- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
Also interesting to note is that 11/13 of the fastest cars are 800V.
You must log in or register to comment.
I’d actually prefer to see a mikes per hr figure here to take efficiency into account
actually reads article
Hyundai Ioniq 6 Limited RWD tops the list with an impressive 868 miles per charging hour
Well holy shit there it is. This is actually a fantastic article. It breaks down everything in so many ways. It has several surprising facets. Pretty crazy how terrible the rivian fair is here and how well the Kia/Hyundai models do. I also wonder why the F1 50 does about the same as a machE.
I’m not sure if I missed it but I also don’t see how they get to how they measure a charging hour. If they are going from 10% to 80% and many vehicles are doing that in far less time, are they just using the average charging speed in miles given from 10% to 80% and multiplying that to get whatever an hour is?
Help me understand what I’m looking at because I just can’t understand the numbers. I’m using the Model 3 Long Range AWD since I know EXACTLY how this car charges. From their results:
- Miles per charging hour: 569 mi/hr
- Add 100 Miles: 10 min 33 sec
- Consumption: 23.9 kWh/100 mi = 4.18 miles/kWh
- Max Manufacture Speed: 250 kW
- Actual Max Speed: 251 kW
- Average Charging Power: 136 kW
- Charging Losses: 0.9%
No way a Model 3 Long Range averaged 136kW adding 100 miles of range unless they started at 50%+ SOC.
First, putting the consumption in kWh/100 miles has to be one of the more annoying metrics. This is 4.18 miles/kWh which is a lot easier to match with. So 569 miles/hr is divided by the consumption is 136kW which is what they list for the Average Charging Power. If they added 100 miles in 10.5 minutes that is also 136kW average charging speed over that 10 minutes. They said the max speed they saw was 251kW which in 10.5 minutes would add 183 miles of range. Adding 100 miles of range from 10% would only require and ending SOC of 41%.
The Model 3 Long Range charges VERY fast to 41%. It holds 250kW until about 25% and is still just above 200kW at 40%. There should be no way it averaged 136kW charging to 41% SOC. They must have done it on a cold day with no preconditioning or something. You can add 180 miles in around 15 minutes when the battery is preconditioned. These numbers are super suspect.
What am I missing?
I’m not sure if I missed it but I also don’t see how they get to how they measure a charging hour. If they are going from 10% to 80% and many vehicles are doing that in far less time, are they just using the average charging speed in miles given from 10% to 80% and multiplying that to get whatever an hour is?
This is why miles per charging hour isn’t a particularly useful metric, since the rate of charge isn’t consistent across a full battery. If you charge from 10-80, drain it and charge 10-80 again and keep doing that until you have an hour of total charge time you’ll get a different number than if you did 50-80 or 10-40 or whatever else.
I think the Out of Spec 10% charge test is the way to go with testing this kind of thing. Start at 10%, charge for 15 minutes and see how many miles you can go before you’re back down to 10%. Seems like a more representative example of how people actually use fast charging in real world scenarios on road trips etc.
It looks like they use 10-80 and then normalize to the 100 mile figure. Giving only 15 min of charge rewards the cars who have a fast charge for a portion of the curve, particularly early on. This may be why ford does well, they allow much faster charging for a short time. Whereas an Audi etron has a nearly flat curve. Based on max charge rate it looks middle of the pack, but few can match it for 10-80.
I kinda like OOS test as well but realistically I am going to charge for how long my car tells me is best so that should also be a test case on top of what OOS and Edmunds are doing.
I am going to charge for how long my car tells me is best
How is that different than charging for 15 minutes?
The title is a little misleading. The test ranking is not just about charging rates but also energy use at Highway speeds. Cars with the fastest charging and lowest energy use — aerodynamics plays a big role here — did the best.
That’s not misleading why would the average customer care about charging rates? Range gained per minute is the charging speed most customers will care about.
I am surprised that the 900V Lucid is so far down. Is it a throttling problem due to heat? I know that has been a problem for Rivian.
Lucid charge curve alone isn’t actually that good
For example, in terms of C rate, a Model S charges faster than it, Taycan and similar much more
It’s just that it’s efficient and has a huge pack
Take a look at the C rate chart here, in terms of pushing cells, Model S/X push them harder
https://insideevs.com/news/555634/lucid-air-fast-charging-analysis/amp/
It really falls off fast from the peak KW
I actually like their test methodology, but Edmunds testing like 2-3 variants of every Hyundai, Kia, and Porsche model really pushes all the other cars down a lot further, but I would say:
- Top 6 (600+ mph) - next level… just Ioniq 5/6, EV6, Taycan
- 7-19 (~500+ mph) - excellent… still road trip beasts
- 20-28 (~400+ mph) - decent
- 29-40 (~300+ mph) - minimum acceptable for road trips
- 41-43 (under 300 mph) - awful… never road trip these
Miles per hour of charging doesn’t seem very indicative of roadtrip pace (sitting for hours is really the slowest way to travel). Seems like it would tell you which vehicle has a flatter charging curve but that doesn’t necessarily correlate to great 15min top-ups. It’ll be nice when publications like Edmund’s actually have experience with EVs, they might start using something like the Out Of Spec 10% challenge .
Looks like they measure time to charge to 100 miles of range based on their average tested consumption, which is 6.9 minutes for Ioniq 6 RWD, and then multiply 100 * (60 / 6.9) = 869 mph. I think it’s actually a decent way to measure it.