I prefer kwh/100 km because your battery capacity is in kwh. If you have a 80 kwh battery and your consumption is 20kwh/100 km you know immediately you have a 400 km range. It’s very easy to mentally estimate range. If you say 200wh/km it’s more confusing to calculate in my view. You could use kwh/km, but then you have too many decimal numbers, and complicates calculations as well.
I am amused at the "kWh/100 km" vs "Wh/km" argument, because I wish I had _either_ . My Model S shows Wh/mile (I'm in the US, so miles), but both of my other EVs -- LEAF and EV6 -- use miles/kWh. I like the EV6 best of those three cars, and generally hate Tesla's UI choices, but the "energy per distance" presentation is IMHO _way_ better than "distance per energy" presentation. The crazy thing is, I just discovered when I drove to Canada and switched the units on the EV6 to metric, that in the EV6, if you are using metric units, _you can choose_! Which just makes me grumpier, because I want to be able to choose "energy per distance" in English/Imperial units too. WTF? Someone realized drivers would like the option, but decided that US drivers were just going to be stuck with the "distance per energy" presentation anyway. Duh.
As someone that drives electric for 5 years now you will never convince me that Wh/km is the better way to do it. I charge kW and a certain amount of kWh in my 20 min stop. I pay kWh, my battery has a capacity in kWh. The current power output of the car is kW. The numbers for cars are simply too high to use W and Wh, period. Same as in industrial settings, MW and MWh are used much more often because at some point kW as a unit is just too small. So if at all, it would be kWh/km. And this is impractical for the same reasons ml/km would be impractical for gas cars. kWh/100km makes a lot of sense and is the better unit.
"As someone that drives electric for 5 years now you will never convince me that Wh/km is the better way to do it. I charge kW and a certain amount of kWh in my 20 min stop. I pay kWh, my battery has a capacity in kWh. The current power output of the car is kW. The numbers for cars are simply too high to use W and Wh, period. Same as in industrial settings, MW and MWh are used much more often because at some point kW as a unit is just too small. So if at all, it would be kWh/km. And this is impractical for the same reasons ml/km would be impractical for gas cars. kWh/100km makes a lot of sense and is the better unit." Incorrect. kWH/100 km is just awful. And converting between kWH and WH is super easy.
The main problem in chinese EVs is the lack of information. My BYD Dolphin hasn't tripmeter, the data about consumption are confuse and hard to access. The time is measured in decimals, not in minutes... a big mess.
Think this is common in the auto industry - lots of ICE car users will find the mpg their vehicle tells them they are achieving seems to be different (more "optimistic") when you use the fuel you put in at the pump vs miles/km travelled
The only real measurement of consumption is the amount of energy recharged by the charger to the same level as it was at the start of the test drive. You pay for energy based on what the charger shows, not the gauge in the car. Of course, for better accuracy, slow DC charging up to 50kW is better, where there is no loss in battery conditioning. Similarly, the distance travelled needs to be measured by GPS or map, then you will have the most accurate data for comparing consumption of individual EVs. But unfortunately this is a somewhat more time consuming procedure.
US EPA use AC energy supplied to the car for their consumption tests, reported in kWh/100 miles, since that indeed are the kWh you pay for. However, Wh/km (or Wh/mi) from the battery is also useful since that determines your range.
Kind of disagree. There are so many people that belive that the numbers given for range rating is the real consumption. People dont understand that if car is rated with 20kWh/100km that it includes charging loss. So they belive if they get 20kWh/100km consumption in display they can reach the rated range. Even experienced reviews compare they numbers in display with the rated consumption and says "we where able to reach the rated consumption". The cost of energy is almost irrellevant compared to this.
@pavelblaha5243 Since SoC is an estimated value, I would not rely on it for accurate numbers. I would argue that the only way to measure both capacity and consumption accurately is if you charge to 100% SoC and repeatedly drive a short fitting route until you have drained the battery completely. The vehicle should refuse to go any further. Then charge back to 100%. The amount you put into the battery now would be the real consumption. Still, though, the manufacturer can do sneaky/stupid stuff that could possibly make even this way inaccurate.
@@jsjs6751 If you don't trust the SoC value on the display, you can go by the battery voltage value, that should hopefully be an accurate enough measurement.
@pavelblaha5243 Sadly, no. If you look at a normal discharge curve, you will realize that the voltage is not directly linear, so the difference between, for example, 30 and 60% SoC, can be very small. This will result in inaccurate numbers. Also, what voltage should you use? Average of all cells? Median? Lowest/highest? Additionally, the voltage in the pack will be heavily influenced by temperature, and maybe even whether it it was last charged or discharged.
There is clearly need for regulations on these things. Like what details the car has to show and for this part the consumption and different trips that can be reset. For consumption you need one "since last charge" and then at least one trip that can be reset at will.
Thanks for this video. It is not only a problem for consumers. One of the other EV only reviewers have done some range testing and they have a procedure where they do a special loop with different speeds where the low speed is at the end and then they calculate range based on this. When they tested some chinese models they did not realize and gave the car much better result since they did calculate range based on the consumption in trip meeter. I pointed to your test in the comment and told them the result was wrong. Personally I belive that consumption during stops need to be included. If not it is impossible to calculate usable battery. I like the Audi way that if it is less than two hours stop there is only one trip
The same with petrol cars, man. At the end of the day, you know how far the car can go at a full charge or full tank. Because you know the distance. If they are bluffing, you'll know. If they can go 400km, you'll know. Forget about the technicality of the meters.
In Indonesia I prefer km/kwh because I can just multiply the km number with the battery capacity of the car. kWh/100km make me calculate more and wh/100km just look like gibberish for me
When i bought my Seal i didn't believe the figures quoted by the company , but the car will do a 500km highway trip on a full charge as i expected , so should i expect more ?
