See Which EV Wins An Efficiency Showdown

JAN 22 2019 BY DOMENICK YONEY 59

Tesla Model 3 vs Chevy Bolt vs Hyundai Ioniq vs Tesla Model S

Who is the king (or queen, if you like) of electric vehicle efficiency? For a long time, the Hyundai Ioniq Electric has worn this crown. Indeed, the EPA rates the 2018 edition at 136 MPGe for combined highway and city driving. This is good enough to edge out its closest competitor, the Tesla Model 3, which wears a 130 MPGe combined rating. But does that really translate in the real world? There’s one way to find out.

In the video above, electric vehicle YouTuber Bjorn Nyland has rounded up owners of the Ioniq Electric and various flavors of Model 3 — from rear-wheel-drive Long Range to Performance — along with a Chevy Bolt and, for laughs, a Tesla Model S. After getting them assembled in one place, the group gets their motors running and head out on the highway. The EV convoy covers a route of about 77 miles, returning to the original starting point to compare figures.

Spoiler alert*
Among the various Model 3 on hand, it was thought that the one driven by Bjorn would be the most efficient. It’s a Long Range rear-wheel drive variant, sitting on 18-inch wheels while wearing the standard issue aerodynamic wheel covers. As the results are tallied, it turns out that this car gave the best result among the Tesla vehicles with an average score of 232 Wh per mile (144 Wh/km).

As you can see in the image above, the result was close, but in this test the Model 3 also managed to edge out the Hyundai Ioniq. The Korean car, in turn, managed to stay ahead of the Dual Motor versions of the mid-size Tesla and even a rear-wheel drive car wearing 19-inch wheels. For its part, the Chevy Bolt finished better only to the full-size Model S. Sadly, there was no Nissan LEAF involved in the action, but judging by the EPA figures, it would have been edged out by the Chevy.

Of course, this wasn’t a scientific undertaking. If the route had been more city-traffic oriented, the Ioniq Electric may have easily cleaned up, if its 150 MPGe city rating is as accurate as we expect it is. Still, it gives us a good indication of how these cars stack up, as well as how factors like all-wheel-drive can impact efficiency.

In the final analysis, we have to say the RWD Model 3 and the Ioniq Electric will have to share the efficiency crown. It should be interesting to see how these numbers shift in the future when the Hyundai hatchback gets a bigger battery later this year.

Source: YouTube

 

Categories: Chevrolet, Hyundai, Tesla, Videos

Tags: , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

59 Comments on "See Which EV Wins An Efficiency Showdown"

newest oldest most voted

It’s not fair. Tesla cheated by making better car.

LMAO, MadBro is going to be furious (again)!

Furious about what? The Model 3 is superior to the Bolt when it comes to efficiency driving at highway speeds over 65 mph. There was never any question about that. The everyday-use friendly hatch/CUV form factor of the Bolt hurts when it comes to high speed driving.

If we handicap based on cost, the Bolt beats the Model 3! Though the Ioniq wipes the floor with everyone then.

This is just looking at efficiency without regard to cost. But you are right that Ioniq is impressive engineering (ie, balancing cost with efficiency). Just wish it’s more powerful and more range even for bit more money (you can’t buy IoniqEV below MSRP). That pretty much describes Tesla 3.

Too bad Hyundai only sells like 15 Ioniq electrics a month.

Ioniq Electric is actually being sold?!?! Wow, I’ve seen more Unicorns and Ioniq EV’s.

Pretty sure they sell more than that each day.

They don’t stock em, that’s why you can’t buy less than MSRP.

They are really stocking it more like IEVs said – there’s stock close to me in NJ and Maryland now.

You can only buy the Ioniq EV in the L.A. area and they only sold about 300 in 2018. Unless they bring far more if and when the 39 kWh hour version arrives it will not really count for anything.

Really? I got my Ioniq EV in Maryland in November, and brought it to PA.

Yes, but the model3 is packed with technology, superior handling and performance, better safety, better autonomous tech and its more efficient.

Even though it’s more expensive, still the best value car there by miles.

That same logic can be applied to many many different scenarios. Shockingly a BMW 3 series is a better car than a Toyota Corolla. And yet the Corolla outsells it by many times over. Huh….suckers by Toyota Corollas I guess.

You are right in a way.. They no longer make this car.

