New Longer Range Renault ZOE Z.E. 40 Tested – Video

10 months ago by Mark Kane 25

Fully Charged signed up for one of the first opportunities to test out the new, longer range, Renault ZOE Z.E. 40 at the special event in Portugal and filed this video report.

Renault ZOE Z.E. 40

Renault ZOE Z.E. 40

Robert reports that nearly twice the battery capacity leaves range anxiety in the dust, and can in theory provide an extended road trip for up to 400 km, or really about 186 miles (300 km) in normalized driving.

The episode also  mentions the cool Z.E. Trip on-board application that searches for charging points, shows the way on the map, and even informs the driver whether or not the EVSE is currently available/free to plug in.

Quick specs on ZOE Z.E. 40:

  • 41 kWh battery (LG Chem)
  • R90: 250 miles (400 km) under optimistic NEDC conditions, but Renault itself expects a real world range of 186 miles (300 km) or even ~124 miles/200km  in extreme cold conditions
    Q90: 230 miles (370 km) NEDC or 173 miles (278 km) real
  • R90 (longer range, 22 kW charging) and Q90 (shorter range, 43 kW charging)
  • 0-62 mph (≈100 km/h) acceleration takes some 13.5 seconds
  • top speed is 84 mph (135 km/h)
  • 65 kW/88hp electric motor

Hat tip to Adrian!

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

25 responses to "New Longer Range Renault ZOE Z.E. 40 Tested – Video"

  1. wavelet says:

    Nice road review.
    Towards the end, he mentions the charging rate as 60kW, which AFAIK is a mistake — max rate is either 43kW AC or 22kW AC, depending on the specific motor variant the submodel has.

  2. DmitryOfNewZealand says:

    I love it. If only they could just put rear door handles in their proper places – I just don’t get why one would want a 5-door hatch look like a 3-door one, so that one might need to shout and point to any possible rear seat passengers where the door handles are if they incorrectly assume (e.g. in the dark), as it was clearly intended by the designers, that it is a 3-door car and wait for you to get out of the front seat to let them in. Electric BMW i3 has an amazing thing when there is kind of a rear door, but to get in one need to open a front one as well. Electric cars with good range are amazing and don’t need their non-essential features to be weirdly different from a normal car, unless it is better aerodynamics like in the GM’s venerable EV1, which porbably would have travelled much further on the same battery due to its still unsurpassed 0.19 Cd.

    1. Seuthès says:

      In France and other many european counties people prefer a 3 doors instead of a 5 doors. It’s look like a coupé, more like a sport car.
      In France it was 80% 3 doors. And now to make easier to build a 4m car, Renault use that solution from Alfa Romeo.

  3. James says:

    Why, oh why can’t we get the cute little Zoe here?!?

    1. Timmy says:

      Where’s “here”? The internet?

      1. mhpr262 says:

        Just download it.

  4. Jason says:

    Looking at the Km traveled (180km?) And the range remaining (80km?) Looks like this trip they might have gotten 250km. It started out positive (300km?), but slowly goes down during the trip. Still pretty good, but pretty far off 400km.
    Looks like a reasonably priced EV with a good price tag.

    1. JC says:

      Real world range is 300km (400km is the NEDC`s unrealistic range), so doing 250km on winding costal roads, driving normally, going mostly uphill, in a cold day, is pretty good.

    2. Seuthès says:

      In french television, a woman journalist have tested the ZOE 40, and she shows that she can’t reach even 200km on the motorway @130km/h.
      And a website http://www.caradisiac.com, the journalist have written an answer to that woman journalist, that their journalists have reache more than 350km.
      I’m waiting their test. Because in general they are not very BEV friendly. So I’m very impatient to see their paper.
      To be fair, their is already two videos that show us the range is more than 275km https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXxda3U3fdc

  5. JyBicycleOrTesla says:

    I wonder why the Zoe uses AC charging instead of DC fast charging? Painful watching Bjorn do a long distance road trip in the older Zoe.

    1. wavelet says:

      Simple: The HW on the car to support it, and the charging station equipment, are much cheaper.
      The “Chameleon” charger in the Zoe isn’t expensive extra HW — they use the inverter already in the car for running the motor in reverse, see here:
      https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/renault-zoe-uses-fundamentally-different-charging-method

      https://longtailpipe.com/ebooks/green-transportation-guide-buying-owning-charging-plug-in-vehicles-of-all-kinds/electric-car-charging-advice-systems/ev-ac-fast-charging-systems-renault-zoe-smart-ed/

      So why doesn’t everybody else use this everywhere? This works in Europe because many AC connections are already 3-phase.

