Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Electric vehicles providing over 200-mile range are multiplying. Two sister vehicles from Hyundai (Kona) and Kia (Soul) coming out this year are said to provide about 240 mile range. Now if the Fed govt would just retain the tax credits...
Well, I don't think Hyundai or Kia are anywhere near the tax credit phase out numbers right now, so that's moot for now. The company's been seriously consider getting an electric vehicle as it's mostly city driving that we do and back to a lot with a level 2 charger.
Anyone on this board jump in and get either of these so far? How's it been going?
I’m assuming that 240 mile range is with no heat or ac? Since I live in a hot climate I’m assuming the realistic mileage with the a/c would be more like 180. That’s not very much.
I’m assuming that 240 mile range is with no heat or ac? Since I live in a hot climate I’m assuming the realistic mileage with the a/c would be more like 180. That’s not very much.
I'm going to guess it's based on driving patterns and a/c usage? Where did you find the 180 number?
I read somewhere before that a/c consumes around 17-20%, and heat uses even more. I just averaged it.
Is that for longer range electric vehicles though? Supposedly running ACs in hot environments to get cabins to what are normally comfortable ranges are a lot less taxing than running the heater in very cold environments is usually a lot more efficient. Heating for EVs in comparison to ICE cars performs much differently, because though those engines are pretty inefficient and generate an incredible amount of waste heat, that waste heat can actually get channeled into the cabin when it's cold out. Depending on if we're talking 90 degree heat or 110 degree heat to get into a comfortable 70, Teslas lose something like 5 to 10 percent range.
Why would the Korean EVs be so radically different? 180 is a 25% reduction from 240. There's something fishy about that to me.
Is that for longer range electric vehicles though? Supposedly running ACs in hot environments to get cabins to what are normally comfortable ranges are a lot less taxing than running the heater in very cold environments is usually a lot more efficient. Heating for EVs in comparison to ICE cars performs much differently, because though those engines are pretty inefficient and generate an incredible amount of waste heat, that waste heat can actually get channeled into the cabin when it's cold out. Depending on if we're talking 90 degree heat or 110 degree heat to get into a comfortable 70, Teslas lose something like 5 to 10 percent range.
Why would the Korean EVs be so radically different? 180 is a 25% reduction from 240. There's something fishy about that to me.
It was a study done by AAA.
Quote:
At 20 degrees, the average driving range fell by 12 percent when the car’s cabin heater was not used. When the heater was turned on, the range dropped by 41 percent, AAA said.
At 95 degrees, range dropped 4 percent without use of air conditioning, and fell by 17 percent when the cabin was cooled, the study found.
I saw that, too, but I also saw these forums posts which also yield the 17% but through the vehicle's real time estimator when clicking around but with a lot of posters saying it's different in terms of real world experience with AC having nearly negligible results.
I think what generally happens is that first turning on the AC in a hot car has a larger initial power draw in turning down the heat of the cabin, but then that power draw dips down quickly once the cabin is actually at around the temperature you're trying to maintain and AC units in EVs are generally a lot more efficient than their ICE counterparts.
That 17% estimate that the car dashboard initially itself and what the study gives are the same number, but it seems like it's universally argued as untrue on the owners's boards though the heating issue is not.
But let's take it at face value. 240 miles with a 17% reduction is to a 200 miles rather than the 25% reduction to a 180 miles. Is that 200 miles per charge usable with your car usage patterns? Do you actually have a place to park your car at home that can have a charger?
Spoiler
Also, the 240 miles was off, but I figured we'd just swing with it for a bit. EPA's actual rating was 258 miles. Even if we're taking this 17% reduction at face value and not something that was taken from a cursory look at an initial onboard computer estimate but without running through a full drain test, then that 258 miles with a 17% reduction is a 214 miles. We just keep raising that floor, what a topic! ^_^
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 06-02-2019 at 08:38 AM..
I'd like to check out the Kona EV. We went to our local dealer two days ago, but they aren't selling it here in Virginia. (We went to look at other vehicles, but I would have been interested in checking out the Kona and comparing to the Bolt.)
We currently have a Spark EV as a second car. It gets about 90 miles per charge and often lasts for a good part of the week. It's perfect for the driving we do. We drive it about 3,500 miles a year so 180-240 miles of range would be more than enough.
I'd like to check out the Kona EV. We went to our local dealer two days ago, but they aren't selling it here in Virginia. (We went to look at other vehicles, but I would have been interested in checking out the Kona and comparing to the Bolt.)
We currently have a Spark EV as a second car. It gets about 90 miles per charge and often lasts for a good part of the week. It's perfect for the driving we do. We drive it about 3,500 miles a year so 180-240 miles of range would be more than enough.
Since we weren't sure an electric car would work for us, we leased our Spark. We loved that little car, but GM Lease wouldn't budge on the buy out at lease end (they wanted $16,000 for a car worth $10,000). So we said goodby and ended up with a Soul Turbo, which we like. Looked at the Soul EV and the Kia Niro, but, with the equipment packages we wanted, both were right around $35,000. The Soul Turbo was $24,000. Given our mostly city driving, the Soul Turbo gets right around 30 mpg.
We should have bought the Spark EV instead of leasing it, but it is too late to fix that.
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
Moderator for: Oregon (and subforums), Auto Racing.
When you signed up for an account, you agreed to abide by the site's TOS and rules. You really should look through them.
City-Data Terms of Service: //www.city-data.com/terms.html
City-Data FAQ: //www.city-data.com/forum/faq/
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
