Polestar Sets Production Car Record For Longest Drive On a Single Charge (arstechnica.com) 105
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: [O]ver in the UK, a single-motor version of the Polestar 3 just set a world record for the farthest drive in an electric car on a single charge. Three "professional efficiency drivers," Sam Clarke, Kevin Booker, and Richard Parker, drove 581.3 miles (935.4 km), taking 22 hours and 57 minutes to complete the task. That's an efficiency of 5.1 miles/kWh (12.1 kWh/100 km) -- more than 40 percent better than I saw in day-to-day driving in the twin-motor version.
"We are very proud to say we have a world record holder in the Polestar family! This official Guinness World Record for range is another proof point that Polestar 3 is setting new standards. We will continue to push the boundaries of technology and electric performance," said Michael Lohscheller, Polestar CEO. The report notes that the Polestar 3 was "entirely standard, on stock tires," and averaged a speed of less than 25 mph (40 km/h).
"We are very proud to say we have a world record holder in the Polestar family! This official Guinness World Record for range is another proof point that Polestar 3 is setting new standards. We will continue to push the boundaries of technology and electric performance," said Michael Lohscheller, Polestar CEO. The report notes that the Polestar 3 was "entirely standard, on stock tires," and averaged a speed of less than 25 mph (40 km/h).
"Professional Efficiency Driver" (Score:2)
Sounds like one of those made-up job titles you see in those "what do you think" bits on theonion.com .
Re:"Professional Efficiency Driver" (Score:4, Informative)
Most people realize DOGE's claims have never had much relationship to actual reality. At this point, we've all seen many reports over the past several months where DOGE's fantasy math repeatedly gets thoroughly dismantled.
Most recently: as of August 12, DOGE's actual savings appeared to be just 5% of what they claimed -
https://www.politico.com/news/... [politico.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Most people realize DOGE's claims have never had much relationship to actual reality.
Most is a generous term to describe just over half the population. That's a lot of people who are still clueless as to the damage they cause. Unfortunately you using the word "most" is a damning report on the populace. If the phrase didn't start with "Nearly all" then we have a long way to go to address ignorance.
The failures of DOGE have not been publicised enough, and there's still plenty of team red who thinks they did a great job.
Re: (Score:2)
Or it could be like the Department of Government Efficiency which has saved the United States $202 billion thus far. https://doge.gov/savings [doge.gov]
Citing DOGE's own statistics will be like citing Trump's partisan BLS statistics, or believing Trump about his grades at Wharton, which he won't release and has threatened to sue Wharton if they're leaked -- 'cause if they were good, they'd be plastered everywhere... In any case, given their track record with accuracy and honesty, I'm dubious that DOGE numbers are correct, complete or encompass everything they should to be a meaningful measure of anything actual.
Re: (Score:2)
citing Trump's partisan BLS statistics
As if statistics out of the government were never partisan.
Re: "Professional Efficiency Driver" (Score:3)
When margins of error on jobs reports are plus-or-minus 500k, if statisticians were honest, why wouldn't they say public policy should not rely on the point estimates?
Re: (Score:2)
When margins of error on jobs reports are plus-or-minus 500k, if statisticians were honest, why wouldn't they say public policy should not rely on the point estimates?
You realize that monthly BLS reports are regularly revised, mainly because companies don't always submit their data/reports in time. Recently, that's apparently due to instability and confusion created by Trump's tariffs.
Re: "Professional Efficiency Driver" (Score:2)
So why make decisions on potentially wildly off data? Is it just a social game, where if everyone believes in the numbers, you can pretend they're reality, when in reality you don't know what jobs are doing, but if you collectively hallucinate, it somehow feels "scientific"?
Re: "Professional Efficiency Driver" (Score:2)
When we were in kindergarten, we talked this way.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the Prius hypermiler thing again.
Ummm, the Chevy Silverado EV... (Score:2, Informative)
...would like to have a talk with you about its recent 1059 mile jaunt.
Re:Ummm, the Chevy Silverado EV... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, at this point this is all just marketing schlock, but i guess they had the Guiness Book of World Records involved.
the 2nd half of TFA kinda calls it out, in fact:
Wait, are you sure that’s a record?
