Jaguar I-PACE Tested At 350 kW Ultra-Fast Charger

SEP 29 2018 BY MARK KANE 63

Jaguar I-PACE initially is not even ready for 100 kW charging.

Bjørn Nyland continues tests of the Jaguar I-PACE and took the car to the IONITY ultra-fast charging station in Germany, that in theory should be able to put out 350 kW at 800 V (or at least half of that in case of lower voltage battery packs).

Officially, Jaguar I-PACE is rated for 100 kW from CCS Combo chargers (0-80% charging should take around 40 minutes). However, in reality, it was good only for about 84 kW at peak and, according to Bjørn, Jaguar is expected to make 100 kW (or even 120 kW) possible later (in coming weeks or months).

As you can see on the graph provided by Bjørn, Jaguar I-PACE doesn’t offer charging power equal to Tesla cars, although higher-voltage battery packs seem to help a little bit.

The advantage for long-distance travel is to leave the ultra-fast chargers at around 60-70% state-of-charge (around 50% SOC power is decreasing) or at around 85% in the case of ordinary 50 kW chargers (I-PACE can take up to 48.6 kW from those units).

Charging power comparison in kW

Charging speed comparison in km/h (it takes into account energy consumption)

Below you can see that high energy consumption of the I-PACE translates to lowest pace of replenishing range among other long-range EVs (Tesla Model X, Kia Niro EV or Hyundai Kona Electric).

Jaguar I-Pace specs:

  • 90 kWh battery for up to 480 km (298 miles) of range (WLTP)
  • 0-100km/h (62 mph) 4.8 seconds / 0-60 mph (sec) 4.5 seconds
  • Top speed mph 200  km/h (124 mph)
  • two permanent magnet electric motors; synchronous – 400 PS (294 kW) total system output
  • all-wheel drive
  • 0-80% DC fast charging in 40 minutes using 100 kW CCS Combo
  • 0-100% AC charging using 7 kW 0n-board charger in nearly 13 hours

Categories: Charging, Jaguar, Videos

Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

63 Comments on "Jaguar I-PACE Tested At 350 kW Ultra-Fast Charger"

newest oldest most voted
buu

so you ripped information form his video and not even a link?

Eveplayer77

Oh come on, its a search away

u_serious?

Why do all EV manufacturers give an “up to” rating for DCFC and nobody can ever achieve that? That’ sh1tty of them.
So far Tesla has been the most accurate. User post videis of their 100-120kW charge rates.

Lou Grinzo

The old joke is that when a company claims performance on some metric “up to X” it means that despite many attempts, configurations, etc. they found it physically impossible to do better than X.

dan

That’s not true. The Tesla starts to taper at 50%, compared to say an i3 that doesn’t taper till 80%.

WARREN

Yup, the i3 33kWh charges very quickly. The rate blows away the Bolt, even though the Chevy pack is twice as big. Go figure.

http://i.imgur.com/NBhp4Ru.jpg

George Bower

Warren,

I3 is also the only pack that uses direct Cooling. Where they run the refrigerant directly in the cooling tubes below the pack. No glycol.

Mint

That’s not a fair comparison at all.

The i3 started charging at 10% SoC, i.e. 11 miles of range remaining. If the Bolt started in a similar state, it would take the same 23 kWh in 25 min. On top of that, with any given amount of energy, the Bolt will drive 4% further on the highway.

I know you’re an i3 diehard, but no need to misinform others. The i3 does not have superior charging to the Bolt under any equal conditions.

Mint

The stated 95 kWh seems way above usable, too.

The charger only delivered 71 kWh from 10-100%, and assuming there’s nothing nonlinear about the bottom 10%, that works out to only 79kWh delivered for a full charge, so maybe 75kWh usable from the pack?

Other figures: Bjorn’s data works out to 4.5 rated km per kWh delivered for the IPace, 5.4 for the larger X, and 7.7 for the Kona. But this may not be apples-to-apples: the IPace data suggests a full charge is only 360km, so I don’t know what rating he’s using (certainly not WLTP).

antrik

Probably his own testing? Just guessing, though.

Another Euro point of view

That “Teslabjorn” seems to be about the only one conducting such key tests boggles my mind. To those of us having the need & inclination for fast highway cruisers like the A6 TDI I currently own super fast charging is exactly what will make us abandon ICE.

