Extended Range 320 Miles???

[jeff_h]

Ford should be ashamed. And so should GM. And Tesla. And practically everyone except the Germans who tend to consistently underpromise and overdeliver on range.

Do you think Ford and the other companies you mentioned just pick a number that they think will sound good and publish it on their labels? There's a defined test process that each manufacturer uses to arrive at those numbers, shown in the link below.

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fuel-economy-and-ev-range-testing

Sponsored

 

[RickLightning]

It comes as a surprise to most new EV drivers that unlike their ICE vehicles, which get better fuel economy at steady highspeed on the highway than in city driving, EVs are LESS efficient at steady highspeed highway driving, than in the city. The reason is regenerative braking in the EV (helps its efficiency) vs. the extra gasoline required for accelerating in stop-and-go city traffic.

The biggest reason that new EV drivers are surprised about the impact of cold weather is that they are totally clueless about the impact of cold weather on a gas vehicle. The majority don't know that winter gas exists, or that cold weather drops their mpg. https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/...d weather and winter driving,to 4-mile) trips.

Have you compared the displayed range to what you actually get? Once I did that, I started ignoring the GOM completely.

I'm too chicken to push it to the limit. I almost always recharge at 30% or higher. At home I rarely drop below 50%.

The great thing about having an EV is that I skip the gas stations and when I get home I just plug in and walk away. No more range anxiety in a 60+ mile radius.

You aren't understanding this at all. You can figure your range without driving to zero... Display says a range at say 80%. Divide by 0.8 and you have the useless range. Now, drive your drive. Write down the range, and divide by that SOC. Now you see the impact of reality.

Or, before shutting off, note the miles per kilowatt hour of your trip. Multiply times battery size and that is your range for that type of driving.

Of course if you drive 45mph for an hour vs. 70mph for an hour, the range is totally different for each type of driving.

 

[Ventorum94]

On my 2023 XLT ER, the handful of times I've been at 100% charge it's been as low as around 280 and as high as 360, so the driving behavior and climate will play roles in the estimated range.

Range is variable, and much under the control of the driver. Motor Trend prepared an eye-opening graph of their longterm test Lightning’s range vs. highway speed:

The ranges shown are based on running 100% to 5% SOC; 324mi at 55mph, 214mi at 75mph. Range is over 50% more with a 20mph reduction in speed on the highway.
Complete article here;
https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/...xlt-yearlong-review-update-3-road-trip-speed/

 

[rufustlong]

Imputed 100% range [243/.84=289.3 miles range @ 100%]

This is pretty much right where I'm at in Washington State in my Flash. Unless you are in the south, it's hard to do better this time of year unless you are just creeping around a flat city.

 

[mrau]

Same here in Michigan for this time of year.

 

[TaxmanHog]

This is pretty much right where I'm at in Washington State in my Flash. Unless you are in the south, it's hard to do better this time of year unless you are just creeping around a flat city.

Southeastern New England, seasonal temps, most of my driving is local roads with an occasional freeway trip.

 

[Billybender32]

One thing I think you should check because everyone keeps talking about EPA but you need to verify you have 131 KW usable battery. I'm in the same boat as you where my mileage was not adding up. I charged it up to 100% made sure I drove around the city got 2.55 mi/kwh and I barley touched 300 with my truck. When I charge it up to 90% every morning I get between 104 to 107 KW hours. When I charge it up to 100% I get between 120 and 123. Based on the car scanner app. That is way off from the 131 that is advertised. My truck's going into the shop in a couple days and I'll see what they say. I look at it as if a gas vehicle had a 20 gallon fuel tank. Mine only has 17.5 gallons.

 

[TaxmanHog]

One thing I think you should check because everyone keeps talking about EPA but you need to verify you have 131 KW usable battery. I'm in the same boat as you where my mileage was not adding up. I charged it up to 100% made sure I drove around the city got 2.55 mi/kwh and I barley touched 300 with my truck. When I charge it up to 90% every morning I get between 104 to 107 KW hours. When I charge it up to 100% I get between 120 and 123. Based on the car scanner app. That is way off from the 131 that is advertised. My truck's going into the shop in a couple days and I'll see what they say. I look at it as if a gas vehicle had a 20 gallon fuel tank. Mine only has 17.5 gallons.

We have a few old threads where experts members shared detailed discussion about how the energy management system doesn't always show the rated capacity in kWh, factors such as temperature and cell / module state of health play factor in these values.

 

[Billybender32]

That might be correct but the car scanner app appears to be pretty accurate. Because when it shows I have a 100 kW hours and I drive an average of 2.0 mi/kwh in 200 miles I'm basically at 0%. When I go on road trips I don't pay attention to the range or battery percentage. I look at the car scanner app to see how many kilowatt hours I have and it usually always adds up perfectly. My truck's new. Has less than 5,000 mi on it. And battery health is at 100%.

 

[Firn]

That might be correct but the car scanner app appears to be pretty accurate. Because when it shows I have a 100 kW hours and I drive an average of 2.0 mi/kwh in 200 miles I'm basically at 0%. When I go on road trips I don't pay attention to the range or battery percentage. I look at the car scanner app to see how many kilowatt hours I have and it usually always adds up perfectly. My truck's new. Has less than 5,000 mi on it. And battery health is at 100%.

That may be true, it can measure the consumption pretty accurately. What he was saying is that the actual capacity of the battery is dependent upon a variety of things, basically that it may be "131kwh" but only when certain outside conditions are met. I mean, we don't expect a battery at 10f to have the same capacity as at 70f.

 

[mrau]

Can always look at the sticker on the side of battery pack to check the kWh size.

Can be seen from underneath on drivers side of the battery pack.

 

[kubel]

Do you think Ford and the other companies you mentioned just pick a number that they think will sound good and publish it on their labels? There's a defined test process that each manufacturer uses to arrive at those numbers, shown in the link below.

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fuel-economy-and-ev-range-testing

The EPA rating allows manufacturers to de-rate their range figures to better reflect reality, and companies like Mercedes do this honestly, but companies like Ford and Tesla are choosing to intentionally mislead their customers with these fantasy range figures. All this will do is disappoint potential customers like OP who can end up buying a car that won't work for them.

Range figures must reflect typical worst case scenarios that are likely to occur during ownership becaues that's the figure customers are using to determine if it will work for them.

 

[Jim Lewis]

Range figures must reflect typical worst case scenarios that are likely to occur during ownership becaues that's the figure customers are using to determine if it will work for them.

You mean the window sticker rating for someone living in Texas should reflect mileage ratings for the North Slope of Alaska?

Sponsored