Today's drive

Luton airport for me later today. Last bigish job for the Civic. £5 drop off fee. Sigh.

And indeed we may have heard your thoughts on the matter a couple of times.
You do you as they say.

It was a journey along mixed country roads, motorways and a little urban. I think I may have been a little pessimistic but today I have a drive from Bodmin to Manchester. I'm about to charge up and the journey is now 100% on motorway or similar.



Apparently there is a new Tesla Model 3 out which is long range 2WD version. Still don't want one as my trip this week has proven that my car works for me and more importantly, the charging network isn't as bad a people say it is.

No, because the differences are masked by the massive background inefficiency of any combustion engine, whereas an EV lays everything bare: drive faster, use more. But it’s not really relevant on short journeys and, as Esp’s data and mine suggest, it pretty much evens out over a long one.

What we might call ‘design maturity’ has an influence too. 2010s EVs, like BPG’s Kia and my i3, were designed to work within the constraints imposed by small (by today's standards) batteries and to work best as short-distance runabouts, with high speeds and long distances some way down the list. (Given that, the e-Niro is a remarkably capable machine, years ahead of most makers’ efforts.) The i3 is more than capable on motorways, but its efficiency drops off noticeably above about 65mph.

Bigger, newer EVs have moved the game on. My impression with the iX is that the efficiency cliff-edge, if it is one, is closer to 80 than 65, and I’d expect something similar in the Ioniq 5. I imagine that’s partly gearing, sacrificing red-hot (by EV standards) 0-62 acceleration for lower revs and less friction at cruising speed.

Winter knocks everything down, of course, but still predictably. The demo iX managed 205Wh/km on a 10°C day in April and I’m guessing that may become 215 when it’s close to freezing. Hardly all over the chart and perfectly easy to live with and plan for.

Not sure that’s true. People typically look at the WLTP headline, ask (if they do any critical thinking at all) what that translates to in real-world use, and use that to decide. Much the same applies in fossil world: Humph ’s famously economical diesel might consume 5 litres (190 MJ) per 100km ‘on a run’ but struggle to better 18 litres (684 MJ) on the mean, traffic-choked streets of Stoke on a December morning. That’s a bigger proportional swing than the electric Kia — and, of course, even at its worst, the EV (81 MJ) is consuming less than half the energy of the diesel at its best. If there’s a type to be avoided because it fails to deliver its promises of efficiency, it’s the combustion engine.

There's typically a 15% drop in efficiency with internal combustion from 25°C to -6°C rising to 24% for short journeys of 3 or 4 miles. EV is typically 39% with a heat pump.
If Humph is getting 18l/100kms he really should look at getting that hole in the fuel tank looked at.

Edit: looked at the EV3 specification sheet, looks like it will initially be offered with the same 150kW motor 0-100kph in mid 7 seconds. The range boost coming from increasing the battery capacity from 64kWh to 81kWh. It looks like the efficiency of motors has plateaued for now.