Some EV Ranges Already Exceed Some Gas Vehicles, With PHEVs Median Range Higher Than All

SEP 1 2016 BY MARK KANE 42

Tesla Model S

Tesla Model S

The DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy has released an interesting comparison on the ranges of cars with different types of powertrains: all-electric, plug-in hybrid and conventional + hybrids.

The results show the minimum and maximum range of every category, using EPA ratings for 2016 model year cars on the road though July.

The median of BEVs range is just 83.5 miles, which is ~4.9-times less than conventional models. However, the median for plug-in hybrids (PHEV) is actually higher than standard petrol vehicles and traditional hybrids.

The other finding is that some all-electric models in series production today, exceed range of some ICEs. Naturally these cars mentioned in the report must be Tesla Model S (294 miles of 90D) followed by Model X.

Editor’s Note: Although as with all data, it gets old almost as soon as you print it – the recently announced 100 kWh versions of the Tesla Model S (up to 315 miles) and Model X (289 miles) have again raised the range ceiling for production EVs.

“Although most electric vehicles (EV) have shorter ranges than gasoline vehicles, there are EVs with ranges equal to or greater than some gasoline-powered models.

For the 2016 model year (MY) the maximum range for an all-electric vehicle (AEV) is 294 miles while the minimum range for a gasoline model is 240 miles. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) use both gasoline and electricity drawn from the grid. The all-electric range of PHEV models varies greatly, and the total gasoline and electric range of a PHEV is between 150 and 600 miles in MY2016 vehicles.

The ranges for EVs have been increasing since their debut in the mass market but technological improvements have also increased the ranges for gasoline vehicles. For 2016, the median range for gasoline vehicles is 412 miles while the highest range is just over 700 miles.


  • Vehicle ranges are Environmental Protection Agency estimated ranges. Each make and model was counted only once, selecting the configuration with the longest range.
  • Plug-in hybrid vehicle range is the total of both gasoline and electric miles, assuming a fully-charged battery and a full tank of gasoline.
  • Hybrid-electric vehicles which are fueled only with gasoline are included in the gasoline vehicle data.”


Categories: General

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

42 Comments on "Some EV Ranges Already Exceed Some Gas Vehicles, With PHEVs Median Range Higher Than All"

newest oldest most voted

No Mirai at 312 miles EPA? An FCEV is also electric. They’re ultimately powered by solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, or natural gas, just as BEVs are ultimately powered by solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, natural gas, and coal.

Yeah, sure.

They’re going to be powered by natural gas. And so will continue the green house effect, and is in no way green.
You must be the last guy to know.

But we can’t produce pressurized hydrogen in home, unlike the BEVs that we can charge with our solar panels.

George W. Bush and his petrol buddies liked hydrogen cars very much, go figure…

You left coal off of your list of energy sources for the Mirai

Toyota’s own advertising boasts that the Mirai FCEV “Runs on Bullsh!t.”

Sounds to me like the Toyota Mirai is just an inside joke.

but let’s be honest about this; the longest range bev has less range than the average icev. a bigger battery does not transform a bev into a suitable car for long distance travel to the average driver (this excludes ev enthusiasts); what the bigger battery does is make the bev more suitable for everyday use. the bigger battery allows the bev to be more forgiving of days when you use more energy than you can recover in an at-home charge. the bigger battery also reduces the number of times that you would have to use public charging infrastructure.

More BS FUD by serial Tesla-hater no comment.

Tesla’s are very good for long-range travel via Superchargers and its one of the reasons the Model S outsells the MB S class.

I doubt that most of the Model S buyers choosing the Tesla over the MB S class are “EV enthusiasts” anymore. They are simply choosing a better car with much better underlying technology. I’m sure that after driving their Teslas including long distance they become EV enthusiasts!

Tesla Buyers aren’t EV enthusiasts. They are becoming EV enthusiasts when they take it for the first time for a spin.

The whole concept is new and futuristic. MB looks pretty antique standing next to Tesla.

The buyer wants a confortable and quiet car.
That’s what Tesla stands for.

But there is also a hype on Tesla. Too bad MB did’t come up the idea first.

“no comment” said:

“…a bigger battery does not transform a bev into a suitable car for long distance travel…”

Poor dinosaur, too dim-witted to realize his kind is rapidly going extinct.

You left out coal as THE fuel source for probably the biggest FCEV market: Japan.

“Earlier this year, Kawasaki Heavy Industries Ltd. and Iwatani Corp. partnered with Kobe city to build a 10 billion yen ($84 million) liquefied hydrogen import hub. The project, due to go online in 2020, will import hydrogen made from lignite coal in Australia.”

My reply was to the OP by four electrics.

The Union of Concerned Scientists found that a gas car of at least 35 mpg is cleaner in Colorado than an electric vehicle. Fuel cells aren’t significantly dirtier than electric. They can both be powered by 100% renewable or 100% traditional energy sources.

Colorado gets 63% of their electricity from coal and just added a $6000 incentive for EVs. What do you think those cars are going to be running on?

Your argument is clearly flawed on a fundamental level.

Look at all those areas of the country with around 100MPGe, I’d love to see a traditional car beat that.

Also of interest, this map has been updatd over time. And as expected, the earlier versions have, overall, lower MPGe values. Which just goes to show that the grid continues to get cleaner, unlike gasoline, which stays dirty.

If the EV owner has solar panels on her house, her EV could be powered by renewable solar energy. If the EV owner has chosen to buy solar, wind, or other green electricity from her electricity supplier, her EV would be powered by renewable energy when her EV is charged at home which is the most common situation.

But your 35 mpg or greater ICE car will be powered by dirty gasoline with no choice to use cleaner power.

