Average mi/kwh

[njg-agt]

Here is the spread sheet I've put together to capture what I believe is the relevant information. If anybody thinks of something I've missed, please advise.
View attachment 2095

A missing data point is the state of learning/tuning of the battery pack, perhaps the total mileage on each car would be a reasonable proxy measure.

 

[MPawelek]

A missing data point is the state of learning/tuning of the battery pack, perhaps the total mileage on each car would be a reasonable proxy measure.

There has been speculation on whether the battery pack has a tuning stage but I have never heard a response from any electrical engineers if this is really true or not.

 

[Adnillien]

There has been speculation on whether the battery pack has a tuning stage but I have never heard a response from any electrical engineers if this is really true or not.

I ask customer care this question and have not received an answer although they did reference the car learning from charging cycles. I have long thought that the so called break in period is not mechanical but the car learning the temperature adjusted voltage versus state of charge curve. I believe that the car is estimating energy consumed by changes in the SOC. This estimates becomes more accurate over time because the car calibrates to the battery during charging cycles. New cars have a fairly conservative estimate that tunes over time and owners see what appears to be an increase in efficiency.

I have no idea why Lucid will not answer this question directly. I am not asking for details, only a high level understanding of how the car determines SOC, energy consumed and efficiency.

 

[Steveinarizona]

So, what you are saying is I need to move to Denver to achieve max mi/kwh?

There are other choices for you. For example, Flagstaff Arizona is at 7,000 feet.

 

[hydbob]

There are other choices for you. For example, Flagstaff Arizona is at 7,000 feet.

True, I was there over Christmas holiday! Very beautiful, but then I'd have to say I live in AZ....

 

[Maverick]

True, I was there over Christmas holiday! Very beautiful, but then I'd have to say I live in AZ....

You're always welcome! Actually, I take that back. We already have enough folks from CA

 

[Steveinarizona]

You're always welcome! Actually, I take that back. We already have enough folks from CA

And little water to hydrate them!

 

[SaratogaLefty]

Okay we finished our test route and here are my thoughts and results: Unfortunately we didn't get a group photo but Dream Palo Alto did grab a few shots which maybe he'll post. Sorry about that but as mentioned Sundays at Alice's is a nightmare for parking. Amazingly we did get a nice group start and stayed in a nice tight formation the entire route. Unfortunately Dream Palo Alto had display problems so he couldn't reset his trip A and we only have his SOC information. The temp at start was right around 59 degrees, dropped to 57 on the coast and then was 64 when we returned to Alice's. As expected GEWC was the range Queen and Saratoga Lefty was the worst. That said, this is the hgihest I've ever seen on my car and for the first leg out to the coast which was windy and slightly downhill, I thought my Trip A info was broken because it started out showing at 6.4 mi/kwh and 0 KwH used and stayed until we started climbing going North on Highway 1. There was essentially no wind and a lot of fog with moisture. Here are the results:

 

[SaratogaLefty]

Okay we finished our test route and here are my thoughts and results: Unfortunately we didn't get a group photo but Dream Palo Alto did grab a few shots which maybe he'll post. Sorry about that but as mentioned Sundays at Alice's is a nightmare for parking. Amazingly we did get a nice group start and stayed in a nice tight formation the entire route. Unfortunately Dream Palo Alto had display problems so he couldn't reset his trip A and we only have his SOC information. The temp at start was right around 59 degrees, dropped to 57 on the coast and then was 64 when we returned to Alice's. As expected GEWC was the range Queen and Saratoga Lefty was the worst. That said, this is the hgihest I've ever seen on my car and for the first leg out to the coast which was windy and slightly downhill, I thought my Trip A info was broken because it started out showing at 6.4 mi/kwh and 0 KwH used and stayed until we started climbing going North on Highway 1. There was essentially no wind and a lot of fog with moisture. Here are the results:View attachment 2153

After this run I am convinced High Regen is significantly better than ACC for increasing range. As an aside, I drove home from Alice's staying on Skyline all the way to Highway 9 and then down to Saratoga and home. At home my total data for Trip A was: 64.7 miles; 15 kwh used; 4.2 mi/kwh; and 52% SOC. Also I switched back to a miles reading instead of SOC and I"ve gone 184 miles since last charge (which was at Millbrae Center to just under 100%) and tbe car is showing I have 233 miles left which would mean a total of 417 miles if true. These are the best readings I have ever had, that said this was a very windy hilly route with some significant climbing and some good downhill sections. We will be doing more testing in the future.

