Compliance car and Honda execs don’t believe in plugs.

MrFixit said:
With your 10 minute benchmark, you can currently get around 150 miles. Getting a full 300 miles takes more like an hour (it is very non-linear, I assume because of battery heating / management as the batteries near full charge). Note that Tesla tends to quote the 80% charge times because of this long charging 'tail'.
Click to expand...

Charging to 80% is pretty much the standard for experienced BEV drivers, for charging when traveling long distance. Beyond that, as your chart shows, you can spend a lot of time at a charger for little benefit. That's why experienced BEV drivers rarely charge past 80% when fast-charging. It's not just Tesla's standard, it's pretty much industry wide.

I keep hoping we'll see a significant improvement in battery tech, by lowering cell charging resistance, which would allow faster charging without overheating. There has been a lot of promise shown in laboratory samples using cell electrodes coated with graphene or CNT (Carbon NanoTubes) to greatly increase surface area, and thus greatly lower electrical resistance. However, despite much effort, industry has failed to produce graphene or defect-free CNT in industrial quantities. :(

Using current battery cell tech, to go from ~27 minutes for 150 miles of range to ~10 minutes for 300 miles of range, the math says we'd have to increase the size of the battery pack, for a car the size of the Model 3, from 80.5 kWh to 435 kWh. Add another, let's say, 10% for loss of efficiency with a larger pack and larger charging cables losing more power, so I think a more realistic figure would be 478 kWh.

That's not a very practical plan. That large a battery pack would be much too big to fit in the car, so they would have to make the car larger and heavier, which means further increasing the size of the battery pack... a vicious circle. And of course, at ~$100 per kWh, that 478 kWh battery pack would cost approximately $48,000. There's not going to be much of a market at that price!

However, let's not conclude this is an impossible goal, or one which is 50+ years off. It was only a few years ago that the standard was 45 minutes to an 80% charge, and now both the Model 3 and the Taycan can do that in approx. 25-27 minutes.

Competition between BEV makers is bringing down BEV charging times pretty rapidly, even without a radical improvement in battery cell tech!

I hope -- this isn't a prediction, but a hope -- to see ultra-fast-charging cars, and ultra-fast EV chargers able to charge them, charging at least 300 miles of range in 10 minutes or less, within 10 years from today. Now, if we only had a magic crystal ball that would let us peer 10 years into the future...
:cool:

MrFixit said:
So maybe a 500 kW 'V4?' Supercharger AND a major battery breakthrough would get you to the holy grail of 300 miles in 10 minutes?

I am a technology optimist, and I'm sure this will happen, but...
my guess would be it will be at least another 5-10 years, and maybe longer before it is commonplace.
Click to expand...

Looks like we're in agreement here.
:)
 
Last edited:
craze1cars said:
But the 40%+ lost in winter for EV's, coupled with longer winter recharge times, causing yet more range reduction and range anxiety, and more time lost waiting for charges? It's just a problem the vast majority of the public will not accept. Most will just buy another ICE, myself included.
Click to expand...

One place that Tesla should be "dinged" for, despite having generally superior EV tech, is for not using a heat pump for a cabin heater. Tesla uses only resistive heating for warming the cabin. That's one reason why Tesla cars lose so much range in bitterly cold weather.

There is a new article at InsideEVs news today, comparing the range of various BEVs in cold weather driving. The test was done in the UK and they use the less accurate WLTP range ratings rather than the more accurate EPA ratings, but according to their test, the Kia Niro was the winner, in terms of loss of range, with 90% of claimed range; the Tesla Model 3 came in at 78%. More than one person commenting to that article praised the efficiency of the Niro's heat pump heater.

Of course we shouldn't assume that this one test represents a point-for-point correspondence with reality; the test was done using real-world driving conditions, so there is bound to be some variation in travel time due to traffic conditions. But still, I think it did yield some valid data points, and shows one area where Tesla could improve their tech.

