Audi E-Tron Electric SUV Charges At Sustained 150-kW Rate

DEC 19 2018 BY MARK KANE 39

Audi e-tron proves its 150 kW charging capability at a 175 kW charger

When Audi announced the e-tron, it promised charging capability of 150 kW (0-80% in around half hour), which is reasonable with its 95 kWh battery pack.

A recent presentation of the charging results recorded for a pre-production e-tron at a Fastned fast charging station proves that 150 kW is totally achievable.

Two tests were performed – one using 50 kW and one using 175 kW DC CCS Combo chargers. The first one doesn’t tell much, as the car was able to accept all the 50 kW that the charger was able to provide.

At the 175 kW charger, e-tron’s charging power depends on the state of charge (of course also on other factors like battery temperature). Starting below 30% SOC, charging power was at about 140 kW or so. Power was steadily increasing to 150 kW around 55% SOC and to maybe even 155 kW peak around 70%. Then the power drops a little bit and continues around 150 kW to nearly 80%. In other words, we can assume that the average from 30 to almost 80% is around 150 kW.

Before 80% SOC, charging power drops quickly to less than 110 kW at 82-83% SOC and then continues to decrease at a linear pace to 50 kW almost to full 100% SOC.

Overall, e-tron demonstrates great charging performance – one of the best that we have seen so far in a production car (pre-production, but it shouldn’t be much different in a production version). With 150 kW, the Audi e-tron is ready for the long-distance travel and with optional three-phase 22 kW on-board charger, it’s outstanding also for home/work/destination charging too.

Audi e-tron specs:

  • 0-60 mph in 5.5 seconds or 0-100 km/h  in 5.7 seconds
  • Top speed – 124 mph
  • about 399 km (248 miles) under WLTP test cycle
  • 95 kWh battery (36 cell modules, each module is equipped with 12 pouch cells, nominal voltage of 396 volts)
  • battery pack weight: 700 kilograms (1543.2 lb)
  • dual-motor all-wheel drive – up to 300 kW and 664 Nm in S mode (boost) or up to 265 kW and 561 Nm in D mode. Front motor is 135 kW, the rear is 165 kW (S mode).
  • Maximum tow rating – 1,800 kg (4,000 pounds) when properly equipped
  • 9.6 kW on-board charger (240 V, 40 A) in U.S. and 11 kW or 22 kW three-phase in Europe
  • DC fast charging up to 150 kW: 0-80% in 30 minutes

Audi e-tron prototype: Charging

Source: Fastned

Categories: Audi, Charging

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

39 Comments on "Audi E-Tron Electric SUV Charges At Sustained 150-kW Rate"

newest oldest most voted

Fantastic vehicle. Sexy beasty.

Eat your heart out Tesla!

e-Tron: 30 minutes 176 miles (assuming 220 miles of range EPA)
Model X: 30 minutes 170 miles

Yeah, I don’t think Tesla is losing any sleep here.

If customers bought a car based solely, or even largely, on miles of charge per 30 minutes, then no, Tesla wouldn’t give a rat’s you-know-what. But customers do care about a lot of things where Audi has an edge, like a familiar, local presence, being able to walk into a store, test drive and then buy that same car quickly, etc. Again: Tesla has done some phenomenal things to date, and I applaud them for their accomplishments just as enthusiastically as anyone here. But as the EV market grows and matures, some of the aspects of buying and owning a Tesla that enthusiasts loved will either make no difference to more mainstream buyers or will actually be a detriment. People make snarky comments here all the time about how car Z isn’t a “Tesla killer”, which misses the point. There won’t be a single “Tesla killer”, but there will be a whole bunch of vehicles from various companies that will eat into Tesla’s appeal, particularly on the lower-priced end of the market. This is why I doubt we’ll ever see any more than a token number of $35K Model 3s built and shipped. The Kona EV, Soul EV, Leaf 60,… Read more »

So far it’s been the haters that have been eating their hearts out while Tesla has been thriving, I doubt any of the new offerings will do much to change that. As for that $35K Model 3: I most definitely don’t see how non premium offerings could affect a premium offering’s sales at the same price, I think it’s quite the other way around.

