Compare EVs Card Updated With Hyundai Sonata PHEV & Audi A3 e-tron

NOV 18 2015 BY MARK KANE 22

2016 Hyundai Sonata Plug-in Hybrid

2016 Hyundai Sonata Plug-in Hybrid

It’s time for a mid-month Compare EVs Card update for those who like to compare up-to-the-minute prices and all-electric range of all the plug-in electric cars available on the market (plus a few older cars that are no longer sold, just in case you wish to compare those too).

Most of the new data comes on plug-in hybrid part of the spectrum:

  • Hyundai Sonata PHEV got MSRP and now offers up to 27 miles of all-electric range at similar price to Ford Fusion Energi, although 50 kW motor power brings some limits on speed and acceleration
  • Audi A3 e-tron got an official 17 miles EPA range, provided you equip the ultra low resistance tires (otherwise 16 miles)
  • Mercedes S550e got slight price bump ($1,250) for model year 2016 (as did many ICE models as well)
  • BMW X5 xDrive40e (up to 13 miles)
Plug-in Cars (with engine on-board) Range & Price (U.S.) Comparison (November 14, 2015)

Plug-in Cars (with engine on-board) Range & Price (U.S.) Comparison (November 14, 2015)

For the all-electric cars, we note:

  • all Tesla Models now included (in the future we will compare all current battery and motor versions of every car)
  • Nissan LEAF got official EPA rating (in line with expectations at 107 miles for the new 30 kWh version)
All-electric Cars Range & Price (U.S.) Comparison (November 14, 2015)

All-electric Cars Range & Price (U.S.) Comparison (November 14, 2015)

As more EVs barely fit on the graph, to compare all we switched to vertical (please enlarge for better viewing):

Plug-in Cars Range & Price (U.S.) Comparison (November 14, 2015)

Plug-in Cars Range & Price (U.S.) Comparison (November 14, 2015)

Categories: General

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

22 Comments on "Compare EVs Card Updated With Hyundai Sonata PHEV & Audi A3 e-tron"

newest oldest most voted

PHEVs under 50 miles AER should not be considered, as companies use the instant torque of the Electric motor and it’s power but don’t give a **** about the reduction of pollution. Those cars are for greenwashing and strict compliance purposes only.

I totally disagree. PHEVs under 54 miles electric epa range should not be considered. Because saving 50-80% of the fuel is superbad.

In all honesty only pure EVs running on salt water based, solar power grown algae batteries should be considered.

Would you sarcastically or seriously agree on PHEV below 30 miles? My point is that there is about no progress if we account those cars with such a waek electric range as Electric cars and brag about it. It is totally wrong.

Why should he agree on AER below any value? What matters is having PHEVs with a variety of AERs that cover people’s normal daily ranges at the lowest possible price, while still allowing them to take trips that require zero planning or anxiety. Some people will be fine with a 10 mile AER, and others will need the Volt’s 53 or even the i3REx’s 72 mile AER. But it makes little financial sense (for anyone who isn’t buying a PEV primarily for ideological reasons) to pay for and haul around more battery than they normally need/can use, even _if_ the additional weight didn’t reduce their ICE MPG for trips beyond the AER.

I’m disappointed with the Sonata PHEV not because of its 27 mile AER, which should cover around 50% of the U.S. population’s routine daily driving needs,

but because it’s base-priced higher than both the 53 mile AER, 4.5 pax Volt as well as the 19 mile AER 5 pax Fusion Energi (its nearest competitor), despite coming onto the market after both of them.

“despite coming onto the market after both of them.”

This is exactly why they should not be considered as EVS.
All the upcomings are in the same sacking range. Companies use the torque and power of the electric motor, but not more.
They get the subsidies, they greenwashing, and it ends there.
They have no intention of increasing the all electric range of their hybrids.

Green sites continue to compile and count these jokes as electric cars. But the resulting pollution saved is very small under a certain threshold.

Of course they’re EVs, they’re all propelled, wholly or partly, by electric motors. You may not find them valuable, but if EVs are ever to become mainstream they have to appeal to the general, non-ideological public with middle-class incomes, and that means they need to get the base MSRP down below $30k. Otherwise, aside from a small niche of BEV purists, and people with the income to afford a Tesla Model S/X, EVs won’t sell, especially not with current U.S. gas prices. And they aren’t selling, because without large subsidies they aren’t economically justifiable, and the average person isn’t willing to spend several thousands more for environmental reasons. PHEVs with modestly-sized batteries and AERs may be less than what you consider ideal, but if they’re affordable by far more people without subsidies and don’t incur range anxiety or take up lots of passenger and cargo space, they’re likely to be much more acceptable. I’ve been saying for the past 3 years or so that the Gen 1 Volt is a Tesla Model 3 available six or seven years earlier, but I think even the Volt’s battery size/AER is excessive, if the price is above $30k. I wanted and still want… Read more »

I’d like to see a chart that shows the (after tax credit) purchase price translated into dollars per mile of range along with dollars per G of acceleration.

As far as range per dollar goes, the Chevy SparkEV is king at $225.55 per mile of range.

Next, the two Leafs, the i-MiEV, Fortwo, e-Golf, and Soul all come in before the first Tesla, which is the S90 at $275.90 per mile of range.

