[ronk]

Since Volvo EV is much less than most of the EV's that are out or about to come out has anyone heard anything about when Volvo plans to extend the range. That's the one thing that's stopping me right now.

 

[SeattleCat]

Volvo’s range is not less than “most” evs. It is however less than some.

I honestly think the range of an ev is less important than the availability of high speed chargers since on a long trip ( I have done 12,000 mile plus road trips but not in an ev ) no matter the range of your ev you will spend the same amount of time charging.

Range helps you get across holes in the grid so to speak but does not actually significantly increase the range done in a day of driving.

 

[Maribo]

Yes, you are right. My XC40's range happens to be just short of a trip I make almost every weekend, so I have to stop and recharge, which costs me 20 min. each way. I chose to live with it because of the many other fine points of the vehicle. That being said, I still wonder, like the OP, where the losses are, compared to, say, a Tesla. Tesla is known to have very efficient motors, so maybe that, the boxy shape, possibly the efficiency of major components such as the inverter. We need to have Sandy Munroe tear one apart and analyze.

 

[goatsweater]

I think the most impactful part of the vehicle is the shape. The efficiency at low speeds is actually quite good, and compares favourably to “long rage” EVs. Get it up to highway speed and it’s pretty much a brick.

 

[Maribo]

I think the most impactful part of the vehicle is the shape. The efficiency at low speeds is actually quite good, and compares favourably to “long rage” EVs. Get it up to highway speed and it’s pretty much a brick.

So, if we want to keep our boxy shape, the solution would be batteries with higher energy density; that is, more kWh with the same weight. Hopefully in the not-too-distant future, but probably not what the OP wants to hear. Maybe there could be some minor improvements with programming, IDK.

 

[SeattleCat]

Maribo.
How short of the journey is your car?

Our boxy shaped is definitely blamed a lot ( and makes sense ).

Anyone have a Tesla to compare city driving with ? That would rule out almost everything apart from aerodynamics and tire drag?

Are folks using adaptive cruise control? That is meant to be part of the efficiency equation.

Anyone with a heat pump getting better range ?

Things that would help range
A. More aerodynamics.
B. More dense battery. (Both said before)
C. Less power/one drive motor only. Of the cars that’s that are more efficient they are often the single motor versions and they dual version are less efficient.

As much as I love efficiency if I had the choice of 201 hp more efficiency (no awd) and cheaper or 402hp end awd as the P8 is I know I would of chosen the P8.

 

[burak]

I think the most impactful part of the vehicle is the shape. The efficiency at low speeds is actually quite good, and compares favourably to “long rage” EVs. Get it up to highway speed and it’s pretty much a brick.

The wind resistance factor of the Volvo is 0.34

 

[Homer]

A Tesla model 3 has a reported wind resistance of .23. Assuming aerodynamic drag is proportional to the square of velocity, and hence the power needed to overcome drag is proportional to the cube of velocity. This means that there is a very strong relationship between the speed that a vehicle is travelling and the proportion of the fuel used to overcome drag.

A 10% reduction in the drag will give a 2% increase in mileage at highway speeds. Using crude math approximations, the different wind resistance numbers would allow the Tesla a 6% mileage advantage. So, the Volvo, if shaped like a Tesla, would go about 15 miles further per charge.

A jeep Wrangler is .454

For those who have driven cars with very aerodynamic windshields, the dash is huge and the sun reflection is significant.
I personally dislike the huge cowl/dash slanted windshield configuration of the low aerodynamic cars.

 

[burak]

A Tesla model 3 has a reported wind resistance of .23. Assuming aerodynamic drag is proportional to the square of velocity, and hence the power needed to overcome drag is proportional to the cube of velocity. This means that there is a very strong relationship between the speed that a vehicle is travelling and the proportion of the fuel used to overcome drag.

A 10% reduction in the drag will give a 2% increase in mileage at highway speeds. Using crude math approximations, the different wind resistance numbers would allow the Tesla a 6% mileage advantage. So, the Volvo, if shaped like a Tesla, would go about 15 miles further per charge.

A jeep Wrangler is .454

For those who have driven cars with very aerodynamic windshields, the dash is huge and the sun reflection is significant.
I personally dislike the huge cowl/dash slanted windshield configuration of the low aerodynamic cars.

xc40 has 0.34

 

[Maribo]

So, the Volvo, if shaped like a Tesla, would go about 15 miles further per charge.

