Range and efficiency/consumption

[egg]

Yes, there are a few Tesla sites open to non Teslas already. Not tried one yet, almost tried the one at Banbury last year, but used the 16 stall Instavolt down the road instead 

[My1stEvBZ4x]

On 2/15/2023 at 8:21 PM, bZ4X said:

Bz4x starts heating 4-5 minutes later when u turn on. And it drains battery %20-%30 extra when you use it. 10kwh usage = 7 kwh for driving + 3 kwh for heating system (at 5-7 degree celsius). 

Imagine cold countries, bz4x wouldnt make 100 miles with full battery at -20°

But this is mentioned before range is a car common problem for all EVs currently. Just wait for the first 2 major software updates then we will see the actual consumption and efficiency. 

I really don't think that software update could increase the range. It may show the Battery percentage, or actual consumption to wheel or whatever they are saying about.. but at the end of the day range is range.. May be if they reduce the buffer after 0 km range, then it could add up 10-15 miles.. 

[ernieb]

Maybe got this wrong but I thought I'd read somewhere that they were looking to 'release' around 20-30miles extra range after the software updates??? They also need to fix the charging rate to reduce the charging turn around time.

[dab1054]

2 hours ago, ernieb said:

Maybe got this wrong but I thought I'd read somewhere that they were looking to 'release' around 20-30miles extra range after the software updates??? They also need to fix the charging rate to reduce the charging turn around time.

Toyota certainly have the potential to release more available miles of range with a software upgrade. They have been very careful with Battery management- I guess they want to be able to honour the 10-year warranty. If the ml/kWh efficiency of the bZ4X (as opposed to range) is in line with other similar sized EVs (which it seems to be, but probably need to go through the warmer weather to establish this), then the range can be improved just by making more of the Battery capacity available.

Here are a couple of ways they could improve 'accessible' range - the real range that people would experience on a day-to-day basis.

1. Toyota could open up some extra usable Battery capacity. bZ4X has 71.4kWh nominal and 64 kWh usable battery capacity. This leaves 7.4kWh 'reserve'. Compare this with other EVs accepted to have good range: Niro EV 68/64.8; Soul 67.5/64; Kona 67.5/64; Ioniq 5 77.4/74; Tesla Y 60/57.5; Tesla Y LR 78/75. So, to be in line with other EVs bZ4X usable capacity could move to around 68kWh. That would deliver about 15 extra miles.

2. Toyota has kept about 8% of battery of battery when '0' range is indicated. No one really wants to run down to zero miles of range- so this part almost never gets used. This 'below zero' range is very much larger than other EVs- giving  around 30 miles of hidden range. So, if they reduce this reserve to around 2% (or less) like other EVs, this would add another 20 miles at least to the range.

So, from the above it is clear that Toyota COULD actually increase the practically useful range for drivers by 30-40 miles, but we have to wait until we see how far they are prepared to go given the generally conservative nature of the company.

 

[bZ4X]

11 hours ago, My1stEvBZ4x said:

I really don't think that software update could increase the range. It may show the battery percentage, or actual consumption to wheel or whatever they are saying about.. but at the end of the day range is range.. May be if they reduce the buffer after 0 km range, then it could add up 10-15 miles.. 

They can definitely do that. They already admit that after software update range and efficiency will be increased. 

[dab1054]

11 hours ago, egg said:

Yes, there are a few Tesla sites open to non Teslas already. Not tried one yet, almost tried the one at Banbury last year, but used the 16 stall Instavolt down the road instead 

I used the Tesla supercharger in Cardiff. My experience was not great to be honest. Firstly, the charging cables are too short and won't reach the bZ4X unless you move to the next bay - so you end up blocking two charge points. The Cardiff site was very busy and, as you can imagine, Tesla owners are not impressed by this arrangement.

Secondly, the rate I got was very low 28kW max when I was hoping for more like 150kW. This was in sub-zero temperatures though. Cost per kWh was 55p/kWh- cheaper than others. The app was very easy to set up and use.

