Jaguar I-Pace EV400 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Premium Member
2020 I-Pace HSE Indus Silver
Joined
·
681 Posts
I just could never let my EV die like that! Honestly, even 50-60% SOC and I start to get a wee nervous, LOL!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
893 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I just could never let my EV die like that! Honestly, even 50-60% SOC and I start to get a wee nervous, LOL!
I've had my Fiat 500e at 0% few times. Not fun

Good to know there are a few miles left on the I-Pace just incase
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deutsch100

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
The Jaguar has a blue line on the discharge side of the power meter when you get really low SOC. When you hit about ~2%, it starts to derate the power which is still plenty for the freeway. At 0% you have a fraction of the maximum power. There are lots of warnings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
Summary of miles travelled before dying:

EQC - 194 miles (75% of WLTP)
e-tron - 206 miles (81% of WLTP)
Leaf - 208 miles (87% of WLTP)
I-PACE - 223 miles (76% of WLTP)
e-Niro - 255 miles (90% of WLTP)
Model 3 - 270 miles (78% of WLTP)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
They should have done this test with 3 Jag, one in Eco, one in Comfort, one in Dynamic, and they should have been more explicit of the type of Jag : pre or post H264.

Comparing the WLTP or EPA rate with a highway only journey does not make a lot of sense, considering that those rate are calculated with a mix a different roads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
I found it odd that all of them started at below 100% charge. They claimed to have charged them all overnight, but they then all .lost a few% sitting overnight. Never seen that on mine. Anyone notice?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
I found it odd that all of them started at below 100% charge. They claimed to have charged them all overnight, but they then all .lost a few% sitting overnight. Never seen that on mine. Anyone notice?
No, I can leave my Jag on the driveway for a couple of days without driving it, and when I take it back, I have the same SoC.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,159 Posts
I found it odd that all of them started at below 100% charge. They claimed to have charged them all overnight, but they then all .lost a few% sitting overnight. Never seen that on mine. Anyone notice?
Mine sat outside in the winter (temps in the teens), for greater than 2 weeks, and never lost any SOC...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
I don't know if they made the test with a pre or post H264 Jag, but I have noticed that even if they pretend that they put all cars in the more efficient mode, you can see from the dash that the Jag was on the Eco mode in the first segment (green line around the dial in the dash), but in the subsequent segment and driver rotations, they seem to forgot to put back the Eco mode and all videos of the dash show a gray line around the dial, which mean they were in the comfort mode most of the time.
 

·
Premium Member
19 I-pace HSE Polaris/Fuji white with most options and a lot of accessories
Joined
·
830 Posts
Actually, you can see the ECO symbol above the green bar on the right "dial" indicating ECO mode. It only shows up in the first display for the I-pace. Perhaps someone should post a comment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Purely anecdotal and only partially relevant as they didn't include a BMW i3....


Our 94Ahr i3 is 'supposed' to have around 200kms of range. We get this quite regularly if it is between 20-25deg C; we average under 100kmph and don't exceed about 110 much. This covers most of our driving but when I go long distance I noticed that the range gets trashed by highway driving (ie around 120kmph) and strong winds (head and cross-winds) and high temps (maybe low but it is seldom colder than about 10-12deg C here!)


Then the range can drop to 150-160kms which can be an aggravation.....


Interestingly when I have tried to do some analytical testing to see the difference between Comfort; Eco and Eco + (which includes NO air-con in Eco +.....) I have hardly noticed the difference (5%?) Hardly worth the lesser performance and no air-con!


So the ranges delivered in the CarWow test are likely to be on the low side (again I am well impressed by the Kia eNiro) as it seems a lot of the driving was at highway speeds, in cooler weather and most probably windy. As someone pointed out the ranges will not reflect 'normal' mixed driving with some urban, stopping /starting and shorter journeys.