I’m rather satisfied with the Bolt ev’s performance as it is the larger car and more practical as it is basically a Station Wagon, and as such it is not particularly aerodynamic.

NewsCoulomb thinks he could’ve done better since he was detoured and possibly windy. But then he was running with lighter wheels while Tesla 3 Performance had sticky tires, so it’s hard to say.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLy-ck6bydA

Because I always obey the law, I never exceed 65 MPH or 55 MPH in city freeways, I don’t know the efficiency at 75 MPH. (that’s the honest truth, officer.)

Well atleast your Bolt EV is more efficient then the Model S P85+ 😁😁🖒

The only efficiency number that matters to me is efficiency at 80MPH. Slower driving means shorter trips where I don’t have to stop and charge anyway.

dang… where is the speed limit 80? 70 is the highest that I can find in Arkansas.

It is 80 mph through much of the central west states. Not to mention, driving in GA or probably AR I suspect the average passenger vehicle traffic speed is more like 75 mph.

I say that as I have driven around Atlanta a lot and cars regularly pass me doing over 100 mph on I-75 between Chattanooga and Atlanta with average probably close to 80 mph and also on I-285 the average speed was more like 75 mph even though it was posted 55 mph (when I lived there). Again, passenger vehicles, trucks tend to more closely follow speed limits.

I’m not even aware of interstates that have 70. Can’t tell you the last time I was on an interstate with that low of a speed limit.

You do not get out much. Much of the West has Interstates higher than 70.

And the Tesla will definitely be the winner at that speed. Bolt efficiency plummets at those high speeds.
Ioniq will be quite similar, but of course the small battery means you won’t be travelling far at 80mph no matter how efficient it is. Hope they upgrade it soon.

Just one data point but just came back yesterday with the fam to Atlanta from Orlando in a Model 3 LR RWD with 18″ aero wheels. 3 people and luggage. Average speed was 75 mph. Temperatures were moderate in the mid 50’s going south then mid 50’s dropping to low 40s coming back north. Heading south we got 253 Wh/mi and heading north we got 262 Wh/mi.

I’m actually most interested in the efficiency in everyday driving since that accounts for the vast majority of the miles I drive. Electricity isn’t free.

Yes exactly! I disagree strongly with those who claim that the low efficiency of the iPace and eTron don’t matter that much.

It matters for electricity cost, DC recharging cost, and DC recharging speed.

I’ve said that every EV buyer will look carefully at highway MPGe for their second EV.

I think it’s the single most important engineering figure of merit: highway MPGe given size & performance (which are commercial market decisions).

Yes, that is why trucks sell so poorly.

my avg is 70mph on freeway with no traffic.

Interesting, not sure on how accurate, but our Bolt has been at 4m/kW for months, which includes highway and more local roads with highway speeds up to the ‘legal limit’. Such would put it at 250W/mile and move up a spot.

kW (power) != kWh (energy). 4 mi/kW and 250 W/mi are meaningless values whereas 4 mi/kWh and 250 Wh/mi are valid efficiency values. It’s important to use the correct abbreviations to avoid confusion.

Speed matters since aero power is proportional to cube of speed. NC was keeping watch on his average speed. I get 4.7 mi/kWh average from LA to San Diego and back. Some freeway speeds, yes, but average speed is not even close to 65 MPH.

A recent highway trip with speeds of 65mph in the cold rain put my 2017 Leaf at 2.9 miles/kWh, or for the table above, about 345 Wh/mile. I wish I had a larger battery so that this huge loss over my summer average of 208 Wh/mile wasn’t so limiting in where I can go. I don’t hit highways often, but it would be nice if I didn’t need to borrow my son’s ICE when I want to stretch my legs a bit.

It’s too bad that Elon Musk decided one night to suddenly end production of the most efficient Model 3 (the 3LR RWD). I guess the Tesla board of directors does absolutely nothing.

I bet the mid-range has the same efficiency. of course won’t travel as far on a charge.

EPA numbers and on paper Mid-Range has less efficiency…. however, I’ve been getting about 240 wh/mi on mine with mostly highway driving and some use of heat over winter. I wish Bjorn included a Mid-Range in his efficiency test.

Yeah, someone needs to do an MR vs LR RWD efficiency test!

Oh, and drag race them while they’re at it to see if the acceleration is actually different, too, or just marketing.