About kWh/100km and units for consumption. Watt is in the SI system, but it's not among the seven _base_ units. Watt is defined as Joules per second, W=J/s. But J is also not a base unit, it's defined as J = kg * m^2 / s^2 where kg is weight, m is meters, s is seconds. So the consumption unit per driven distance we all should use immediately is kg * m / s^3 or kilogram meters per seconds cubed. We shouldn't be afraid to drop the Watt. James Watt himself was the main promoter of horsepowers instead in the early days of machines so he won't be rolling insulted in his grave for that. If there's ever an EV, Chinese or not, that let us chose this most pedantic unit, then that will be my next EV for sure.
"We shouldn't be afraid to drop the Watt" Why make something easy when you can make it super complicated and convert it into a flop? "If there's ever an EV, Chinese or not, that let us chose this most pedantic unit, then that will be my next EV for sure." You better hurry before that company goes bankrupt.
I still disagree in Wh/km vs kWh/100km. The reason is still the same: As long, as you pay per kWh, this measure makes sense. Also you can compare better the figures with old fossile world. Nevertheless, in the U.K. or in the USA the more used figure is Miles/kWh. But this makes complete Brainfart to continental Europeans ...
Different sizes of the tires should be no excuse not to get an accurate speedometer. Or odometer, for that matter. Just about every new car has GPS/GNSS on board, so just by dividing driven distance by the time it took, you can calibrate the speedometer quite accurately against a longer preferably straight stretch of road. I have a hunch this is how Tesla does it, because the software does detect a tire change after having driven a few kilometers. And you need some distance to get rid of most of the GPS inaccuracy. Maybe a kilometer or so? And then you subtract a few km/h just to be on the safe side.
I think all EVs (well, I guess all cars) have some mismatch between reality and instrument cluster data. Agree - consumers must have the right to get accurate consumption numbers. I like kwh per 100km. I pay per kwh and not Wh. No one outside some EVs uses Wh. Look at your electricity bill at home.
@@HTX-enjoyerpeople that use Wh/km instead of kWh/100km probably also used g/km consumption back when they drove a car with internal combustion engine.
Resetting the time and mileage but not the average consumption is weird, but the best solution is both long term and short term average consumption counters. The shorter one can run for a day and the longer term runs until reset, or in case of my car, it resets the long term counters after every 100.000 km.
The crazy thing is that the Chinese have their own test for measuring range, the Chinese Light Cycle Test or something. This gives ranges that are even more wildly optimistic than WLTP.
CLTP is more focused on city driving. Because Chinese don't drive that much on highways. They use trains most of the time to travel outside of the city.
I don't understand why they do that, bc yes some chinese cars have pretty high consumption, but there are also a lot of cars which are pretty low on consumption so why not let the customer know the real value. Why mislead them if it's not high anyways, it doesn't make any sense. It only makes people more skeptical about chinese cars
Does most all of Chinese built cars use a similar consumption calculation method? You say it's stupid but there must be a reason adopted by BYD and others. Just wondering if it's a standardized practice. I didn't want my ignorance to get in the way of facts. Thanks for the ride along.
Nobody is talking about the road safety problem with a speedometer showing too high speed: Everyone with a more correct speedometer will want to overtake to be on the correct speed limit instead of far below. And as we know, every overtake is an increased risk of accidents to happen. So the road authorities should demand a more accurate speedometer. Which should be very easy to do, even with different size tires.
Actually, real consumption on ICE cars is more quite more to calculate/verify, because as long as one knows how many kilometres between fillings off fuel, one divides the litres per the distance, then one has quite accurate value for the consumption (of course, the fuel pump can give one wrong numbers as the odometer, but even so, less things to have errors on). On the other hands on EV's, there are so many variables (distance, actual net capacity of the battery that is not exactly the same even between several cars of the same brand, model and battery size, actual energy that goes into the battery when charging, consumption displayed by the car, losses overall,...) that can have errors, that getting an accurate number seems always to be difficult.
A lot of customers do not understand the way the calculations are made, and they might complain that when I reset the trip-meter, it says it uses 500Wh/km! There must be something wrong with the car. The "Chinese way" works around that problem. I'm pretty sure they do it with purpose.
Bjorn an interesting discussion. I have to say I like my M3 LR with the usage since charging and usage on this trip display. Keep these great Videos going. Hello from Australia.
I am sorry to hear that you live in the UK, just hang in there. I know what you must be thinking but don't do it, life is too valuable to just throw it away. Stay strong, my friend
@@GabrielBourke _"Can't believe the brits and yanks still use miles per gallon"_ -- me either, and I live in the US. Many decades ago, there was a lot of talk about the country moving to metric. I'm still waiting. The really annoying thing to me about this EV efficiency debate is that Tesla got this right IMHO with the "energy per distance" presentation (they do Wh/mile, but I'd be just as happy with kWh/100 miles), but my LEAF and EV6 both do "distance per energy" (miles/kWh). The really _really_ annoying thing to me about the EV6 is that, as I learned recently, if I switch the display units for the car to metric, the settings add a new option to choose between "energy per distance" and "distance per energy". I.e. Kia (and presumably Hyundai group makes across the board) saw fit to offer _some_ owners the option, but for those of us for whom non-metric is necessary, we are stuck with the lame "distance per energy" presentation of efficiency. :(
@@hojnikb CLTC makes sense for their market. Their cities are dense, lots of start stop traffic. Conditions that are ideal for EV's, at least in so far as range is concerned. It's not like Australia or USA where there maybe majority of trip is highway.
You are joking but calculating equivalent fuel consumption is an amazing way to put consumption into perspective for “fossil” people. When I told my friends that a Zoe that I rented was doing me the equivalent of 2L/100km they were blown away. People don’t do the math…
@@ruigoncalves2 That's not only that, it's also the USA way is inverted. That is, we care about „I need to get to point B, how much will it cost me?“, while in USA it's „I've got a pay day, how far can I get?“ And the analogy… it works nice as an additional info, but not really useful as the main info. I'm always annoyed when someone measures in football fields and forgets to mention if these are American football or the European one, because these aren't the same size...