There was a previous Dutch (?) test where they drove a circuit that reflected normal use more closely. If I recall correctly the i3 went pretty far after it was drained to zero SOC - about 20-30kms
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Summary of miles travelled before dying:

EQC - 194 miles (75% of WLTP)
e-tron - 206 miles (81% of WLTP)
Leaf - 208 miles (87% of WLTP)
I-PACE - 223 miles (76% of WLTP)
e-Niro - 255 miles (90% of WLTP)
Model 3 - 270 miles (78% of WLTP)
Thank you for the summary. But I like to make a point to others.
First of all where is Model X. We all know EPA is closer than WLTP to real life experience. At least here in the US I can grantee that.

Second
Model 3 long range did 270 miles, EPA is 322
IPace did 223 Miles, EPA is 234
Do you see the massive gap on tesla ? so the percentage based on EPA clearly make IPace stand above tesla by far.
This is just marketing, all tesla cars have fake EPAs, just like this....
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,159 Posts
Thank you for the summary. But I like to make a point to others.
First of all where is Model X. We all know EPA is closer than WLTP to real life experience. At least here in the US I can grantee that.

Second
Model 3 long range did 270 miles, EPA is 322
IPace did 223 Miles, EPA is 234
Do you see the massive gap on tesla ? so the percentage based on EPA clearly make IPace stand above tesla by far.
This is just marketing, all tesla cars have fake EPAs, just like this....
What exactly is 'fake' about this comparison?

It was done in the UK, where they use WLTP, not EPA. Why in the world would someone in the UK give a rat's ass what the EPA says about anything?

Can you please explain to the less enlightened (such as me) how Tesla can 'fake' the EPA? How come the EPA allows Tesla to scam them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
@Dantrium from experience I have noticed that the gap between Tesla numbers and reality is larger than other manufacturers. I don’t know why or how, but it is possible to game the drivetrain firmware to get better results with less power during testing, just like in dieselgate they detected the testing cycles and met emissions by dropping output power. Not saying this is what is happening but it is a possibility.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
893 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
@Dantrium from experience I have noticed that the gap between Tesla numbers and reality is larger than other manufacturers. I don’t know why or how, but it is possible to game the drivetrain firmware to get better results with less power during testing, just like in dieselgate they detected the testing cycles and met emissions by dropping output power. Not saying this is what is happening but it is a possibility.
Tesla has mastered the art of manouvering regulators and politicians
Don't put anything past them
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
Also I found this in an article that shows Taycan is getting much more range than Porsche’s self reported mileage. May explain while Tesla’s numbers are so optimistic.

“Also notable is the fact that the EPA provided the range figures themselves, and that's not how it usually happens. Many people don't realize that the manufacturer does the range testing and provides the EPA with the range rating and the data to back it up. The EPA has the choice to accept that data and publish it, or to then do their own internal testing. In the case of the Taycan, the EPA decided to do their own range certification, and those numbers came out much lower than what Porsche expected.”

This is a bit nuts if true, testing should be done in the same manner by EPA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Thank you for the summary. But I like to make a point to others.
First of all where is Model X. We all know EPA is closer than WLTP to real life experience. At least here in the US I can grantee that.

Second
Model 3 long range did 270 miles, EPA is 322
IPace did 223 Miles, EPA is 234
Do you see the massive gap on tesla ? so the percentage based on EPA clearly make IPace stand above tesla by far.
This is just marketing, all tesla cars have fake EPAs, just like this....
What exactly is 'fake' about this comparison?

It was done in the UK, where they use WLTP, not EPA. Why in the world would someone in the UK give a rat's ass what the EPA says about anything?

Can you please explain to the less enlightened (such as me) how Tesla can 'fake' the EPA? How come the EPA allows Tesla to scam them?
UK or not , it's not a valid test. it means nothing and proves nothing. Now if they tested range, weight with passengers and cost that would be more valid.

This is how you fake EPA. It's easy. One method would be this. As manufacturer, You know location of your cars and you know which cars are being tested or you handed over for testing. We all know ( at least as a softwarec engineer i know) all these cars can be remotely controlled this is differentthan SOTA. So right before the test, you use over the air control and enable 100 percent of the internal battery , reduce a acceleration, startup in eco mode etc. When test is completed then you restore the original the settings.

How else can you explain the fact tesla EPA numbers do not match and has the biggest gap?
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top