In the far distant past (!) when I drove an ICE car, I was the kind of nerd who obssessed about fuel consumption. With my ID.3 I'm being forced to relinquish my obssession.
I hoped to achieve 5M/kWh but in my pattern of UK driving I don't get above 4M/kWh, and on short winter journeys I get 3 - 3.5M/kWh.
I see reviews on Youtube claiming over 4M/kWh in Hyundai vehicles and others. Am I heavy-footed, or is my ID.3 very inefficient?
Also, I wish there was an agreed standard unit for energy efficiency - M/kWh, Km/kWh, Wh/KM, kWh/100kM. If I'm using one unit and a reviewer is using a different one, it's annoying to have to convert!
Efficiency measurement
-
- Posts: 251
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2020 2:30 pm
ID.3 1st Edition Manganese Grey - called Heidi Flowerpot
-
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 1:33 pm
A lot of those Hyundais have a 38kWh battery - there's about 1535kg kerb weight to pull. The 64kWh version, more in line with an ID3 Pro Performance in output (204ps) and battery capacity is 1635kg - its pulling about 15% less weight than the ID3, no wonder its more efficient.
Cupra Born V2 e-boost 230ps Aurora Blue, replaced ID3 PP Family
Audi S3 - because I hate rapid charging for long distance driving.
Octopus referral: https://share.octopus.energy/lush-fawn-565
Audi S3 - because I hate rapid charging for long distance driving.
Octopus referral: https://share.octopus.energy/lush-fawn-565
5 miles/kWh is about 0.5 above the WLTP figures, you were never going to get anywhere near 5?
As Monkeyhanger says the Hyundais with a Kona 39kWh battery have
WLTP Ratings
Range 190 mi
Rated Consumption 230 Wh/mi
Vehicle Consumption 207 Wh/mi
1610kg
The Kona 64 kWh version has
WLTP Ratings
Range 301 mi
Rated Consumption 237 Wh/mi
Vehicle Consumption 213 Wh/mi
1760Kg
Whilst the ID 62kWh
WLTP Ratings (TEL)
Range 265 mi
Rated Consumption 248 Wh/mi
Vehicle Consumption 219 Wh/mi
1812kg
So yes it's less efficient and heavier.
Figures from https://ev-database.uk/
As Monkeyhanger says the Hyundais with a Kona 39kWh battery have
WLTP Ratings
Range 190 mi
Rated Consumption 230 Wh/mi
Vehicle Consumption 207 Wh/mi
1610kg
The Kona 64 kWh version has
WLTP Ratings
Range 301 mi
Rated Consumption 237 Wh/mi
Vehicle Consumption 213 Wh/mi
1760Kg
Whilst the ID 62kWh
WLTP Ratings (TEL)
Range 265 mi
Rated Consumption 248 Wh/mi
Vehicle Consumption 219 Wh/mi
1812kg
So yes it's less efficient and heavier.
Figures from https://ev-database.uk/
-
- Posts: 251
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2020 2:30 pm
Thanks for this helpful info. What is the difference between 'rated consumption' and 'vehicle consumption'? It appears 'vehicle consumption' shows greater efficiency than 'rated consumption'?G43FAN wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 6:04 pm 5 miles/kWh is about 0.5 above the WLTP figures, you were never going to get anywhere near 5?
As Monkeyhanger says the Hyundais with a Kona 39kWh battery have
WLTP Ratings
Range 190 mi
Rated Consumption 230 Wh/mi
Vehicle Consumption 207 Wh/mi
1610kg
The Kona 64 kWh version has
WLTP Ratings
Range 301 mi
Rated Consumption 237 Wh/mi
Vehicle Consumption 213 Wh/mi
1760Kg
Whilst the ID 62kWh
WLTP Ratings (TEL)
Range 265 mi
Rated Consumption 248 Wh/mi
Vehicle Consumption 219 Wh/mi
1812kg
So yes it's less efficient and heavier.
Figures from https://ev-database.uk/
If I've got my sums right, 219 Wh/mi equates to 4.57M/kWh or thereabouts, and 248Wh/mi is 4.1M/kWh - both figures I fail to match. Although I suppose I probably could get somewhere near that if I did a journey in summer, at 56MPH and without heating or aircon...
I checked the EV Database website, a great resource, thanks for the link. It rates my car at 270 Wh/M, and browsing the database that's fairly good, only a couple of Teslas and some smaller cars with smaller batteries do better. And 270Wh/M is 3.7M/kWh, and I get quite close to that, so I'm happy...
ID.3 1st Edition Manganese Grey - called Heidi Flowerpot