|
|
|
Any GTAM'ers own an electric vehicle?
- Thread starter PrivatePilot
- Start date
That's a number I can't personally provide yet as we have yet to go on any long trips that would rely solely on the ICE for any long distance.
I did a lot of reading online and found ranges between 35-42MPG as being an expected range, with about 38MPG being average - 6.1L/100KM. Like any other car that can be lower in the extreme winter cold, and can be better with maintaining a more moderate speed during long commute. For example, a trip across Highway 7 to Ottawa (at 85/90KPH) is going to beat a trip to Ottawa via the 401 at 110-120KPH. At 90KPH people report mid 40's MPG, or ~5.2L/100KM.
Over the ICE miles we have seen so far we seem to be averaging better than 6.1L/100KM however, around 5.5-ish, but only a full tank over a long trip will tell the real story and it's been hard to calculate our ICE mileage as all of it so far has been mixed with electric as well.
City ICE MPG are reportedly better than highway ICE MPG as well, kinda the reverse of a typical ICE car. In the city, even when the battery is exhausted, the engine still benefits from regen, so every stop light you brake (regen) at you gain a bit of electric back that delays the engine from starting again, and the engine still shuts down when coasting or stopped at a light. A good example, my wife just got home from work but had to zip out almost immediately for an appointment and even though the battery showed 0KM range she still drove completely down the length of our street towards the main road without the ICE starting using just regained buffer power from regen while coming into our neighborhood.
Yes, before anyone jumps on it (cough), the "average" ICE numbers ARE about 1L/100KM more than a Prius, but more or less on par with the Honda hybrid offerings. This is why I've said several times that there is a "magic number" of kilometers where if you can't recharge, something like a Prius does start to become a better choice...however, for our application we are ahead, particularly the ~210K or so KM we drove it Saturday, Sunday, and Monday without burning a drop of gas proving such.
For something like Taxi service where you're running major miles without the ability to charge and focus on electricity vs gas, yes, a Prius wins vs the Volt. That said, that's not our use, and we are winning significantly vs any Hybrid option.
So, todays stats:
My wife's commute to Peterborough this morning (76KM, she dropped our daughter off at work at her Co-Op, so an extra 5K vs normal) was accomplished 45.6K electric and 30.7KM gas, for a total average of 2.38L/100KM.
Calculating her trip home on pure ICE, which is the closest I'm going to get to a "straight highway ICE" calculation at this point albeit over only 70KM, it calculated out to almost exactly 6.0L/100K. Still a win vs a regular Civic which averages around 7.3-7.5L/100KM, on par with a Hybrid Civic between 5.9 to 6.1L/100K (so basically a wash), and a Prius would have averaged 4.5-5.0L/100K. Again, when compared to the Prius, she still averaged (between electric and gas) 3.8L/100KM over 155 Kilometers, which beat it.
Once she gets her charger access at work these numbers become far better yet - all the consumption figures basically go down to half.
And hey, I hear gas is going up 6 or 7c a Litre tonight. Electricity isn't.
I did a lot of reading online and found ranges between 35-42MPG as being an expected range, with about 38MPG being average - 6.1L/100KM. Like any other car that can be lower in the extreme winter cold, and can be better with maintaining a more moderate speed during long commute. For example, a trip across Highway 7 to Ottawa (at 85/90KPH) is going to beat a trip to Ottawa via the 401 at 110-120KPH. At 90KPH people report mid 40's MPG, or ~5.2L/100KM.
Over the ICE miles we have seen so far we seem to be averaging better than 6.1L/100KM however, around 5.5-ish, but only a full tank over a long trip will tell the real story and it's been hard to calculate our ICE mileage as all of it so far has been mixed with electric as well.
City ICE MPG are reportedly better than highway ICE MPG as well, kinda the reverse of a typical ICE car. In the city, even when the battery is exhausted, the engine still benefits from regen, so every stop light you brake (regen) at you gain a bit of electric back that delays the engine from starting again, and the engine still shuts down when coasting or stopped at a light. A good example, my wife just got home from work but had to zip out almost immediately for an appointment and even though the battery showed 0KM range she still drove completely down the length of our street towards the main road without the ICE starting using just regained buffer power from regen while coming into our neighborhood.
Yes, before anyone jumps on it (cough), the "average" ICE numbers ARE about 1L/100KM more than a Prius, but more or less on par with the Honda hybrid offerings. This is why I've said several times that there is a "magic number" of kilometers where if you can't recharge, something like a Prius does start to become a better choice...however, for our application we are ahead, particularly the ~210K or so KM we drove it Saturday, Sunday, and Monday without burning a drop of gas proving such.