Jan

He is not the only one. The german blogger Dirk Henningsen did a similar test and was disappointed about the charging speed. Due to the low production numvers of the iPace and the low amount of high speed chargers, the probability to get hands on both is pretty low. Dirk got his Jaguar iPace in Hamburg and also needed to drive to Denmark to get to one of the first Ionity chargers.

Get Real

Yes, Another Euro is proud of his “Clean Diesel”!

Davek

The fact that he’s a regular poster on this website would indicate that he’s (she’s?) more than a little interested in EVs. For some people who really do need to rip thousands of highway kilometres on a regular basis, there isn’t really a good option right now, short of a Tesla for north of six figures. So yeah, I get why he drives an A6 Diesel. I was also in a Diesel until pretty recently, because it was the most efficient car I could get for my use case and in my budget. I say cut people some slack; for the most part just being here is evidence that we’re all on the same side.

And once someone brings out a mid-sized electric wagon with an 80+ kWh battery that can charge at 150+ kW and doesn’t require you to sell any major organs to pay for it, I’m sure AEPOV will be on it like white on rice. I might be too 🙂

earl colby pottinger

Example: I travel from Oshawa Ontario to Miami Florida or 2450 kilometers in distance at least 4-6 times a year. Now I am no speed demon and have no problem taking two or three days doing the journey but in my ICE car I only need to make four gas stops to do the trip. Assuming I do two stops at a motel with or near a charger I will still need 6 extra stops to recharge the car going one way if I drive a Tesla.

I wonder if a slower route that will give me more range is possible?

For most other BEV cars out there the amount stopping to recharge will become a major headache.

So far for my needs it is Tesla for range or Bollinger to work up north on my property.

HR

Assuming you do full recharge at lunch and supper time that takes care of 4 stop over two days. Leaving only one extra stop per day. Not too bad considering the distance.

A model 3 LR would be you best bet to minimize the charging time (considering it’s excellent efficiency on the highway).

antrik

If you do these trips only a few times a year, I’d assume a good PHEV might be your best option?

(Though frankly, it probably wouldn’t save much time over a Model 3 LR, unless you tend to do very rare/short rest stops…)

Riggald

WLTP has 4 cycles – and one of them is pretty much exactly what we are after. 12 minutes of cruising at 71-73mph, from a standing start.
But the WLTP does not publish that “Extra High” cycle separately.
The EPA Highway cycle is 48mph average, with a peak of 53mph. The EPA MPGe rating includes losses in the actual wall charger, which also makes it harder to use, for estimating usage and range.

Riggald

I-Pace is currently restricted to 200A, pending an OTA to take it to 240A (100kW).

This OTA is scheduled for ‘soon’, afaict.

The onboard hardware is restricted to 110-120kW (so I expect it’s 117kW/280A) Supposedly that is planned for another OTA at some point.

CDspeed

As I’ve read the I-Pace’s quick charge capability is software limited, but it has the hardware capability to get up to 120 kw. It will be unlocked in a future OTA update, why they’re limiting it initially is a bit of a strange move.

wavelet

Why strange? They may not (for example) be 100% confident of how the TMS would handle 100kW charging in very hot climates, and might want to test the charging system at 84kW for say 6 months on a decent number of cars, before enabling the 100kW max. As long as they aren’t advertising false charge rates, I see no problem here.

Recall that Tesla at some point released a SW update that allowed quicker acceleration for some variants of the Model S — presumably they were playing it safe with the motor controller, and, after they decided it could handle it, allowed it to use more current.

arne-nl

Tesla did the same thing. Not so strange.

philip d
One thing those charts really make clear is that we should probably switch from comparing the charging specs of one EV to the next from its kW rate to a ~miles per hour or miles per minute charge time. When the average customer is looking to buy an EV, kW rate of charge won’t give them an accurate picture of charging time vs. range between models. Just for arguments sake let’s say that the I-Pace is able to charge at a 120 kW rate like a Model X. Since they are both marketed as “SUVs” the average customer might think they are equal in how long it will take to charge their battery to go the same distance. But in reality since the I-Pace is less efficient than the larger Model X it will get less range for the same amount of charge time. Using a “dc fast charge” mpm/charging would also be a more familiar sounding metric like mpg to the average customer. Many customers new to EVs might wrongly believe that all EVs, since they are quite efficient compared to ICEs, are pretty much the same so their efficiency rating isn’t really what new customers likely look at.… Read more »
wavelet

Nope. Give me objective spec numbers every time. MPGe is a horrible metric.
“miles per minute” is also very confusing since it looks like a unity of spatial velocity.

mzs112000

Well, you could say “Miles of driving range per minute of charging”…

Chris O

So for this crow to turn into a swan someday the right infrastructure needs to be build and the car needs to be “unlocked” for some reason to actually take full benefit from that infrastructure.

