4 ms·

> BYD needs literally 5x the electricity of the Volvo(50kWh Vs 10kWh) for the same range Which "same range"? Did you just calculate electric efficiency using t

> BYD needs literally 5x the electricity of the Volvo(50kWh Vs 10kWh) for the same range Which "same range"? Did you just calculate electric efficiency using the total range including gasoline? In that case your PHEV needs an infinite times the electricity of a car driving on gasoline alone. If anything on paper the U8 is 10% more efficient (Volvo says 50km from the 15kWh battery, not 10kWh). With gasoline factored in you have two vehicles with equal 1000km range despite the U8 being significantly heavier. You can argue that the CLTC isn't nearly as accurate as the WLTP and you'd be right but you still need to check your math and/or logic above.

gambiting 3y ago
>>Which "same range"? Volvo can do 1000km using 75 litres of petrol + 10kWh of electricity(and it is 10kWh in my model, 15kWh is a newer one). BYD can do 1000km using 75 litres of petrol + 50kWh of electricity. The math on this is very simple, no?
- abenga 3y ago
  Sounds like they have the same range. Different power efficiency, for sure, but they do have the same range fully fueled and charged.
  - gambiting 3y ago
    .....which is exactly what I said. I complained about BYD's efficiency not range.
- oefrha 3y ago
  Using current U.S. numbers [1][2]: average electricity price is $0.162/kWh, might be cheaper off peak or with solar roof; average gas price is $3.083/gal ($0.815/L) for regular, and $3.885/gal ($1.026/L) for premium which is recommended for your Volvo. So, with regular gas: 75L + 50kWh: 75 * 0.815 + 50 * 0.162 = 69.225 75L + 10kWh: 75 * 0.815 + 10 * 0.162 = 63.525 A difference of 10.3%. With premium gas: 75L + 50kWh: 75 * 1.026 + 50 * 0.162 = 85.050 75L + 10kWh: 75 * 1.026 + 10 * 0.162 = 78.570 A difference of 8.2%. You failed to mention it's the gas part that's frigging expensive. [1] https://www.energybot.com/electricity-rates/ https://www.energybot.com/electricity-rates/ [2] https://gasprices.aaa.com/ https://gasprices.aaa.com/
  - gambiting 3y ago
    I'm not in the US. In Europe my Volvo doesn't require premium 98 octane , regular 95 is fine. I appreciate the calculation but I don't know why you're trying so hard to escape the fact that the BYD needs 40kWh more(!!!!!) to travel the same distance(combined with 75 litres of petrol) - it's not hard to see that(as I said 70 comments ago) the BYD is a heavier and less efficient car. There isn't much to argue with here(or at least I wouldn't think so?).
    - oefrha 3y ago
      Pretty sure your comment trying to paint or at least hint at the BYD being 5x inefficient is the strange one, when it's actually ~1.1x. Which would be really low down on the list of things to consider when purchasing a $150k SUV. If I were in the market for one, I would go for the option that gives me 180km electric range rather than a puny 50km so that all the day to day short range driving is comfortably covered, even if it's only 90% efficient. In addition, if we compare only the first 180km, your Volvo (using regular gas) comes out at 75 * 0.815 / (1000 - 50) * (180 - 50) + 10 * 0.162 = 9.98 which is actually more expensive. Edit: All the precise calculations are in fact quite pointless. > so the owner is definitely going to notice it on their energy bill. Highly doubt owners of $150k SUVs are sensitive to ~$600 more over 100k kilometers.
    - buran77 3y ago
      Your logic is still... lacking. I don't say it lightly but it might be the worst case of obtuseness I've seen in many years of HN. You mix and match units when calculating a ratio of efficiency and it gets you meaningless conclusions. By your "logic" a Tesla M3, a leader in electric efficiency, is the worst of the bunch. It needs ~100kWh of electricity to drive the same 1000km distance. And ICE cars can do that trip with 0 electricity, many even with less fuel so they must be the best? It makes no sense other than for you to feel good about your car. But your car needs 10-11kWh to drive ideally a pathetic 30km (!) and 75l of fuel for the other 970km. Other ICE cars, or non-PHEV XC60 (the diesel) need no electricity and 50-60l of fuel for the same distance. And they're much cheaper to buy. So why did you pay anywhere between 15k-45k EUR more to have a "compliance car" hybrid that doesn't even float (/s) when this means you're just getting "less efficient"? Unless you bought the bragging rights, and now you're here to defend them. The goal of any electrified car is to drive as much as possible on electric power alone without the need to run the engine. Not only because ideally some owners can make their own electricity but also for comfort and emissions.