@@michalvaner3167 Everywhere _except_ the US, football fields are different sizes from American football fields. It's not just Europe. Though, unlike American football, regular football fields aren't even always the same size as each other. For example, FIFA has regulations regarding the size that allow fields to vary as much as 10 meters in either dimension from smallest to largest. But I digress... I agree 100% the US "distance per energy" presentation is backwards. Tesla gets this right even in US cars, but for some reason other manufacturers -- at least, Nissan and Kia, since those are the other two EVs I've owned and am familiar with -- stuck with the dumb "distance per energy" presentation. To add insult to injury, I learned recently that if I were to set my units in my Kia to metric, the settings would display an additional option allowing me to choose between "distance per energy" and the more rational "energy per distance". But since US speed limits, distances, etc. are not metric, I'm stuck with the non-metric settings, and Kia allows only "distance per energy" when you're not using metric. That's right! They programmed the setting into their software, then took the setting away for US drivers (and as I understand it, those in the UK as well).
Charging losses are due to internal resistance in the battery. If you assume this resistance - in ohm - is constant and does not vary with current then charging losses are linear and higher charging speed should result in the exact same loss - in kWh - over the same charge. If the battery ages the internal resistance increases, then the charging/discharing loss increases.
Valley Girl. Californians can’t say two vowels - or consonants- together. “Couldn’t” comes out as “cou n’t.” Bjorn does not perceive the “you” sound in |fluctuate|
Thank you for the correction. Please use correct punctuation next time. It was a bit hard for me to understand what you meant. You should have written: "Love the channel. You mention..."
I drive EV’s since 2019 and got used to kw/h as consumption and no other. Last EV was my Renault Megane E-Tech Iconic and also shows Kw/h so felt perfect. No need to change it to something else if you ask me
@@bjornnyland kWh/100km. My VW e-Golf 2019 did have the same as my last EV the Renault Megane E-Tech Iconic what is 15 Kwh that is the default consumtion showing what I got used to. Why change it to someting else?
There is a good way to prevent lung cancer, triggered by diesel gate cars driving in front of you (other than closing everything): a HEPA cabin air filter with activated carbon. Should be standard on every car, imo.
ICE cars have been capping fuel consumption displays for years; certainly in the early 2000s, Vauxhall/Opel Vectra's wouldnt show less than 9.9MPG (not sure of the litre/100KM version), even if you were ragging them around a race track (or up the motorway), and probably getting 5-6 mpg. (As seen in a BTTC homologation 2.5L V6 turbo charged S2 saloon - ultra-rare manual gearbox - not sure about the smaller engines/ autobox version) (I worked for Vauxhall Fleet). Ré electricity consumption when in Park, a Kia update to my older Soul suddenly started counting the time I spent parked with the radio on against overall consumption; so I now use a small Bluetooth speaker when parked for a long time, so it doesnt mess up my actual miles/KWh. (Speaker is recharged by a small solar panel in the window). Meanwhile rounding up/down when converting to/from Metric and Imperial seems to happen a lot with Chinese products; I've encountered tape measures, where 1 inch = 2cm; so I can easily believe they round up/down other, supposedly more precise figures.
Thanks Bjørn for this interesting and informative "rant" about measurement and units. As a former Test Engineer, I applaud your test methodologies and insistence on using correct SI units. It is shameful that even Norse Elbilforening (The Norwegian Electric Vehicle Association) cannot keep their kW and kWh correct. IMO it is the responibility of organizations like this, and Automotive publications, to educate the public by using correct energy and power units and terminology. I never see Auto mags measuring the gas tank in hp, or the engine power in gallons. 😂 To laymen this often seems "picky," but I disagree. Your analogy of authors not capitalizing names of people or countries explains this well.
Anyone using an electric car especially in the city knows that for short distances 5-10 km the consumption is higher. My experience say about 18-20 kWh hour for a 2-2.5 tone car😅
TBH, I've never noticed any significant difference in efficiency depending on the length of the trip. Much bigger factors are stop/go vs highway, flat vs hilly terrain, and operation of cabin climate controls. The idea that that one extra period of acceleration at the beginning of a drive would have any noticeable difference on range for all but a uselessly short drive seems ludicrous to me.
They use a different standard to come up with the efficiency. If Norway or wherever the cars are sold are tested using the local testing standard, it will have a different rating. It’s that simple. Furthermore, as we get faster and faster charging speed, it wouldn’t matter that much. Sure Tesla is very efficient but it’s also fairly barebones when comparing to the features to the Chinese cars. I will gladly sacrifice some efficiency for the features.
Please do a rant about the correct use of kW and kWh! It is infuriating that people refuse to learn the correct units - and causes untold amounts of confusion when people ask for help and don’t use the correct terminology…
If complaining about other people, shouldn't you lead by example and use accurate unit descriptions too? It is kW and kWh. Edit: Mega Watt is MW. Capitalization matters.
The BYD Atto3 was totally crazy. Was an early software version where it divided drawn energy by a fixed distance after resetting. My guess, it was 50 Km. So, for this distance, the car shamelessly underreported its consumption. Then it was the rolling average as explained in the video. Absolutely useless. The rest of the firmware at that time was total crap as well; would even make VW blush of shame.
I would really like to know how Tesla and teslafi calculates consumption so I dont have to be "cluless". For an example the car states 150wh/km for a trip. In teslafi there are 2 values called "used" and "added" when the car has been charged at a SC, both values is in a kWh value. If you divide this values with km driven the give added 160wh/km and used 175wh/km. I have asked several people and the response has been that added was what was put in the battery and the difference is because of preheating and used is what you buy aka the loading session included charging loss.This is in a MY produced in Berlin autumn 23. Pls explain so I dont have to be cluless.