Assuming you mean 15 miles more than it currently does, which is about 200, more or less, our model 3 AWD gets about 270 more or less. The Tesla still does better for some reason(s). I haven't had the Volvo for very long, and need to accumulate more data to compare to the Tesla under similar conditions. Our weekly trip is 180 miles with a 2000 ft elevation gain. It would probably make it with no room to spare, but I really don't want to have to push it the last few hundred yards (uphill)!

 

[SeattleCat]

Watch this video.

This is the 3rd time (at least) he has ranged the Volvo. This time he ran it to zero.

Plot spoiler he got over 220 miles so 180 should be easily doable. Anyways watch and let us know.

Also let us know how your trip goes. Both ways would be great data

ps if you run out of power Volvo warrantee will come tow you to the charger

 

[Maribo]

That sounds about for right for level ground and going slow. I will report back as I accumulate more data.

 

[Homer]

Thanks to Burak. I assumed the wind resistance coefficient of the Volvo of 0.34. The increased mileage was calculated using an assume 0.23 for the Tesla and 0.34 for the Volvo. The jeep Wrangler was mentioned as it is often considered the least aerodynamic of all cars.

The increased range of the Tesla is often credited to the unique design of the battery system and the management of the battery through software/hardware engineering. The actual capacity is not much greater than most cars, it is how the power is managed through proprietary hardware/software systems.

When judging your range, make certain you are charging to 100%. The Volvo is delivered with the charge max at either 80-90% to preserve battery life. However, range information is published using a 100% charge. Also, EPA ranges are performed indoors, at room temperature. And, the cars are loaded with only one passenger.

So, comparing EPA range on a Tesla to real world range on a Volvo is impossible. If you load the car with luggage, add a passenger, and drive at temperatures less than 70 degrees, your mileage will suffer and you are not duplicating EPA estimates.

 

[Maribo]

So, comparing EPA range on a Tesla to real world range on a Volvo is impossible.

Well, it would be unfair, anyway. That is why I project the range in either case using the measured efficiency (Wh/mile or kWh/100 mile) to add to the miles traveled. Tesla doesn't generally get EPA range, either.

 

[DeaneG]

My Model 3, a dual-motor "stealth" performance version with base 18" wheels and all-season MXM tires, has an EPA range that could be considered to be between 353 miles (dual motor on 18" MXM tires) and 315 miles (dual motor performance with 20" PS4 tires). It actually consumes about 275Wh/mi (lifetime average), and has a range of about 260-275 miles, far short of either EPA figure.

 

[Welland canada recharge]

Had to take my son today from Welland Ontario to Toronto Ontario to get his Covid 19 vaccine - it was a 242.4 KM round trip (151Miles). Left the house with a 89% Charge - returned and the Charge level was at 20% - it was about 13 degrees Celsius (55 F) - at the end of the trip the car showed it averaged 21.1 KWH/100 km (62 miles) - there was some wind today but since it was a round trip I figure the wind cancelled it self out since I would have had a disadvantage one way and advantage the other.
Not sure if this contributes to the discussion - but it is a real life example.

 

[Rugbychix]

and has a range of about 260-275 miles, far short of either EPA figure.

Testing Tesla's Range Anxiety: Tesla Model Y, Model 3, VW ID.4, Ford Mach-E | Edmunds

When we published our real-world Edmunds EV range test, Tesla challenged our finding that its vehicles fell short of their EPA range estimates. Was the challenge valid? Here's the test we conducted to find out.

www.edmunds.com

That being said, Volvo needs to get the average rate of charging up in 40-80, especially 60-80. What really matters is how much charge can you get in an average restroom/beverage break. If they could increase charging speeds 10%-15% in that range it would greatly improved the multiple stop experience

 

[SeattleCat]

I thought they had increased the charging rate to 148 at compatible charging stations which is basically the 150 max as advertised with the software updates. I could be wrong of course.

 

[Rugbychix]

I thought they had increased the charging rate to 148 at compatible charging stations which is basically the 150 max as advertised with the software updates. I could be wrong of course.

There are folks reporting charging between 150-155 for the Polestar 2 and XC40. The problem is peak speeds are kind of meaningless for most drivers, it's really the average speed that matters. Well at least until we have way more fast chargers and people feel comfortable driving their EV down into the single digits. In one test where the battery was brought down to 0%, it took only 12 minutes to get to 30% It took another 30 minutes to go from 30% to 80%. Since very few people are going to deliberately take their EV under 10% and even less under 5%, the car charging fast between 0% and 10% isn't all that useful. Here's the charging "curve." Full video on it:

 

[goatsweater]

Aside from watching the display like a hawk, anyone know how to collect this data? The videos are single instance data points, and I’d be interested in monitoring charges over a longer period of time to get averages and see if we get improvements (or regressions) over time.