[ernieb]

I’ve read elsewhere that Tesla owners are more than hacked off with other manufacturers cars bay blocking because of the car charger port locations being at odds with the Tesla design. If none Tesla manufacturers want to use the Tesla charging network they must surely try to emulate the Tesla charger port position?

[My1stEvBZ4x]

1 hour ago, dab1054 said:

Toyota certainly have the potential to release more available miles of range with a software upgrade. They have been very careful with battery management- I guess they want to be able to honour the 10-year warranty. If the ml/kWh efficiency of the bZ4X (as opposed to range) is in line with other similar sized EVs (which it seems to be, but probably need to go through the warmer weather to establish this), then the range can be improved just by making more of the battery capacity available.

Here are a couple of ways they could improve 'accessible' range - the real range that people would experience on a day-to-day basis.

1. Toyota could open up some extra usable battery capacity. bZ4X has 71.4kWh nominal and 64 kWh usable battery capacity. This leaves 7.4kWh 'reserve'. Compare this with other EVs accepted to have good range: Niro EV 68/64.8; Soul 67.5/64; Kona 67.5/64; Ioniq 5 77.4/74; Tesla Y 60/57.5; Tesla Y LR 78/75. So, to be in line with other EVs bZ4X usable capacity could move to around 68kWh. That would deliver about 15 extra miles.

2. Toyota has kept about 8% of battery of battery when '0' range is indicated. No one really wants to run down to zero miles of range- so this part almost never gets used. This 'below zero' range is very much larger than other EVs- giving  around 30 miles of hidden range. So, if they reduce this reserve to around 2% (or less) like other EVs, this would add another 20 miles at least to the range.

So, from the above it is clear that Toyota COULD actually increase the practically useful range for drivers by 30-40 miles, but we have to wait until we see how far they are prepared to go given the generally conservative nature of the company.

 

Most of the tests including Norway test was driven till the Battery is completely empty. So my understanding is they used the reserve too.. 

[Cyker]

Just be careful what you wish for - The Battery fires in the Chevy Bolt were partly due to them having such a low buffer, which was why they had so much more range than other cars with similar sized packs.

Low buffer will also shorten the life of the pack if used regularly - The reason the Toyota hybrids have defied expectation with Battery life is they use so little of the pack's capacity under normal use.

[dab1054]

2 hours ago, My1stEvBZ4x said:

Most of the tests including Norway test was driven till the battery is completely empty. So my understanding is they used the reserve too.. 

They used the 64 kWh of available Battery capacity but total capacity is 71.4kWh so 7.4 kWh remains, some of which could be used for extra range.

[bZ4X]

31 minutes ago, dab1054 said:

They used the 64 kWh of available battery capacity but total capacity is 71.4kWh so 7.4 kWh remains, some of which could be used for extra range.

Actually, they used all capacity, including buffer, until car stoped. If I am not mistaken car went 30 miles extra after showed "0" range. 

[cavities]

4 hours ago, bZ4X said:

Actually, they used all capacity, including buffer, until car stoped. If I am not mistaken car went 30 miles extra after showed "0" range. 

That is not how it works. Even when the car no longer move, there is that few kwh remaining. With Toyota, they set more buffer than most. They only depleted the usable 64kwh portion of the battery  and the entire 71.4kwh is never depleted. 

[My1stEvBZ4x]

3 hours ago, cavities said:

That is not how it works. Even when the car no longer move, there is that few kwh remaining. With Toyota, they set more buffer than most. They only depleted the usable 64kwh portion of the battery  and the entire 71.4kwh is never depleted. 

Okay.. Lets assume that they will add another 4 KW to the net capacity which is very unlikely. Current range 323/64 is 5 Km per Kwh. So it adds to 343 KM. which is still whooping 32% of difference. 

It looks like they are planning to add more Battery for the Australian version of bZ4x which is planned to be released in 2024. 