Booker, Clarke, and Parker drove an impressive distance on a single charge, but "longest EV drive on a single charge" is a slightly more nebulous thing. In this case, the Polestar 3 was entirely standard, on stock tires. But if you're prepared to start tweaking stuff around, longer drives are possible.
Last week, Chevrolet revealed that it took one of its Silverado WT trucks—with a gargantuan 205 kWh battery—and then fitted it with worn-down, massively over-inflated tires and drove it around the Detroit area for 1,059 miles (1,704 km). That required a team of 40 drivers, and like the Polestar 3, the average speed was below 25 mph (40 km/h).
Squeezing 4.9 miles/kWh (12.7 kWh/100 km) out of something the size and shape of a full-size pickup is probably more impressive than getting slightly more out of an SUV, but we should note that the Silverado drivers kept the air conditioning turned off until the final 59 miles.
And in July, Lucid announced that it, too, had set a new world record for the longest drive on a single charge. In its case, it took a Lucid Air Grand Touring from St. Moritz in Switzerland to Munich in Germany, covering 749 miles (1,205 km) on a single charge. That's significantly farther than the Polestar, and the Lucid drivers achieved more than 6 miles/kWh (10.4 kWh/100 km), but the route also involved going mostly downhill.
Re:Ummm, the Chevy Silverado EV... (Score:4, Insightful)
Chevy didn't do it on a stock production car. You can't replicate that by getting it out of the showroom, and you can't replicate it safely full stop.
Lucid picked the start of a tall mountain and dove on a steady decline for most of the path giving them a massive elevation change to help them. Yes the decline was low in terms of percentage, but every bit matter here so you can't replicate that going the other way.
Polestar's attempt was flat using a production car. In fact given its WLTP figures and those of Lucid and Chevy it's likely they could beat both if they put those conditions on their attempt, and that despite the Lucid having a larger battery and larger WLTP range.
Re: (Score:3)
I think Lucid’s achievement is clearly more impressive than this. The article’s claim that Lucid had a route that “involved going mostly downhill” is cretinous — it was something like a 0.6% grade, as I recall. There was an article about it on here a while back, and I did a first approximation of the benefit of the “downhill” grade, and it was worth about 40 of the 749 miles driven, ie irrelevant.
Re: Ummm, the Chevy Silverado EV... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
The Chevy was all stock powertrain and software. The tuning was minimal just tweaking the wheel alignment (i'm guessing setting it to zero toe whereas maybe by default it's slightly toe in )
and pumping up the tires to max.
given they made 1059 ... they prob still would've hit 1000 even w/o the wheel alignment.
The team drove a production Silverado EV Max Range WT on public roads near GM’s Milford Proving Ground in southeastern Michigan, wrapping up the final stretch on Detroit’s Belle Isle. To fit this endeavor into their regular work schedules, engineers drove in one-hour shifts, bringing their day job knowledge into a challenge they were all personally invested in.
The truck’s hardware and software were untouched, and the only adjustments included the following driver habits and small setting adjustments, all within the acceptable limits established in the truck’s owner’s manual.
When it was safe to do so, drivers were advised to maintain an average speed of 20-25 mph and to minimize any hard braking or quick accelerating.
For the majority of the test, there were no passengers in the truck.
The windshield wiper arms were set to the lowest acceptable position to reduce drag.
Tires were inflated to their highest acceptable pressure for lower rolling resistance.
The spare tire was removed to lighten the vehicle.
The wheel alignment was optimized.
An accessory tonneau cover was added for smooth airflow.
Climate control was turned off for the duration of the test.
And finally, the test was performed in summer for optimum ambient temperature for battery efficiency.
https://news.gm.com/home.detai... [gm.com]
i think the reason people think the thing was optimized is because of where they put the quote from some VP where he's talking about how everyone had to work together
25MPH (Score:4, Insightful)
It's easy to get great efficiency when you're traveling at 25MPH, where drag is a minimal contributor. Most modern EVs can manage close to 5 mi/kWh at those speeds. Range is then just a question of battery capacity, so is the improvement in energy density, or just packing more batteries into the vehicle?