For something like Taxi service where you're running major miles without the ability to charge and focus on electricity vs gas, yes, a Prius wins vs the Volt. That said, that's not our use, and we are winning significantly vs any Hybrid option.
So, todays stats:
My wife's commute to Peterborough this morning (76KM, she dropped our daughter off at work at her Co-Op, so an extra 5K vs normal) was accomplished 45.6K electric and 30.7KM gas, for a total average of 2.38L/100KM.
Calculating her trip home on pure ICE, which is the closest I'm going to get to a "straight highway ICE" calculation at this point albeit over only 70KM, it calculated out to almost exactly 6.0L/100K. Still a win vs a regular Civic which averages around 7.3-7.5L/100KM, on par with a Hybrid Civic between 5.9 to 6.1L/100K (so basically a wash), and a Prius would have averaged 4.5-5.0L/100K. Again, when compared to the Prius, she still averaged (between electric and gas) 3.8L/100KM over 155 Kilometers, which beat it.
Once she gets her charger access at work these numbers become far better yet - all the consumption figures basically go down to half.
And hey, I hear gas is going up 6 or 7c a Litre tonight. Electricity isn't.
Last edited:
-D-
Banned
Ok so let's call it 8L/100km loaded car (4 adults and luggage).
Seems to be on par running on gas alone.
Like you said, work the electric in your favor and you are winning.
How big is the fuel tank?
Your electric range should increase with decreased weight in car e.g. 1 driver and not passengers along with only keeping no more than 50% fuel in tank if you tend to spend more time using electric mode. No need to drive around with a full tank. I would likely run 1/4 tank.
Seems to be on par running on gas alone.
Like you said, work the electric in your favor and you are winning.
How big is the fuel tank?
Your electric range should increase with decreased weight in car e.g. 1 driver and not passengers along with only keeping no more than 50% fuel in tank if you tend to spend more time using electric mode. No need to drive around with a full tank. I would likely run 1/4 tank.
Not sure where you got 8L/100K from. That's below 30MPG and I haven't found any stories of anyone getting that low of a fuel economy on a Volt except for a few isolated ERDTT/short commute scenarios, people not maintaining things (tire pressures are a biggie), or admittedly driving aggressively. It's certainly not a normal number you'd see on a Volt under almost any circumstance.
FWIW with regards to weight we got one of our absolute best ranges (the one I posted a few responses back) with 2 of us in the car vs one. Not sure it makes a huge difference - speed (IE, air drag) has the biggest observable impact at this point, second only to heating. At 110KPH on the 401 the eco-meter is actually about 20% of the way up in the "consumption" side, but it's easy to accelerate without moving it even half that much and then return to the "Ideal efficiency" centre while cruising in the city, even with 2 of us in the car.
Tank size is 35L. Given as how my wife is still burning a few L of gas every day (battery range not quite enough to make it all the way, and charger at work not setup yet, so gas entire way home) it's not likely to be beneficial to bother running around with a partial tank at this point. Right now she's enjoying NOT having to fuel up every few days - With her current consumption she should only have to visit a gas station once every 1.5 weeks or so, and once she gets the charging station at work, probably only twice a month or less.
FWIW it does suggest in the manual to do exactly that however if you rely almost exclusively on electric miles.
FWIW with regards to weight we got one of our absolute best ranges (the one I posted a few responses back) with 2 of us in the car vs one. Not sure it makes a huge difference - speed (IE, air drag) has the biggest observable impact at this point, second only to heating. At 110KPH on the 401 the eco-meter is actually about 20% of the way up in the "consumption" side, but it's easy to accelerate without moving it even half that much and then return to the "Ideal efficiency" centre while cruising in the city, even with 2 of us in the car.
Tank size is 35L. Given as how my wife is still burning a few L of gas every day (battery range not quite enough to make it all the way, and charger at work not setup yet, so gas entire way home) it's not likely to be beneficial to bother running around with a partial tank at this point. Right now she's enjoying NOT having to fuel up every few days - With her current consumption she should only have to visit a gas station once every 1.5 weeks or so, and once she gets the charging station at work, probably only twice a month or less.
FWIW it does suggest in the manual to do exactly that however if you rely almost exclusively on electric miles.
Last edited:
-D-
Banned
I rounded up to the extreme for 8L/100km.
You said 7+. As I wrote with fully loaded car you likely up to 8.
Like you said, once she is charging at work then you are laughing.
