Hyundai IONIQ Forum banner

1 - 20 of 76 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,781 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
In this topic, we can collect info on comparative tests on range and efficiency.

The first one is today's test in Norway around Oslo: Motors rekkeviddetest av elbiler sommer 2021 direkte.

Here a large number of EV's were driven from 100% charge to empty (car not moving anymore). Note that all cars had different sizes of batteries. An overview of the results ordered according to the range found today in comparison to the 'officially claimed' indication (WLTP) is as follows:

factor
km today/km indicated
km todaykm indication
claimed (WLTP)
info
1.24556.2450556.2 km BMW iX3 (450 km. WLTP 19.0) 13.3
1.13528.1468528.1 km Audi e-Tron GT quattro (468 km. WLTP 20.1) 16.1
1.12236.2210236.2 km Honda e (210 km. WLTP 17.8) 13.4
1.11537484537.0 km (Referenz) Hyundai-Kona (484 km. WLTP 14.7) 12.1
1.10219.6200219.6 km Mazda MX-30 (200 km. WLTP 19.0) 12.1
1.09502460502.0 km Hyundai Ioniq 5 AWD 19 Zoll (460 km. WLTP 17.7) 14.4
1.09532487532.0 km Volkswagen ID.4 First Max (487 km. WLTP 18.2) 14.5
1.08452417452.0 km Mercedes-Benz EQA (417 km. WLTP 18.1) 15.0
1.07442.9415442.9 km Volvo XC40 Recharge (415 km. WLTP 24.0) 17.5
1.07654.9614654.9 km Tesla Model 3 LR (614 km. WLTP 14.8) 12.4
1.05564539564.0 km Volkswagen ID.3 Pro S (539 km. WLTP 16.2) 13.5
1.03332.4324332.4 km Opel Mokka-e (324 km. WLTP 15.6) 13.8
1.03307.8298307.8 km Fiat 500 (298 km. WLTP 14.9) 12.4
1.02551.9540551.9 km Ford Mustang Mach-E AWD (540 km. WLTP 18.7) 16
1.01617.9610617.9 km Ford Mustang Mach-E RWD (610 km. WLTP 16.5) 15
1.01454.4448454.4 km Tesla Model 3 SR (448 km. WLTP 14.2) 12.2
1.00421420421.0 km Volkswagen ID.3 1st Plus (420 km. WLTP 16.2) 13.3
1.00522520522.0 km Skoda Enyaq High + Suite (520 km. WLTP 17.2) 14.5
0.99345350345.0 km Citroën ë-C4 (350 km. WLTP 14.3) 13.1
0.99467470467.0 km Polestar 2 (470 km. WLTP 15.6) 16.6
0.97438.9451438.9 km Xpeng G3 (451 km. WLTP 14.7) ??

Note that the last number in the info column is the found efficiency in kWh/100km. For the Ioniq 5 (AWD with 19" wheels), it is 14.4 kWh/100km which is a quite good number. But, of course, that strongly depends on factors such as speed (was at the speed limit: 80 and 100 km/h max roads) and temperature (was 21 °C max).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
In this topic, we can collect info on comparative tests on range and efficiency.

The first one is today's test in Norway around Oslo: Motors rekkeviddetest av elbiler sommer 2021 direkte.

Here a large number of EV's were driven from 100% charge to empty. Note that all cars had different sizes of batteries. An overview of the results ordered according to the range found today in comparison to the 'official' indication is as follows:

factor
km today/km indicated
km todaykm indicatedinfo
1.24556.2450556.2 km BMW iX3 (450 km. WLTP 19.0) 13.3
1.13528.1468528.1 km Audi e-Tron GT quattro (468 km. WLTP 20.1) 16.1
1.12236.2210236.2 km Honda e (210 km. WLTP 17.8) 13.4
1.11537484537.0 km (Referenz) Hyundai-Kona (484 km. WLTP 14.7) 12.1
1.10219.6200219.6 km Mazda MX-30 (200 km. WLTP 19.0) 12.1
1.09502460502.0 km Hyundai Ioniq 5 AWD 19 Zoll (460 km. WLTP 17.7) 14.4
1.09532487532.0 km Volkswagen ID.4 First Max (487 km. WLTP 18.2) 14.5
1.08452417452.0 km Mercedes-Benz EQA (417 km. WLTP 18.1) 15.0
1.07442.9415442.9 km Volvo XC40 Recharge (415 km. WLTP 24.0) 17.5
1.07654.9614654.9 km Tesla Model 3 LR (614 km. WLTP 14.8) 12.4
1.05564539564.0 km Volkswagen ID.3 Pro S (539 km. WLTP 16.2) 13.5
1.03332.4324332.4 km Opel Mokka-e (324 km. WLTP 15.6) 13.8
1.03307.8298307.8 km Fiat 500 (298 km. WLTP 14.9) 12.4
1.02551.9540551.9 km Ford Mustang Mach-E AWD (540 km. WLTP 18.7) 16
1.01617.9610617.9 km Ford Mustang Mach-E RWD (610 km. WLTP 16.5) 15
1.01454.4448454.4 km Tesla Model 3 SR (448 km. WLTP 14.2) 12.2
1.00421420421.0 km Volkswagen ID.3 1st Plus (420 km. WLTP 16.2) 13.3
1.00522520522.0 km Skoda Enyaq High + Suite (520 km. WLTP 17.2) 14.5
0.99345350345.0 km Citroën ë-C4 (350 km. WLTP 14.3) 13.1
0.99467470467.0 km Polestar 2 (470 km. WLTP 15.6) 16.6
0.97438.9451438.9 km Xpeng G3 (451 km. WLTP 14.7) ??