The other thing to consider when talking $/AER mile is that each additional mile of AER is less valuable. For instance, the first 40 miles are the most valuable, as shown by how much of the Volt’s miles are driven electric. Then the next 40 are a little less valuable. By the time you’re at 240 miles, the next 40 miles of range up to 280 miles are far less valuable than the first 40. So, sure, the Tesla seems like a pretty good deal $/range mile, but if I had bought one, I would have only used miles 80-280 3 or 4 times, so it’s not as good of a deal as the raw numbers indicate. Miles 160-280, for sure, have very little value to me. I would use them zero times ever.

Another example: If a car had 1,000 miles range, and cost $200,000, it would be a “great deal” at $200/mile. In reality though, probably 600 of those miles are completely pointless to 98% of the population and the car is actually a terrible value for most people.

“The other thing to consider when talking $/AER mile is that each additional mile of AER is less valuable.” What you are saying is partly true. I do think that each extra mile in range gets less valuable as range increases, but this function only applies after a “required minimum range” has been met. The average miles driven per day in the U.S. is about 37 miles. For any given month, probably 90% of the population don’t exceed 80 miles on a single day even once. But, while its true that people don’t usually drive more than 80 miles/day, I don’t think 80 miles range is the minimum threshold. If this were the case, the Nissan Leaf would be selling in numbers comparable to ICE vehicles. If range above 80 miles was significantly “less important” than the first 80, then electric cars would have been viable since the 1960’s using only lead/acid batteries. I think Elon Musk is right. The range “sweet spot” is somewhere between 200 and 300 miles. An electric vehicle must have at least 200 miles to compete with gasoline vehicles. But he also acknowledges that with any range above about 400 miles, you are just pulling… Read more »

Agreed, the “required minimum range” has to be met, then every mile afterward is worth less. Point is, however, that everyone’s minimum is different. For me, anything over 80-100 is significantly less valuable, and anything over 200 is practically just plain a waste of money, weight, etc. I’m not saying the chart is useless, it’s an interesting chart, but for many people, the Tesla’s “value” is greatly diminished because it has far more range than many people need.

Regarding the Tesla 40, the value REALLY isn’t there for that one compared to the other Tesla’s, because you’re paying for the fancy car, and only saving a small percentage by going with the smallest range. If you’re going to pay $60k anyway, why not another $10k (~20%) to get a LOT more range (50%). The value was good for $/AER compared to some cars, maybe, but not good compared to other Teslas, correct?

That’s the other consideration with the chart. Its comparing basically just the batteries of the cars and ignoring the car itself which is a huge part of the cost.

It’s an interesting chart, so long as people realize it’s limitations.

I’m a medical courier who drives 500 miles a day…Just because you drive less than 80 miles/day does not mean that, as you say, “many people” drive less than 80 miles per day.

By the same token fact that I’m a medical courier mean that many people drive more than 500 miles per day.

What you and I do has nothing to do with “most” people, which is to say, the majority of the mass market for vehicles when talking about cars.

And it is the market which has demonstrated that the minimum acceptable range for “most people” is between 200-300 miles. Its been this way forever with gas vehicles. And not surprisingly, the market is showing that the minimum required range for most people in electrics is between 200-300. Elon said it, the market demonstrates it, sales prove it, and the LACK of a market for what would be cheaper 40 mile range lead/acid vehicles verifies it.

If Tesla and Chevy keep their word, the Model 3 will come in at $137.50 per mile of range while the Bolt comes in at $187.50 per mile

In spite of a confused general circulation New Orleans newspaper report that quoted Musk/Straubel as saying the Model 3 would have 250 miles of range, they actually said at least 200 miles and hopefully a bit more. They also said 250 miles is a good target range today (which Tesla achieves in their existing ~$80,000 vehicles but they never promised to achieve that as the minimum base EV range for a $35,000 Model 3. You can watch the video yourself on YouTube.

Meanwhile, GM has repeatedly said the Bolt will get a minimum of 200 miles and that test miles are easily achieving that.

Needs of the many, I know. But boy oh boy, it just feels awful seeing this. Too bad I don’t have the raw data. I’d break it apart:

BEV without DCFC
PHEV >= 40 miles AER
PHEV < 40 miles AER


Why is the RAV4 EV still on this list?

One thing these charts show me is that Tesla has no competition in long range bev space, contrary to all the Tesla killer articles that come out continually, the truth is, no vehicle has, even by the wildest stretch, come close to Tesla’s hegemony in this arena.

The flipside of that coin is that the cheapest Tesla I can buy today S70 RWD is $91,500 CDN. That’s with the Ontario $8,500 rebate.

So we’ll have to wait and see what the model 3 will really cost. I know Musk said $35k before incentives. But that’s USD and the way the CDN$ is going and the 13% HST we’re looking at $44K for the base model. (1.33*1.13*35 = $52.6K – $8.5K = $44.1K)

With the 8,000$ from QC, it is 85,300$ How do you come with 91,500$ ?

Because he calculate better than you.
Base, base price on Tesla CND site for the 70 RWD no option, not at all zip zero is 87 300$+ 1 300$(frais de destination et de réglementation)= 88 600 cnd$ + taxes(calculated BEFORE deduction) goes up to 101 867.85$ and THEN you subtract the 8 000$ incentive and you only pay
93 867.85$CND
Good for You?
If not prove me wrong and don’t claim gas and maintenance saving as all those EV provide them anyway.

Yes, but their is growing evidence that Audi and other companies are eventually going to build compelling EVs thanks to Tesla’s pressure and that validates Musk’s plan all along.