Good catch and thanks for sharing. Let's see, if the German ADAC will find out the same and I hope they will still give you Chinese cars for driving/testing. Very funny, that you use so many German words. 😂
Ironic that the grammar rant includes 'fluctate' which isn't a word 😂. 'Fluctuate' is the one you want. From an engineer who is also triggered by kW vs kWh mix ups 😮
You can't rely 100% on the battery SoC either. The "BMS" have a calibrated estimate of the remaining energy. But while driving, the car probably measures the actual usage. So these values have to be calibrated both ways in some specific way to get somewhat usable numbers. And a battery will typically NOT contain that exact amount. Probably less, right? 😉
There is no need for them to try to make their consumtion look better. Look at the latest range test in Auto Bild Germany. All the expensive German cars were beaten by cheap NIO et5 and BYD seal. 😂 Even the eqs 580 with 120kWh battery had problems reaching 400km😂. What a POS car. But in Björns test the EQS has fantastic range, maybe you are the one lying to all you viewers🤔
This test doesent say anything. The tested cars are so different in terms of design and cw. They used the nio et5 eith the higehst avaible battery 100kwh and went for the smallest with the id7. So the et5 reached 20km more with 23kwh more capacity. They took the eqs580 instead of the 450+ which clearly has the highest range with 700+km. So what should this test tell us? But on the other hand check the id7 touring vs et5 touring on bjorn channel. Id7 has more range with smaller battery. Thats engineering dude
@@oxidalpha6350 Björns test does not say anything, you are correct there. It is about usable battery, there the id7 and the et5 are just about the same and you can see that the consumtion is about the same. Even if the id7 is slower and only rear wheel drive. Look at some real test like DCAR where they test auto brake systems of cars. There was not a worse performer than the ID7. The ID7 is a POS car☺
@@Lucas-wp2ph with this test i was talking about your auto bild test not bjorns test. In bjorns data sheed you can see more range with id7 than with the nio plus nios has bigger battery. There are some range tests also. The eqs is very good. The test from auto bild is nonesende they just compared very different cars to each other Even the gtx with more cw and smaller battery has more range than the nio you can find in bjorns test.
It depends on how you test. How you mix the long and short trips, the temperatures and weather. Western car makers fooled the world for a decade with cheating on CO2 emissions. Disel gate. This is acceptable. Norway with shitty roads, and cold temperatures should not complain realy.
@basfinnis Oke, oke , oke.... let me ask you something: If you lie an important thing about a product, would other people buy it or again? Or as a new potential buyer, and you have followed Björn with his test and also know about this knowledge? Of course, if the Chinese BEV is going to adapt to the European style of habits, then it is good. But till then, don't buy Chinese EV!
Well. Watching news / documentaries / reports about china lead me to buy as less stuff as possible from china. China is an evil country. It is what it is.
I’d say don’t buy Chinese cars or anything from China for the simple reason not to give them your money they will use to take over your country but it might be already too late for this.
Chinese cars do not actually have very good components in their drive train which therefore makes them less efficient, they are not always designed with drivetrain efficiency in mind like tesla for example, some Chinese cars have really cheap designed drive trains motors, battery cells etc not to mention heat management
Please provide some facts here. At the moment they are the only ones able to charge over 6C and the only ones that are able to run PM motors at over 30 000rpm. But if you know something more please tell me😊
One of many reasons I won't buy Chinese in the foreseeable future... software and other things are just not there yet and things like battery swap are silly for most people. Like Lucid can do over 800 km on one charge on highways, why would you ever need battery swap? Or that silly globe with eyes... their designs are not very inspired either.
It's not sloppy implementation. They do it to make it look like the car is using less electricity
So it’s dishonest
Yeah just pure dishonesty. Like VW's diesel gate or Toyota's safety ratings, just in the few past years...
@@Dactylonian pretty much yeah, and it's very annoying because I want to know how much I can drive
Problem is WLTP encourages dishonesty and manipulation, and not just from Chinese brands.
@@altern8ive China switched to NEDC now, with which you can claim an extra 200km
I prefer kwh/100 km because your battery capacity is in kwh. If you have a 80 kwh battery and your consumption is 20kwh/100 km you know immediately you have a 400 km range. It’s very easy to mentally estimate range. If you say 200wh/km it’s more confusing to calculate in my view. You could use kwh/km, but then you have too many decimal numbers, and complicates calculations as well.
I am amused at the "kWh/100 km" vs "Wh/km" argument, because I wish I had _either_ .
My Model S shows Wh/mile (I'm in the US, so miles), but both of my other EVs -- LEAF and EV6 -- use miles/kWh. I like the EV6 best of those three cars, and generally hate Tesla's UI choices, but the "energy per distance" presentation is IMHO _way_ better than "distance per energy" presentation.
The crazy thing is, I just discovered when I drove to Canada and switched the units on the EV6 to metric, that in the EV6, if you are using metric units, _you can choose_! Which just makes me grumpier, because I want to be able to choose "energy per distance" in English/Imperial units too.
WTF? Someone realized drivers would like the option, but decided that US drivers were just going to be stuck with the "distance per energy" presentation anyway. Duh.
3:03 Kinda dissapointed that Björn didnt pick the ramp alternative for more achievement points
As someone that drives electric for 5 years now you will never convince me that Wh/km is the better way to do it. I charge kW and a certain amount of kWh in my 20 min stop. I pay kWh, my battery has a capacity in kWh. The current power output of the car is kW. The numbers for cars are simply too high to use W and Wh, period. Same as in industrial settings, MW and MWh are used much more often because at some point kW as a unit is just too small. So if at all, it would be kWh/km. And this is impractical for the same reasons ml/km would be impractical for gas cars. kWh/100km makes a lot of sense and is the better unit.
And how much kWh is used should be shown for 50/70/90/110/130 kilometres per hour
0,15kWh/km is impactical. That's why we divide by 1000 to get Wh. It's not hard
YES!
I'll go with wh/m ... :-) (hint, I just dropped the k's)
"As someone that drives electric for 5 years now you will never convince me that Wh/km is the better way to do it. I charge kW and a certain amount of kWh in my 20 min stop. I pay kWh, my battery has a capacity in kWh. The current power output of the car is kW. The numbers for cars are simply too high to use W and Wh, period. Same as in industrial settings, MW and MWh are used much more often because at some point kW as a unit is just too small. So if at all, it would be kWh/km. And this is impractical for the same reasons ml/km would be impractical for gas cars. kWh/100km makes a lot of sense and is the better unit."