You should look to see if an aftermarket company makes some kind of add on battery pack.
One would think they would have a flat pack that sits in the trunk.
You said 7+. As I wrote with fully loaded car you likely up to 8.
Like you said, once she is charging at work then you are laughing.
You should look to see if an aftermarket company makes some kind of add on battery pack.
One would think they would have a flat pack that sits in the trunk.
The only 7L/100KM numbers I mentioned were for a regular (non hybrid) Civic when I was comparing consumption.
The only way to end up the 7+L/100KM range on a Volt would be maybe a string of 10-15KM commutes in the dead of winter with a lot of ERDTT - "Engine Running Due To Temperature" - below -4C the 2011-2012 Volts start the engine into charge sustaining mode and for heat. FWIW I plan to install the hack that will lower this to -15c or so to avoid ERDTT on short winter trips - grocery store, for example. This is a menu option on the 2013+'s.
-D-
Banned
I already answered that as best as possible in post 382 above.
Unsure - I think that's the engineers figured out the fine line where the engine needs to be powerful enough to generate adequate power while operating in gasoline mode however - an anemic engine would directly result in anemic performance when running in gas generator mode, which customers would dislike. In it's current configuration the Volt is equally as perky in gas mode as it is in battery mode, even though for all intents and purposes the gas engine is basically just generating electricity.
There some question if it would have got any better MPG as result though - case in point, the Smart ForTwo - I saw one today and out of curiosity looked up their average fuel economy on Fuelly - 6.2 to 6.5L/100KM. MORE than the Volt...and for a car that's several thousand pounds less, seats on 2, but does have a 3 cylinder engine.
In the end, there's a line between economy and performance that automakers need to keep in line - if someone takes a test drive in a car they're thinking of buying and they try to merge onto the 401 and discover that they can't even get the car up to 50KPH by the end of the onramp (downright dangerous), they ain't gonna buy it. The Volt has NO problem in that regard - there's plenty of that famous electric torque on tap and it snaps to attention when you tell it to.
Does GM have any recent 3 cylinders to draw from? Developing a new engine from scratch is pricey. They have tons of 4 cylinder experience and parts to pull out of the bins.
For a car like the volt, I would love to see someone try a small turbine. It is the perfect operational scenario for it, it's either off or running at full power. A turbine can be obscenely small, but they are never used as they work terribly when you need to change throttle/speed. Again, I don't see this happening as it just costs way too much to develop.
Turbines don't really translate to car usage - they take too long to spool up (so instead of "I need power now" you get "I'll give you power in 6 or 8 seconds"), and they also not terribly fuel efficient outside high altitude/high speed usage - IE, aviation.
Although technology has come a long way, many of the challenges from the Chrysler Turbine Car experiment are still very real issues. Google that if you're not familiar with it.
Although technology has come a long way, many of the challenges from the Chrysler Turbine Car experiment are still very real issues. Google that if you're not familiar with it.
Slowbird, when do you pickup your Volt BTW?
The offline way the volt uses the engine fixes the major problem (spool up). The offline car starts the engine when the batteries are getting low and leaves it at full power (directing the juice to either the wheels or batteries) until the batteries are full, then it shuts it off. Having a ramp at the beginning and end of that cycle causes no problems as you are running off the battery pack at those points anyway. You should never need power now with the volt. Obviously the turbine messes with the current system of using the engine to heat the car as in that situation you may have more power than you can deal with/want.
Altitude and speed are not going to change, so if they make a turbine less efficient than an ICE, the experiment is over before it starts.
Turbines don't scale down very well. There is a nasty little relationship called the "Reynolds number" in fluid dynamics which becomes killer to downsized turbomachinery. This is the relationship between the viscosity and the momentum of fluid flow. What works well on a megawatt scale is not so good on a kilowatt scale.
The other problem is that it's not so easy to have a high pressure ratio (akin to the compression ratio in a piston engine) and maintain good efficiency. If you try to operate a small turbomachine at a high pressure ratio, the fluid-dynamic losses (see aforementioned Reynolds number) will kill you. The usual alternative is to operate it at a relatively low pressure ratio but with a heat exchanger to transfer heat from the exhaust to the compressed air before the combustion chamber. In order to be efficient, that heat exchanger has to be big. If it's big, then it becomes slow to react. The engine won't like stopping and starting or changing output power very quickly.