Re:25MPH (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a fundamental problem of EV vs ICE. ICE engine power band is very narrow in relation to engine RPM, i.e. you only get the power out at very narrow range of RPM, and operating outside of it is very inefficient. This leads to ICEs needing to operate on gearboxes that reduce engine RPM to wheel RPM quite a bit, and that shift the engine to wheel ratio to stay in the power band as long as possible. This results for most ICEs having in optimal engine to wheel RPM (where engine is operating in the most efficient manner) being achieved around 80-100 mm/h for passenger gasoline cars (tends to be a bit lower for diesels). Going below or above that will increase fuel consumption either due to inefficient gearing ratio at lower speeds or too much drag at higher speeds.
EVs are not like that, as they don't have the "optimal engine RPM" as a meaningful metric. Their power curve is almost flat. So for them, it's all about the friction. Air friction, rolling friction, etc. The faster you go, the less efficient you get as friction increases. This is why optimal speed for EV efficiency is so much lower than ICEs.
So if you did a same thing with a typical ICE sedan (i.e. something like a Corolla back when it was pure ICE rather than a hybrid that it is today), your optimal speed for fuel efficiency would probably be between 80 and 100km/h. Funnily enough it's gone down now that they're hybrids, because what Toyota calls "e-CVT" (planetary differential functioning as a pseudo-constantly variable transmission) allows ICE to operate in the most efficient part of its power curve with close to optimal gearing ratio to wheels even at low speeds. It's why those new corollas can be driven between 60-100km/h and retain really good fuel efficiency. Before driving at city speeds (even without accelerating and braking) let to lower fuel efficiency. And it's why Toyota can get away with Atkinson cycle ICEs in those hybrids, in spite of their much worse performance when it comes to changing RPM, squeezing even more fuel savings at same power output.
Re: 25MPH (Score:4, Informative)
I mostly agree but for ICE the most efficient speed is nearly *always* the lowest speed you can select the top-most gear.
My modded tdi with a shorter 5th idles in top gear at 900rpm/25mph. If I idle down 10 miles of country dirt road with a 25mph speed limit I can break 90mpg but anything normal is only in the 50mpg range.
Same for my gasser 2000 Insight which can best the tdi but its so much more wickedly optimized down to an Aluminum Monocoque and electric power steering and no alternator and an engine half the size. I can easily drive normal speeds and get 70-80mpg but if I am willing to idle the lowest speed in 5th with hazard lights on the car immediately is north of 115mpg.
Who the hell would drive like that?
Re: (Score:2)
The top-most gear in a modern car locks the torque converter so you get the same efficiency as a manual transmission in the same gear.
Re: (Score:2)
EVs may benefit from a transmission that can change drive ratios. Case in point: Porsche Taycan has a two-speed transmission. The benefit is probably quite small, otherwise other EVs would have a similar setup. It may also be that the benefit is primarily in performance rather than efficiency.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
EVs may benefit from a transmission that can change drive ratios. Case in point: Porsche Taycan has a two-speed transmission. The benefit is probably quite small, otherwise other EVs would have a similar setup. It may also be that the benefit is primarily in performance rather than efficiency.
What I'm seeing a a means to produce high performance EVs is using two motors, one optimized for acceleration, the other optimized for speed. That is likely to win out over a single motor with a two speed transmission.
I did some work on a solar car while at university and there were varied means tried to get a single motor to work well in both efficiency on the flat and still be powerful enough to get the car up a steep hill. We were dealing with very limited power, something like two horsepower, so optim
Re:25MPH (Score:4, Informative)
The benefit for EV transmission ala Taycan is to increase the maximum top speed of the vehicle. Motors provide full torque at stall speed and linearly across its entire operating parameters, but the electronics driving motors may have difficulty controlling exact speeds across the entire range. This leads to a lot of situations where high powered EVs with loads of torque have relatively low top speeds. My own EV still presses you into the back of your seat right until it reaches its top speed, it literally torques into that top speed and overshoots it, unlike a traditional car where the top speed is determined by power output. Expanding that top speed gives up some control at low speeds. A transmission gets around that.