Incorrect. kWH/100 km is just awful. And converting between kWH and WH is super easy.
The main problem in chinese EVs is the lack of information.
My BYD Dolphin hasn't tripmeter, the data about consumption are confuse and hard to access. The time is measured in decimals, not in minutes... a big mess.
Ok, it is great that you mention this topic. Its bonkers...
Think this is common in the auto industry - lots of ICE car users will find the mpg their vehicle tells them they are achieving seems to be different (more "optimistic") when you use the fuel you put in at the pump vs miles/km travelled
Look at Aiways, 16.0 advertised, nearly impossible to get under 20 kWh/100km
63kWh advertised, 50-55 useable
Maybe that's why they're broke;)
The only real measurement of consumption is the amount of energy recharged by the charger to the same level as it was at the start of the test drive. You pay for energy based on what the charger shows, not the gauge in the car. Of course, for better accuracy, slow DC charging up to 50kW is better, where there is no loss in battery conditioning. Similarly, the distance travelled needs to be measured by GPS or map, then you will have the most accurate data for comparing consumption of individual EVs. But unfortunately this is a somewhat more time consuming procedure.
US EPA use AC energy supplied to the car for their consumption tests, reported in kWh/100 miles, since that indeed are the kWh you pay for. However, Wh/km (or Wh/mi) from the battery is also useful since that determines your range.
Kind of disagree. There are so many people that belive that the numbers given for range rating is the real consumption. People dont understand that if car is rated with 20kWh/100km that it includes charging loss. So they belive if they get 20kWh/100km consumption in display they can reach the rated range. Even experienced reviews compare they numbers in display with the rated consumption and says "we where able to reach the rated consumption". The cost of energy is almost irrellevant compared to this.
@pavelblaha5243 Since SoC is an estimated value, I would not rely on it for accurate numbers.
I would argue that the only way to measure both capacity and consumption accurately is if you charge to 100% SoC and repeatedly drive a short fitting route until you have drained the battery completely. The vehicle should refuse to go any further.
Then charge back to 100%.
The amount you put into the battery now would be the real consumption.
Still, though, the manufacturer can do sneaky/stupid stuff that could possibly make even this way inaccurate.
@@jsjs6751 If you don't trust the SoC value on the display, you can go by the battery voltage value, that should hopefully be an accurate enough measurement.
@pavelblaha5243 Sadly, no.
If you look at a normal discharge curve, you will realize that the voltage is not directly linear, so the difference between, for example, 30 and 60% SoC, can be very small. This will result in inaccurate numbers.
Also, what voltage should you use? Average of all cells? Median? Lowest/highest?
Additionally, the voltage in the pack will be heavily influenced by temperature, and maybe even whether it it was last charged or discharged.
There is clearly need for regulations on these things. Like what details the car has to show and for this part the consumption and different trips that can be reset.
For consumption you need one "since last charge" and then at least one trip that can be reset at will.
In-car measurements will always be indicative only.
@@pavelblaha5243 Don't have to be. Trucks are required to have calibrated measurement of several items.
Thanks for this video. It is not only a problem for consumers. One of the other EV only reviewers have done some range testing and they have a procedure where they do a special loop with different speeds where the low speed is at the end and then they calculate range based on this. When they tested some chinese models they did not realize and gave the car much better result since they did calculate range based on the consumption in trip meeter.
I pointed to your test in the comment and told them the result was wrong.
Personally I belive that consumption during stops need to be included. If not it is impossible to calculate usable battery. I like the Audi way that if it is less than two hours stop there is only one trip
The same with petrol cars, man. At the end of the day, you know how far the car can go at a full charge or full tank. Because you know the distance. If they are bluffing, you'll know. If they can go 400km, you'll know. Forget about the technicality of the meters.
It's like the range estimation, it is so different between for example VW and Hyundai/Kia...
In Indonesia I prefer km/kwh because I can just multiply the km number with the battery capacity of the car. kWh/100km make me calculate more and wh/100km just look like gibberish for me
Glad to hear my MG isn't doing this at least.
When i bought my Seal i didn't believe the figures quoted by the company , but the car will do a 500km highway trip on a full charge as i expected , so should i expect more ?
kWh is very very common for electricity consumption.EV, household, etc. If your point is going to SI metric system, try J/m :D
About kWh/100km and units for consumption. Watt is in the SI system, but it's not among the seven _base_ units. Watt is defined as Joules per second, W=J/s. But J is also not a base unit, it's defined as J = kg * m^2 / s^2 where kg is weight, m is meters, s is seconds. So the consumption unit per driven distance we all should use immediately is kg * m / s^3 or kilogram meters per seconds cubed. We shouldn't be afraid to drop the Watt. James Watt himself was the main promoter of horsepowers instead in the early days of machines so he won't be rolling insulted in his grave for that. If there's ever an EV, Chinese or not, that let us chose this most pedantic unit, then that will be my next EV for sure.
Isn't kg mass instead of weight? Just want to be pedantic too....still like your comment though....
"We shouldn't be afraid to drop the Watt"
Why make something easy when you can make it super complicated and convert it into a flop?
"If there's ever an EV, Chinese or not, that let us chose this most pedantic unit, then that will be my next EV for sure."
You better hurry before that company goes bankrupt.
Car manufacturers lying about energy consumption? wauw… Nothing new under the sun there
I still disagree in Wh/km vs kWh/100km. The reason is still the same: As long, as you pay per kWh, this measure makes sense. Also you can compare better the figures with old fossile world. Nevertheless, in the U.K. or in the USA the more used figure is Miles/kWh. But this makes complete Brainfart to continental Europeans ...
3:02 skipped the monster stunt over the bridge this time
Different sizes of the tires should be no excuse not to get an accurate speedometer. Or odometer, for that matter.