 

[hydbob]

Okay we finished our test route and here are my thoughts and results: Unfortunately we didn't get a group photo but Dream Palo Alto did grab a few shots which maybe he'll post. Sorry about that but as mentioned Sundays at Alice's is a nightmare for parking. Amazingly we did get a nice group start and stayed in a nice tight formation the entire route. Unfortunately Dream Palo Alto had display problems so he couldn't reset his trip A and we only have his SOC information. The temp at start was right around 59 degrees, dropped to 57 on the coast and then was 64 when we returned to Alice's. As expected GEWC was the range Queen and Saratoga Lefty was the worst. That said, this is the hgihest I've ever seen on my car and for the first leg out to the coast which was windy and slightly downhill, I thought my Trip A info was broken because it started out showing at 6.4 mi/kwh and 0 KwH used and stayed until we started climbing going North on Highway 1. There was essentially no wind and a lot of fog with moisture. Here are the results:View attachment 2153

Wow @GEWC got 97% of EPA and @SaratogaLefty got 94% of EPA...very nice guys and gals!

 

[DaveyBoyGT]

"Defy physics?" No--Lucid is defying their range promises --was 520 miles achieve in a down-hill vacuum at perfect temp?

Almost. The EPA range test is done on a dynamometer inside a building. Perfectly flat, constant temperature, NO wind resistance. That's how they benchmark the cars. After that they engage in a SWAG session, post a scientific fudge factor (including all the impossible to determine variables) to the result and come up with a real-life range. Isn't science wonderful!

 

[DaveyBoyGT]

There are other choices for you. For example, Flagstaff Arizona is at 7,000 feet.

Just go to the top of Pike's Peak and hypermile all the way down to the bottom. You can't drive very fast anyway and you will regenerating your motor the whole way down. Probably you'll get 10 mi/KWH or more.

 

[GEWC]

After this run I am convinced High Regen is significantly better than ACC for increasing range. As an aside, I drove home from Alice's staying on Skyline all the way to Highway 9 and then down to Saratoga and home. At home my total data for Trip A was: 64.7 miles; 15 kwh used; 4.2 mi/kwh; and 52% SOC. Also I switched back to a miles reading instead of SOC and I"ve gone 184 miles since last charge (which was at Millbrae Center to just under 100%) and tbe car is showing I have 233 miles left which would mean a total of 417 miles if true. These are the best readings I have ever had, that said this was a very windy hilly route with some significant climbing and some good downhill sections. We will be doing more testing in the future.

Nice - over 4! I took the highway home after running a quick errand and ended with Trip A at 79.8 miles, 16 kwh used, 5.0 mi/kwh and 55% SOC. Not bad at all.

 

[LRSIII]

Almost. The EPA range test is done on a dynamometer inside a building. Perfectly flat, constant temperature, NO wind resistance. That's how they benchmark the cars. After that they engage in a SWAG session, post a scientific fudge factor (including all the impossible to determine variables) to the result and come up with a real-life range. Isn't science wonderful!

Yes, the EPA test is done on a dynamometer. However, aerodynamic drag definitely is considered. Estimated aerodynamic drag for a vehicle affects the load settings on the dynamometer.

 

[DaveyBoyGT]

Yes, the EPA test is done on a dynamometer. However, aerodynamic drag definitely is considered. Estimated aerodynamic drag for a vehicle affects the load settings on the dynamometer.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the EPA doesn't really specifically take drag coefficient into the calculation of the range. They conduct an urban speed test and a highway speed test on the dynamometer, then in their infinite wisdom apply a universal fudge factor of 0.7 to the calculated number which becomes the published range for the car. Everyone needs to understand that the EPA range estimates are rather speculative, and only give a relative measure of range among the EV published range numbers. The accuracy range could be as high as 20% based on driving strategies and environmental conditions.

 

[LRSIII]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the EPA doesn't really specifically take drag coefficient into the calculation of the range. They conduct an urban speed test and a highway speed test on the dynamometer, then in their infinite wisdom apply a universal fudge factor of 0.7 to the calculated number which becomes the published range for the car. Everyone needs to understand that the EPA range estimates are rather speculative, and only give a relative measure of range among the EV published range numbers. The accuracy range could be as high as 20% based on driving strategies and environmental conditions.

I hate to correct you again, because I like to be a positive guy on the internet, but you are wrong. The aerodynamic drag of a vehicle is considered in the EPA dynamometer test. Typically, it is measured by "coasting down" a vehicle in neutral from highway speed to low speed (I believe from 75 mph to 5 mph). The more aerodynamic a vehicle is, the more time it takes to coast down to the lower speed. This coast down test also inherently encompasses tire rolling resistance and driveline losses. The results are used as part of the dynamometer road load settings for the vehicle for testing purposes.

One can criticize the EPA tests for being too "gentle" (modest acceleration rates and top speeds during the tests), but EPA does understand basic physics. There are historical and statutory reasons why the test cycles are the way they are, and there also are differences between "fuel economy" values for Corporate Average Fuel Economy requirements purposes and the values shown on a vehicle's Monroney label.

You are right in the extremely narrow sense that EPA "doesn't specifically take drag coefficient into the calculation of the range." That's because the agency takes a far more accurate and comprehensive approach.

You can google EPA coast down testing if you'd like to get lost in the weeds on this subject.

