Polestar Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
As many of the P1.7 updates related to improving range, has anyone seen any real world improvements?
Thanks
Jon
 

·
Super Moderator
Polestar 2, Midnight (blue), charcoal interior, non-PP
Joined
·
3,120 Posts
To be fair, the updates are generally aimed at improving the cold weather efficiency, so I wouldn't expect to see any difference yet as it still appears to be August in the UK.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,952 Posts
Said another way, to set expectations, I expect that the highway efficiency is mainly a function of the drag coefficient, the baseline motor and inverter efficiency, and the tires/wheels being used. There may be some ground to gain in tuning the level of regen used in different scenarios, but that’s going to be marginal at best. Whatever highway efficiency there is in summer is basically all we will see going forward, unless there is a change to the car shape/size, the specific motors/inverters used, or the tires/wheels.

In contrast there are probably gains to be had for winter driving and specifically for short trips around town, mainly in terms of how much it heats up the battery and how regen/friction braking is used in those scenarios. Hopefully the optimizations of v1.7 truly do help those scenarios as it seems there’s much to be gained there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I took delivery of my car last week. It came with 1.7 installed. I’ve obviously not had a polestar with anything other than 1.7 but the consumption I’m getting seems to be better than I’ve seen reported over the last year from cars with older software.
Having driven over 500 miles, on all terrain and having never, ever driven carefully (in fact I’ll probably never drive this aggressively again due to family and friends ask asking to “see them what it can do”) I’ve averaged 32kwh/100 miles.
On Friday I did a long drive, mostly on motorway and got 30.2.
This seems an improvement on what I’ve seen reported online.
 

·
Registered
Snow non-PP w/tow hook
Joined
·
178 Posts
I took delivery of my car last week. It came with 1.7 installed. I’ve obviously not had a polestar with anything other than 1.7 but the consumption I’m getting seems to be better than I’ve seen reported over the last year from cars with older software.
Having driven over 500 miles, on all terrain and having never, ever driven carefully (in fact I’ll probably never drive this aggressively again due to family and friends ask asking to “see them what it can do”) I’ve averaged 32kwh/100 miles.
On Friday I did a long drive, mostly on motorway and got 30.2.
This seems an improvement on what I’ve seen reported online.
That's pretty much in line with what I've had through the summer, so doesn't sound like it's any better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
213 Posts
My average over 8500 miles (before the data corrupted and I had to reset) was 35.2 per 100 miles from Dec last year. I think the summer brought this down a bit and the best I’ve seen on a long trip was 31.5. Looking forward to seeing if 1.7 improves anything but I bet if it does it’s quite marginal.
 

·
Registered
Ordered MY 2022 on Friday 13th of August! Long Range Dual-Motor, Snow/Nappa, Pilot, Plus, Tow hitch
Joined
·
294 Posts
To those testing this:

Please can you report on any changes you see to the charging curve as well?

"Charging stability improvements" are also mentioned in the release notes.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,594 Posts
"Charging stability improvements" are also mentioned in the release notes.
The main fix was to the missing phase/OBC module problem, which lead to a decreased AC charge rate.
 

·
Registered
Ordered MY 2022 on Friday 13th of August! Long Range Dual-Motor, Snow/Nappa, Pilot, Plus, Tow hitch
Joined
·
294 Posts
I was hoping that they stretched the maximum charge rate a bit too. Would be so nice if we could hit 50% at 150kW
 
  • Like
Reactions: polerad

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,361 Posts
Range is so dependent on so many factors, that no small sample of cars in different places being driven in different ways is going to tell anything. When/if the EPA/WLTP folks do their controlled (albeit not real-world representative) tests, we'll know whether the car is performing better on 1.7. Since the improvements are really marginal, it's not going to make you think the car is now comparable to a Lucid Air. We've got what we've got range wise, it's more than enough for just about any application, and not focusing on it is the best policy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
346 Posts
Range is so dependent on so many factors, that no small sample of cars in different places being driven in different ways is going to tell anything. When/if the EPA/WLTP folks do their controlled (albeit not real-world representative) tests, we'll know whether the car is performing better on 1.7. Since the improvements are really marginal, it's not going to make you think the car is now comparable to a Lucid Air. We've got what we've got range wise, it's more than enough for just about any application, and not focusing on it is the best policy.
That EPA test has already been done. It's why the '22 models have a stated range of 249 miles (long range dual motor), and that's withOUT a heat pump. That range bump is supposed to be pushed out to the 21 models sometime this fall, per Polestar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,361 Posts
That EPA test has already been done. It's why the '22 models have a stated range of 249 miles (long range dual motor), and that's withOUT a heat pump. That range bump is supposed to be pushed out to the 21 models sometime this fall, per Polestar.
233 vs 249 is negligible. It makes the P2 look better in press reports and car mag comparisons. Only an ignorant buyer will pick a 249 car over a 233 car. In real world driving if you are down to your last 16 miles you already made some poor decisions earlier in your trip.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
346 Posts
233 vs 249 is negligible. It makes the P2 look better in press reports and car mag comparisons. Only an ignorant buyer will pick a 249 car over a 233 car. In real world driving if you are down to your last 16 miles you already made some poor decisions earlier in your trip.
7% range increase ain't nothin'. We have how many threads on this forum talking about the heat pump? And there are people willing to buy the Plus Pack just for that, to gain roughly another 7%...maybe....in a narrow temperature window. I also wouldn't view it as 16 extra miles to use at the end, but 7% across the board, in all weather scenarios as well. We're also assuming it's just the added 7%, but there's all the other battery and motor management tweaks that make it potentially a more realistic range figure. So, the weather penalty isn't quite as much of a concern, maybe, as it would otherwise be. Example, with made up numbers:

MY21:
EPA: 233
Winter: 190

MY22:
EPA: 249
Winter: 203

And if this is coming as a result of tweaks to the software, then a buyer doesn't have to make the choice between 233 or 249 for the P*2.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,361 Posts
Anything is better than nothing. But 7% is not much unless you are obsessed with range. I'm not knocking the improvements, we always strive to move in that direction. But realistically the small increment is irrelevant except for the obsessed. If you are making a decision based on 16 miles of range, you are buying the wrong car.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top