Range test shows really bad results

[lightboxcar]

7 minutes ago, philip42h said:

if the car uses x amount of energy per mile at 30 mph, it will use 4x that at 60 mph and 9x that at 90 mph ...

Wow, didn't know that, thanks, it's massive difference.

You would think driving faster would get you there quicker, hence the saving power, as Battery is used for less time.  Seems maybe not ...

[philip42h]

55 minutes ago, lightboxcar said:

On another note, currently 'road trips to Vienna...' seem to be the preserve of fortunate RAV4 owners.

However having checked the distance from London to Vienna ( approx. 950 miles by road ), it may be doable in the BZ4x , if en-route hotels that have overnight charging can be located .....

An interesting hypothetical example ... we actually 'started' in northern France and journeyed to Vienna in two day stages of 700km each. The hotel we stayed at en route boasts that:

"You are able to park your car directly on site of the hotel. There are over 200 parking spaces and 4 charging points for electric vehicles - power points type 2 with maximum output of 22kW."

So that's charging for 2% of their potential visitors. Assuming we were lucky we could have started day 2 with a full Battery. (I'm ignoring the fact that I couldn't have started day 1 with a full Battery and just assuming that I could ... 🙂 )

The weather was mild, but I was aiming for a cruising speed of 120 kph down the autoroutes / autobahns - so that's definitely 'highway' speeds. According to EVDB I might expect / hope for a realistic range of around 200 miles / 320 km. Starting with a full Battery I could probably have ticked off the first 300 km before stopping at a DC rapid charger - and rapidly topped the battery to 80% charge so an equivalent range of 256 km. So the second, and subsequent, legs are probably limited to 230-240 km and so I would have had to 'refuel' three times each day as well as overnight ...

That's neither impossible nor unacceptable, but you are really very reliant on the charging infrastructure being in place ...

[philip42h]

8 minutes ago, lightboxcar said:

18 minutes ago, philip42h said:

if the car uses x amount of energy per mile minute at 30 mph, it will use 4x that at 60 mph and 9x that at 90 mph ...

Wow, didn't know that, thanks, it's massive difference.

You would think driving faster would get you there quicker, hence the saving power, as Battery is used for less time.  Seems maybe not ...

Bother ... I need to correct that since I didn't write quite what I meant ... travelling at twice the speed will consume energy at 4x the rate, but you will get there in half the time, so you'd only be worse off energy-wise by a factor of 2.

[lightboxcar]

30 minutes ago, philip42h said:

but you are really very reliant on the charging infrastructure being in place

To overcome this eventuality , we have a RAV4 PHEV on order too ( if / when it will ever arrive is anyone's guess.... )

[rfrancis073]

Thanks for posting.  Not sure what to make of this test.

Will be interesting to see if the US / Canada AWD CATL Battery exhibits range issues?  Strange test.

[Cyker]

On 11/9/2022 at 2:16 PM, lightboxcar said:

Looking at the City vs Highway figures, there is a massive difference.

Does that mean that EV ranges are going to be quite poor on long motorway drives , for example London to Glasgow ?

It's the higher speeds - Higher speeds require more power, but EVs don't gain efficiency at higher loads like ICEs do, so they consume proportionally more power. Under load ICEs, are able to drag more energy out of the same amount of fuel which is why their range actually goes up at higher speeds, (up to a point anyway!), and the fuel consumption doesn't go up as much as might be predicted.

On 11/9/2022 at 1:11 PM, lightboxcar said:

Thank you, that is interesting.  Amazon show these but they are just for phones.  Not sure where to get a portable car battery, certainly would be great to have

Teslabjorn has been testing such things - 2kWh Ecoflow units I think, but they're very heavy and very expensive, and 2kWh minus charging losses doesn't get you much range in an EV...!

 

On 11/9/2022 at 1:53 PM, lightboxcar said:

Am sure you are correct.

But there is one out there, almost...

It's big, and much more expensive than RAC membership

https://www.zap-map.com/zipcharge-go-10000-pre-orders/

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/technology-news/uk-firm-launches-portable-ev-charger-urban-drivers

Ahh, the old meaning of the word 'portable' like we used to use in the 80's to talk about 'portable' computers, that were the size of a large suitcase and weighed as much as a medium-sized laser printer  

[swoop5511]

Interestingly, not sure whether its related or not, but the BZ4X product web site is not accessible this morning. Looks like some details may be getting updated / reviewed. 

The car is listed and showing, but cant access it ...