I trusted Toyota and preorder the car with 2022 model on May2022. With in a month they changed the AC onboard charging from 6.6 to 11 KWh. Now Australian version with more changes. Bz4X itself is a pretty outdated(with respect to charging speed, V2L, etc) car compared to some manufactures. I haven't even received my car yet and now it looks outdated already against 2023 and Australian bZ4X model!! 

[cavities]

Heres an entire post from another bz4x group regarding the latest test done in Norway.

What do you think?

--

Kirill Ka******

--

If you feel bad about the results of the recent EV test in Norway, don't be.

When I saw the results of that test, I thought that they are a bit limiting and don't tell us the whole story.

The entire message seems to be around Actual mileage vs Claimed. But that doesn't tell us how the cars in the test performed with what they have been given by design (e.g. the battery)

So I took the same table and added a few columns. I wanted to see how efficient the cars were on the test, so here are the results of the same test but this time, we can look at the usable Battery capacity vs actual mileage to see the efficiency.

Toyota doesn't seem to be doing that bad also not being the lightest car in the pack.

[dab1054]

7 hours ago, cavities said:

Heres an entire post from another bz4x group regarding the latest test done in Norway.

What do you think?

--

Kirill Ka******

--

If you feel bad about the results of the recent EV test in Norway, don't be.

When I saw the results of that test, I thought that they are a bit limiting and don't tell us the whole story.

The entire message seems to be around Actual mileage vs Claimed. But that doesn't tell us how the cars in the test performed with what they have been given by design (e.g. the battery)

So I took the same table and added a few columns. I wanted to see how efficient the cars were on the test, so here are the results of the same test but this time, we can look at the usable battery capacity vs actual mileage to see the efficiency.

Toyota doesn't seem to be doing that bad also not being the lightest car in the pack.

Thanks for reporting this and well done to Kirill Ka..... This is the sort of efficiency analysis that the Norway group should have done instead of being obsessed by the WLTP vs winter range. From my own bZ4X I see ml/kWh efficiencies pretty much comparable to other similar-sized EVs. The analysis above puts the bZ4X efficiency a bit higher than the average. Once all this pfaff about range dies down I hope we can all settle down and enjoy our bZ4Xs. Almost certainly we will find that its range and efficiency are about average which is probably what Toyota were aiming at.

[bZ4X]

On 2/16/2023 at 7:17 PM, cavities said:

That is not how it works. Even when the car no longer move, there is that few kwh remaining. With Toyota, they set more buffer than most. They only depleted the usable 64kwh portion of the battery  and the entire 71.4kwh is never depleted. 

Thanks. What I found, 

 

Can anyone explain please if whatever miles are left after hitting 0 come from the usable battery capacity or from the buffer?

Its a bit vague. the only confirmed value in interviews is "minimum of 8% SOC, but can be more. So at min 5.72 KW are reserved. And that is on top of a the buffer that manufacturers put to cover Battery degradation. This is a Toyota specific buffer to "give the customer piece of mind" they can still find a charger even then driving to zero SOC. Which may be ok for petrol cars, but is an absolute no go for EVs. No one will drive their car down to zero and then be like ok i got 10-20 miles for find a charger. Its a completely wasted buffer.

But they also confirmed they will "release" this buffer for use in an upcoming SW update (summer time) a few more QOL changes coming in the same update

[lightboxcar]

On 2/2/2023 at 9:26 PM, Cyker said:

Be interested to see your results

Well we gave in and used the heating, the heated seats are just too good not to use !  This is despite purchasing gloves with Battery powered heaters !!  So we have yet to complete a full "brim to empty" test with zero use of AC/heating.   Will try again this next week, starting tomorrow.

Nevertheless, as the weather has been gradually warming up, use of the heating has got less and less, and range has improved accordingly.

First two weeks of Janaury, we were getting a estimated total range of around 150 miles.  By early Feb that increased to about 177 miles.  Latest figures for the last week indicate a estimated total range of approx. 208 miles.