But looking at the larger picture, the range loss in winter is important primarily because it takes so long to do on-the-go charging. If you could charge your car from 10% SOC (State Of Charge) to 80% in 10 minutes, and if ultra-fast-chargers were so commonplace that it was easy to find one almost anywhere, then a range loss of 30% or even 40% would be much less important.

We're still in the "early adopter" stage of the EV revolution. We'll see a lot of improvements over the next 10 or 15 years, just as those who bought a Ford Model T in 1909 saw a lot of improvements over the next 15 years or so. In 1909 there were no drive-in gas stations (the first in 1913), no U.S. national highway system (started in 1916), almost no parking lots in cities (parking a motorcar in town was generally done in a livery stable), and few paved roads anywhere. The EV revolution won't cause changes as significant as those of the motorcar revolution, but it certainly will cause some significant changes.
​
 
BeMurda said:
It's -22F (-30C) here in Canada today. People with Teslas are experiencing 60% range loss, there are many discussions. Couple that with many roads where the typical driving speed is equivalent to 75mph and range is pathetic. Given nobody wants RWD up here because of the huge amounts of snow, the Tesla with AWD is also $30k more expensive.
Click to expand...

Funny, the RWD Teslas, both the Model S and the Model 3, have proven very popular in snowy Norway. Also, the absolute worst range loss I've ever seen claimed for any Tesla car, due to bitterly cold conditions, is 50%; a loss of more than 40% is quite rare indeed.

Also, the price difference between the SR+ RWD Model 3 and the LR AWD Model 3 is* exactly $10,000... pretty far from the $30k you're claiming. Plus, the price difference between the LR RWD and the LR AWD is much, much less than $10k.

Are you sure you're not just copying some Tesla-bashing B.S. that someone posted to social media? Unfortunately, there is a lot of that going around.

*Or at least it was on 9 June 2019, according to a screen shot posted to the Tesla Motors Club forum.
​
 
Last edited:
A YouTube video posted two days ago with the following title may be of interest to those considering a Tesla:
Tesla Model 3 Maiden Voyage - 115,000 mi Overview

If this comment should be posted someplace else, please let me know.
 
Pushmi-Pullyu said:
One place that Tesla should be "dinged" for, despite having generally superior EV tech, is for not using a heat pump for a cabin heater. Tesla uses only resistive heating for warming the cabin. That's one reason why Tesla cars lose so much range in bitterly cold weather.

There is a new article at InsideEVs news today, comparing the range of various BEVs in cold weather driving. The test was done in the UK and they use the less accurate WLTP range ratings rather than the more accurate EPA ratings, but according to their test, the Kia Niro was the winner, in terms of loss of range, with 90% of claimed range; the Tesla Model 3 came in at 78%. More than one person commenting to that article praised the efficiency of the Niro's heat pump heater.
Click to expand...

I have a 2017 LEAF SV with a heat pump and it takes remarkably less energy than, say, the heater in my Volt did.

The heat pump isn't going to help anyone coping with -30° C though. At that temperature, everyone loses substantial range.

Did the article on the UK test mention the temperature range it was conducted in? Most of the UK experiences a relatively mild winter.
 
Pushmi-Pullyu said:
One place that Tesla should be "dinged" for, despite having generally superior EV tech, is for not using a heat pump for a cabin heater. Tesla uses only resistive heating for warming the cabin. That's one reason why Tesla cars lose so much range in bitterly cold weather.
Click to expand...
FWIW, small heat pumps like the ones you’re talking about do not perform well, as in saving energy, in single digit temperatures. They’re main benefit is realized at temps above freezing. Even my cold climate, expensive home heat pump only gives me up to 1.5 the energy put in at +5 F. If you want to use a home heat pump in the far north, you have to go to a liquid glycol based loop. For those in the frozen north, automotive heat pumps are not worth the extra cost.
 