 

[jabbahop]

I hate to correct you again, because I like to be a positive guy on the internet, but you are wrong. The aerodynamic drag of a vehicle is considered in the EPA dynamometer test. Typically, it is measured by "coasting down" a vehicle in neutral from highway speed to low speed (I believe from 75 mph to 5 mph). The more aerodynamic a vehicle is, the more time it takes to coast down to the lower speed. This coast down test also inherently encompasses tire rolling resistance and driveline losses. The results are used as part of the dynamometer road load settings for the vehicle for testing purposes.

One can criticize the EPA tests for being too "gentle" (modest acceleration rates and top speeds during the tests), but EPA does understand basic physics. There are historical and statutory reasons why the test cycles are the way they are, and there also are differences between "fuel economy" values for Corporate Average Fuel Economy requirements purposes and the values shown on a vehicle's Monroney label.

You are right in the extremely narrow sense that EPA "doesn't specifically take drag coefficient into the calculation of the range." That's because the agency takes a far more accurate and comprehensive approach.

You can google EPA coast down testing if you'd like to get lost in the weeds on this subject.

here is an article that talks about the testing procedures and as LRSIII indicated, they do attempt to account for aerodynamics, rolling resistance, etc.

How Fuel Economy Is Measured (And Why You Get Different MPGs)

Ever wonder who comes up with those fuel economy numbers?

jalopnik.com

without those adjustments one would get truly crazy range numbers.

 

[LCIDdreams]

Nice - over 4! I took the highway home after running a quick errand and ended with Trip A at 79.8 miles, 16 kwh used, 5.0 mi/kwh and 55% SOC. Not bad at all.c

Whoa- that would be a 560 mile range when extrapolated out to the 112kwh GT battery capacity! You are the hypermile master!

 

[Bbq9]

Okay we finished our test route and here are my thoughts and results: Unfortunately we didn't get a group photo but Dream Palo Alto did grab a few shots which maybe he'll post. Sorry about that but as mentioned Sundays at Alice's is a nightmare for parking. Amazingly we did get a nice group start and stayed in a nice tight formation the entire route. Unfortunately Dream Palo Alto had display problems so he couldn't reset his trip A and we only have his SOC information. The temp at start was right around 59 degrees, dropped to 57 on the coast and then was 64 when we returned to Alice's. As expected GEWC was the range Queen and Saratoga Lefty was the worst. That said, this is the hgihest I've ever seen on my car and for the first leg out to the coast which was windy and slightly downhill, I thought my Trip A info was broken because it started out showing at 6.4 mi/kwh and 0 KwH used and stayed until we started climbing going North on Highway 1. There was essentially no wind and a lot of fog with moisture. Here are the results:View attachment 2153

for those interested in the route elevation change

 

[DaveyBoyGT]

I hate to correct you again, because I like to be a positive guy on the internet, but you are wrong. The aerodynamic drag of a vehicle is considered in the EPA dynamometer test. Typically, it is measured by "coasting down" a vehicle in neutral from highway speed to low speed (I believe from 75 mph to 5 mph). The more aerodynamic a vehicle is, the more time it takes to coast down to the lower speed. This coast down test also inherently encompasses tire rolling resistance and driveline losses. The results are used as part of the dynamometer road load settings for the vehicle for testing purposes.

One can criticize the EPA tests for being too "gentle" (modest acceleration rates and top speeds during the tests), but EPA does understand basic physics. There are historical and statutory reasons why the test cycles are the way they are, and there also are differences between "fuel economy" values for Corporate Average Fuel Economy requirements purposes and the values shown on a vehicle's Monroney label.

You are right in the extremely narrow sense that EPA "doesn't specifically take drag coefficient into the calculation of the range." That's because the agency takes a far more accurate and comprehensive approach.

You can google EPA coast down testing if you'd like to get lost in the weeds on this subject.

Sorry to disagree with you again, but the EV range rating tests, as I understand, don't involve coast down testing. They do coast down testing with gasoline engines. They only do dynamometer testing for EVs, as I roughly described above. A car has to be moving on a road to do coast down testing to incorporate the impact of drag coefficient. Dynamometer tests don't have air blowing over the car. The standard used to test EV range is the Multi-Cycle city/highway test procedure from the SAE J 1634 standard and involves 5 cycles of test at urban and highway speeds until the battery is depleted, and energy consumed in the test is calculated with the miles driven. Future testing may include drag coefficient tests but they don't now do it. They also need to figure out a way to incorporated regen braking too, because of its unique advantage over ICE cars.

If you have more recent testing procedures than is described below, I would appreciate you posting it for all to see, because I haven't seen anything that includes coast down testing for EVs. The only manner that drag coefficient is incorporated is in the 0.7 adjustment factor noted earlier.

How Does The EPA Calculate Electric Car Range? - CleanTechnica

There’s one statistic to rule them all when it comes to comparing electric vehicles: range. Range gets headlines. It earns automakers bragging rights, or gives their competitors mocking rights. Range is what determines whether or not an electric vehicle will fit into someone’s lifestyle.

cleantechnica.com