Note that the last number in the info column is the found efficiency in kWh/100km. For the Ioniq 5 (AWD with 19" wheels), it is 14.4 kWh/100km which is a quite good number. But, of course, that strongly depends on factors such as speed (was at the speed limit: 80 and 100 km/h max roads) and temperature (was 21 °C max).
Coming through with the numbers for us again!
If my math is right 14.4kwh/100km works out to a realistic range (under those conditions, all else being equal) of 537.5km for the US battery (77.4kwh) for a theoretical effective range of between 311 (with the international LR battery) and ~334 (with the US LR battery) miles.

Does "to empty" mean until the vehicle stops moving, or until 0 miles indicated range? Also, what exactly are km today vs km indicated? My presumption is that to empty means until the vehicle stops moving, or else the nominal EPA range of ~240-odd miles is extremely conservative.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,781 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 · (Edited)
Indeed, they continued until the cars stopped moving (now added there). The 'km today' is the distance as measured in the test of yesterday, whereas the 'km indicated' is what is known at forehand as the general WLTP-indication from the car producer; I added the label WLTP now.

Yes, IF 77.4 kWh is the USABLE capacity and not the total capacity of the battery for the US, indeed you would get 537.5 km under these circumstances, which is 334 miles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: woods

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Indeed, they continued until the cars stopped moving. The 'km today' is the distance as measured in the test of yesterday, whereas the 'km indicated' is what is known at forehand as the general WLTP-indication from the car producer; I added the label WLTP now.

Yes, IF 77.4 kWh is the USABLE capacity and not the total capacity of the battery for the US, indeed you would get 537.5 km under these circumstances, which is 334 miles.
That's interesting. We don't know exactly how much they're holding in reserve, but let's say 10% for purposes of discussion, that would leave a net effective range of ~300 miles (which is way more than the ~240 nominal. That's actually a touch suspicious, though we can probably presume that the cycle they used in that test is more forgiving than the EPA cycle)
 

·
Registered
2019 Ioniq 28kWh
Joined
·
282 Posts
In this topic, we can collect info on comparative tests on range and efficiency.

The first one is today's test in Norway around Oslo: Motors rekkeviddetest av elbiler sommer 2021 direkte.

Here a large number of EV's were driven from 100% charge to empty. Note that all cars had different sizes of batteries. An overview of the results ordered according to the range found today in comparison to the 'official' indication (WLTP) is as follows:

factor
km today/km indicated
km todaykm indicated (WLTP)info
1.24556.2450556.2 km BMW iX3 (450 km. WLTP 19.0) 13.3
1.13528.1468528.1 km Audi e-Tron GT quattro (468 km. WLTP 20.1) 16.1
1.12236.2210236.2 km Honda e (210 km. WLTP 17.8) 13.4
1.11537484537.0 km (Referenz) Hyundai-Kona (484 km. WLTP 14.7) 12.1
1.10219.6200219.6 km Mazda MX-30 (200 km. WLTP 19.0) 12.1
1.09502460502.0 km Hyundai Ioniq 5 AWD 19 Zoll (460 km. WLTP 17.7) 14.4
1.09532487532.0 km Volkswagen ID.4 First Max (487 km. WLTP 18.2) 14.5
1.08452417452.0 km Mercedes-Benz EQA (417 km. WLTP 18.1) 15.0
1.07442.9415442.9 km Volvo XC40 Recharge (415 km. WLTP 24.0) 17.5
1.07654.9614654.9 km Tesla Model 3 LR (614 km. WLTP 14.8) 12.4
1.05564539564.0 km Volkswagen ID.3 Pro S (539 km. WLTP 16.2) 13.5
1.03332.4324332.4 km Opel Mokka-e (324 km. WLTP 15.6) 13.8
1.03307.8298307.8 km Fiat 500 (298 km. WLTP 14.9) 12.4
1.02551.9540551.9 km Ford Mustang Mach-E AWD (540 km. WLTP 18.7) 16
1.01617.9610617.9 km Ford Mustang Mach-E RWD (610 km. WLTP 16.5) 15
1.01454.4448454.4 km Tesla Model 3 SR (448 km. WLTP 14.2) 12.2
1.00421420421.0 km Volkswagen ID.3 1st Plus (420 km. WLTP 16.2) 13.3
1.00522520522.0 km Skoda Enyaq High + Suite (520 km. WLTP 17.2) 14.5
0.99345350345.0 km Citroën ë-C4 (350 km. WLTP 14.3) 13.1
0.99467470467.0 km Polestar 2 (470 km. WLTP 15.6) 16.6
0.97438.9451438.9 km Xpeng G3 (451 km. WLTP 14.7) ??