gambiting 3y ago

>>Which "same range"? Volvo can do 1000km using 75 litres of petrol + 10kWh of electricity(and it is 10kWh in my model, 15kWh is a newer one). BYD can do 1000km using 75 litres of petrol + 50kWh of electricity. The math on this is very simple, no?

abenga 3y ago
Sounds like they have the same range. Different power efficiency, for sure, but they do have the same range fully fueled and charged.
- gambiting 3y ago
  .....which is exactly what I said. I complained about BYD's efficiency not range.
oefrha 3y ago
Using current U.S. numbers [1][2]: average electricity price is $0.162/kWh, might be cheaper off peak or with solar roof; average gas price is $3.083/gal ($0.815/L) for regular, and $3.885/gal ($1.026/L) for premium which is recommended for your Volvo. So, with regular gas: 75L + 50kWh: 75 * 0.815 + 50 * 0.162 = 69.225 75L + 10kWh: 75 * 0.815 + 10 * 0.162 = 63.525 A difference of 10.3%. With premium gas: 75L + 50kWh: 75 * 1.026 + 50 * 0.162 = 85.050 75L + 10kWh: 75 * 1.026 + 10 * 0.162 = 78.570 A difference of 8.2%. You failed to mention it's the gas part that's frigging expensive. [1] https://www.energybot.com/electricity-rates/ https://www.energybot.com/electricity-rates/ [2] https://gasprices.aaa.com/ https://gasprices.aaa.com/
- gambiting 3y ago
  I'm not in the US. In Europe my Volvo doesn't require premium 98 octane , regular 95 is fine. I appreciate the calculation but I don't know why you're trying so hard to escape the fact that the BYD needs 40kWh more(!!!!!) to travel the same distance(combined with 75 litres of petrol) - it's not hard to see that(as I said 70 comments ago) the BYD is a heavier and less efficient car. There isn't much to argue with here(or at least I wouldn't think so?).
  - oefrha 3y ago
    Pretty sure your comment trying to paint or at least hint at the BYD being 5x inefficient is the strange one, when it's actually ~1.1x. Which would be really low down on the list of things to consider when purchasing a $150k SUV. If I were in the market for one, I would go for the option that gives me 180km electric range rather than a puny 50km so that all the day to day short range driving is comfortably covered, even if it's only 90% efficient. In addition, if we compare only the first 180km, your Volvo (using regular gas) comes out at 75 * 0.815 / (1000 - 50) * (180 - 50) + 10 * 0.162 = 9.98 which is actually more expensive. Edit: All the precise calculations are in fact quite pointless. > so the owner is definitely going to notice it on their energy bill. Highly doubt owners of $150k SUVs are sensitive to ~$600 more over 100k kilometers.
  - buran77 3y ago
    Your logic is still... lacking. I don't say it lightly but it might be the worst case of obtuseness I've seen in many years of HN. You mix and match units when calculating a ratio of efficiency and it gets you meaningless conclusions. By your "logic" a Tesla M3, a leader in electric efficiency, is the worst of the bunch. It needs ~100kWh of electricity to drive the same 1000km distance. And ICE cars can do that trip with 0 electricity, many even with less fuel so they must be the best? It makes no sense other than for you to feel good about your car. But your car needs 10-11kWh to drive ideally a pathetic 30km (!) and 75l of fuel for the other 970km. Other ICE cars, or non-PHEV XC60 (the diesel) need no electricity and 50-60l of fuel for the same distance. And they're much cheaper to buy. So why did you pay anywhere between 15k-45k EUR more to have a "compliance car" hybrid that doesn't even float (/s) when this means you're just getting "less efficient"? Unless you bought the bragging rights, and now you're here to defend them. The goal of any electrified car is to drive as much as possible on electric power alone without the need to run the engine. Not only because ideally some owners can make their own electricity but also for comfort and emissions.