Just about every new car has GPS/GNSS on board, so just by dividing driven distance by the time it took, you can calibrate the speedometer quite accurately against a longer preferably straight stretch of road.
I have a hunch this is how Tesla does it, because the software does detect a tire change after having driven a few kilometers.
And you need some distance to get rid of most of the GPS inaccuracy. Maybe a kilometer or so?
And then you subtract a few km/h just to be on the safe side.
I think all EVs (well, I guess all cars) have some mismatch between reality and instrument cluster data.
Agree - consumers must have the right to get accurate consumption numbers.
I like kwh per 100km. I pay per kwh and not Wh. No one outside some EVs uses Wh. Look at your electricity bill at home.
They are literally the same thing except you decide to multiply it by 100x for no reason.
@@HTX-enjoyerpeople that use Wh/km instead of kWh/100km probably also used g/km consumption back when they drove a car with internal combustion engine.
"I like kwh per 100km. I pay per kwh and not Wh."
So argue for decimal points then? Per 100 km is just awful.
Resetting the time and mileage but not the average consumption is weird, but the best solution is both long term and short term average consumption counters. The shorter one can run for a day and the longer term runs until reset, or in case of my car, it resets the long term counters after every 100.000 km.
The crazy thing is that the Chinese have their own test for measuring range, the Chinese Light Cycle Test or something. This gives ranges that are even more wildly optimistic than WLTP.
CLTP is more focused on city driving. Because Chinese don't drive that much on highways. They use trains most of the time to travel outside of the city.
0:15 was that a Deckard Cain from Diablo reference?
I think so! 😀 Bjorn used to be a gamer (is a gamer?) so might well be!
Yes
@@bjornnyland did you listen to “Never Talk To Cain (Diablo II Voicemails)” very funny :))
I don't understand why they do that, bc yes some chinese cars have pretty high consumption, but there are also a lot of cars which are pretty low on consumption so why not let the customer know the real value. Why mislead them if it's not high anyways, it doesn't make any sense. It only makes people more skeptical about chinese cars
Does most all of Chinese built cars use a similar consumption calculation method? You say it's stupid but there must be a reason adopted by BYD and others. Just wondering if it's a standardized practice. I didn't want my ignorance to get in the way of facts. Thanks for the ride along.
Nobody is talking about the road safety problem with a speedometer showing too high speed: Everyone with a more correct speedometer will want to overtake to be on the correct speed limit instead of far below.
And as we know, every overtake is an increased risk of accidents to happen.
So the road authorities should demand a more accurate speedometer.
Which should be very easy to do, even with different size tires.
Actually, real consumption on ICE cars is more quite more to calculate/verify, because as long as one knows how many kilometres between fillings off fuel, one divides the litres per the distance, then one has quite accurate value for the consumption (of course, the fuel pump can give one wrong numbers as the odometer, but even so, less things to have errors on).
On the other hands on EV's, there are so many variables (distance, actual net capacity of the battery that is not exactly the same even between several cars of the same brand, model and battery size, actual energy that goes into the battery when charging, consumption displayed by the car, losses overall,...) that can have errors, that getting an accurate number seems always to be difficult.
A lot of customers do not understand the way the calculations are made, and they might complain that when I reset the trip-meter, it says it uses 500Wh/km! There must be something wrong with the car.
The "Chinese way" works around that problem.
I'm pretty sure they do it with purpose.
Bjorn an interesting discussion. I have to say I like my M3 LR with the usage since charging and usage on this trip display. Keep these great Videos going. Hello from Australia.
I am used to miles per kWh when it comes to consumption (UK)
I am sorry to hear that you live in the UK, just hang in there.
I know what you must be thinking but don't do it, life is too valuable to just throw it away.
Stay strong, my friend
"Consumption" is how much energy consumed, like Wh/mi or L/100 km. Miles/kWh is energy efficiency, aka "economy" or "efficiency," not consumption.
@@georgepelton5645 That's probably why the Americans call it mileage as short for miles per gallon.
Can't believe the brits and yanks still use miles per gallon
@@GabrielBourke _"Can't believe the brits and yanks still use miles per gallon"_ -- me either, and I live in the US. Many decades ago, there was a lot of talk about the country moving to metric. I'm still waiting.
The really annoying thing to me about this EV efficiency debate is that Tesla got this right IMHO with the "energy per distance" presentation (they do Wh/mile, but I'd be just as happy with kWh/100 miles), but my LEAF and EV6 both do "distance per energy" (miles/kWh). The really _really_ annoying thing to me about the EV6 is that, as I learned recently, if I switch the display units for the car to metric, the settings add a new option to choose between "energy per distance" and "distance per energy".
I.e. Kia (and presumably Hyundai group makes across the board) saw fit to offer _some_ owners the option, but for those of us for whom non-metric is necessary, we are stuck with the lame "distance per energy" presentation of efficiency. :(
are they lying about the LFP battery also saying over 800km on a full charge
It does.... in their CLTC test :D
@@hojnikb CLTC makes sense for their market. Their cities are dense, lots of start stop traffic. Conditions that are ideal for EV's, at least in so far as range is concerned. It's not like Australia or USA where there maybe majority of trip is highway.
That is not lying, it is another method called CLTC. WLTP is not correct also.
I don't think Bjørn will answer since you dropped the question mark. Didn't you head his speech????????????????????????????????????
@@N1rOx Australia is one of the most urbanised countries on the planet where 99% of all trips are done around suburbia.
Of course we should drop kWh/100km. The only sane unit is the one used in USA ‒ miles per gallon equivalent (of course I'm kidding)…
You are joking but calculating equivalent fuel consumption is an amazing way to put consumption into perspective for “fossil” people.
When I told my friends that a Zoe that I rented was doing me the equivalent of 2L/100km they were blown away.
People don’t do the math…
@@ruigoncalves2 That's not only that, it's also the USA way is inverted. That is, we care about „I need to get to point B, how much will it cost me?“, while in USA it's „I've got a pay day, how far can I get?“
And the analogy… it works nice as an additional info, but not really useful as the main info. I'm always annoyed when someone measures in football fields and forgets to mention if these are American football or the European one, because these aren't the same size...