So the way I see it you guys have a couple of more rounds of heart eating to go.

That debate has been happening for decades. Premium base model, or for the same price a fully loaded mainstream model?

Now it’s a bit different – premium 200 mile car, or mainstream 260 mile car for the same price.

Some will choose the premium, some will choose the mainstream, as has always happened.

A Model S 100D can add about 50% in 30 minutes (20-70). Bjorn has some nice videos on that topic (or any topic). That’s almost 170 EPA miles. I think the LR RWD Model 3 can also get to 170 miles in 30 minutes, but a Model X will not add 170 miles in 30 minutes.

So with the same battery a Model X will add less miles in 30 minutes than a Model S? Must be those darned falcon doors!

More likely the 20% consumption difference between the S&X.

Think about that question again real hard.
I’ll give you two hints.
1)Both the X 100D and the S 100D will add the same amount of kWh in those 30 minutes
2)The X gets 295 miles of range out of 100kWh and the S gets 335 miles.

So now the big question, if both cars can charge roughly 50 kWh in 30 minutes, will both add 168 miles, or will one of them just gain 148 miles?

And…how much does this embarrass GM’s Bolt DCFC rate–MadBro?

You know, since it takes about half an hour to add a paltry 50 miles or so to the Bolt’s battery.

On a 150A+ DCFC a Bolt EV will add about 100 miles in 30mins if the charge is started with an SOC below 20%.

Yeah, and its an unfair comparison anyway. Tesla has never had a car that is similar price wise to what people pay for a Bolt ev.

An I-Pace, or an E-Tron or a Porsche Taycan – yes those are fair comparisons since the competing Tesla is only a little more money.

But you can (with the tax credit) – usually buy 2 – lowly Bolt evs for the price of one Tesla.

The Bolt ev is built down to a price – a CHEAP CAR – if you will. It will be outperformed by the Tesla. Most people can live with that.

Which production cars are better??

In terms of KW it is actually the best we have ever seen in a production car.

In terms of kW/kWh, or C-rate the Ioniq is still better. It might only charge at 60-70 kW, but if you’d scale it up to 95 kWh, it would charge at 200-240 kW up to 80%, but then of course cooling would be harder and so on, so not really apples to apples.

Agreed, Tesla doesn’t really charge very fast, only around 1 to 1.5 C. My old 60 Ah / 22 kWh BMW i3 charges at 2 C up to 62% or so before tapering down to 1 C by 80%. However, since it is only 22 kW, the range isn’t good.

What people have to realize is that Tesla gets the range, power, and charge rate (miles per minute) by having large packs, and in the case of the Model 3, it is very efficient as well. It is much more difficult to work with low capacity packs and get high performance and fast charging.

The Tesla is less stressed under charging so the battery will last longer without taking as extreme of measures to cool it and such. The Audi is the same, it really isn’t charging very high C rate, so it isn’t that stressed. It sounds like they are more worried about current in cables and connectors than anything (cooled cable, etc).

Tesla uses NCA with less cycle life than NMC. So actually Teslas battery is more stressed even if the C-rates are lower.

But big packs see way less full cycles with high currents and more small cycles compared to small packs, so in general that choice of cell chemistry is not a problem and ageing over time becomes more important for users who do not get so many kilometers per year on their car. We still have to wait for data on that.

That is encouraging and I am a little jealous, given that I drive a Bolt. I kind of see 50 kWh as an absolute bare minimum, so 150 is great.


As in the ship that made all other battleships utterly obsolete in one fell swoop? Not with that range and not with those charging specs, great as they are. USS Model X and Model S and KMS Taycan are definitely not outclassed.