It is too bad that they didn’t include an i3 BEV in the test. BMW is very conservative in their ratings as you can see from the Autocar test results:

https://i.imgur.com/rIzk2U7.jpg

How the hell did it beat the Ionic?! I demand a recount!

Cd on Ioniq = 0.24, Tesla 3 = 0.22. I think frontal area is similar, so Tesla would have bit of an advantage at illegal high speed; I think that road is 65 MPH limit, but they were keeping 75.

Yes but with x2 the battery and a bigger car.

They are close enough that any number of minor differences would account for it…not to mention random experimental noise/error. Tire pressure, tread, driving style of the driver, tread life remaining, HVAC usage, etc etc.

Tesla 3 is .23

For me the effienciy test on German Autobahn from NextMove was most interesting.
Model 3 LR RWD
https://nextmove.de/tesla-model-3-reichweitentest-bei-150-vs-120-km-h-auf-autobahn/

150 km/h: 229 Wh/km ( How cool is that ???!!!! )
120 km/h: 164 Wh/km

Speed between 120 km/h and 150 km/h is very comfortable here and I think no other car can top the M3 in efficiency at these speeds.

The low aero drag on the 3 really helps at high speed. (Plus everything else of course)

The Prius PHEV gets 133 MPGe in all electric mode. So these BEVs are really not that exceptional and should do much better than that considering the Prius has a transaxle to deal with.

If there’s ever a Prius that can drive all electric at 75 MPH going up hill for the distance of this test and doesn’t have a ICE, then let’s see. Until then, it doesn’t even qualify to compare.

The Prius is only half the efficiency of a model3 and the performance is truly awful.

A cute ‘test’, and thanks for doing it.
Too many uncontrolled variables for this to be very meaningful.
Sorry, but anyone interested in efficiency doesn’t drive at 75mph. Happy nobody got a ticket as the maximum speed limit on that track I believe is 65mph.
In real life, I doubt that during a trip a different charging station would be selected based on this consumption variation. A couple of more minutes DCFC’ing because of the differences is negligible.
The driver-to-driver variation can easily exceed a 10% consumption difference for the same car, even in this semi-controlled ‘test’. Heck, put a good hypermiler behind the wheel and the EPA ratings can readily be exceeded by 30%.
A better controlled metric would be measured wall-to-wheels consumption, as the displayed battery-to-wheels numbers that are being bandied about would need calibration authentication.
I have yet to talk to a BEV owner who considers ‘efficiency’ as a parameter of interest when it comes to operating cost, unlike ICE vehicle owners.
Flame suit on.

True stuff. A simple dyno test would have gotten a true number. End of the day it’s range not the specific efficiency.

I agree wall to wheels kwh is the only accurate way to see what the cost is. I have a model 3 and charge at home 240v and 32amps. When I installed a WH meter on the charging circuit I was surprised at the kwh losses. The onboard trip meters are very misleading. Battery maintenance and the vampire should not be left out of an efficiency test as well as climate control. I have no idea what the losses are for cars other than Tesla M3, but if you drive the M3 around 30 miles per day in cold weather the wh/m on a 24hr basis will surprise you. This car is not fuel efficient for short trips in cold weather.
Since Jan 1st I have driven 603 miles. My lifetime trip meter shows 266 wh/m and my wall meter shows 247kwh or 410 wh/m.
Having said that I really enjoy this car and expect to drive it for a long time.

A better way to compare the energy use would be to fully charge each vehicle, run the course and then measure the AC KWH to fully charge at the end. This uncovers those hidden losses.

That actually would introduce new variables. Because the amount of energy required to charge a battery isn’t a constant value. There are many variables that changes charging efficiency.

Although charging power varies (decreasing as SoC inreases), the amount of energy going into the Vehicle can be unambiguisly measured. AC charging is primarily a charger efficiency issue whereas with DCFC it’s IR losses in both the battery pack as well as the cabling.

The EPA measures energy at the wall so that charger losses are included. That is hard for the average person to do, but it does matter and could change the results of this test.

Is measuring consumption with GOM in the car really the right way to do it?
It doesn´t make a clear look wich car is the most efficient.

I believe Hyundai Ioniq´s consumption is lower. But if it is not, than it´s because the round shape without as few edges as possible.
Also Tesla Model 3 cx= 0.23, Ioniq cx= 0.24

Too bad the Mid-Range TM3 wasn’t included…