2 ms·
This article is odd. It dismisses up to 30% range loss (250mi to 150mi) by hand-wavingly saying "well, ICEs run less efficiently" (which for modern vehicles mea
by FireBeyond 3y ago
This article is odd. It dismisses up to 30% range loss (250mi to 150mi) by hand-wavingly saying "well, ICEs run less efficiently" (which for modern vehicles means a drop of about 3mpg, so somewhere in the order of 10%).
And then comments that pre-warming requires the engine to idle (on my large SUV that means 0.3g/h, according to the computer) to get the cabin warm, ignoring that in the process of doing so, it warms the engine, thus negating a lot of the efficiency impact of the cold start.
One thing I like about my Audi in winter, if I'm going somewhere briefly? "Residual heat". Tap a button on the climate console, and it uses residual engine/coolant heat and a fan to keep warming the cabin for about 15 minutes with everything turned off, just a fan running (perhaps a small pump?).
- timbit42 3y ago"up to 30%" But it can be as low at 16%, for example the Audi e-tron. Also, battery tech is improving many times faster than gasoline tech so EVs will likely have less range loss in winter than ICEVs within 10 years.
- stanski 3y agoMany things will happen within 10 years. I think the article refers to current times.
- snapplebobapple 3y agoYes, and thats when i will consider buying them. I am hoping we jave a much cheaper, possibly sodium, chemistry by then that is less toxic to the environment to dispose of as well. I will be running the power to charge them this uear when i replace my busted garage though, because there is nowhere near enough capacity for the whole neighboirhood to have fast charging and thats the actual bottleneck to easy adoption.