SMS Taycan 🙂

This is promising for other VW vehicles too

Exactly, even base ID will be 125 kW charging, but probably a lot more efficient, so probably more miles/min. Depending on what VW decides to bring to the US (hopefully something affordable since they don’t want to bring base ID here), I would add them to my list of considerations. AP and constant updates are still a great feature though, and I have told myself I won’t buy another car without OTA updates of critical software (i.e. I don’t like waiting 4 months and have a dealer trip to update my Lane Keep Assist or HV range calculation, etc).

The trouble is that those of us in America who really want the base ID probably won’t get the chance and will have to wait for the Crozz…

I really wish car makers would sell something besides their biggest cars in the US.

That sustained charge rate is really awesome.

Charging speed in kW is rather uninteresting.
What’s much more interesting are km/h.
And I fear that the etron will not take the crown here because of its horribly high consumption. The I-Pace is already fairly bad. But the etron appears to be worse, especially when you compare the WLTP ratings (470 km vs. 417 km). So it seems that Audi needs the 150 kW charging speed to stay somewhat competitive on long range travels.
When using the usualy calculations for real world range (WLTP/3*2) then the Audi won’t even make 300 km before it needs recharging.

Will be interesting to see the first (true) test results.

I was disappointed by the mileage of this car, and also skeptical on its actual chargeability. Well… I was wrong about that last part. Of course, I would have preferred a more efficient car, but this charging power achievement is a total game-changer. Out of my price-range, though…

I agree wholeheartedly. Best charging speed this side of the Thai-Khan, worse efficiency than the I-Pace. I really like a lot of the details on the e-Tron (esp the dual charge ports!), but it’s a shame that it’s such a hog. Fast charging isn’t going to help you when the vast majority of chargers that are still limited to 50 kW; until that changes an Ioniq will walk all over the e-Tron.

I’ll say it again: put this technology in something that’s actually optimised for aerodynamics and efficiency! You could probably almost double the effective km/h charging speed! Well… Actually that car exists. It’s called the Thai-Khan.

People keep saying “aerodynamics” as if this is an issue. But looking at the car and it’s reported aero, the issue seems to be weight, because they choose to make a luxury car. I could be wrong, naturally, but the evidence so far suggests that is the case.

The good news is that if you want that tech in a more efficient car, it is likely all the new offerings from VW will be worth looking into.

The Germans are definitely moving the meter on quick charging which is great. Mind you, e-Tron definitely needs the extra charging rate to make up for low efficiency. For instance, assuming a 220 miles EPA range that 30 minutes of charging won’t net you (substantially)more miles than the more efficient Model X despite the better charging specs.

This is a PRE-production model car, and this is VW group. After dieselgate you have to ask if this performance is real and what the production models will actually do, and how long the batteries will last if charged at these rates.

Or you could read the reviews the car is getting, realize that the people who built this and the diesel engineers are not the same people, and notice that based on the cooling system installed around those batteries they obviously took this more seriously than Tesla…

looks like it has hidden top buffer

352 miles per hour isn’t bad. I’ve gotten up to 385 on my 2013 Model S. The 2017 Model 3’s can get around 480. The Tesla semi is supposed to be around 800 MPH in what… 2020 or 2021. Assuming the E-Tron is a 2019, it sounds like they still got 5 or more years of catching up to do.

If it didn’t have the little dip at 70% and continued up, that profile looks like SparkEV (18.4 kWh) with 3X bigger battery. This is what I had hoped with Bolt since Bolt has 3X bigger battery than SparkEV. Oh well, concede to Audi for now…

Range is disappointing. 9.6KW onboard charger is good.

… cool, but the range with a 95 kwh battery is less than the much bigger Model X with a 75 kwh battery. This is while Model X is still based on the 6 years old and heavy 18650 cells. As Tesla open-sourced all their battery patents it seems like Audi does not want to produce a competitive EV. Or, maybe, they just can’t.

Or, and just bare with me a second on this, the issue is all the weight they put in the car making it the car they think that the typical Audi buyer wants and maybe they actually know their own market?

Nah, I am sure you know the average Audi buyer better than Audi. You should send them your resume… 🙄

Nice!! this is definitely a move in the right direction for EV’s.