Note that the last number in the info column is the found efficiency in kWh/100km. For the Ioniq 5 (AWD with 19" wheels), it is 14.4 kWh/100km which is a quite good number. But, of course, that strongly depends on factors such as speed (was at the speed limit: 80 and 100 km/h max roads) and temperature (was 21 °C max).
Reading these numbers comparing with Kona and Model 3 I know the Ioniq 28 would do under 11kWh/100km (possibly 10.5-10.8kWh/100km) under those test conditions. knowing this the Ioniq 5 uses too much juice for me. It's a larger car yes, but for me that does not matter as I don't need such a big car. 40% more juice = 40% higher cost per driven distance. For a car in that size it's ok and not great which is shame.

I have great hopes for future smaller cars, possibly the Ioniq 6 would fill my needs better.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,781 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
With the Ioniqs 28 and 38, I was/am able to get 10 kWh/100km in summer for my 45 km trips to and from work. I will see how close I can get when I have the Ioniq 5...

Indeed a bigger car and AWD will cost some efficiency.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
I think this is quite promising and at least an indication that Hyundai is being conservative with their estimates. Not a comparative test, but there's a YouTuber in Korea who was able to get 454 km/282 miles of range with the AWD model that had 20" wheels and 255 tires.
 

·
Registered
2019 Ioniq 28kWh
Joined
·
282 Posts
I think this is quite promising and at least an indication that Hyundai is being conservative with their estimates. Not a comparative test, but there's a YouTuber in Korea who was able to get 454 km/282 miles of range with the AWD model that had 20" wheels and 255 tires.
Range is one number, consumption is another. 454km on that of a big pack is not impressive speaking consumption. If 454km is enough range... well for me range is not an issue rather consumption.

As the Hyundai Ioniqs of today are leaders in consumption (by far) I would have hoped the new Ioniq range could still be ahead of the pack and not just matching ID4/Enyaq or Model y. It's not completely up the ally as Volvo XC40 or Polestar 2 but still not the step ahead I would have hoped for.

Small pack, RWD and smaller wheels might bring it down though. Future tests will tell...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Range is one number, consumption is another. 454km on that of a big pack is not impressive speaking consumption. If 454km is enough range... well for me range is not an issue rather consumption.

As the Hyundai Ioniqs of today are leaders in consumption (by far) I would have hoped the new Ioniq range could still be ahead of the pack and not just matching ID4/Enyaq or Model y. It's not completely up the ally as Volvo XC40 or Polestar 2 but still not the step ahead I would have hoped for.

Small pack, RWD and smaller wheels might bring it down though. Future tests will tell...
Agreed, I think it depends on whether range vs. consumption is more important to you. For me, it's range since I will probably make a few trips in the 200 mile range yearly. I will always charge at home and electricity is relatively cheap ($0.11/kWH) so that's less of an issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
I want the Ioniq to be efficient. I think that should be Hyundai’s top priority. Comfort and convenience should, in a rational world concerned with sustainable resource management not be at the top of a buyer’s preference. But it is for most people and Hyundai is in business to make money so they have made a rather large, but very appealing car. The range loss from the awd Limited model is concerning, but I have been seduced by many of its features. Do 20” wheels make sense? Not really for my needs. I saw that size up close on a new car and they just looked huge.

I would like the car to be smaller and lighter than it is. I would like for it to be the industry leader in its efficiency, but any purchase is a compromise and I am excited by the prospect of owning one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Efficiency at speed is a compromise between design and a low drag coefficient. Tesla has the lead here, although some have said the Model Y looks like "a bloated whale". I don't disagree ;)

I suppose I'm willing to sacrifice a little efficiency for a car that I much prefer to look at.