But critically that transmission has no practical purpose on a road car. Yeah if you take your Taycan around a track you may get good use of it, but with virtually all EVs having a top speed over just over 200km/h at least there's little reason to expand this further by adding a complex mechanical components.
Re: (Score:2)
That may be the most efficient ICE speed for how much torque is delivered to the wheels, however the speed at which it is most efficient when you take drag (air resistance in particular) into account is much lower.
Re: (Score:1)
Electric locomotives do not exist for the reason you imply they do. They are not an energy efficiency thing. Not even a little bit. If you didn't have other advancements in ICE tech, they'd be significantly less energy efficient than geared ones, as original ones all were.
They are there to solve a borderline unsolvable problem of keeping diesel in effective part of the power band in something as massive as a locomotive. Forces in those are so incredible, that transmissions become exceptionally unreliable. S
Re: (Score:2)
1. No. And you'll find that out once you dig into the history of diesel electric locomotives. Or talk to people who drove them and diesels. They have the most amazing stories.
2. You didn't read your own link. It's in full agreement with me.
3. You're still stuck on EREVs, selling them as hybrids. Which they technically are. Except that they form an utterly tiny portion of sold cars, because they're extremely inefficient.
Whereas pretty much all HEVs and PHEVs built on that same Toyota patent are a massive mar
Re: (Score:2)
Batteries have another fundamental flaw, they require materials that are difficult to mine
Which material, Lithium? It's not difficult to mine or refine. It is in fact the 31rd most abundant element on Earth.
Re: (Score:2)
FWIW, while, yes, a gas generator - electric motor drivetrain is more power efficient than virtually all gas-to-motion systems in most circumstances, the latency on a Diesel Electric engine is enormous, and their primary reason for using that drive train are the forces involved - direct transmissions start to fail regularly when your load is anything orders of magnitude larger than a city bus.
For that reason, for example, in the UK most DMUs until relatively recently (British Rail has had them in widespread
Re: (Score:2)
It's easy to get great efficiency when you're traveling at 25MPH
This is significant given the number of people who drive in the city / stuck in traffic on commutes. I regularly get longer range in my car than the official rating.
Re: (Score:2)
Drivetrain improvements to the motor and linkage help, and of course changes to the shape of the car to make it more aerodynamic. The car is a crossover shape, a slightly more compact SUV. It's interesting that manufacturers have managed to make that shape so efficient.
Re: (Score:2)
Nitpick incoming:
581.3 mi / 22.95 hr = 25.33 mph
935.4 km / 22.95 hr = 40.76 km/h
The average speed was a hair above 25 mph (40 km/h). What am I missing?
"Averaged a speed of less than 25 mph (40 km/h)." (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Still pretty fast compared with traffic in and around Seattle.
Re: fast compared with traffic in and around Seatt (Score:2)
Absolutely and sadly true.
But the fact of that and the actual dynamics of that traffic prove that their claimed efficiency metric ids bogus.
While the traffic through areas places like seattle might average around 25mph the reality is that it is also a constant acceleration/deceleration battery eating tango.
The Poledancer record is just a vanity award.
Re: introduces more regen (Score:2)
You're being funny, but is it intentional?
Do you also believe in perpetual motion machines?
Regen braking would require more than 100 percent recovery to be able to overcome losses due to heat/friction/conversion/etc losses to be a useful resource in slow stop/wait/go city traffic.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
people want long range for road trips
Yeah. Road range is a big problem in these parts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can confirm. Having recently been on a comparable bike ride, I ate a lot, but not 2 kilos of chocolate!
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it is far more useful than highway traffic. Most people spend their average time pretty close to this speed. Heck when I drive internationally and even peg my speed on the autobahn at 210km/h (speed limited for my car) I typically get home 3 hours later with well under 100km/h average speed. And when I don't drive internationally my speed is in fact closer to 40km/h despite my commute typically taking place mostly on a highway.
Impressive (Score:5, Interesting)
I expected to call this a stunt but the two things I suspected turned out to not be true:
1. Its not so hilariously slow that its pointless. 25 Mph is slow don't get me wrong, but its not "we're not really moving" slow. That's around the speed in many metro areas.
2. I also suspected that this might be some hilariously stripped down glorified golf cart, but no it appears to be a "real" car of normal size.
