Optimal cruising speed for Jaguar I-Pace
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 вер 2024
- Special thanks to Bilbutikk1 for lending me the car :)
www.bilbutikk1...
My referral link:
ts.la/bjrn3169
Most of my music is from Artlist.io. If you sign up for one year and use my referral link, you will get two months free:
artlist.io/art...
Donation links:
streamlabs.com/...
/ teslabjorn
My live channel:
/ teslabjornlive24
Teslabjørn Discord server:
/ discord
Reduce food waste and get great deals on food:
toogoodtogo.no/
You are the best electric car reviewer! There is no doubt about that. No one comes close!
I couldn't agree more!
I doubt anyone in the world has more first hand knowledge of EVs than Bjorn.
WONDERFUL!!! This is exactly(!) the kind of information I was looking for after having seen some other EV reviews. Highly appreciated! Crucial and relevant info, absolutely appropriate technical/mathematical approach, and I appreciate the (non-negligible) time you took to gather and evaluate all this! These kinds of curves should become standard for professional EV testing... Keep up this awesome work, greetings from Germany to Norway.
As usual, tonnes of data. As you say, it must take you a huge bundle of hours. It's all appreciated, Bjorn.
Tons of data processed into a set of meaningful curves that are practically relevant and easy to grasp. I agree, excellent precious work.
Loved your roadtrip and info about the I-Pace!
I think your approach is very good, for me it shows that the iPace is not only well conceived, designed and very well constructed and finished but is, in the real world practical. Yes, for long road trips one has to plan and factor in charging stops but they are doable. Assuming one has the ability to change overnight at home then the iPace is a real alternative to a Tesla, which is a good thing. So well done Jaguar and well done Tesla for setting the bar so high.
Not sure how you landed on that conclusion based on this video. The I-Pace is significantly less aerodynamic and has higher consumption than a 6 year old vehicle (Model S) and the Model X (which is a vastly larger vehicle). The I-Pace is awesome but JLR are definitely playing catch up
Edvard in my life I do not break the speed limit here in the UK or anywhere. Even when I lived in Germany I never felt the urge to go much over 130 km/hr. So the sweet spot described by Bojrn is what I would do. That would give me about 4 hours driving before having to take a break. So even on my regular weekly long trip 100 miles each way I wouldn’t need a fast charge. Most days I do a total of 110 miles. On those annual trips to the north of England I’d fast charge twice but not to 100% as no need. We have fast chargers at every motorway service station so plenty right beside the road.
As for annual holiday well the boat doesn’t need charging and takes me where I want to go. Not impossible that I might drive to a skiing resort again in the future (French Alps) but even then easy to do in the iPace as my middle aged bladder demands breaks every 2 hours or so.
Yes a Tesla can do all that, but I have looked at both and prefer the comfort and quality of the iPace. I don’t like the Tesla screen preferring a more traditional layout and occasionally go off road , which is a big no-no in a Tesla. I’m not so worried about efficiency as I am about range and will be totally happy with a reliable 200+ per charge.
Thank you Bjorn!! This is such good data and really helpful for other customers to know what kind of EV they are stepping into! Keep up the good work 👌
Nice one Bjorn, a massive amount of time investment to bring us this data. As always very interesting.
Good job, thanks for the time and effort to produce these videos
That graph at 10:00 is such a good idea - and a great way to compare various vehicles fairly, taking into account multiple factors, specifically all the factors that go into the charging times and how that affects your overall trip time.
I have created a LibreOffice/Excel spreadsheet following Björn's approach and allowing everybody to generate the exact same curves for one's own e-vehicle, even facilitating the measurement protocol during a reference charging procedure (which is necessary for this of course). I have described this in a separate (longer) comment in this thread. Feel free to use and enjoy. If you liked those graphs, you will love my spreadsheets (they contain no macros or stuff).
1:07 Check them Teslas on the right😎 #efficiency
The overall speed with 50 kW chargers is the same as Renault Zoe driving 110-130 km/h (on 43 kW AC)...!
What efficiency figures do you have for Ioniq? I can only measure up to 70mph in the UK, at that speed I got 4.3mi/kWh = 232Wh/mi = 145Wh/km (measured at 11deg.C)
This has been done here in German (without the 5 extra minutes):
www.goingelectric.de/forum/allgemeine-themen/lieber-minimale-oder-maximale-reisestopps-auf-langer-tour-t16959-10.html
Ioniq is the most efficient e-car so far..
