[Charli3_Tang0]

Volvo C40 Recharge Gets More EPA Range Than Initially Anticipated

The all-new Volvo C40 Recharge, which is the first Volvo available only as an all-electric car, has received its official EPA range and efficiency numbers.

insideevs.com

Of note, the C40 went through a 5 cycle EPA test (vs the XC40s 2 cycle test).

 

[santellavision]

Volvo changed the 2022 XC40's range to 223miles.

 

[improvius]

However, we noticed a difference in the rating, as the C40 has EPA 5-cycle test results, while the XC40 has the EPA 2-cycle test results. We guess that the 5-cycle version of the two available tests translates to a slightly better range.

I think it's the opposite. The C40 should get noticeably better results because of its improved aero as compared to the XC40. I suspect the 5-cycle test is overall translating to a slightly lower range than would the 2-cycle.

 

[Charli3_Tang0]

I think it's the opposite. The C40 should get noticeably better results because of its improved aero as compared to the XC40. I suspect the 5-cycle test is overall translating to a slightly lower range than would the 2-cycle.

I understand that the more test cycles you opt to take, the higher the rating you'll end up with in the end (though that doesn't necessarily translate to reality...).

While the C40 does have a reduced drag coefficient, I don't believe it was drastic enough to result in significantly higher range... this seems to confirm that, but it's still not an apples to apples comparison without a 5-cycle XC40 test running the latest OTA.

 

[improvius]

Going by Volvo's internal reporting, they seem to expect noticeably better efficiency than the XC40.

https://www.volvocars.com/images/v/-/media/Market-Assets/INTL/Applications/DotCom/PDF/C40/Volvo-C40-Recharge-LCA-report.pdf

 

[Charli3_Tang0]

I haven't been able to read that entire document, but it appears to be related to manufacturing efficiency... Does it compare drag between the two vehicles? I do see that doc lists the C40 as 10 kg heavier than the XC40.

 

[improvius]

In that report, the "use phase emissions" are notably higher for the XC40 than the C40.

 

[A2_]

In that report, the "use phase emissions" are notably higher for the XC40 than the C40.

Which can only really be a function of decreased cost of charging - so as I see it
1) c40 charges more efficiently [faster] (I don't think this is the case, when both vehicles are charged using wind they both have near 0 use-phase)
2) c40 requires fewer charges - a function of increased range.

the lower carbon footprint of C40 Recharge compared with XC40 Recharge is mainly because of better aerodynamic properties of the C40 Recharge.

Are the EPA numbers done with the range optimizer on?

 

[A2_]

Something else to consider, the EPA range test fluctuates speed between 0-60. I bet enough of the test is done at low enough speeds that the C40's improved aero doesn't have much of an impact. It'll be neat to see when an XC40 and a C40 can move at something more like US highway speeds (70+) and the decreased drag coefficient of the C40 can actually be put to work

 

[blitzswede]

Are the EPA numbers done with the range optimizer on?

No. EPA does not test utilizing any range optimizing modes, options or features, and that includes the heat pump option.