Sport Mode all the time

[Firn]

There's no agree or disagree. It's true or false.

Take 2 identical trucks to a drag strip and run them each 5 times. The 1st truck you floor it every single time. The 2nd truck you accelerate gracefully. Do you really think that after 5 runs they're going to use the same amount of energy?

Incase you still don't understand lets compare it to something that everyone can agree on. You get better mileage going 65mph than you do going 80mph. By your logic both trucks should use the same amount of energy because at 80 mph you're driving for a shorter period of time.

Since you had to bring a condescending tone into it we will go ahead and keep it that way.

Your two arguments show you don't understand the point at all.

In the drag strip situation of course the truck that accelerated slower used less energy, it reached a lower speed. It went from zero kinetic energy to a value LOWER than the truck that accelerated the whole way, of course it expended less energy doing so, it's final kinetic energy is lower. But that's not how people drive, they accelerate up to their predetermined speed. That may be 35 after leaving a stop sign, or 75 on an on ramp, in the end their final speed isnt determined by how hard they accelerated to get there.. In both cases they used a set amount of energy to go from zero potential energy to the SAME kinetic energy. Read up on the conservation of energy if you don't get this. If two vehicles have the same efficiency and weight you cannot put more energy into one than the other and still end up at the SAME SPEED.

As for your 60mph argument vs 80, that shows you don't even understand that the conversation is about energy at all. If between two trucks one of the truck went half as fast and that use HALF THE ENERGY PER MILE, and completed the trip in twice the time then yes, they would both use the same amount of energy. But that isn't how it works, the amount of energy needed to push something through the air is exponentially higher the faster it goes, so the truck going twice as fast uses FOUR TIMES the energy. But in the end that has NOTHING to do with acceleration. You seem to have gotten lost on the time component and didn't think about what is being discussed.

Physics 101 tells you that ignoring efficiency the amount of energy you put into a system results in the same end case, you cannot put more energy into one of two identical systems and yet reach the same end point. What CAN happen, and what does happen, is that in ICE vehicles the EFFICIENCY changes depending on power output, in that case less energy goes into accelerstion and more into heat. This is not the same for EVs, and although system efficiency MAY change the harder you accelerate the difference is very small. In fact I expect the biggest difference would likely comes from the fact that the faster accelerating truck spends more time at a higher speed than the slower accelerating one, but since you are speaking of seconds on a trip that takes tens of minutes the difference is miniscule in comparison to energy expended elsewhere.

Sponsored

 

[Traconesu]

Whether you accelerate from 0 to 60 rapidly, or slowly, you use the same amount of electricity.

None of the modes harm the truck.

You can't be serious. If you get from point A to point B at 70 mph versus 55 mph of course you'll use more power out of your battery.

 

[Traconesu]

Since you had to bring a condescending tone into it we will go ahead and keep it that way.

Your two arguments show you don't understand the point at all.

In the drag strip situation of course the truck that accelerated slower used less energy, it reached a lower speed. It went from zero kinetic energy to a value LOWER than the truck that accelerated the whole way, of course it expended less energy doing so, it's final kinetic energy is lower. But that's not how people drive, they accelerate up to their predetermined speed. That may be 35 after leaving a stop sign, or 75 on an on ramp, in the end their final speed isnt determined by how hard they accelerated to get there.. In both cases they used a set amount of energy to go from zero potential energy to the SAME kinetic energy. Read up on the conservation of energy if you don't get this. If two vehicles have the same efficiency and weight you cannot put more energy into one than the other and still end up at the SAME SPEED.

As for your 60mph argument vs 80, that shows you don't even understand that the conversation is about energy at all. If between two trucks one of the truck went half as fast and that use HALF THE ENERGY PER MILE, and completed the trip in twice the time then yes, they would both use the same amount of energy. But that isn't how it works, the amount of energy needed to push something through the air is exponentially higher the faster it goes, so the truck going twice as fast uses FOUR TIMES the energy. But in the end that has NOTHING to do with acceleration. You seem to have gotten lost on the time component and didn't think about what is being discussed.