Jaguar requires quite some patience and a leap of faith from its customers.

DL

None of the Tesla drivers I work with, which at last count was 9, rarely, if ever, use the Supercharger network. They charge at home or at the office or both, but using standard L2 systems. Something like the Jag would suit all of them just fine.

Mint

“Rarely” is the whole point of long range EVs. You want range and fast charging when you need it, which for most people is several times a year.

I doubt Tesla has even half the sales if they had only 50kW charging. 84kW is better, but still somewhat lacking.

In 2 years (hopefully less), the IPace will be up against the Y. I’m guessing 250km of charge in 15 min.

Davek

I bet different rims would make a significant difference for the I-Pace’s consumption. That big open design must pump a tonne of air at speed… That’s the first place I’d try to optimise.

noleaf4me

Give Jaguar a break — this is their real first attempt at making an EV. Tesla has been at it for over a decade.

proppo

Jaguar is making the claim that they can play with the big kids, they need to put up or shutup.

Stimpacker

Yup. Tesla killer indeed.
I promote BEVs locally but I don’t apologize (like bro1999) for them. I point out each vehicle’s pros and cons fairly, including Tesla.
Jag and many others have compared the I-PACE to the Model X. This is one comparo that they lost. So suck it up and do better (soon).

Really hoping to see more mid sizes SUV BEVs. They need to satisfy family hauling and road trip duties, not race track times.

antrik

To be fair, Jaguar is probably not the best brand to look towards when “family hauling” is first priority…

Sammy

Depends on the size of the family does it not?

Alex

I-pace is a very nice car, but small efficiency and now also slow charging are disappointing.
Let’s not forget that the Korean cars have smaller batteries and it’s normal that they also take less power when charging.

It’s a bit strange why so slow charging knowing that the i-pace is very powerful, normally is expected that if a battery can give big amount of power can also “suck” big amount of power.

pjwood1

Falling short on distance remains a way to limit sales into a compliance sweet spot. It also fosters the “city” image, of EVs.

antrik

Are you suggesting they are doing it on purpose?…

Bill Howland
I’d classify this article as ‘finding fault’. The Tesla averages 108 kw and the much lower cost I-pace averages 82 kw. Those numbers are very roughly in the same ball park. Then of course, it is always mentioned that the efficiency (to my mind still not fully determined – since I’m not sure how much “Regular Driving” (as I define it) has been done with the car to date) is much less than “standard” which puts the car even in a worse light. If the point of the article is that JLR exaggerates the ‘specs’ of the I-pace a bit, or that ‘full implementation of 100-120 kw is a bit in the future’, I can accept that. Tesla, at the same point of time, just for reference referred to my Roadster as “The ALL-WEATHER Super Car !!”. There was just a bit of exaggeration there, too. Point is don’t get your feathers too ruffled over advertising statements. The Warranty is actually the far better document to peruse. Also – why cannot people who include charts precisely label the x and y Axis? I can guess at what the numbers mean, but it would be just a guess. Last time I… Read more »
Dan F.

Totally agree about poorly labeled or unlabeled axes. Also graphs which don’t take either or both axes to zero give a distorted graphical impression of the degree of change; these cars are not closing in on zero at 90% charge as it appears on the graph, they are still at a 25 to 40 kW charge rate.

Do Not Read Between The Lines

Uh, what? He compared cars with the same pack capacity. Even the 75 is higher power.

And the Model 3, which is much cheaper than the iPace, and has a smaller pack, also charges faster. So the Model Y (if it arrives) should too.

At the moment the i-Pace is an energy hog, and doesn’t do anything to make up for it in charging rate. But I’ll reserve judgment on it as JLR has said that imorovements are coming.

Mark.ca

On the speed chart the Tesla 90kwh is posted.

rey

all Jags have been Energy hogs,Specially the ICE V12s.

