Hyundai IONIQ Electric Gets Detailed EPA Ratings (City/Highway/Combined) – Becomes U.S.’ Most Efficient Vehicle


Hyundai IONIQ Electric Marina Blue

Hyundai IONIQ Electric Marina Blue

It’s official…

The EPA has released finalized figures for the Hyundai IONIQ Electric and we must admit that we’re more impressed now by this first electric Hyundai then we were when the automaker put out preliminary figures some time ago.

Before we dive into the figures, let us first point out this testing note:

(tested in the (default) Normal mode using (worst case) Level 1 paddle regeneration control)

So, your results will likely beat the EPA figures then if you up the regen and/or drive the car in a more efficient mode than Normal.

Here are the range figures:

IONIQ Electric EPA Ratings

IONIQ Electric EPA Ratings

That’s 135.4 miles in the city, 110 miles on the highway and 124 miles in combined driving (via a ~28 kWh battery). Not too shabby, but the real surprise is the vehicle’s efficiency.

City efficiency is listed at 150 MPGe. Highway is 122 MPGe and combined is 136 MPGe. These results are well above the automaker’s expected combined rating of 125 MPGe and in fact make IONIQ Electric the most efficient car in the U.S. It even beats the updated 133 MPGe rating of the Toyota Prius Prime.

The IONIQ clearly is hitting above expectations and we’re excited that it’ll launch in the U.S. in just a couple of months, but with a 200-mile IONIQ on the horizon, we wonder if this first IONIQ will be a success.

Categories: Hyundai

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

43 Comments on "Hyundai IONIQ Electric Gets Detailed EPA Ratings (City/Highway/Combined) – Becomes U.S.’ Most Efficient Vehicle"

newest oldest most voted

124 miles should be plenty. If we could make a 2011 Leaf work for several years, even with a degraded battery, 124 miles would be amazing.

I still don’t get how they allow these manufacturers to manipulate the EPA ratings of their vehicles. In this latest EV comparison, even though the Ioniq had higher EPA efficiency and range ratings, the i3 trounced it in the real world tests.

Awesome, now it all comes down to pricing and comparing that with the 17 e-golf and 17 Focus EV but it looks to have an edge when it comes to economy and range. Amazing!

Its listed on the EPA website, Hyundai’s site still says winter release. Any other news about dates, or will it be available in 50 states?

winter can last until the end of march… 😉

I’m in Phoenix, I don’t really understand the concept of winter.

Let me translate. It might not be available until the old people all leave to go back to Minnesota.


One of Hyundai’s IONIQ press releases from last week stated “early 2017”. I take this to mean Q1 2017.

We’ll likely hear some more details from Las Vegas (CES) in January 20117.

Remember, initial launch will be Southern California with other markets being added over 2017.

Hyundai has stated you’ll be able to order an IONIQ from any US dealer in all 50 states at some point. Not clear if this is just for IONIQ-hybrid, or all 3 powertrain variants.

Where is this kind of data at on the site?

I certainly do wish they’d give real-world figures, and not the synthesized, misleading “MPGe” figure. Or at least not just that. With a “~28 kWh” battery and a combined test result of 126 miles, it would appear that Hyundai is claiming the Ioniq Electric gets ~4.5 miles/kWh. However, according to the car’s Wikipedia article, the EPA tests only claim an “energy consumption of 25 kWh/100 mi”, which of course would come to 4 miles per kWh. For the older generation of BEVs, the most efficient car was the BMW i3, at 3.6 miles/kWh, and that was with a lightweight carbon-fiber body and special narrow tires. In the new generation, the Chevy Bolt does even better, with 3.97 miles/kWh. So how can the Ioniq Electric get, apparently, better energy efficiency than the Bolt? Well, for one thing, the Ioniq’s Cd is reported at .24, whereas the Bolt’s is a disappointing .32. Of course, that’s only half the equation; the actual drag has to take into account frontal area, so CdA is actually the important figure, and that figure is a lot harder to find. Generally what you find is only estimates; the actual exact frontal area may not be reported. But… Read more »

1 MPGe = 0.04775 km/kWh

Highway analysis:
122 MPGe = 5.83 km/kWh = 3.62 miles/kWh
122 MPGe = 17.17 kWh/100km

Right, but if you continue:
110 miles of range : 3,62 MPkWh = 30,4 kWh
How is that possible when the battery has only 28 kWh. I made this calculation for other newer EVs with similar results. The first Leaf numbers for rage and MPGe worked good.
Does anyone know why this math is not working anymore for the Eva numbers?