The youtube channel "Horst Lüning" got 115 Wh/km for 90 km/h and 150 Wh/h for 120 km/h trying" to constantly drive the targeted speed.
Model 3 (164 Wh/km at 120 km/h, from channel "NextMove") may beat these values with the lighter small range battery.
Pretty Good. I have been watching your channel for a while now. Just trying to patient. I'm told l'll get mine in Feb. 2019. Can't wait!!
very useful even if it must have slightly improved since then, I could not find this elsewhere. The relative slow DC speed vs the competition, even more so in 2022 is bugging me but it is still my favorite EV. ONLY Bjorn does this ! Thank you
Perfect info! Super useful for long trip planning! 👌
Very informative! Your I-Pace reporting leaves no open questions.
thank you a lot for your videos. looking forward for more.
1st public comment ever on UA-cam ;) thank you exactly what I am looking for as a person who has to drive all over Germany for business and looking at EVs
Thanks Bjørn, very informative video. It's essential to show people that EVs aren't less convenient than ICE cars, just have a slightly different usage model, and how to make the best use of them.
Hi Björn, thank you for investing so much time to get the data.
I know how time consuming this is, not only because of my test with the I-Pace within I record the first charging curve at Rödekro at IONITY 350 kW charger.
You are right. The sweet spot at 130 km/h is a very good news. I was wondering whether it could be round about 100 km/h.
Because of IONITY will place each 120 km a HPC you have to charge at every single station, good to know that with 130 - 150 km/h you are able to drive to the next station (114,9 - 139,4 km distance).
We also have to keep in mind that there will be a lot of other different HPC charging networks like Ultra-Charge, Mega-Charge, Fast-E and so on so we will have a lot of different possibilities in future to charge.
But you are right. The I-Pace driver has to survive the next 1 - 2 years with lower speed at long distance rides.
I hope we will see us soon in Germany.
Best wishes
Grüße Dirk from EV-Car-Vlog
At the very beginning of Superchargers, they were only 90 kW and the design was slightly different (more angular). So I guess those were V1 an the current generation is V2.
I think the supercharger V2 was the urban charger
Exactly, surprised Bjørn doesn't know this. The ones with red Tesla illumination are V2. V1 is without light and put out 105kW.
The first Superchargers also didn't have liquid cooled cables.
Only V3 have liquid cooling, i once saw a V2 cable overheat and put out less power in one of Bjørn videos. It was a hot day in Norway and a very busy Supercharger. About 280-300A max without cooling. CCS cant do even that with only 200A without cooling.
Great video. Thank you for all your work, Bjorn.
I really hope that Ionity takes off big time and starts building lots of chargers fast. Tesla still has the only viable charging network for long distance travel right now and it is still a bit uncertain exactly how serious the manufacturers backing Ionity are.
The success of the e-tron and the EQC here in Germany would be a lot more certain if there was already a full-fledged charging network available at release.
Love the iPace, first great premium EV from Europe. Congrats to Jaguar.
Just remember: This is a first release version of the iPace. The Tesla S & X are now very mature mechanically and technically, both having mid model upgrades to optimise their operation.
The reported excellent feel and feedback to the driver of the iPace, maybe the physical connection with the driving experience results in slightly less power/distance efficiency.
I heard that every I-Pace that will be delivered to customers will get a major update. I still hope that people like you (the field testers) will give the input for improvements that will be updated at delivery..
Thank you Björn for your very exhausting test. It helps with the decision to switch to an EV. Especially in Germany not so easy. Right now, the Audi e-tron is at the top of my list of European EVs. But maybe the Model 3 comes even faster than expected to Europe.
Looks like such a nice car but the consumption/range will be a real issue here in Australia. I was thinking about one as an alternative to my Model S 100D but with that consumption and without SuperChargers, it just won't be viable for the Melbourne/Sydney (900Ks) run.
That truck full of Teslas at 1:06, tho.
Love the data! I used my Ioniq electric figure for 70 mph (232Wh/mi), and using a 50kW charger I think the Ioniq comfortably beats the iPace on average speed. That car is just sooo thirsty, I hope they can improve on it. However - I think we are both omitting any fast charger losses, I will try to measure this for the Ioniq soon.
Great video Bjorn!
Great video Bjørn!
Du er utrolig god til å forklare hva det innebærer å kjøre ulike elbiler og du har en grunnforståelse for sammenhengen mellom bil og infrastruktur som er imponerende.
Very Good Bjorn! Well done! :)
Great job Bjorn! I'm quite surprised by the thirstyness of the i-Pace, could it be related to the choice of tires?
