What's new
By:

Efficiency of around 1K miles

I

iloveyou

Member

Joined
Mar 19, 2026
Messages
27
Reaction score
49
IMG_5666.webp
 
New England early spring, 50F-65F. local 40mph 80%; high way 65mph 20%
 
socktucker said:
Leaner Gravity is getting 2.8 dynamic for me
Click to expand...
You would have gotten much better mileage if you drove like an old lady (apologies to old ladies!) 😎
 
iloveyou said:
Efficiency improve continuously………EPA rating is True depend on your driving patterns
Click to expand...
As most of you are keenly aware, the realizable efficiency is highly dependent on driving and environmental parameters. To make the posted data meaning, please specifythe following:
> city and or highway driving
> estimated mph and % of time (e.g., City driving avg 35-40 mph/50% of the time; Hwy 75mph/50% time)
> elevation (flat, high elevation, up and down hills, etc.)
>temperature (70-75F, -40F/C, 120F, etc.)

These basic parameters will help us interpret the data iin context.

About a year ago, I posted a 15min drive I my Rivian R1S in Phoenix city streets. The drive recorded was about 15min, covering 4-5 miles at about 40mph and hitting all green lights (i.e., no stops). I "pegged" the R1S's efficiency meter at 5mi/kwh. But, as you know, that's hardly the normal for city/hwy driving. My average for city/hwy driving is probably closer to 2.5mi/kWh. Context is important to understand the data.
 
iloveyou said:
Efficiency improve continuously………EPA rating is True depend on your driving patterns
Click to expand...
Wow, 3.45 mi/kWh over 1,231 miles is impressive!

BS8899 said:
As most of you are keenly aware, the realizable efficiency is highly dependent on driving and environmental parameters. To make the posted data meaning, please specifythe following:
[…]
Click to expand...

I agree driving patterns affecting efficiency. I interpreted the 3.45 mi/kWh over 1,231 miles as evidence showing some peoples’ day-to-day driving can match the EPA testing scenario. Will I ever achieve that? Not a chance with my driving style!

It’s pretty clear the EPA 5-cycle test does not represent what many of us care about: 70-75 mph continuous highway driving. Many people are reporting ~2.8 mi/kWh with wide variations.
 
Yeah, Driving patterns matters! 80% local speed is lower than 40MPH, 20% is highway lower than 70MPH under 45F to 70F environment temperature. The EPA rating is achievable but NOT most of the people.
 
For what it’s worth I drive 4 EVs the same way. In this order:

Most efficient by far: Air Touring over 3 in all conditions
Next , GGT: over 2.8 all conditions I’d call it a tie with my Model Y
Last: BMW i7 at around 2.5

It’s fair to say that all of them aspire to their rating but none quite get it, so just like MPG ratings they’re representative of their relative efficiency in their field
 
Last edited:
iloveyou said:
Yeah, Driving patterns matters! 80% local speed is lower than 40MPH, 20% is highway lower than 70MPH under 45F to 70F environment temperature. The EPA rating is achievable but NOT most of the people.
Click to expand...
Your driving data is close to EPA's, averaging ~48mph. As such, it is legit when looked at on a standalone basis, i.e., if you drove the EPA script, you get EEPA numbers.

Most of the time, when people talk about range, they are talking about drive a fair distance, presumably on a highway, from one place to another. In that context, the EPA numbers are often over-stated. Furthermore, there are two different EPA tests (5 cycle and 2 cycle). On top of that, the EV manufacturers apply their own "correction factors. Some manufacturers are conservation (e.g., the Germans), and some are liberal (e.g.., Tesla and Lucid). Hence, using manufacturer's claims as comparison is a crapshoot.

If you are interested in range on road trips, you should reference the road trip tests. An example would be OoS's cross-country I-90 trip or their recent Maine to Key West trip. In my opinion, OoS 's 70 mph "run-dry" tests done at Ft Collins are suspect because the tests were done at high elevation (5,300ft) in thinner air and ran to completely drain the battery. As such, over-states the actual achievable range.
 
I have taken many trips on Highways and average 2.8 to 2.90 at 75 mph,
> 2.91 to 3 at 65 mph…
Around town at 35 to 50 mph: 3.34 to 3.40
(Outside temp at 65 to 80 deg F)..

When cold… 25 to 30 deg… 2.1 to 2.4
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7820.webp
    IMG_7820.webp
    1.1 MB · Views: 89
  • IMG_7819.webp
    IMG_7819.webp
    413.9 KB · Views: 67
  • IMG_7817.webp
    IMG_7817.webp
    433.7 KB · Views: 78
  • IMG_7815.webp
    IMG_7815.webp
    1.2 MB · Views: 62
  • IMG_7814.webp
    IMG_7814.webp
    770 KB · Views: 67
I’ve always disregarded the dynamic range and efficiency on the left display. It is very labile and reflects some combination of ongoing and recent historical driving patterns. But it is ALWAYS much lower than the Trip efficiency I see.

How do you all interpret dynamic range and efficiency numbers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top