@@michalvaner3167 Everywhere _except_ the US, football fields are different sizes from American football fields. It's not just Europe.
Though, unlike American football, regular football fields aren't even always the same size as each other. For example, FIFA has regulations regarding the size that allow fields to vary as much as 10 meters in either dimension from smallest to largest.
But I digress...
I agree 100% the US "distance per energy" presentation is backwards. Tesla gets this right even in US cars, but for some reason other manufacturers -- at least, Nissan and Kia, since those are the other two EVs I've owned and am familiar with -- stuck with the dumb "distance per energy" presentation.
To add insult to injury, I learned recently that if I were to set my units in my Kia to metric, the settings would display an additional option allowing me to choose between "distance per energy" and the more rational "energy per distance". But since US speed limits, distances, etc. are not metric, I'm stuck with the non-metric settings, and Kia allows only "distance per energy" when you're not using metric.
That's right! They programmed the setting into their software, then took the setting away for US drivers (and as I understand it, those in the UK as well).
Charging losses are due to internal resistance in the battery. If you assume this resistance - in ohm - is constant and does not vary with current then charging losses are linear and higher charging speed should result in the exact same loss - in kWh - over the same charge. If the battery ages the internal resistance increases, then the charging/discharing loss increases.
Yes, but you can’t assume that the internal resistance is constant because as most resistors, the resistance depends on the temperature.
All cars companies lying about consumption. Werther they are petrol, diesel or even EV.
Love the channel you mention a few times the word, "fluctate", I think you mean to say "fluctUate". Thanks again Mr Bjorn
Valley Girl. Californians can’t say two vowels - or consonants- together. “Couldn’t” comes out as “cou n’t.” Bjorn does not perceive the “you” sound in |fluctuate|
Thank you for the correction. Please use correct punctuation next time. It was a bit hard for me to understand what you meant. You should have written:
"Love the channel. You mention..."
I drive EV’s since 2019 and got used to kw/h as consumption and no other. Last EV was my Renault Megane E-Tech Iconic and also shows Kw/h so felt perfect. No need to change it to something else if you ask me
You mean Wh/km?
@@bjornnyland kWh/100km. My VW e-Golf 2019 did have the same as my last EV the Renault Megane E-Tech Iconic what is 15 Kwh that is the default consumtion showing what I got used to. Why change it to someting else?
1:58) “there’s always a butt crack!”😂 Must be following a Harley Davidson…
There is a good way to prevent lung cancer, triggered by diesel gate cars driving in front of you (other than closing everything): a HEPA cabin air filter with activated carbon. Should be standard on every car, imo.
Stay a while and listen ( deckard cain )
Chinese cars also have horrible availability of parts. There is also no third party parts available...
ICE cars have been capping fuel consumption displays for years; certainly in the early 2000s, Vauxhall/Opel Vectra's wouldnt show less than 9.9MPG (not sure of the litre/100KM version), even if you were ragging them around a race track (or up the motorway), and probably getting 5-6 mpg.
(As seen in a BTTC homologation 2.5L V6 turbo charged S2 saloon - ultra-rare manual gearbox - not sure about the smaller engines/ autobox version)
(I worked for Vauxhall Fleet).
Ré electricity consumption when in Park, a Kia update to my older Soul suddenly started counting the time I spent parked with the radio on against overall consumption; so I now use a small Bluetooth speaker when parked for a long time, so it doesnt mess up my actual miles/KWh.
(Speaker is recharged by a small solar panel in the window).
Meanwhile rounding up/down when converting to/from Metric and Imperial seems to happen a lot with Chinese products; I've encountered tape measures, where 1 inch = 2cm; so I can easily believe they round up/down other, supposedly more precise figures.
Thanks Bjørn for this interesting and informative "rant" about measurement and units.
As a former Test Engineer, I applaud your test methodologies and insistence on using correct SI units. It is shameful that even Norse Elbilforening (The Norwegian Electric Vehicle Association) cannot keep their kW and kWh correct. IMO it is the responibility of organizations like this, and Automotive publications, to educate the public by using correct energy and power units and terminology. I never see Auto mags measuring the gas tank in hp, or the engine power in gallons. 😂
To laymen this often seems "picky," but I disagree. Your analogy of authors not capitalizing names of people or countries explains this well.
Anyone using an electric car especially in the city knows that for short distances 5-10 km the consumption is higher. My experience say about 18-20 kWh hour for a 2-2.5 tone car😅
TBH, I've never noticed any significant difference in efficiency depending on the length of the trip. Much bigger factors are stop/go vs highway, flat vs hilly terrain, and operation of cabin climate controls.
The idea that that one extra period of acceleration at the beginning of a drive would have any noticeable difference on range for all but a uselessly short drive seems ludicrous to me.
They use a different standard to come up with the efficiency. If Norway or wherever the cars are sold are tested using the local testing standard, it will have a different rating. It’s that simple. Furthermore, as we get faster and faster charging speed, it wouldn’t matter that much. Sure Tesla is very efficient but it’s also fairly barebones when comparing to the features to the Chinese cars. I will gladly sacrifice some efficiency for the features.
Features like annoying beeps that are hard to turn off?
KW and KWh definitely, Bjorn.
mpg/m per kWh a con as done under laboratory conditions.
Please do a rant about the correct use of kW and kWh! It is infuriating that people refuse to learn the correct units - and causes untold amounts of confusion when people ask for help and don’t use the correct terminology…
If complaining about other people, shouldn't you lead by example and use accurate unit descriptions too? It is kW and kWh.
Edit: Mega Watt is MW. Capitalization matters.
@@christianlinke380 Fair enough. Not a mistake I normally make and corrected now, thanks for pointing it out.
I want a rant about kwh/h!