821Wh/Mi LOL
that's hilarious.
I gess Jaguar can fine-tune the software. Didn't it happened to Tesla with the dual motor too? I think i saw it, the model S dual motor started consuming more than the single one, then they tuned it and ended consuming less than the single.
I love the I pace, i've been in one and it's a fantastic car! I would prefer a model S, though.
I guess it could help. But it still doesn't explain why it doesn't pick up much speed when in neutral and going downhill.
@@bjornnyland, i guess you are right, that big front doesn't seem aerodynamic at all.
You can't change the Cd via over the air software update, unfortunately...
Can you provide a chart showing the car weight of IPACE, Kona, Niro and MX/MS ?
Interesting!!! Asian skils are good :)
Just a little comment. The Jaguar uses an awd drive system that is constantly active. Tesla does not. AFAIK the Tesla awd system distributes power to all wheels ONLY when necessary, otherwise reverting to two-wheel drive depending on road conditions. This could account for the "inefficiency". If I am wrong please correct me.
You make choosing between an i-pace and a Tesla sooo difficult for me!
Just seen this: your predictions for i-pace drivers were on the money re long distance travel it seems!
Could you do this maths, for the new Zoe. I drive at 63mph (really 61mph), as max in eco mode. Perhaps I could go faster? It has a max charge rate of 45kw. (52Kwh battery)
This is grate :) thx bjørn 🐻
Great review Bjorn. Being a Brit I'm slightly biased to the i Pace so I guess its not bad for JLR's first attempt but its not a Model X as far as performance goes. However I've driven a P100D L and performance made me use the F word when flooring it in ludicrous mode but I hate the American interior and trim. (they wouldn't let me take the model X our) Hmmm
Waiting for the Land Rover EV....
that quality
Hi Bjorn, are you an engineer? Great work you're doing.
THX a lot
I'm doing a test today with my Kona to workout impact of regen level on consumption on straight and level test route. (How parasitic induce load will reduce efficiency) have you studied this on any of your reviews?
I created a spreadsheet file by which it becomes clear how Bjørn has calculated these numbers (tables at 6:00, 8:00 and 9:30). I can 100% reproduce the I-pace values exactly and understand how they have been generated. I also approximated, with the same method, the three Tesla-X values from 9:30. The spreadsheet also contains the comparison diagram from the video at 10:12, and an extra spreadsheet by which everybody can record one's own individual charging characteristic for one's own EV/charging station combination. This way, everybody can generate these curves for the own EV now! I created the spreadsheet with LibreOffice (*.ods format) and also exported it from there to MS-Excel format (*.xls). Here are the two links: Hope they are not corrupted when opening with MS-Excel, in LibreOffice they look perfect: ODS format: "www.dropbox.com/s/kv8ookv6yom8txn/Long-Distance_Travel-Speed_Calculator.ods?dl=0" and XLS format: "www.dropbox.com/s/1k60zg52j9dm71k/Long-Distance_Travel-Speed_Calculator.xls?dl=0" (Spreadsheet files are plain simple, have no macros or advanced stuff at all).
NOTE: The energy consumption that occurs during the little detour towards the charging station (Bjørn assumed avg. 3 km detour per charging stop) is neglected (i.e. assumed as zero) in Bjørn's mathematical model (and hence also in my spreadsheet). I think that's ok! Because, that effect is really negligible. In my spreadsheed I added a field called "Time for (un)plugging the charging cable" that I set to "0 minutes" by default to be aligned with Bjørn's model. The user of this spreadsheet can put another more suitable value here, as desired, and that value may also contain the (very little) extra charging time needed to account for the energy consumed on the small detour.
PS: Bjørn, in the three worksheets for Tesla-X, I entered educated guesses for the values for energy consumption and the avg. charging power, such that I arrive exactly at the net travel speed values from your video as of table at 9:30. See figures in red colour. Maybe you can replace the "red" figures by the actual figures and share the updated spreadsheet somehow.
PS 2: Bjørn, I figured out that apparently you assumed an I-Pace battery capacity of 80 kWh in the calculation model here, because in the table at 8:00 you assume that charging from 10% to 60% corresponds to a charging of 40 kWh. So 10% to 60%, that's 50% of the battery. If 50% is 40 kWh, then 100% is 80 kWh. Maybe this was a typo and you meant to say from 10% to 55% (this amounts to ~40 kWh for a 90 kWh battery), or I missed something. Anyway, in my spreadsheet I entered the 80 kWh capacity into the spreadsheet of the I-pace, to be aligned with your numbers here.