Rick

I tested the ipace, on highway it barely gets 280 km if you don’t go faster than 120 km/h…

Bill Howland

174 miles at 75 miles per hour ain’t too shabby.

John-EU

That’s 120 km/h. If you also need to go uphill a bit, it is shabby ad you will not even reach the 174 miles. I am saving for the LR Model 3!

Bill Howland

Well, most Tesla ‘3’s are lower cost than the I-pace, and can go further. So the ‘3’ Is the correct choice in your case.

Jaimie

And winddirection and rain can affleck range to. The faster you drive is the most important issue on range

Kbm3

Compared to my roughly same size Model 3 which goes over 280 miles at that speed with a smaller battery, it is.

theflew

All things being equal I would prefer the Jags looks inside and out.

John Doe

It all depends on needs. If I had a car like this, I would need to charge once every 14 days..

That is. . when I don’t use my e-bike. Then I would only need to charge it once a month. At the most..

But I still have periods with a lot of driving too, when I drive about 1000km a day too. Due to fuel costs, I would spend a bit longer time, and drive an EV – when they make a proper electric passenger van.

arne-nl

Summer or winter?

Bill Howland
I’d classify this article as ‘finding fault’. The Tesla averages 108 kw and the much lower cost I-pace averages 82 kw. Those numbers are very roughly in the same ball park. Then of course, it is always mentioned that the efficiency (to my mind still not fully determined – since I’m not sure how much “Regular Driving” (as I define it) has been done with the car to date) is much less than “standard” which puts the car even in a worse light. If the point of the article is that JLR exaggerates the ‘specs’ of the I-pace a bit, or that ‘full implementation of 100-120 kw is a bit in the future’, I can accept that. Tesla, at the same point of time, just for reference referred to my Roadster as “The ALL-WEATHER Super Car !!”. There was just a bit of exaggeration there, too. Point is don’t get your feathers too ruffled over advertising statements. The Warranty is actually the far better document to peruse. Also – why cannot people who include charts precisely label the x and y Axis? I can guess at what the numbers mean, but it would be just a guess. To show you… Read more »
Kbm3

To make matters worse, the iPace with the about the same interior size as the Model 3, will add only 67% of the range (miles per minute) per kW of charging because of the terrible efficiency.

Bill Howland

I’m not sure of the numbers, but when I saw the I-pace at the “Drive Electric” event, I didn’t even realize it was an I-pace at first – to me the car LOOKED huge, the seats looked mammoth (for a 4 seater) and it SEEMED much larger than a 3. But as I say it was the very first time I saw the car and initially didn’t even know what it was. It definitely seemed to be Jag-like as to appointments.

Nix

If they are intentionally getting the I-PACE out to buyers as fast as they can (a very good thing) and they are just being conservative about charging rates while they collect a massive amount of real world data, I don’t see the problem.

The reality is that any car company can test until they are blue in the face and never run into odd corner cases that only happen rarely and then only in real world situations where multiple variables happen to line up just right (wrong).

So if they want to take a few weeks or months or whatever to make ultra-sure on their charging, they should do it, and nobody should hold it against them that they are doing the right thing and putting safety first. So I take these first graphs with a grain of salt for now.

Him

GRAPHS DON’T HAVE ANY X- OR Y-AXIS LABELS.

Christian

The Ionity charger he used is in Denmark, not Germany.

Jaimie

I was thinking the same, but the title of vid Bjorn used ” I pace from Norway to Germany part 1″. The author havent watched that vid complety i guess and skipped to the comparison vid

Speculawyer

Well this is pretty disappointing. This is one area where they claimed to be better than Tesla….and it turns out that they lied? They better fix this or retract that claim.

Ron M

Jaguar sold a little over 21,000 vehicles in the US YTD so calling the Jaguar I-Pace a Tesla killer is laughable.

Sammy

Who said that it was a Tesla Killer? From seeing the reports of the I-Pace launch it was the Hacks/Journalists who tried and failed to get JLR to agree that it was a Tesla Killer. That didn’t stop the reporters saying “Jaguar I-Pace is a Tesla killer”.

I hate the term Tesla Killer. Even Elon Musk wants more EV’s on the market.
IMHO, it is the media that want to kill Tesla and the Koch Brothers.