Increased range will be nice for adoption of EV's. I suspect charging speed is a bigger hurdle, but I'm sure they're working on that too.
Re: Impressive (Score:2)
In Wales, the speed limit was changed to 20mph for many roads (down from 30mph), so 25mph is indeed a useful value.
Note that Wales is in the UK, where this test was performed.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Its not so hilariously slow that its pointless. 25 Mph is slow don't get me wrong, but its not "we're not really moving" slow. That's around the speed in many metro areas.
It's also something any EV owner already knows. You'll get fantastic efficiency creeping along at a snail's pace. People have been hypermiling EVs since the Leaf.
The problem lies with long road trips over open stretches of road where the lack of traffic allows you to cruise at 70-80MPH. That's when you really start to burn through the kilowatt-hours.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. But this was a test in the UK. We have busy congested motorways, where the max speed is 70mph, and is frequently lower than that due to roadworks, accidents, congestion, etc. The longest motorway is the M6, and it’s only 232 miles! If you drove the longest continuous motorway route in the UK, from Dover to Glasgow, you’d still only be driving 450 miles.
Re: (Score:2)
That's around the speed in many metro areas.
More than that, it's around the average speed anyone is likely to make in a peak hour commute. I regularly find myself doing 30-50km/h on significant stretches of a highway while shouting Uah fuck my life, at myself wishing I could work from home that day.
Re: (Score:2)
The Polestar 3 hits 250kW up to about 20%, then slows to 150kW for most of the rest of the charge cycle. That's pretty decent, especially considering how far you have to travel before you need to do that.
BFD (Score:3)
Call me NOT impressed.
How far will it go driving at NORMAL speeds? Like 35/45/55/65 MPH? below 25 MPH is a JOKE!
NONE of these tests are real world tests for driving/distance.
Come back to me when you drive 500+ miles at those speeds.
More than traffic at rush hour in LA... (Score:2)
In LA at rush hour average speed is below 20mph
In may other metros it is probably the same...
Re: BFD (Score:2)
Exactly.
I want to be able to take myself on an all-day adventure where we drive 150 miles to a beauty spot, have good time, drive around exploring in the evening, and then we drive back home on a single charge, without wasting hours of the valuable time with my family at a charging spot.
Re: (Score:2)
I could do that today in my EV, which does not have an especially impressive range (an EQA, with a 330 mile range). Does this mean that when I parked at the beauty spot, I would not plug it in if there were a charger? No, it does not. And in the UK, there would be very likely to be a charger at the beauty spot.
I could only do this is in the summer, though. Winter range is more like 250 mph. So we’d need a stop on the way back if we couldn’t charge at the destination.
Re: BFD (Score:2)
The problem is that you can't just plug in your car and just leave it for the entire day. You've got to stay with the car. Imagine a trip to the Lakes district. You arrive and then go for an 8-hour hike. You can't just leave your car plugged in all day.
Re: (Score:2)
Course you can! It just depends on the type of charger. But a 7kW destination charger is designed for exactly this use case, and they’re pretty common.
Re: BFD (Score:2)
It's not a problem with the charger. It's the fact that you are hogging the charging port all day, preventing others from using it.
Re: (Score:2)
This is literally what a 7kW destination charger is there for. No one expects you to come off a 7kW charger after an hour or two, they expect it to be in use all day. Expectations are completely different from what they are with a rapid or even a fast charger. The most common scenario is a hotel car park, but there’s loads of these chargers everywhere, and everyone knows that when someone’s using it, they’ll be there for ages. It feels like this is you speaking from your imagination, not y
Re: BFD (Score:2)
There's also not going to be any chargers in most hile starting locations in places like Wales, Lakes or Peaks.
Re: (Score:2)
Not true at all. There’s hundreds all over the Lakes, for example, and more coming all the time. Name five hike starting points and I’ll tell you where there’s a nearby charger for each of them.
Re: BFD (Score:2)
Let's make it easy for you and give you the most common destinatios:
- Buttermere
- Honister Slate Mine / Honister Pass
- Pen-y-pass
- Edale
- Malham Circular
Name the nearest charging point that is at the start of the hike. Not kilometers away.