KentuckyKen said:
FWIW, small heat pumps like the ones you’re talking about do not perform well, as in saving energy, in single digit temperatures. They’re main benefit is realized at temps above freezing. Even my cold climate, expensive home heat pump only gives me up to 1.5 the energy put in at +5 F. If you want to use a home heat pump in the far north, you have to go to a liquid glycol based loop. For those in the frozen north, automotive heat pumps are not worth the extra cost.
Click to expand...
I'm in suburban Detroit and my car's heat pump is very worthwhile. While we typically get a couple of months continually below freezing, spring and fall are full of good temperatures for heat pumps.
 
I don’t need heat lower south for the swing seasons so it wouldn’t help me but I’m glad you get some less range destroying heat out of yours when it’s not buttery cold. I’ve found that AC, seat heater, and headlights don’t make much of a difference, but cabin heat and defrost absolutely destroy my EV range. Cold weather range reduction is the dirty little secret of EVs that no one wants to mention up front.
 
I have been watching video’s on YouTube, mainly Bjorn Nyland in Norway (and Thailand) and “out of spec” motoring in the US. While neither is your typical American driver, they are real world experiences with lots of long range driving. My main takeaway is that EV’s are going to be like iPhones. Within 10 years what seemed like “odd behavior” to us boomers becomes our new normal. And those of us still lugging around neck straining DSLR’s are in the minority. I mention cameras because Japanese camera execs are still behaving like smart phones don’t exist while they preside over one of the most spectacular market collapses in history.
The reality is that 20 minute charging stops will probably be normal and people will be doing them at shopping centers and not thinking twice about 2 or 3 stops in a driving day. I know that’s not what most of us think we can tolerate or expect, but in a saner greener world,it will not bother the majority. I fully expect the US to be the last bastion of Dino driving. I’m retired now and on that proverbial fixed income, that pretty much limits my range. I was good for one more new car, and turned out to be the Clarity. I could not stretch to the Model 3, it was a stretch to the Clarity. If only a poor excuse of an uninsured motorist, driving illegally, had not Totalled my Camry hybrid, my plan was to wait till late this year to get a new car. Alas, not to be.
 
KentuckyKen said:
FWIW, small heat pumps like the ones you’re talking about do not perform well, as in saving energy, in single digit temperatures. They’re main benefit is realized at temps above freezing. Even my cold climate, expensive home heat pump only gives me up to 1.5 the energy put in at +5 F. If you want to use a home heat pump in the far north, you have to go to a liquid glycol based loop. For those in the frozen north, automotive heat pumps are not worth the extra cost.
Click to expand...

That's true for normal heat pumps, but one or more auto makers have, according to reports I've read, started using an innovative type of heat pump which is more efficient even at somewhat lower temperatures.

Now, that's not to say that you can get by with using one when it's (let's say) -25° F. However, if my understanding is correct, those improved heat pumps do continue to function well at freezing temperatures and somewhat below.

BEVs will still need to have a resistive cabin heater as backup for when it's really, really cold.

My Google-fu failed to find any online article which specifies the temperature ranges at which such improved heat pumps work effectively. However, for those interested, a number of links to articles on the subject are given below. Sadly, they are mostly theoretical and few have any details about real-world testing or performance.

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2015/09/20150908-boschiaa.html

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1124387_can-heat-pumps-solve-cold-weather-range-loss-for-evs

https://www.automotive-iq.com/electrics-electronics/articles/electric-vehicle-heating-and-cooling

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610215010498

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/ad5f/e191cbed39db42c24d83245574e317fdc899.pdf
 
KentuckyKen said:
FWIW, small heat pumps like the ones you’re talking about do not perform well, as in saving energy, in single digit temperatures. They’re main benefit is realized at temps above freezing. Even my cold climate, expensive home heat pump only gives me up to 1.5 the energy put in at +5 F. If you want to use a home heat pump in the far north, you have to go to a liquid glycol based loop. For those in the frozen north, automotive heat pumps are not worth the extra cost.
Click to expand...
Yours must not be very expensive :) My cold climate home heat pump gives me 1.82 COP at 5F, I think that is still pretty good and worthwhile in car, but I don't know how good the car heat pumps are. I think there are some minisplits that do better, and have a COP greater than 1 well below 0. 5F is pretty uncommon in the colorado mountains (at least in the daytime when sane people do long trips), where I live, but if I lived in the frozen north a PHEV might make more sense. I was surprised to read that the Tesla doesn't use a heat pump.
 