[Guest]

Was checking few minutes ago and yes, looks like an internal upgrade for Bz4x - maybe adding 11kw charger and yoke steering wheel plus some extra options to buy online??? I’ve got front/rear dash cam installed on production line and I never saw that as an option online? 

[Guest]

O, o, o !!!maybe solar roof??

[philip42h]

2 hours ago, swoop5511 said:

Interestingly, not sure whether its related or not, but the BZ4X product web site is not accessible this morning. Looks like some details may be getting updated / reviewed. 

The car is listed and showing, but cant access it ...

I'm not quite sure what you mean but the bZ4X has disappeared from the list of cars for sale in the UK! Unlike the RAV4 PHEV and the Highlander which have simply become 'priceless', the bZ4X has 'gone' altogether. It seems reasonable to assume that it'll be back within hours complete with specs and prices applicable to the UK 'relaunch' ...

[swoop5511]

3 hours ago, philip42h said:

I'm not quite sure what you mean but the bZ4X has disappeared from the list of cars for sale in the UK! Unlike the RAV4 PHEV and the Highlander which have simply become 'priceless', the bZ4X has 'gone' altogether. It seems reasonable to assume that it'll be back within hours complete with specs and prices applicable to the UK 'relaunch' ...

The BZ is listed but you cant access the "product page" . I can however select the RAV4 and select individual versions or configure a car etc

[bZ4X]

Use this link:

 

https://www.toyota.co.uk/new-cars/bz4x

[philip42h]

... and it's back! It was completely missing from the table of New Vehicles earlier. But you still can't buy one - just be kept informed:

[egg]

On 11/9/2022 at 9:15 AM, swoop5511 said:

Some stuff in the test definitely does not feel right and based on the numbers don’t add up.

Before we start in, they’re testing against WLTP range and claiming failure to meet that range.  According to Which UK (July 2022) only 1 car since 2017 that managed to meet declared WLTP range. All other cars are well below. See info further down. We can discuss the value of WLTP or lack thereof separately ….

Back to my value, last week in mild temperatures (AC/heating off, fan on), I was averaging between 3.4-3.6 miles per KW driving all week. My commute and general driving so far

If as they claim the useable battery is only 62kw:

at 95% SOC I have a range of 254miles – which would mean a 267miles at 100% - which in return would mean 4.31 miles per KW. And that would be a ridiculous number for a boxy SUV like the BZ4X 

For example, what I would consider direct competitors in size and weight: Skoda Enyaq is 3.2m per KW & VW ID4 is 3.4m per KW. I wouldn’t compare the BZ4X for a model 3 or Zoe or ID3 or other high efficiency cars.

Unfortunately, software is where the car is currently let down. For example, I cant get a numerical value (%) for SOC from the car – only get it from the app and there the connectivity is very hit and miss for me. There is a lot of guessing and napkin maths going on when the car should be clearly displaying all the relevant figures

I am fortunate enough that I get free access to lvl1 charging at work. (It’s a dedicated / purpose build set up – i.e. can safely use for 8h+) and I actually haven’t needed to charge at home on the wallbox or on the road. 2-2.5 days charging at work is enough to get me through a week worth of driving.

Here, is where the numbers don’t add up, assuming that I am pulling steady 2.3kw per h on the lvl1 charge (?) and I “think” I get approx. 30% charge in a day (again would be nice if I could actually check this properly in the car) then that would in fact equate to a 61.3 useable battery.

But that leads back to a stupidly efficient car and I rather believe that Toyota is not displaying the SOC correctly vs not displaying consumption correctly. Again software is the issue, a fixable issue, but unless I completely missed something - you cannot see the SOC displayed in a numerical value anywhere through the car. You have the bar on the “hud” and that’s it.

Going back to my displayed average of 3.5m per KW, assuming the rule of thumb that car has realistic range of 80% of WLTP meaning for the FWD claimed WLTP range is 317.5m, 80% of that is 254m and if multiply my average from last week with the battery size (3.5*71.5) I come to 250.25 which puts me in the 80% of WLTP range and more importantly re battery size also very close to what I saw when I received the car with 95% SOC.

Re rule of thumb. See link below which confirm my stated “rule of thumb” assumptions

First, Which UK (independent tester) who states their tests show on average real world range is 18% less than WLTP. The article has a lot of info re range and is very worth reading.

https://www.which.co.uk/news/article/revealed-the-truth-about-electric-car-mileage-aC1bt9t5jU50

Secondly, green.car confirms in their testing that cold weather driving removes another 10-20% range on top of the 20% reduction against original WLTP claimed values.

https://www.green.car/guides/electric-car-range-and-how-its-calculated-wltp-and-real-world-range/#:~:text=A%20good%20(and%20cautious)%20rule,in%20the%20very%20cold%20conditions.