Also, enough charging points should be available so that I have a guaranteed charging point when I arrive.
Also, like I pointed out in the other response, the problem is that you can't just plug your car at a charging point and leave it there for 6-8 hours of hiking because
Re: (Score:2)
1. These are not the most common destinations, but they’re not *uncommon*, so OK. It ought to go without saying that there’s tons of chargers in Windermere and Grasmere etc, plus Keswick etc
2. Buttermere has chargers in Buttermere itself, at the Bridge Hotel.
3. There’s absolutely no need to have loads of chargers in the way you say, because even though the OP set arbitrary conditions for insisting on doing the charging only at the destination, the vast majority of other visitors will charg
Re: BFD (Score:2)
Rosthwaite for the Honister Pass... You're having a laugh. Tells me you've never been there and don't know what you're talking about. Most hiles there start at the slate mine which is several miles and hundreds (if not thousands) meters of elevation to get to that point alone.
I'd address your other points, too, but it seems you're just serving me with garbage and uninformative AI results without actual hiking experience in that area so I'd just be wasting my time. You'd never understand how silly your respo
Re: (Score:2)
“Several miles”. It’s two miles. And you talked about hiking in the area. Yes, most hikes start at the slate mines. But not all hikes start at the slate mines. And you could, you know, choose a fucking hike that doesn’t. A tiny concession to the fact of driving an EV. And given that you are literally there *to hike*, two miles of hiking can actually be part of the fucking hike. You’re being a dipshit about this. It’s also about 200 metres of elevation difference. If you c
Re: BFD (Score:2)
Mate, this is the last message I'm going to send in response to this thread and it is only to tell you that you're unrealistic and you clearly don't know much about hiking - how much difference 2.8 (yea, it's 2.8, not a small concession) miles and 260 elevation make when you have a full day out ahead of you. You start thr hike where you need to start the hike to complete a specific route, where your next Wainwrights are, not where a charger is. Many times this means on a side of the road or a small rural ca
Re: (Score:2)
I’m sure you’re terribly pro at this with your hiking boots and everything, but it remains the case that there is a hike that will take you from Rosthwaite through the Honister Pass. The hike from Rosthwaite to the Honister Pass *is an integral part of the hike*. Pretending that it’s a separate thing that you have to do in order to do the actual hike *is your delusion*.
It *also* remains the case that you asked for charger in Buttermere, Edale and Malham, and I provided details of chargers
Re: BFD (Score:2)
Wales introduced a *default 20mph* speed limit (not 25mph) on most residential roads in 2023 to boost safety & encourage walking/cycling.
So, perhaps it is more useful than you think.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How far will it go driving at NORMAL speeds? Like 35/45/55/65 MPH? below 25 MPH is a JOKE!
25MPH is the normal speed most people drive at. I commute across a highway and my average speed is about 30MPH. You are completely detached from the reality of driving.
Re: (Score:2)
Total attached to reality of driving, do it -all the time-.
Work commute in town to the highway is 35 MPH. Highway to work is 65 MPH, off highway onto streets to work are 35 MPH.
Hold on a minute... (Score:1)
How did Polecat come up with the longest drive at 581.3 miles when a Chevy Silverado EV traveled 1,059.2 miles without recharging its battery?
Right here on /. https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
https://www.theverge.com/news/... [theverge.com]
Did I miss something?
As for using imperial units - relax you overly sensitive clod... I'm just using the same units to make the comparison easier. I could have just as easily done it in furlongs, rods, or chains.
Re: (Score:2)
The Silverado was slightly modded, while this was a stock Polestar.
Neat I guess (Score:2, Insightful)
...but charging speed improvements would minimize the importance of this metric. I don't care if I can only go 200miles on a single charge if it takes less than 3-5 minutes to recharge it.
Re: (Score:2)
Best way to spec efficiency? (Score:3)
That's an efficiency of 5.1 miles/kWh (12.1 kWh/100 km)
This appears to be a repeat of the mess the metric system made of petrol consumption. The imperial mpg made sense in how it presents the data but for metric instead of going with km per liter they went with liters per 100km which annoyed me as I never drive 100km.