The BYD Atto3 was totally crazy. Was an early software version where it divided drawn energy by a fixed distance after resetting. My guess, it was 50 Km. So, for this distance, the car shamelessly underreported its consumption. Then it was the rolling average as explained in the video. Absolutely useless.
The rest of the firmware at that time was total crap as well; would even make VW blush of shame.
kWh per 100km?! Ridiculous!!!
*_It should be Joule per meter: J/m!_* 😆
(20kWh/100km = 200Wh/km = 720kJ/km =720J/m) Since 1kWh = 3,600,000J(3.6MJ)
Glad to see the intrusive thought didn't win when passing by that truck trailer
Timestamp?
@@bjornnyland 2:58 I know my first thought seeing that perfectly aligned trailer was " Let's jump it"
Then again, i'm not a daddy 😄
I would really like to know how Tesla and teslafi calculates consumption so I dont have to be "cluless". For an example the car states 150wh/km for a trip. In teslafi there are 2 values called "used" and "added" when the car has been charged at a SC, both values is in a kWh value. If you divide this values with km driven the give added 160wh/km and used 175wh/km. I have asked several people and the response has been that added was what was put in the battery and the difference is because of preheating and used is what you buy aka the loading session included charging loss.This is in a MY produced in Berlin autumn 23. Pls explain so I dont have to be cluless.
Chinese lying in so many things, not only in cars consumptions...
Next video please about fuel consumption on internal combustion engines. 😏
Good catch and thanks for sharing. Let's see, if the German ADAC will find out the same and I hope they will still give you Chinese cars for driving/testing.
Very funny, that you use so many German words. 😂
Ironic that the grammar rant includes 'fluctate' which isn't a word 😂. 'Fluctuate' is the one you want. From an engineer who is also triggered by kW vs kWh mix ups 😮
Thank you for the correction.
@@bjornnyland much love for your work! Will you get your hands on an EV3 soon? #inbjornwetrust
I like my 4 Wh/h LED bulds more than the old 50 Wh/h incandescent lamps
You can't rely 100% on the battery SoC either.
The "BMS" have a calibrated estimate of the remaining energy. But while driving, the car probably measures the actual usage.
So these values have to be calibrated both ways in some specific way to get somewhat usable numbers.
And a battery will typically NOT contain that exact amount. Probably less, right? 😉
There is no need for them to try to make their consumtion look better. Look at the latest range test in Auto Bild Germany. All the expensive German cars were beaten by cheap NIO et5 and BYD seal. 😂 Even the eqs 580 with 120kWh battery had problems reaching 400km😂. What a POS car. But in Björns test the EQS has fantastic range, maybe you are the one lying to all you viewers🤔
This test doesent say anything. The tested cars are so different in terms of design and cw. They used the nio et5 eith the higehst avaible battery 100kwh and went for the smallest with the id7. So the et5 reached 20km more with 23kwh more capacity.
They took the eqs580 instead of the 450+ which clearly has the highest range with 700+km.
So what should this test tell us?
But on the other hand check the id7 touring vs et5 touring on bjorn channel. Id7 has more range with smaller battery. Thats engineering dude
@@oxidalpha6350 Björns test does not say anything, you are correct there. It is about usable battery, there the id7 and the et5 are just about the same and you can see that the consumtion is about the same. Even if the id7 is slower and only rear wheel drive. Look at some real test like DCAR where they test auto brake systems of cars. There was not a worse performer than the ID7. The ID7 is a POS car☺
@@Lucas-wp2ph with this test i was talking about your auto bild test not bjorns test. In bjorns data sheed you can see more range with id7 than with the nio plus nios has bigger battery.
There are some range tests also. The eqs is very good. The test from auto bild is nonesende they just compared very different cars to each other
Even the gtx with more cw and smaller battery has more range than the nio you can find in bjorns test.
It depends on how you test. How you mix the long and short trips, the temperatures and weather.
Western car makers fooled the world for a decade with cheating on CO2 emissions. Disel gate.
This is acceptable. Norway with shitty roads, and cold temperatures should not complain realy.
Wh/km is better. kWh/100km is classic style.
I pay for kWh. kWh is the one called one 'electric unit'. So I prefer kWh/100 km or km/kWh
Don't buy Chinese EV!
Really? Childish
@basfinnis
Oke, oke , oke.... let me ask you something: If you lie an important thing about a product, would other people buy it or again? Or as a new potential buyer, and you have followed Björn with his test and also know about this knowledge?
Of course, if the Chinese BEV is going to adapt to the European style of habits, then it is good. But till then, don't buy Chinese EV!
Well. Watching news / documentaries / reports about china lead me to buy as less stuff as possible from china. China is an evil country. It is what it is.
@@yingmustang67Oki? 😂 Björn is probably doing the 1000 km test now. Think it will win over Tesla Y ! Let’s check..
I’d say don’t buy Chinese cars or anything from China for the simple reason not to give them your money they will use to take over your country but it might be already too late for this.
❤❤❤
Yess! Frick these chinese stuff!
Chinese products lying about things? I could never!
Elon musk never lies either, Tesla Vision works better then Ultra sonic 😂
Chinese cars do not actually have very good components in their drive train which therefore makes them less efficient, they are not always designed with drivetrain efficiency in mind like tesla for example, some Chinese cars have really cheap designed drive trains motors, battery cells etc not to mention heat management
Please provide some facts here. At the moment they are the only ones able to charge over 6C and the only ones that are able to run PM motors at over 30 000rpm. But if you know something more please tell me😊
One of many reasons I won't buy Chinese in the foreseeable future... software and other things are just not there yet and things like battery swap are silly for most people. Like Lucid can do over 800 km on one charge on highways, why would you ever need battery swap? Or that silly globe with eyes... their designs are not very inspired either.
Batteryswap is the future
åoeioeioeioeioei.. shjiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
im first
h0w r u ,bjørn
Perhaps you have misspeled "o" in bjorn's name 😅
@@halopartiska2 It's "ø" :). Literally. Look at his youtube name.
@@teipkep that was meant as a joke on your first comment
@theelectricviking