EPA ratings are mystery meat, so trying to relate various figures is futile. This is especially true since EV can get twice the efficiency at some speeds than others, something that can’t be captured with just one number.

One thing to keep in mind is that EPA range is based on battery to wheels while MPGe rating is based on wall socket to wheels (ie, includes charger loss). EPA numbers still don’t work out, but they get closer.

Charging loss. Apparently it takes 30,4 kWh from wall to charge the 28 kWh battery.

Sch asked: “Does anyone know why this math is not working anymore for the [EPA] numbers?” When the EPA first started using the misleading “MPGe” ratings, I tried to do some simple math analyses, and quickly realized that their MPGe ratings don’t appear to have a close relationship to actual kWh used or the range reported, and the difference between the two ratings seems to vary at random for different vehicles. So I can’t answer your question. The “MPGe” metric is a misleading crutch for those who are unfamiliar with the concepts of kW and kWh as efficiency ratings for cars, and possibly even worse is that the EPA’s reported MPGe numbers don’t seem to conform to reality. Furthermore, in using the term “MPGe”, the EPA is misleading uninformed auto buyers into thinking that PEVs (Plug-in EVs) perform in a manner similar to gasmobiles. This causes even more confusion than necessary, for several reasons. One of the more obvious is that gasmobiles in general get better efficiency (MPG) ratings on the highway than in town, whereas for PEVs it’s usually the opposite. The EPA would do a service to the public by reporting electrical energy usage and efficiency ratings only… Read more »

1 MPGe = 0,0297 miles/kWh

Is that wall to wheels or battery to wheels? What charger and what was the efficiency? What speed since EV efficiency range is far wider than gas cars? There are just too many questions than your simple conversion number.

It’s wall to wheels AC charging. EPA ratings obviously are based on EPA test cycles (city, highway and combined). Conversion factor from MPGe to miles/kWh is same for all test cycles.

AC L1 or L2? 1 kW, 1.4 kW, 3.3 kW, 3.6 kW, 6.6 kW, etc. etc. EVSE will determine power / voltage, which may also determine efficiency. Again, MPGe isn’t so simple.

I don’t know the power level used in testing. I would guess it’s either maximum power or manufacturer has liberty to choose the most efficient power. In any case 1 MPGe = 0.0297 miles/kWh.

You have a valid point, that the testing of efficiency is a complicated issue and there are several sources of error. But the conversion between MPGe and miles/kWh is a simple unit conversion.

Part of the confusion is that when the car’s computer displays miles/kWh, it is only displaying the actual kWh the controller is metering to the motor. It is not calculating in charging losses. Where the EPA numbers do include charging losses.

So when you compare the EPA kWh/100 mi or MPGe numbers to miles/kWh from the car, they are actually measuring two completely different things.

On top of that, car makers can voluntarily lower their test results, in case they fear customers may sue them for the numbers being far too optimistic. Like what happened to Hyundai/Kia and Ford:

This isn’t unique to EV’s, car makers can do that for any car. And it throws a monkey wrench into trying to do real world math.

I’m afraid you will continue to be frustrated trying to get any EPA numbers (regardless of units of measure) to be an exact match for exact math.

“The “MPGe” metric is a misleading crutch for those who are unfamiliar with the concepts of kW and kWh” Yes, it is a crutch. Very much so. And just like when you get crutches when you have a broken leg, crutches like MPGe are sometimes necessary when you care more about attracting people to buy EV’s than you care about everybody using the best units of measure. The thing is that we as EV enthusiasts are 1% of US car buyers. We want to attract the other 99% of buyers (a substantial majority of whom currently don’t even know the difference between a kW and a kWh) to buying EV’s. We should meet them on their terms, not force them too far out of their comfort zone. ——- “The sooner potential car buyers become familiar with those metrics…” Sure, some day they will all learn kW and kWh. And then we can throw away the MPGe crutch. But until then, we as EV enthusiasts should all be willing to learn MPGe. If we aren’t willing to take on that burden, why would we expect the 99% of new car buyers we want to attract to EV’s to take on the… Read more »

The IONIQ would appear to have much lower aerodynamic drag than either the i3 or the Bolt EV. They may also have reduced the losses in the electronics.