The figures here are history repeating. The imperial mile/kWh make sense if you are in the USA, but it is annoying to see kWh/100 km. I have seen Wh/km and that seemed reasonable and is what I use in my calculations.
Being a lead foot in a performance car I get thru about 200Wh/km. I hear people who care about such things use about 150Wh/km. By that metric Polestar used 121Wh/km. It will interesting to see the final figures for the Aptera.
For those in the USA it looks like you have a valid way to spec BEV efficiency but for the rest of the world is this not a chance to get rid of that stupid 100km part and just have km/kWh or Wh/km?
Re: (Score:2)
That's nothing to do with metric. It used to be km/litre there too. When people started to use litres/100km I can't say exactly. It's just one of those changes that's happened over the years. I personally still prefer the older km/litre myself.
Re: (Score:2)
With BEVs we have a chance to ditch the 100km part making one less scaling step when doing the mental maths on energy use. Since
Re: (Score:2)
but for metric
There is no universal measure for this, it has nothing to do with metric. Some cars give the range in L/100km, others in km/L.
All the figures make sense to everyone who has passed basic primary school math.
Being a lead foot in a performance car I get thru about 200Wh/km.
And there's no standard for units either. I get around 21kWh/100km (but I don't have the energy efficient model of my EV). But there's something significant about multiplying things by 100. The battery size is listed in kWh on the car spec sheet (that is universal across all models and regions), and peopl
Re: (Score:3)
The rationale for the change from km/kWh to kWH/100km was supposedly introduced to focus people’s attention on getting the number to be as low as possible (look how little electricity we needed in order to go 100 km). But the problem, at least to my mind, is that the numbers are just less intuitive. By and large, people associate bigger with *better*. And the changes from 3 to 4 to 5 to 6 mpkWh are easy to grasp — simple numbers that everyone can work with. Much harder to get one’s head r
Re: (Score:2)
I find it hilarious to see on American forums the same minds that think 5/16" is a good size for a drillbit and that there are 1760 yards in a mile suddenly are unable to divide numbers. No there's nothing more intuitive for bigger=better, any idiot who has played golf can understand that the opposite can be true and adjusts it contextually. All the numbers are easily converted, and it's trivial to get used to any number.
That's the absurdity about all of this. It takes literally seconds to understand, minut
Re: (Score:2)
I’m British and happily work in metric as well as imperial. The thing with numbers is, most people just aren’t very good with them. Your and my numeracy is way better than the average persons. People do indeed find division much harder than multiplication, and many find multiplication pretty hard. So yes, multiplying a kmpkwh figure by the kWh capacity of an EV is much easier for many people as a mental calculation than dividing a kwh per 100km figure by a car’s kWh capacity and then multi
Re: (Score:2)
Litres per hundred kilometres is easier to compare. a difference of 1l/100km is the same no matter what the values are, whether it's 20l/100km or 5l/100km. But a difference of 1mpg is much less at 40mpg than it is at 5mpg.
That's old f. news (Score:3)
Chevrolet beat this week ago
https://news.gm.com/home.detai... [gm.com]
Re: That's old f. news (Score:2)
No, it didn't.
Re: (Score:1)
According to whom? Oh, right, Guinness.
Guinness will go out to verify record setting events but they have to be invited in order to have their own witnesses on site. I recall that Guinness wants to be paid for this service. While I can see that as something of a BS reason to deny a record by having a requirement for their own people on site there's less room for cheating. By having a requirement for payment this means they aren't sending people out for BS stunts that have no real chance of setting a rec
Average use is what matters (Score:2)
These are completely irrelevant, pointless results. The game was rigged to beat the distance at the cost of anything else. Meanwhile, normal people need long range at motorway speeds. If you're driving 30mph, you are usually in a built-up area with numerous chargers around, when range doesn't matter. It's the high speed that needs more range. Not the other way around.
Some Say He Smells of Elderberries and Patchouli (Score:2)
all we know is the call him The Stig.
When he drives the Polestar 3, the battery runs flat before he completes the course.
All I want to know is how far can it go in stop and go traffic for an hour in the summer heat? That and how long it takes to recharge it.
Sure, that's reasonable (Score:2)