As far as lightness, most of it is dictated by the battery pack. Hopefully the forthcoming solid state batteries are much lighter.
 

·
Registered
2019 Ioniq 28kWh
Joined
·
282 Posts
I’ve no idea what that table is about but I have never seen a real world test of a Model 3 LR that got remotely near 650km.
Also the E-tron can rarely get under 20kWh/100km so this test is clearly VERY easy driving where Ioniq 28 can do 10kWh/100km or even less.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Also the E-tron can rarely get under 20kWh/100km so this test is clearly VERY easy driving where Ioniq 28 can do 10kWh/100km or even less.
Hey Superhero. I'm a noob here.

What's the price difference on the battery tech for the consumption levels you are looking for? I'm guessing there was a budgeting issue, or maybe even an "access to others technology" issue. I could be missing the mark though!
 

·
Registered
2019 Ioniq 28kWh
Joined
·
282 Posts
Hey Superhero. I'm a noob here.

What's the price difference on the battery tech for the consumption levels you are looking for? I'm guessing there was a budgeting issue, or maybe even an "access to others technology" issue. I could be missing the mark though!
Not sure I understand the question. I want to get the "fuel" cost as low as possible while still being able to use the car as my daily driver. With lower consumption my driving gets cheaper, for me not about battery tech.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Not sure I understand the question. I want to get the "fuel" cost as low as possible while still being able to use the car as my daily driver. With lower consumption my driving gets cheaper, for me not about battery tech.
Wouldn’t a better battery, hold charge better and more efficiently? That would lower your cost…
I guess I’m not understanding how you view consumption? Isn’t that how much you use it? And your fuel cost is set by your electric company, not any car manufacturers.

lighter and smaller I am fine with, but we are past fixing that on this model.

more confused than before, sorry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Lower fuel cost is just lower energy use per km. Part of it is vehicle aerodynamics and part weight. A lighter, more energy dense battery would mean you'd need less power, so besides the battery itself you'd have smaller motors, less thick wiring, etc.

Aerodynamics is a black art IMO but I believe it is heavily influenced by vehicle class. You'll never have aerodynamics on a crossover that are as good as a sedan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Lower fuel cost is just lower energy use per km. Part of it is vehicle aerodynamics and part weight. A lighter, more energy dense battery would mean you'd need less power, so besides the battery itself you'd have smaller motors, less thick wiring, etc.

Aerodynamics is a black art IMO but I believe it is heavy influenced by vehicle class. You'll never have aerodynamics on a crossover that are as good as a sedan.
Thanks for fleshing that out a bit for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
We really have to interpret these numbers in context. The configuration tested was not the most efficient (The RWD config would probably be a few percent more efficient at least, I don't think we know for certain), and the Ioniq 5 cannot reasonably be compared directly to the OG Ioniq and Kona. The Ioniq 5 is significantly bigger than both (because of either type class, size class, or a combination). Smaller cars are almost always more efficient on average than larger ones, sedans are almost always more efficient on average than SUV/Hatch/Crossover types.

So the best comparison is against it's direct competitors, specifically the ID.4, Mustang Mach-E, and Model Y. Model Y is not on the list, so I'll use numbers I've found online (which are not direct comparisons. Per edmunds the model Y seems to reserve around 5% of it's range after indicated 0, so I'll consider that for comparison purposes:
Ioniq 5 AWD (19" wheels): 14.4 kwh/100km
ID.4 First Edition (Which is RWD only): 14.5 kwh/100km
Mustang Mach-E AWD: 16 kwh/100km
Tesla Model Y Long Range: ~16.8 according to Inside EVs (other sources say 17ish) - 10% = 15.12 kwh/100km

By these numbers, the Ioniq 5 is competitive with if not better than it's most immediate competitors (That Model Y number seems a bit high to me, but tesla's range numbers are also well known to be misleading so idk). The AWD Ioniq 5 is more efficient than the RWD ID.4, which is pretty impressive (also considering it's a much more powerful vehicle).

In other words, the Ioniq 5 is impressively efficient for its segment and price range (The part time AWD system probably has a lot to do with that. Also smaller wheels are known to be more efficient than larger ones on average). Power consumption on the order of 10kwh/100km is unrealistic by the standards of the segment at this time. This will no doubt improve over time (the adoption of solid state batteries, whenever that happens, will almost certainly be revolutionary). It's also worth noting that the I5 achieves it's efficiency with an unimpressive drag coefficient (0.288 vs the Model Y's claimed 0.23) indicating that it's efficiency is principally due to good engineering rather than aerodynamic effects.

In other words: The numbers are actually pretty impressive.
 
1 - 20 of 76 Posts
Top