On a utility power generation scale, you can have multiple stages of compression, each one operating at a low and manageable pressure ratio, and multiple stages of intercooling, plus exhaust heat recovery, with good big efficient heat exchangers, because size and weight almost don't matter and the device has to operate at a constant speed corresponding to our 60 Hz (or 50 Hz in europe) electrical grid, and "throttle response" almost doesn't matter. Doesn't work so good when scaled down.
Regarding the 3 cylinders vs 4, GM does have a 1 litre 3 cylinder engine in the european market, but that doesn't necessarily mean it would make sense in this application. The Volt engine uses the Atkinson cycle (through cam timing trickery) - which means it doesn't have as much power and torque as a "normal" engine of the same displacement, but it's more efficient. (Toyota Prius does the same thing - the hybrids use the electric part of the powertrain to top up the power output so that the car doesn't feel lethargic despite having an engine calibrated for efficiency rather than power) It's more efficient to use a somewhat bigger but more mildly tuned engine than it is to use the smallest possible engine that has to work hard to get the job done.
GM did their homework with the Volt.
The other problem is that it's not so easy to have a high pressure ratio (akin to the compression ratio in a piston engine) and maintain good efficiency. If you try to operate a small turbomachine at a high pressure ratio, the fluid-dynamic losses (see aforementioned Reynolds number) will kill you. The usual alternative is to operate it at a relatively low pressure ratio but with a heat exchanger to transfer heat from the exhaust to the compressed air before the combustion chamber. In order to be efficient, that heat exchanger has to be big. If it's big, then it becomes slow to react. The engine won't like stopping and starting or changing output power very quickly.
On a utility power generation scale, you can have multiple stages of compression, each one operating at a low and manageable pressure ratio, and multiple stages of intercooling, plus exhaust heat recovery, with good big efficient heat exchangers, because size and weight almost don't matter and the device has to operate at a constant speed corresponding to our 60 Hz (or 50 Hz in europe) electrical grid, and "throttle response" almost doesn't matter. Doesn't work so good when scaled down.
Regarding the 3 cylinders vs 4, GM does have a 1 litre 3 cylinder engine in the european market, but that doesn't necessarily mean it would make sense in this application. The Volt engine uses the Atkinson cycle (through cam timing trickery) - which means it doesn't have as much power and torque as a "normal" engine of the same displacement, but it's more efficient. (Toyota Prius does the same thing - the hybrids use the electric part of the powertrain to top up the power output so that the car doesn't feel lethargic despite having an engine calibrated for efficiency rather than power) It's more efficient to use a somewhat bigger but more mildly tuned engine than it is to use the smallest possible engine that has to work hard to get the job done.
GM did their homework with the Volt.
Thing is, the engine on the Volt doesn't charge the batteries (any signifigant amount, it may dump a bit into the battery here and there during high RPM to low RPM events) in normal driving mode, the engine solely provides traction electricity, not charging effort.
The Mountain Mode does something sorta in between, reserving some of the battery (40% state of charge) for use later, and if the SOC is below 40% when mountain mode is engaged it will run the engine at an aggressive RPM to indeed recharge back up to that 40%, but not surprisingly (remember, net energy loss ) it results in a massive MPG hit. It's really not efficient.
Went for a drive this morning and made 65KM on a single charge. I took the picture when the battery meter was reading 1KM left just in case the engine started and blew it (as it goes instantly to 0.1L consumed the second the engine starts) but rest assured I did make it to my driveway without it starting, and 1KM still reading on the battery still actually.
This is actually nearly 10KM over the rated range of the battery.
Any concerns about the health of the battery at 4+ years and 130,000KM on the car are hereby dispelled.
This is actually nearly 10KM over the rated range of the battery.
Any concerns about the health of the battery at 4+ years and 130,000KM on the car are hereby dispelled.
Pulled over safely I hope lol
I get your excitement, but do try to avoid turning into one of those eco nuts driving around with one egg under the accelerator and another atop your shoulders.
Congrats on the auto; of the eco options I dislike the volt the least. Seems quality.
I get your excitement, but do try to avoid turning into one of those eco nuts driving around with one egg under the accelerator and another atop your shoulders.
Congrats on the auto; of the eco options I dislike the volt the least. Seems quality.
Iceman
Well-known member
65km normally doesn't sound that impressive to me. But when I start thinking about it, that's an entire car with people running around essentially free. That car would take my wife to/from work everyday for free without charging at work.
Sent from my SM-A500W using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-A500W using Tapatalk
-D-
Banned
That's one of the soft benefits of this type of car.
You can get up and perhaps go do different things or drop by x or y places as it will cost you less than the cost of 1 TTC fare in 1 direction for 1 person.
|
|
|
|
|