PS 3: I added now to the spreadsheet (last worksheet) an easy-to-use template for a simple manual measurement protocol during charging, to record the charging power in dependence of the battery's percentage charge. The user only has to enter his stop watch timer value (use stopwatch on your smartphone!) whenever the charging percentage grows by 1% in the vehicle. All the rest is done by the spreadsheet, i.e. it generates an "average charging power" look-up table from that in dependence of start/stop percentage of the charging session --> very easy to use. With this, using the other worksheet, every EV-owner can readily figure out his/her own "sweet spot" (optimum ultra-long-distance cruising speed) and the corresponding charging strategy.
please calculate CD drag? impact on the cars.....
Curious though if you have the total distance vs speed graphs driving at (85% to 10%) posted somewhere those would be awesome also.
tesla .24 vs Jag at .29?
seems like the jaguar is the best place to spend time. whether on a longer journey or stuck in traffic...
Or being smirky in the youtube-comments:)
Hi, great vid , but I thought drafting was done at a lot closer distance than the distance you used. Thanks
How were the performance seats vs the regular ones in the last ipace you drove?
Good and bad.
Pretty funny, a car carrier full of Tesla's at 1:04
you Drive in Komfort Modus or Eco ??
Likely doesn't matter
Stop at only 60% when chargin at 100 kW? It appeared to still get 60 kW charging, so I wonder what numbers you get i f chargin 10-80% with 100 kW charger?
still considerably worse! Note the charging power reduces considerably when battery is more than ca. 55% full, and Bjørn has assumed a relatively low detour overhead per stop (5 min). If you however assume a longer detour overhead per charging stop, your optimum will be at a higher value than 60%. Use my spreadsheet (see my other longer comment about that) if you want to understand it better.
As long as we dont know the time it takes to charge to e.g. 80% on 100kW charger, your spreadsheet doesn't help.
+SkogsMangan : It has technical/ physical reasons why charging power reduces when battery gets fuller. It is in principle the same in case of Tesla-X and I-Pace, there's another video of Bjørn showing this diagram (search for "350 kW" in Bjørn's profile). So while you are right that an actual measurement is always better than an extrapolation, an educated guess based on facts is pissible, and the spreadsheet definitly helps for that :-)
There are problems you can wrightly list with both telsa/ipace. Both are exspensive,more so with model x,especially maintainance and ipace using far to much juice.Theres alot of very good reviews off IPACE thou,and Ive read All of them. It boils down to this.Dont buy either Telsa or X/ipace.Buy kia Niro or Hyundai kona.Both for price and it's range ECT ECT,absolutely destroy the other 2.
Why Niro over I pace?
i would like to know if the I pace will have software update like tesla? do you have any info about that?
yeah they do have over the air updates just like Tesla
They will have over the air software updates.
thank you all for the answers.
SOTA = Software Over The Air is not enabled on current I-Paces delivered yet. So for now the owners have to go to the dealership to get it updated. But SOTA will be rolled out later.
@@bjornnyland great, thanks for the prompt answer.
6:03 Wait a second, i don't get it. Why does the charging and detour time increase ? And what the heck is this factor ? If you charge always 60 kWh, it should always the same time, no ? Same for the average detour time.
I just did another spreadsheet and get same average speed without the factor.
+Esunisen Detour time increases because you have to stop more often at higher speed.
Hæ ? Charging + detour time is constant, it's always 1.22 + 0.08 hours. Only the driving time and total cycle time is variable. Cycle = driving + detour + charging.
It's like a PWM with variable frequency and variable duty with one of the states being constant.
Esunisen: Bjørn has normalized all detour times to the distance value of the first row, which is 241,0 km in this case. He could have normalized it to any other value like 1 km or 100 km the relative ratios wouldn't change. The end result is correct, I recalculated and checked it with my own spreadsheet that you can download yourself, see my other (longer) comment. I made clearer headlines to each column of this table, then it is clearer what Bjørn has calculated.
wasn't v1 supercharger the original roadster charger?
V1 was the 90 kWh supercharger, it was quickly phased out though. The 120kWh is gen 2
The original roadster could never use Superchargers, and still can't. I believe the main obstacle was the cooling system was too small to handle the thermal load.
Maybe ipace isn’t so aerodynamic and looses to other evs
It is actually more aerodynamic than the model x :)
@@adamwestberg1308 for real?