Physics 101 tells you that ignoring efficiency the amount of energy you put into a system results in the same end case, you cannot put more energy into one of two identical systems and yet reach the same end point. What CAN happen, and what does happen, is that in ICE vehicles the EFFICIENCY changes depending on power output, in that case less energy goes into accelerstion and more into heat. This is not the same for EVs, and although system efficiency MAY change the harder you accelerate the difference is very small. In fact I expect the biggest difference would likely comes from the fact that the faster accelerating truck spends more time at a higher speed than the slower accelerating one, but since you are speaking of seconds on a trip that takes tens of minutes the difference is miniscule in comparison to energy expended elsewhere.

What a bunch of BS. When I drive the interstate at 55 mph I get 2.3 mpk when I drive that same route at 70 mph I get 2 mpk.
If I accelerate slow to 55 or 70 or accelerate fast to 55 or 70 I use even more energy accelerating fast and may not even achieve the 2.3 mpk @ 55 mph.

 

[Firn]

What a bunch of BS. When I drive the interstate at 55 mph I get 2.3 mpk when I drive that same route at 70 mph I get 2 mpk.
If I accelerate slow to 55 or 70 or accelerate fast to 55 or 70 I use even more energy accelerating fast and may not even achieve the 2.3 mpk @ 55 mph.

So somehow accelerating quickly changes what you get on the Interstate at a steady speed? Are you driving this interstate route for 3 miles?

And somehow you drive the same interstate, in the exact same conditions, but sometimes at 55 (what, ten UNDER) but then also drive it at five over.

And to be clear, this is controlled conditions. No traffic or not, not behind another car accelerating.

If you have an argument make it, but this feels like "well that one time I didn't accelerate as hard I think i remember i saw different numbers.

 

[Altivec]

I definitely see an improvement in efficiency in sport mode over normal mode. It's probably due to the slightly more aggressive regen. Instead of coasting and braking in Normal, I am assuming it sits in regen for a few seconds longer each time I brake. I think you will notice this more if you are a city driver doing a lot of stop and go. I doubt you will gain much in sport if you do long distances.

I also like the steering feel and pedal mapping better in sport but I stopped using it. Just got completely annoyed of having to be so attentive starting my truck in anticipation of hitting OK to keep it in sport. I really wish Ford would fix this so I can go back to using Sport. I would take that fix over Karaoke 1000 times over. If you're listening Ford, drive mode should be tied to each user. My wife prefers normal and I prefer sport. Each of us, should resume to what mode we were using last.

 

[TaxmanHog]

If you're listening Ford, drive mode should be tied to each user. My wife prefers normal and I prefer sport. Each of us, should resume to what mode we were using last.

Amen @Ford Motor Company real value updates!

 

[eRockBoon]

@Firn are the motors really equally efficient at all power outputs?

even if they are, under aggressive acceleration, you’re still gonna have additional losses in efficiency, simply due to the fact that your tires don’t have infinite traction. When accelerating aggressively your wheels will spin and that’s energy invested in moving the tires that’s not driving the vehicle forward, resulting in a lower efficiency

 

[Firn]

@Firn are the motors really equally efficient at all power outputs?

even if they are, under aggressive acceleration, you’re still gonna have additional losses in efficiency, simply due to the fact that your tires don’t have infinite traction. When accelerating aggressively your wheels will spin and that’s energy invested in moving the tires that’s not driving the vehicle forward, resulting in a lower efficiency

I'll fall back to my original comment were i purposely didn't say "exactly".

You are right, we could get down into things like increased friction in the CV joints, internal resistance of the battery cells themselves, scrub rates of the tires, and as I said longer times at high speeds.

I do think that accelerating hard and "spinning the tires" are two completely different things though. Yeah, if you are actually breaking the tires free then that is wasted energy, but you can accelerate quite agressivly without braking the tires lose. And sure, there is some tire scrub, but that should be very very minor.

I'm not going to claim it's exactly the same, like I said I purposely didn't claim that in my first response. But even the combined inefficiencies should be very small compared to a gas engine.

Sponsored