Electric Car Market Overview (chart)

Great work - Congrats!

My one complaint is that the most popular car on these forums appears to be missing. The Honda Clarity PHEV. The Clarity EV is there in the chart, but in reality it is only available by lease in a couple of west coast states, whereas the PHEV is available for purchase or lease nationwide and in Canada.

 

Just a suggestion:


The usable capacity is 18.6 kWh as measured by owners. It is too common that the maximum battery capacity is listed, not the usable capacity. Also, the kWh/100 miles from www.fueleconomy.gov is a rounding error off. I've looked at the EPA data and noticed they have similar problems ... so don't set your hair on fire. <grins>

It isn't clear but I think it makes sense to have a total range, not just EV range, for plug-in cars. This becomes important for those who want one car with city EV range as well as cross country, long legs of gas.

The 'hover pop-up' is nice but it would also help to have a 'sticky' pop-up two or more cars could be looked at on the screen.

Bob Wilson

 

I applaud your efforts, but I think it needs work.

Under "Price", I clicked on the "more than $100,000" radio button. At the top, it displayed "Shown 4 models out of 94", but only three symbols appeared on the graph. I noted that under "Tesla" it said "3" (models) of which 2 show the symbol for "available for pre-order" and one shows the symbol for "currently produced".

I wasn't aware that Tesla has any model in production with an MSRP of $100,000 or more, but after looking around a bit I see instructions to hover over any item for more details.

I'd like to make what I hope is a useful suggestion: Add a caption to the bottom of the graph: "Hover mouse over any symbol for more info", or something similar.

Okay, so the "in production model" is the Model X100P. But that's not a "model", it's the most expensive trim level available for the Model X.

The second item is the "Tesla Roadster concept". Okay, fair enough. You can get a reservation, altho I'm not sure about an actual "pre-order", but that would be quibbling.

However, the third item is the "Faraday Future FF91 concept". Ummm... hopefully it's not necessary to point out that this most definitely is not a Tesla car? I also very seriously question that the FF91 can be properly described as "available for pre-order", since it's virtually certain that it never will be produced.

So, Denis EVfanboy, I applaud your efforts, and I hope you (and your team, assuming you have one?) will continue to work on the site to make it more usable and to display facts and figures accurately.

P.S. -- I did not vote in your poll, since there is no option for "I can see you've put a lot of work into this, and I'd like to encourage you to develop this site more fully".

 

We run into it when discussing whether the battery has lost enough capacity to be a warranty replacement. The reduced operational 'capacity' leads to a lot angst. But this is not a tool problem. Perhaps a semantic solution like "lab", "bench", or other modifier that indicates it includes "inaccessible" capacity. Use the infamous "(*)" I'm just spit wadding ideas.

I've become fond of using this source for my engineering studies:
https://www.epa.gov/compliance-and-fuel-economy-data/data-cars-used-testing-fuel-economy

My favorite trick is to use the roll-down coefficients to make a parameter curve and then add benchmarks to tweak the curve. This gives me a curve I can use for detailed range and performance:

• ~65 mph ->72 mi EPA EV range, ~1 hr
• ~40-45 mph -> 1.5x EPA EV range, ~2.5-3.0 hr
• ~30 mph -> 2x EPA range, ~5 hr

I'm not suggesting a change in scope as much as brain food.

++

Perhaps some sort of 'hover+click' to hold or release.

GOOD LUCK!
Bob Wilson

 

Okay, and I certainly don't object; lots of websites give specs for different versions of the Tesla car models, as if the different versions are different models altho they aren't. Perhaps they do that for some non-Tesla models, too, altho I haven't noticed that happening. (I'm a Tesla fan, so I tend to focus more on Tesla-related web content.)

But I think it's confusing to use the descriptor "model" when you're referring to different versions of the same model. How about changing the descriptor "model" to "model/version" where that is applicable?

Just a suggestion, of course.

And thanks again for all the work you and your team are putting in on this!

 

It's a thorny problem, all right. Some EV makers cite the full battery capacity in the specs or description; other EV makers cite the usable capacity. There's no standard or consistency.

Furthermore, if you do try to find third-party ratings for a particular EV's full vs. usable capacity, you quickly find that the experts disagree. So I don't think there is any reliable source for such data. (Bob Wilson (bwilson4web) may disagree. He's an engineer and I'm not, so I'll defer to him on this subject.)

The only solution I can think of, one that should work for all EVs, is to always add a "(usable)" or "(full)" descriptor following any citation of battery pack capacity. That is, it will work if you can figure out if the EV maker is reporting full capacity or usable capacity. That's not always easy to tell!

​

 

If it was me I'd use "versions" in both places, for the sake of consistency. But it's your website, not mine!

 

Hi, thank you for sharing this wonderful site EVcompare.io I didn't know it (but now it is done). Juste to add some comment regarding the last graph.

Battery capacity=f(efficiency) with decreasing tendency
- It is quite normal to decrease efficiency using big battery capacity because of the tremendous weight of battery pack. The energetic density of a battery is poor in regard to classic fuel (Gasoline or Diesel), therefore the sensitivity of Efficiency with Battery capacity (weight) is big.

 

Hmmm, well, it's certainly true that the amount of energy which can be carried in an EV's battery pack is much more limited (using today's battery tech) than what can be carried in a typical gasmobile's gas tank.

But I'd say that the sensitivity to energy efficiency is a function of the total weight of the car. Not just the weight of the battery pack.

As battery tech has advanced and energy density has increased, the weight of the battery pack has come down in relation to the capacity -- the kWh carried. But EV makers have, in general, wisely chosen to increase the capacity of EV battery packs, rather than decrease the weight.

​

 

I think most if not all production EV makers make some attempt to reduce weight, altho some try harder than others. The BMW i3 even used a mostly carbon-fiber body to reduce weight; Tesla used aluminum in the Model S and Model X for the same purpose.

Sandy Munro has praised Tesla to high heaven for integrating multiple functions into the parts and assemblies in the Model 3, which reduces the number of parts and thus reduces cost. I'm sure that helps a lot with reducing weight, too.

​

 

Ah! Sorry I misunderstood your comment. Mea culpa, I should have read that more carefully.

Yes, I think you're right there. I'd love to learn more about the new Tesla Standard Range Model 3 battery pack, and those innovations in pack architecture which Elon bragged about. I think he was talking mostly about cost reduction and perhaps some simplification, but my guess is the changes resulted in some reduction in weight, too.

​