Now this week the weather has been considerably cooler. I work morning shift and leave the house at 5am. Temps this week have been around 4 degrees in the morning. 

I have had temp control set to 21 degrees and heated seats in use and my range has dropped to 2.8-3.0 miles per KW. Using 2.9 as the average and again multiplying by 71.5 brings me to 207.35 range. That would reduce my range by another 17%, which I understand is relatively normal. I.e. real world range is 80% of claimed WLTP and then take off another 10-20% in cold weather.

Quick note, looking online, the 71.5kw battery is claimed as useable rather than total battery size. Toyota also seemed to have updated some technical data

The bottom one is the interesting one. 23.3kw/100miles equates to 2.67m per KW which is only a touch below my “cold” weather average of 1 week.

EV database has the following range estimations based real world data of EVs vs claimed WLTP

Toyota bZ4X FWD price and specifications - EV Database (ev-database.uk)

Those numbers seem to confirm my very basic maths. Approx. 250-260 in summer and approx. 200 in winter.

I think that Toyota is playing it very safe and has applied very conservative “settings” to the car while also is aiming to protect its battery. The warranty is 90% and 10 years which I think is one of the longest / best warranties available in the market today. I would like to think with more real world user data that Toyota, similar to MEB cars and for example Polestar 2 and relaxes these settings int ime.

MEB cars, same as the BZ4X, launched with artificially throttled charging and relaxed that after about 8-12 months of cars in the field. Polestar range improved after software updates (see Which linked article)

It comes back to what does mean for you. Here and now the worst case range of approx. 200 miles is still more than sufficient for me. Commuting is obviously no issue. Based on our location in the East of England we can drive to the in-laws, Stansted & Heathrow airports, our usual spots on the coast and more all without needing to re-charge.

For me that’s no issue – “your mileage may wary”

at 95% SOC I have a range of 254miles – which would mean a 267miles at 100% - which in return would mean 4.31 miles per KW. And that would be a ridiculous number for a boxy SUV like the BZ4X 

That is in fact the number that it achieved in the WLTP tests (4.3 miles per KWh) for pure grade (fwd and small 18 inch wheels).

The range you have quoted in car I believe is worked on these figures until such a time you have managed to get enough miles on the car, to the point that it will display realistic range for your driving history.

Toyota have never publicly disclosed the useable capacity for the Battery, but using this 4.3 miles per KWh figure, along with the 317 mile range, it must be circa the quoted Battery range of 71.4KWh.

For whatever reason, watching this video of test/charging capacity, I believe the useable capacitiy (from 100% to 0%) is only approx 85% (approx 62 KWh) of the full useable capacity as tested in the WLTP testing.

Has anyone compared miles driven with a comparable loss on the range meter in car?

If my theory is correct, you will lose more miles from remaining range, than you have travelled.

I am extremely worried by this video, and have a number of theories as to what is going on with the Battery capacity. 

Please could someone compare miles travelled with range lost in car, i am due to take delivery of the car in the next few days, and this would calm my worries

[egg]

BZ4X specifications, including consumption figures from WLTP test, this screenshot is from toyota magazine online article 

[lightboxcar]

1 hour ago, philip42h said:

... and it's back! It was completely missing from the table of New Vehicles earlier. But you still can't buy one - just be kept informed:

Our dealer told us this week that all BX4X current production is sold out.

They will not be able to take orders for some time, and when they can, delivery will be 2024 at the earliest !!!

[bZ4X]

2 minutes ago, lightboxcar said:

Our dealer told us this week that all BX4X current production is sold out.

They will not be able to take orders for some time, and when they can, delivery will be 2024 at the earliest !!!

Hmm thats suspicious! They sold whole years stock in couple weeks? 

[lightboxcar]

10 minutes ago, bZ4X said:

Hmm thats suspicious! They sold whole years stock in couple weeks? 

Maybe the problem is component supply.  You cannot order RAV PHEV now, and Audi have pulled a few cars from sale too

But they did say there was a backlog of orders to process because of the recall, and that there had been huge demand for the BZ4X, much more than Toyota had expected !!

[lightboxcar]

41 minutes ago, egg said:

I am extremely worried by this video

Many seemingly very experienced members of this club have cast doubts over that video.

