Polestar Forum banner

81 - 100 of 145 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
A lot of short journeys is cold with no pre-heat while plugged in will cause a lot of loss. In addition I'm sure a lot of reports say the car losses a fair few % in the first few miles then settle downs. This might be down to it having to heat the cabin up and/or batteries.

However it won't hurt telling Polestar what you are getting both in car and calculated, then see what happens.
Also inaccuracies in the car metering. On a short drive, the fullness decreased by 1% every 1.5ish miles. Parked, did my hour shop and found the fullness of the battery had increased by a per cent or two. (no I had not plugged into the Tesco chargers) Those 1 or 2 per cent soon vanished when I continued driving.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Is consumption really that important ?
For everyday local driving and if you have home/work charging, probably not.

But for those that do want to do occasional road trips, you're talking about:
1) Lower range by around 30% or so compared to the model 3 long range
2) Slower charging (i.e. not getting anywhere near 150 kW or not holding it long enough through the charge session)

So when you combine both of those, instead of stopping, lets say every 4 hours to charge for 30min, you're stopping every 3 hours to charge for 45min. It also means you need more charging stations between your start and destination. Maybe you're ok with that increased frequency and time but others would prefer to not bother.

It's also a pain for those that don't have at home/work charging. An extra 50/75 miles of range means a few more days (of local driving) between visiting a charging station to top off.

Give the car's price and battery capacity, I do think it should have been able to achieve a range closer to the model 3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
This is academic for me and my use case. I have a home charger and access to a work charger. The longest trips we will take are ~200 mi each way and we do those maybe 1x/year, and for those, with pessimistic inputs, ABRP estimates we would spend only 10-20 min more for the round trip than for a TM3 LR w ugly-as-sin aero wheels. If we wanted to go further, we would fly (once we get a vaccine....).

That said, this is awfully reminiscent of the IPace's initial range, which was expected to be more given its Cd/size/battery capacity. The assumption from Carnegie-Mellon engineers is that there are powertrain inefficiencies, and I imagine that must be the case for the P*2:

Seems that acceleration/regen is the least efficient thing based on the observation of low efficiency for shorter trips around town. And I imagine the P*2, IPace, and e-tron's weights don't help there.

My bet/hope is that the inverter's programming isn't fully optimal here. I'm guessing the P*2 currently (pun intended) draws too much current relative to the torque needs to get the P*2 moving, and draws current back too much relative to what it needs to for regen braking.

The charging curve seems like it's already improved (comparing fastned's curve to Bjorn's), so hopefully some similar software update will come out in terms of the inverter programming to improve the overall powertrain efficiency.

Or, we'll just get one of the variety of EVs coming out with expected better range/charging off the bat when the lease is up....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Discussion Starter #84
Paid attention on a couple of short journeys today and had a play in excel.

Usual short journeys (one 4.3 miles and the other 6.8 miles) both at an average of 15mph (town).

My excel wonderings suggests that each journey has a fixed consumption of 0.8 kWh irrespective of distance. So the driving consumption was about 28 kWh / 100 miles but when combined with the fixed battery conditioning consumption the two journeys come out at 46.5 kWh / 100 miles and 39.7 kWh / 100 miles and the overall for both journeys is 11.1 miles at 42.3 kWh / 100 miles.

So what? Well my calculations match what the car said.

So if i did a 35 mile journey with a stop half way excel sheet model predicts i'd get 32. 4 kWh / 100 miles at the same average speed. I did that journey 9 days ago and saw 38 kWh / 100 miles but also included some motorway stuff.