The major factor is the heater for sure.  So this brings up the question of summer high temperatures when air conditioning will be needed to cool the car interior.  Will this have a similar major impact on range ?  Or will the Battery be much more efficient in high ambient temperatues and so compnesate for using AC ?

Other observations include for example, watching the range on the dashboard literally plumet when going uphill on motorways at 60 to 70mph, the range takes a masive hit.  On the the other hand going downhills on motorways at the same speeds , the range stays the same and sometimes even goes up a mile or two.

We stopped using the air circulator button.  As pointed out earlier by another member, this did indeed cause excess windows misting, even when using two huge silca gel bags on the dashboard.

So the only "extra" button we try and always use is (what we have now learned from the manual ) called the Regen Boost button.  Not completely convinced this makes a big difference, so after the next "brim to empty" test, we may test the next cycle not using the regen boost at all, and compare ther results.

Chatted to a Tesla owner last week (Model 3 long range ), he said they get 200 miles range this winter, but " we drive it like an ordinary car, and as fast as we like, don't do anything at all to conserve Battery power...."

Having now spent months and months reading all the useful contrubutions by other members, and other info about EV's generally, it is perfectly clear that Cyker ( post above ) has consitently called out EV's for where they really are today, irrespective of brand or model.   It really is a use case situation.  EV's right now simply cannot get anywhere near the range and conveneince of refueling that ICE can.  In winter this is particularly so.

But as the aforementioned Tesla owner asked "how often to you do more than 200 miles ? "  For us it's rare, other it may be every week or even more.

There is one other potentially very important question for all bZ4X owners, and for that matter all curent EV owners.  Will your vehicle be made obselete as soon as year 2026 ?   The current goldrush race for new battery technology is getting billions of dollars thrown at it.  It is possible that for examaple a new battery will come to market with a 600 plus mile range, half the weight or less of current EV batteries, and can be charged in half the time or less.   What would be the resale value of todays's bZ4X be then ?

 

 

Edited February 19, 2023 by lightboxcar
correction

[YarisHybrid2016]

On a technical level, the energy density of current batteries is only 4% of hydrocarbons. They have got a VERY long way to go to catch up.

I was tempted to get an EV back in 2015, but prices to buy and recharge were much lower than they are today. At current prices to buy any EV worth talking about, combined with the now rip-off prices for recharging away from a private dwelling, and they're currently not worth the price of admission.

The idea is good, but too much is currently wrong to make them usable.

1) We need more nuclear power and overall increase in power generation capacity (stop closing perfectly good coal/gas stations!)

2) The cost per kWh to recharge away from home needs to go back to sane levels

3) EVs need to be far cheaper to buy.

[ernieb]

@lightboxcar, I think the A/C is much more efficient than the heat pump so summer performance should be better. The heat pump starts to work well around the +5oC and above so as the days get warmer you should see a progressive improvement in range.

In my PHEV preconditioning via the charging cable is obviously the best option then the car is only maintaining the heating/cooling especially true in short trips.

[dab1054]

 

Thanks lightboxcar for interesting post. Battery technology will certainly improve over time but it's going to be small steps- think how long it took to perfect ICE technology. Getting the range up to 200-300 miles was an important step and probably that's where the more cost effective cars will sit for quite a few years. Of course you can have an EV with huge Battery which will increase range but at an eye-wateringly large price. However, I reckon in 10 years time the bZ4X will probably still be absolutely fine, a bit like a 10 year old Toyota hybrid is now- slightly dated but still an excellent performer!

[bZ4X]

16 minutes ago, dab1054 said:

 

Thanks lightboxcar for interesting post. Battery technology will certainly improve over time but it's going to be small steps- think how long it took to perfect ICE technology. Getting the range up to 200-300 miles was an important step and probably that's where the more cost effective cars will sit for quite a few years. Of course you can have an EV with huge battery which will increase range but at an eye-wateringly large price. However, I reckon in 10 years time the bZ4X will probably still be absolutely fine, a bit like a 10 year old Toyota hybrid is now- slightly dated but still an excellent performer!