  6. cylindrical says:

    One can only hope that Carlos Ghosn similarly allows higher-density batteries with the same form factor to replace the original ones residing in early LEAFs. That would be fantastically good.

    Anyway, it was pleasingly mind-blowing to see Ghosn chatting away with Kryten.

  7. Bill Howland says:

    Hum, How much you want to bet the new Leaf has a 41 kwh battery?

    Perhaps that is why they’ve been pretty mum lately in that it is nowhere near a BOLT which is almost half-again larger.

    There was one Frenchman commenting here that Renault’s ‘Elegant’ 43 kw charging was not really that energy efficient. It would be interesting to know what percentage of the charging power actually ends up in the battery.

    1. pop says:

      Actually, at 43kW, it is quite efficient. The issue is that the charger is very inefficient at lower kW. It is acceptable at 11kW, lousy at 3,7kW, and won’t even charge at f.i. 2kW.

      And with public chargers often starting at only 1-3 phase 6Amp, that is a growing problem for me here in NL. The car won’t start charging at a growing number of public chargers, and I really have to start selecting chargers being at least 11kW to prevent issues.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        ‘Quite efficient ‘

        Ok, well, what are the numbers roughly then?

        1. Seuthès says:

          When you charge @10A-230V (2.3kW), the efficency is very low. It’s about 50%.
          And @16A-230V (3.7kWh), it’s about 75%
          For 24A-230V (5.5kW), it’s about 85%
          With more power you can’t expect more than 87%.

          The Cameleon charger is a false good idea. You lost power in the motor, and lost power in the inverter.
          But it’s cheap. I would prefer a 5.5kW AC charger for the house combine to a 50kW+ DC charger.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            Thank you Seuthes for the information.

            The ac charging of Teslas in north america (always single-phase) are quite interesting..

            If charging on 100-120 volts, you can expect about 30-40% more electricity being used than on ANY 200-250 volt rate for the “S”, “X”, Mercedes “B”, or the short-lived RAV4EV.

            My Roadster was somewhat interesting : 100-120 volts was downright horrible, with the thing downswitching to 12 amperes from 15 (when nearing 100 volts) which was even worse efficiency.

            But 200-250 volts were very interesting:

            It was much much more efficient than anything 100-120 volts, however, it was quite efficient at 17 kw, but peak efficiency was at 6 to 9,5 kw. You could charge it as low as 3 kw but the efficiency would drop off to be worse than the 17 kw efficiency – but as I mentioned all the North American Single phase ‘modern’ Tesla chargers seem to be equally efficient as long as you are using 200-250 volts. The reason I didn’t attach any numbers is because it depended on whether it was hot or cold out – when cold, the higher charge rates indirectly warmed the battery, and when hot, the higher charge rates used more and more juice to run the airconditioner to get rid of the battery heat.

    2. Someone out there says:

      I think you are right. Nissan is having problems coming up with a decent battery pack at an acceptable price, this is what is delaying them. The new LEAF really has to be at least on par with the Bolt or significantly cheaper. Much cheaper is unlikely and I doubt they will have a 60 kWh battery or higher.
      If they are smart they will come up with a 40+ kWh replacement battery for the older LEAF at the same time, that way they might keep their existing customer base happy. Otherwise people will complain loudly about depreciation and lack of upgrade path and that will reflect badly on the new LEAF.

  8. notting says:

    “even ~124 miles/200km in extreme cold conditions”
    At least the German pricelist says “cold conditions”.
    BTW: I knew somebody from Montana (ca. 40km away from Canada) who lived as exchange school teacher in Germany for one year. He still wore T-shirts when most of his students already wore pullovers for weeks (I’m quite sure that the average French weather which was probably used as reference is similar to neighbor countries like Germany).

    notting

  9. shawn marshall says:

    Clean energy is cheap – bollocks.

    1. MikeM says:

      But you’ve got to admit Shawn, it’s a good bit cheaper than “clean coal”.

  10. jim stack says:

    Does this indicate the LEAF will go twice as far when the 2018 version comes out?

  11. Hugh says:

    I believe Robert said the 4 big battery suppliers are Panasonic, LG Chem, Samsung SDI and Tesla. Tesla uses Panasonic batteries so I wonder what he meant. Who is the 4th large battery supplier?

    1. Seuthès says:

      Panasonic/Tesla, LG Chem, SDI. The fourth would be BYD, I think.

  12. spice says:

    Great little car which (I think) is only going to get better. Renault – could do with a split fold rear seat?