Conclusion - i estimate the battery conditioning every journey costs between 1% and 2% of battery capacity. On that basis i reckon my maximum range (@15c average speed 15 mph) would be about 260 miles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Hi,

I'm owning a 19" thunder, delivered the 19th august. Got around 20.2kwh/100km at this moment for ~1700km. Because i'm living in Belgium most of the driving is around 15 á 20km for each trip. Max 10% is highway. The best figure I got was a 14.7kwh/100km when I drove at home from work (~13km).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
180 miles there and back yesterday in East Anglia. 14C average, dry roads mostly single carriageway. 30.5 kWh/100mi. One pedal driving, a few spirited overtaking manoeuvres.
19” wheels.
Was that on a single charge or did you stop for a top-up?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
New video by Bjorn:

So, in this test, model 3 has 30% higher range and charges 30% faster too (it could have charged even faster if the charger allowed it).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
611 Posts
I just imported a CAD image into my CAD program and then used tools to find a frontal area for the Polestar 2 (non-performance) of 2.29 m^2. I've also found a drag coefficient from Polestar of 0.278. Thus, the "drag area" is 0.278(2.29) = 0.637.

For the Tesla Model 3, I've found 2.18 m^2 and 0.23 for the drag area of 0.501.

Thus, ignoring other things (weight, powertrain efficiency, brake caliper drag, tires and tire pressure), the Tesla should be 0.637/0.501 = 1.27 or 27% more efficient. Good match, eh?

I'm telling you, guys, it's all about wind resistance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
694 Posts
I'm telling you, guys, it's all about wind resistance.
I agree at speeds above 40(ish) mph ... but a lower speeds it's nothing. It's an expediential curve on performance. Faster you go the more its make an impact.

Can you do the same for the Kona or Niro?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
180 miles there and back yesterday in East Anglia. 14C average, dry roads mostly single carriageway. 30.5 kWh/100mi. One pedal driving, a few spirited overtaking manoeuvres.
19” wheels.
So what was your average speed for that? Given the road type I'd estimate about 50-55mph? A decent range for those types of roads I think
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
New video by Bjorn:

So, in this test, model 3 has 30% higher range and charges 30% faster too (it could have charged even faster if the charger allowed it).
Maybe I'm being overly sensitive but I feel like the endless TM3 vs P*2 comparisons haven't changed anything.

Get the Tesla if range/charging is a primary priority.
[Say, if you're a YouTuber who makes a living regularly driving 10-12 hrs on end]

Get the Polestar if you like its interior, build quality, chassis tuning, newness, overall design, etc more

We've always known that the P*2's range didn't match the TM3's. While the P*2's range is less than initially estimated, it still seems to be sufficient for me (and most average driver's I suspect).

And, the charging curve has already gotten better with time [what version of software did Bjorn's tester have?] - and with its stated hardware/specs seems reasonable they'll be able to get close to the e-tron's charging curve eventually.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
Here's a nice video summarizing how to gain maximal efficiency/range in an EV.

tl;dw -
  • coast as much as possible, i.e. turning 'One Pedal' to 'Off'
  • Don't use cruise control!
Also: The P*2's drag coefficient is the same as the Leaf's!
That's some magic right there given how ingloriously ugly the Leaf is.

Question to the crowd: Could the P*2's cruise control and regen systems be suboptimally tuned for maximal efficiency? Could that explain the dramatic diffs in efficiency in some folks' tests/experiences?
I think the regen is great at enabling true one-pedal drive, but might not be great for efficient recharging/consumption.

And: Does anyone have CAD drawings of the P*2's rims?
I'm tempted to design up some inserts for the holes in the rims to see if that improves aero (without being too ugly...)
Any downside to this? Wouldn't be using friction braking that much so doubt heat dissipation is a major factor.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Discussion Starter #99
I have been enjoying not using one pedal driving and regen.

If the battery to motor energy conersion is 90% efficient and regen is 90% efficient then you would only be getting 80% of the power you put in back. I would be amazed if regen is anything like that good.

If you coast and use the road and read what is happening around you it should be more efficient and actually quite enjoyable when done well.

All that said, my economy is still pants. Ho hum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Just did our first road trip with a non-PP, 19" wheels. Very full car - 2 adults, 2 kids, boot full of luggage. Drove for 151 miles, battery went from 100% to 25%, avg 34.2kWh/mile, avg speed was 52.7mph with plenty hills and a few launches (was the Northern-most section of the A9 in Scotland). External temp was 7-9C, showery throughout.
 
81 - 100 of 145 Posts
Top