That put me at ease at the bZ4X. I know that my Toyota will be like the first day after 7-8 years. Therefore, the second hand price should be relatively better than other competitors.

[Beyondzerocustomerservice]

Interesting letter in Which? Magazine this month.

author has a BMW x drive 40, price starting at £ 69,905.

71.7 KWh Battery

WLTP 262 miles

real life, 200 miles summer, 150 miles winter.

Claimed consumption 3.1 miles/ kwh

reality 2.0 to 2.3

Charging speeds - car rated at 150 kw/h

most ever seen 70 kw/ h at a 350kw/h charger

usually 40 kw/h

Some similarities?

[Graham100]

Sadly, WLTP and real life a very different, at least for BMW and Toyota.

I still don't understand why my Kia E Niro albeit an 2WD but with a smaller Battery, winter and summer always achieved around 250mph.

I have re-read the Toyota press release still on their website announcing and bragging that the Bz4X AWD had achieved a WLTP of "up to 285 miles".

Nowhere was there a warning that real life would be much worse!

 

Toyota bZ4X SUV - Media.Toyota.co.uk.pdf

[Cyker]

The Kia e-Niro and Hyundai Kona Electric are not representative of the average EV - They are, to my knowledge, still the most efficient non-Tesla EVs by a country mile, and the only ones I know of that it's even possible to hit 5 miles/kWh, where everyone else is lucky to get 3 and more usually are in the 2's!

I can't think of any other EV apart from maybe the more efficient Teslas that can squeeze as much range out of the Battery as they can.

It's one of the more annoying aspects of EV progression, as when they came out, I was quite hopeful I'd see my 300+ mile EV Yaris within a few years, but instead of continuing that upward trend, they have remained the peak, which sucks.

Even the newer cars like the Ioniq 5 and ID3 can't touch the Kona and e-Niro for range per kWh in the real world. If anything they're going backwards! We really need a Battery tech breakthrough - If they can just double the energy capacity, even with the near-2 orders of magnitude energy density deficit to chemical fuels, the high efficiency of electric motors will get them to comparable ranges to ICE cars, but the improvements have been slow and mostly in single-digit percents when you strip away the BS. Lots of promises, but not much real progress...

 

I do feel a bit sorry for the people that created the WLTP, although it's their own short-sightedness that caused it. The main point of the WLTP was to address the ridiculous gap between NEDC-rated MPG and real world MPG, and it does that fairly well for ICE vehicles and even hybrids (Not cheating PHEV's or EV's though  ) - Modern WLTP ratings are much more achievable, and even exceedable, in real world driving (Case in point: The Mk3 Yaris had an NEDC MPG of 80-something MPG, which was virtually impossible under normal driving conditions; The Mk4 is 'only' rated at 68-ish MPG under the WLTP, but it's very possible to get over 70 and even 80!)

Unfortunately they seem to have been blindsided by EVs, so the range ratings are about as accurate as the old NEDC mpg rating  

 

[philip42h]

7 hours ago, Graham100 said:

I have re-read the Toyota press release still on their website announcing and bragging that the Bz4X AWD had achieved a WLTP of "up to 285 miles".

Nowhere was there a warning that real life would be much worse!

The Toyota website includes the 'disclaimer':

Quote

Figures are provided for comparability purposes; only compare fuel consumption and CO2 figures with other cars tested to the same technical procedures. These figures may not reflect real life driving results. All vehicles are certified according to the World Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP). Please visit the Vehicle Certification Agency website for the latest information. Choice of options and accessories fitted (pre-registration) may affect the official CO2 figures, car tax and 'on the road' price. Find out more about WLTP or contact your local Toyota Centre

All EV manufacturers include similar disclaimers ...

OK, it is worse than that ... the WLTP figure gives a result for a test conducted in a lab at 23 degrees C so is nowhere near representative of real world conditions. And, unfortunately, the onus is currently on potential EV buyers to educate themselves sufficiently to be alert to that fact.

And, yes, the WLTP needs updating to better reflect real world performance ... but this is where we are today.