Would love to know the sweet spot for my 30kw Leaf 🤔
Now you know the test methodology, you can test it for yourself if you have free time :-)
Update: You will love it: I have created a LibreOffice/Excel spreadsheet file following exactly Björn's approach (and exactly reproducing his values) and allowing everybody to generate the exact same curves for one's own e-vehicle. The spreadsheet file is even facilitating the measurement protocol during a reference charging procedure (which is necessary for this of course). I have described this in another separate (longer) comment in this thread.
All you need to do is to charge your Leaf at a reference charging station, from maybe 4% or so until 100% (if possible), while you are sitting in the car and run a stop watch on your smartphone. Then you write down the stop watch times each time the battery charging status goes up by 1%, until the end of the charging. Then you take the spreadsheet file and enter theses values there. Then you are ready to play around (in another worksheet of this same file) with these numbers and you can find your best loading strategy and corresponding sweet spot for your e-vehicle.
You will love my spreadsheets (they contain no macros or stuff).
It seems a race would be really tight if I-Pace had full access to 100+ kW chargers.
X75D
If I-Pace could achieve an average charging power of 100 W (as opposed to 80 kW in Björn's video) for a load from 10% to 60% or so, then its long-distance travel-speed would be pretty much in between the Tesla-X 75 kWh and 90 kWh versions. Why I know this? Because I re-programmed Björn's formulas into a spreadsheet and modified the parameters, and generated the same graphs, plus the graph for the "hypothetical" "improved" I-Pace. You can have the spreadsheet files, I made them publicly available on my dropbox, see my other longer comment in this thread.
+Karen Pease : So you say Björn's Tesla X figures are those of a crippled battery pack. Quite a statement, you should address this point directly to him then.
The I pace has a higher coefficient of drag than the Model S or X which would work against it. I'm going to point out an issue I see in design of CUV vehicles be it gas or electric. I have a Suburban a box. Not efficient, but I have loads of room to pack stuff in. I would still purchase a box style EV with lower efficiency in order to pack the stuff I need into it. That sloping rear cuts into storage
@@karenrobertsdottir4101 yes. A lot of people don't get that. Chevy is bringing out a 4 cylinder Silverado. Honestly except for the lack of 4wd, the 4 cylinder will probably meet the needs of most half ton truck buyers. The guys that are really towing, they are buying 3/4 ton or bigger with the diesels. I think as battery tech gets better, I could get my suburban sized EV with 300 miles of hwy range. Air suspension could lower me when not loaded down. My front end could be more aerodynamic, and with electric powertrain I don't need all the hood. The VW ID Buzz is as close as I will probably get to that in the next couple of years. Really looking forward to that. I would like it to be about 6 inches longer tho
Poor efficiency this Jaguar I-Pace, shame it is so heavy and bad SCx
This would be because it has two motors 4WD. watch the video by fullychargedshow. Can a Tesla do this.
Thanks Steve !!!
I think you have a logic error in the calculation due to adding a "factor" that you then multiply with the charging time. What you should be calculating is the total distance and time of a single charging session, so average speed would be equal to distance traveled divided by driving time + charging time. Charging time should be fixed and without any multiplier as you only stop and charge once per charging session.
Edit: remove misleading numbers
Never mind, you also screwed up the driving time, in the other direction. So you somehow have 190km/h the car driving the 117.6 km for whole 76 minutes. In the end average speed numbers for 50kW charging work out almost the same.
Nah, my Asians calculations are correct. It's just a bit cryptic to understand all the numbers.
The end result is correct. But you do not need the factor at all. it gets cancelled out in the final result and you only get confusing intermediate numbers because of it.
One interesting consequence in my numbers I see that i-Pace would be faster than Tesla (at 99.6 km/h average) if it could charge at 120kW average speed. It would be helpful if you'd link your Google Sheets spreadsheet used to calculate all of this. That'd allow people to experiment and reason about this better.
I re-created the complete calcualtions of Björn in a spreadsheet, and I can confirm that all is correct. I get perfectly exactly the exact same numbers. You are right the "factor" column is not needed - there are many different ways in math to arrive to the correct results, depending how you turn and twist numbers and in which order.
The only very little "error" that Björn made is that he took the detour into account as 3 km distance and corresponding 5 min time (i.e. detour speed is assumed to be 36 km/h, not shown in the video), but he fully neglected that also some energy is consumed during this detour, which needs to be re-charged on top of the other energy, and that costs some extra time. But since that is probably negligible, it is only a minor mistake and should not impact the overall result significantly. The detour parameters are anyway just estimates, I mean you can say 4 km instead of 3 in Björn's model and than have the missing energy consumption "priced in", for example...