Pushmi-Pullyu said:
Funny, the RWD Teslas, both the Model S and the Model 3, have proven very popular in snowy Norway. Also, the absolute worst range loss I've ever seen claimed for any Tesla car, due to bitterly cold conditions, is 50%; a loss of more than 40% is quite rare indeed.

Also, the price difference between the SR+ RWD Model 3 and the LR AWD Model 3 is* exactly $10,000... pretty far from the $30k you're claiming. Plus, the price difference between the LR RWD and the LR AWD is much, much less than $10k.

Are you sure you're not just copying some Tesla-bashing B.S. that someone posted to social media? Unfortunately, there is a lot of that going around.

*Or at least it was on 9 June 2019, according to a screen shot posted to the Tesla Motors Club forum.
​
Click to expand...

$30k more expensive *than the Clarity. I could have been clearer. The Clarity is $40k, Model 3 AWD is $65k. The AWD Tesla is too expensive to qualify for the federal rebate. The Clarity gets it, $5k off at point of purchase. That's how I came up with the $30k.

It was - 48C wind chill here today. - 42C temp at night. This happens pretty much every year. Central Canada gets much colder than most of Norway, no bodies of water to temper climate. The 60% range loss will be rare but can happen at times like these.
 
Anyone think if big oil has something to do with the stalling for EV cars ?

Notice Tesla who does not produce any ICE, is freely selling lots of their EV cars while all other manufacturers who produce ICE cars, are stalling EV cars ???
 
4sallypat said:
Anyone think if big oil has something to do with the stalling for EV cars ?

Notice Tesla who does not produce any ICE, is freely selling lots of their EV cars while all other manufacturers who produce ICE cars, are stalling EV cars ???
Click to expand...
Those ICE-loving manufacturers (eg. FCA, whose electric Fiat 500e wasn't a big seller) pay hundreds of millions of dollars to Tesla for emissions credits. Our government's regulations make for strange bedfellows.
 
4sallypat said:
Anyone think if big oil has something to do with the stalling for EV cars ?

Notice Tesla who does not produce any ICE, is freely selling lots of their EV cars while all other manufacturers who produce ICE cars, are stalling EV cars ???
Click to expand...

Does anyone think that Tesla sells lots of their EV cars because they only sell EV cars?

Other than Tesla, auto manufacturers sell cars that are profitable.
 
As crazy as it seemed at the time, Tesla did well starting with low volume luxury-level models with good driving dynamics, conservative but attractive styling and outrageous performance.

LEAFs, Prius Primes, Volts and Bolts just don't have the sex appeal that Tesla has cultivated. All they have to do now is sustain it and learn about customer service.
 
Last edited:
Dan Albrich said:
So I absolutely want one-car/vehicle fits all. My commute is 5 miles each way. I sometimes do 3000+ miles and think nothing of it (I enjoy driving). I hate even the thought of *ever, and I mean not even once* waiting for my freaking car to charge. I'd switch to full ICE before that. I do not have space or interest in keeping multiple vehicles.

So in my case the PHEV is not an intermediary vehicle. It is an absolute perfect match for what I want. If I can avoid it, I will not buy any BEV in the foreseeable future. That is, until BEV's either include 5000+ miles of range, or recharge times that match or beat gas fill up time.
Click to expand...

I am in exactly the same position as Dan. I'm a "single car family" and have no desire to own multiple cars. Most of my driving is local, but I regularly need to be able to drive 500+ miles in a day. The PHEV is proviing to be the perfect car for me and the Clarity has been absolutely amazing in the two years I've owned it. No matter how much I may lust after the Tesla, it just would not work for me with its ~250 mile range which will probably be MUCH lower in my northern Minnesota winter. Hope the PHEV market continues to thrive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top