Aero drag matters even in city, as it is about 50% of the load on the drivetrain at ~30MPH.

Very few people realize the wind resistance, even at the lower in-town speeds. Ask any out of shape person how much more difficult it is to ride a bicycle at 20 mph vs 10 mph! When I was in really top notch recreational shape, I tried to hold 25 mph on the flats, no wind, and couldn’t do it for more than a mile. Professional racers can do it, but not us mere mortals.

25 MPH for a mile or two is easy with right body position. My record is 18 MPH average speed for 24 miles, and that includes traffic lights. On long stretches, I was going 25 MPH+ for miles, and I was just bike commuter.

Of course, this was after over 6 months of riding 20+ miles a day, thanks to government conspiracy to prevent me from driving.

Pushy, The EPA does provide the official kWh/100 mile rating:


Page 32:

It might be easier to do your math from there.

Thanks, Nix.

I couldn’t resist correcting your word problem.

“With a “~28 kWh” battery and a combined test result of 126 miles, it would appear that Hyundai is claiming the Ioniq Electric gets ~4.5 miles/kWh.”

There are 2 errors in the premise of this word problem.

1) It assumes all 28 kWh are usable. I searched, I couldn’t find how much is usable.
2) It fails to include charging losses.

The EPA numbers that show the combined rating of 4 miles/kWh (25 kWh/100 mi) includes both of these factors. This actually has nothing to do with MPGe vs kWh units.

If Hyundai just put a 45kWh battery in this car they would have a 200 mile EV with 100kW fast charging….

Yes idd, am I still the only one that thinks the basic Tesla Model 3 will have just a 50kWh battery in stead of the often said 60kWh?

What’s this about a regen paddle? Please tell me other manufacturers are not taking up GMs redundant paddle gimmick. Ugh!

No Tesla or i3 owner has ever said “gee, I wish I had another redundant input to use for regen!”

Yeah, the brake pedal is bad enough! Although regen doesn’t work when it is too cold or the battery is entirely full.

Why wouldn’t too cold not work well with regen? With TMS, battery would be at optimal temperature, so shouldn’t it work just the same? If you have Leaf or eGolf, it may not work well, but I think it’ll be ok with other cars.

My former 12 Leaf would not regen if the car had cold-soaked outside (e.g., at the office) on extremely cold days (such as 5 F or less). Presumably, this corresponded to the lower limit for charging the battery, which is all regen is doing (but at a much higher rate).

SparkEV asked:

“Why wouldn’t too cold not work well with regen? With TMS, battery would be at optimal temperature…”

Not necessarily. Leave (for example) a Tesla Model S outside and not plugged in overnight in bitterly cold weather, and the battery pack will be cold in the morning. Too cold to accept the high power input from regenerative braking. That’s why PEV’s (Plug-in EVs) all have to use friction braking, rather than regen, when the battery pack is too cold.

I’m quite happy to have an option to change the regen on the fly in my Leaf, beats having to keep my foot slightly depressed all the time when I want to coast to varying degrees. I don’t see it as a gimmick at all. Having to dig through a menu option every time I want to change it would be annoying.

While we are on the topic, I’m also happy that my car will regen more when using the brake pedal. Simpler to do what Tesla did, but not as efficient (for a regular driver).

Yes, that’s one of the few places where I’d “ding” Tesla cars; that using the brake pedal never activates regenerative braking.

As you say, that is simpler, and perhaps it’s safer; I dunno. But this is one area where I hope Tesla improves things in the future.

OUTSTANDING efficiency engineering by Hyundai here on this BEV and their PHEV edition will likewise be really excellent.

Hyundai (along with GM’s Voltec) is really out-engineering Toyota on high efficiency drivetrains now and they are to be congratulated on this achievement!

Despite the Trumpster/trickster’s attempts to roll back progress on autos, efforts like these will ensure that progress will continue to their logical conclusion worldwide.

in our forum,they did a lot of range tests.
the dealer in landshut(münich) already sold 36 electric ioniq in 1 month.

highway, cruise control 120kmh,outside temp.0 Celsius
18kwh energy consumption

sorry,the dealer is in landsberg,what is also close to munich