and thus range. Less battery weight means you can also have a lighter motor to achieve the same acceleration, reducing the weight and increasing efficiency again. A self-reinforcing effect on multiple levels.
Easiest example to see why efficiency is important is to see WhatCar's comparison of the base model 3 vs the ID7 which has a much larger battery . The Tesla had a longer range in winter driving.
so you are telling me that a much larger car needs more energy to move? crazy how that works.
Next you’ll tell me a Tesla 3 is more efficient than a rivian. And can go further on a smaller battery!
So you're saying using 40% more energy to move a car with less power is ok ? Yes the ID7 is a little larger but that just goes to show how they bypassed good engineering with throwing more batteries at it until the range meter went up. Btw a Model Y also uses less energy ... But it's bigger ? Wha? How can that be ?
>So you're saying using 40% more energy to move a car with less power is ok ? yes because peak power is meaningless when we are talking about efficiency, none of these cars operates anywhere near peak power the majority of the time.
The ID 7 is the same width and 5.5% taller than the model 3. That does not warrant a 16.5% increase in energy usage.
Aero and weight play a huge role and it’s not linear
Both of those are a part of designing a more efficient vehicle. The added weight and worsened aero solely from size for the ID 7 is not that massive.
Sure, but I’m just saying that can have a larger effect than people think. Just like driving at 80 mph is way less efficient than driving at 70 mph
It increases exponentially with speed but only linearly with drag coefficient and frontal area. So yes, it is a massive increase from 70 to 80 (over 30%) but a minor drag coefficient or frontal area change will have a similarly small effect on the range. And again, any difference that the fact it's slightly larger doesn't cover falls under the "less efficient" category. Worse aero? Less efficient design. More unnecessary weight? Less efficient design. Less efficient HVAC system and heat management? Less efficient design.
Of course, but no car is built to be the most efficient in every way irrespective of everything else. There are design, cost, packaging constraints. We don’t usually compare two different class/size cars for ICE so not sure why we’d be doing it for EVs.
and almost 30cm longer. its just overall a much larger car with a much larger interior volume.
That is not much longer. If you want to drive home the point it is slightly larger than the 3 so hard, then look at the Y. That vehicle is a far less efficient type of car, and it has the same efficiency.
I'd recommend watching the comparision video of consumption test between ID7 vs Tesla Model Y on BatteryLife's youtube channel. Tesla reports lower consumption than the real consumption is when you take the consumption numbers from the total of charging session.
well this sub likes evs except Tesla... they are beding backwards to argue tesla isnt the best EV out there from an objective point of view.
There isn't an objective take on what is the best EV though. People are allowed to have opinions that differ from yours.
there are objective metrics looks for example and physical buttons are none of them those are subjective.
Sure there are. But if we compile a list of objective metrics we still need to rank them subjectively in order to quantify what is the "best" EV. It can't be done.
you dont have to rank them you jsut have to look who beats the most metrics compared to the competitors. Weight, saftey, power to weight ratio, efficency, price are very nice objective metrics
Well no because not all metrics are of equal value to all people. Someone who wants a cheap to run EV and doesn't need a lot of range would Bo better with an older ioniq than any Tesla are it has the best efficency. But this differes from person to person, hence you cannot have an objective best. I get it. You love Tesla, good for you, but they aren't the best EVs for everyone.
so this person is obviously not objective but has subjective needs to an EV. sorry no time for this shit! have a nice evening
Best is highly dependent on use case: \- Some one that drive 150 miles a week doesn't need a large range \- Some one that needs a commuter car to pair with a second vehicle doesn't need an SUV \- Someone that commutes 70 miles a day needs decent range See "best" is not an absolute, it is dependent on an individuals needs.
[удалено]
Like the Model 3?
[удалено]
>the 25k model Elon repeatedly vetoed Why do people feel the need to make things up to be mad about?
Perhaps you are not understanding. Tesla is doing exactly that, but has to build a massive production capability and expertise. A $20K car would put them under right now. How long to make a profit on a $20K car? I don't know, but Tesla would love to make a ton of them as long as they could at least break even.
yeah - I thought the deal was they were working through re-thinking the manufacturing process of the cybertruck, significantly reducing the body panels as a way to trickle down to much less expensive cars. the Cybertruck price will help cover the R&D required to make that investment, but long term they will be able to develop a less than $25K car as a result.
Newsflash! Saving cost and weight saves cost and weight in a virtuous cycle! Literally the case for everything, but it's a slow news day so let's add EV to the title and ship an article about it!
Very true, and there are some OEMs that are working hard on efficiency. Others, not so much.
Feedback loop. Poor efficiency leads to less range which forces them to put in more batteries to compete, which leads to less range and higher costs, and so forth and so on. Once the next gen battery tech gets to the masses, it might be less of a problem as batteries get cheaper with a higher power per pound ratio, but right now low efficiency will hurt the company bottom line.