Toyota are a huge company, it's most unlikely they would do anything bad like publish fake/false figures.

It has also been said several times on this forum that the system will take time to learn/calibrate.

We are very relaxed and confident this will be an outstanding vehicle , and expect to get as good or better ranges in real world conditions.

For example, we did a test drive a few days before the recall.  At the end of the drive we had MORE range showing than what we had when we started !!!

Did test the 'eco' mode for a while which probably contributed to the regen

[egg]

3 minutes ago, lightboxcar said:

Many seemingly very experienced members of this club have cast doubts over that video.

Toyota are a huge company, it's most unlikely they would do anything bad like publish fake/false figures.

It has also been said several times on this forum that the system will take time to learn/calibrate.

We are very relaxed and confident this will be an outstanding vehicle , and expect to get as good or better ranges in real world conditions.

For example, we did a test drive a few days before the recall.  At the end of the drive we had MORE range showing than what we had when we started !!!

Did test the 'eco' mode for a while which probably contributed to the regen

I do understand, as there seemed many inaccuracies with the figures quoted in the English translation which i put down to exactly that.

I 100% believe all quoted consumption figures from the WLTP testing are correct, but that the test was carried out with a 71.4KWh useable Battery.

What worries me is that for whatever reason, has the useable Battery been throttled back by the software to circa 62 KWh??

[lightboxcar]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

useable battery been throttled back by the software to circa 62 KWh

No idea why Toyota would want to do that, so somewhat sceptical.

Our feeling isyou can read all the stories and tech data for ever and a day, the bottom line will be what owners actually achieve in the real world.

Cars are now getting dlievered and results are already coming through, they look promising, and very much in accordance with expected results.

There may also be some 'reserve' capapacity in these cars.  For example one of our ICE cars has about 50 miles range left when it says tank empty.

[rfrancis073]

1 hour ago, lightboxcar said:

No idea why Toyota would want to do that, so somewhat sceptical.

Our feeling isyou can read all the stories and tech data for ever and a day, the bottom line will be what owners actually achieve in the real world.

Cars are now getting dlievered and results are already coming through, they look promising, and very much in accordance with expected results.

There may also be some 'reserve' capapacity in these cars.  For example one of our ICE cars has about 50 miles range left when it says tank empty.

Supposedly Toyota did this so that they could give the 90% Battery capacity remaining after 10 years.

[egg]

I've just agreed to take delivery of mine on Tuesday.

I just hope theres a massive 10KWh buffer below zero, which can be used, lengthening the range.

Watched another charging test on YouTube (out of spec reviews) admittedly it was the CATL 72.8KWh Battery pack fitted to the USA awd vehicles, but this only used 61 KWH to 99% charge too

[dab1054]

2 hours ago, egg said:

I 100% believe all quoted consumption figures from the WLTP testing are correct, but that the test was carried out with a 71.4KWh useable battery.

What worries me is that for whatever reason, has the useable battery been throttled back by the software to circa 62 KWh??

If you look at the latest Toyota technical information the bZ4X Battery capacity is given as 201 Ah (Ampere hours) rather than in kWh. If you do a calculation based on Battery voltage of 355 V (as given in tech specs) this works out as 355 V x 201 A = 71.4 kWh capacity, so the same as original specs. Not sure why capacity is being given in Ah seeing as most other EV manufacturers seem to specify kWh. Possibly this has some relevance to the 'usable' Battery capacity?

[swoop5511]

I keep coming back to my original post. WLTP does not matter. Look at the "which uk" article. Since 2017 (!) only 1 car hit the advertised WLPT range. Everyone else below between 10 and 20 something percent and the average being 18%. 

For the FWD version the WLPT range is 312.5 as per Toyota website. Was 317 prior update. Take either value and work out 80% and its 250-254. I received my car with 95% SOC (havent charged above 80% since) and had a displayed range of 254 miles. As expected.

For bad weather, you take off another percentage. I expected to get a car that does 250 miles in mild weather / summer and 200 miles in bad / cold weather. This car delivers that. Anything beyond that is a bonus. 

I fully suspect that Toyota has reserved a large pool of the Battery for 2 reasons. One as noted above the warranty and two the fact that its has no route charge planning. Toyota has stated in the past that their aim was to get people to buy this car that potentially would not normally buy an EV. The last thing they wanted was people running out of juice stranded on the side of the road. 

Separate note, with the stronger regen braking applied and really getting into a flow using almost no breaks I am now consistently getting 4.1-4.2m per KW up from 3.5ish.