It’s also significantly easier to clean up the grid than individual cars. Coal is essentially being phased out, probably with natural gas being scaled back soon, so this map will change a lot faster than you’ll buy a new car.

Your argument is pure discredited FUD Oswald.

Coal is going away in the US, rapidly.

And coal will be mostly replaced by renewables:

So as the grid becomes decarbonized, the EVs using the grid become more and more efficient vis a vis carbon.

It’s funny how they ignore the pollution created by refining gas….

Oswald — Colorado EV owners can run their cars on Solar or Wind, regardless of what the grid average is.

Why is it that people can’t think an inch out of the box, and think they are stuck with grid average electricity, and can’t do a thing about it?

1) Install solar. Colorado has tons of state and local incentives, and 300 days of sunshine:

2) Use a program like WindSource, and power your EV on 100% Wind Power, without having to install your own windmill:

3) Don’t have a roof and want solar anyways? Join a Solar Collective in Colorado:

If you are still talking grid averages when it comes to charging EV’s in Colorado, you either haven’t done your homework, or simply don’t care what the facts are.

“The Union of Concerned Scientists” is actually nobody else then “The Union of Concerned Automotive Lobby”

Oswald said:

“The Union of Concerned Scientists found that a gas car of at least 35 mpg is cleaner in Colorado than an electric vehicle.”

Seriously, dude… just what do you think you’re accomplishing by posting an EV hater post, using cherry-picked data, to InsideEVs?

It’s not like we haven’t seen all this B.S. before, many times. If you somehow think you’re posting something original, check out:

Your post falls into category #3.

Now go peddle your B.S. somewhere that it might be appreciated, like a forum for Big Oil & Gas employees.

I should have said: outdated cherry-picked data.

This graph should be built using a box plot to show how much overlap there is, because if there is only a couple outliers in the overlap, the argument isn’t particularly strong.

For the next decade+, PHEV is the way to go for people who leave the city. You get daily commuting on battery, longer trips mostly on gas with opportunistic charging (including the first ‘n’ miles). I checked charger availability close to my planned vacation routes this summer (about 3K miles traveled total) and there were almost none.

As charger infrastructure improves, supporters of the movement should create a tool that helps people chose based on their typical driving patterns. Would be great to have the app record all routes traveled so that EV prospects could get a report on how many trips could have been supported by the charger network.

I think something like that would have been better to show the degrees.
Surely people will purchase the vehicle that best suits their driving needs, and phevs have flexibility.

But as the demographics for getting from place to place change in many ways, due to advocacy/support of higher efficiency transport and continuing and increasing punishment of legacy transportation, the graphs will change dynamically inexorably moving towards the highest efficiency and least polluting option.

So phevs will be the transition phase, but eventually it will be mostly purely electrified transportation with a lot of mass transit and uber/lyfte like solutions.

There will be fewer personally owned vehicles, as both expense to operate one and suitable alternative options to ownership will increase.
A component of this trend can be found in the falling numbers of licensed drivers. Also the number of people who own their own vehicles is dropping.

Maybe we could get Flo to upgrade the Progressive plugin device to inform users what EV’s or PHEV’s would best fit their actual driving habits:

Nissan has a smartphone app that does exactly as you say in the UK market. Designed to show the opposite of what you claim though – that EV’S can work for long distance commutes.

Brian Johnson: Nissan has a smartphone app that does exactly as you say in the UK market. Designed to show the opposite of what you claim though – that EV’S can work for long distance commutes.

I still don’t think the total range is nearly as important as the ability to refuel wherever you are and do so quickly. 100 miles on an EV would be plenty if there were as many fast charging stations as there are gas stations.

I suspect the only reason gas tanks are so large on regular vehicles is because people cannot refill them at home, so people expect to do a week’s worth of driving on a single tank.

100 miles will never be plenty.

But 200-300 miles can be enough for many assuming a lot of very fast charging stations (150kw+) and a car that can handle it.
But ~400 mile EVs will probably be the norm for BEVs within 10-15 years.

David — The problem with short range EV’s, is that the batteries can’t be charged as fast as the same cells in a larger battery pack. Compare the two theoretical battery packs built from the same battery cells: 1) A 100 mile battery where the cells hit their maximum “C” rating when charging to 80% in half an hour (adding 80 miles of range in 30 minutes). 2) A 200 mile battery built with the same cells could theoretically charge to 80% capacity in the same half and hour, but that would put 160 miles worth of charge into the same “C” rated cells in the same time. You can push more electricity faster into the 200 mile pack, than you can into the 100 mile pack before maxing out the “C” rating for each battery cell. So it might be that larger range battery packs may end up being needed in order to allow the high speed charging you consider important. As a side benefit, over a ten year period the 200 mile battery pack could be driven roughly twice as many miles before losing the same amount of capacity as the 100 mile pack. Bigger batteries will win,… Read more »

I disagree, both options are good but the floor in your argument is that the battery size (in kWh) is the only factor that determines the rate that a vehicle can be charged.

If you use LTO batteries instead of NMC batteries you could drop the “up to 80% charge” time from around 30 min to less than 10 min but the volumetric and gravimetric energy density would be much worse which would probably limit the range of the car. Clearly there are other factors (such as cost, LTO is still eye wateringly expensive) but I think that if you had a 30 kWh vehicle that could charge to 80% in 8 mins it could conceivably be as practical for some people as a 60 kWh car that takes 30 mins to recharge, both to 80%.

I am a strong believer that we will need to see a much wider range of vehicle designs if we are going to get beyond the 30% uptake mark that we see in countries like Norway who via their incentive programs have pretty much shown us what would happen if we just took today’s vehicles and made them much, much cheaper.

Just_Chris said:

“…LTO is still eye wateringly expensive”

Then why bring it up in a post in which you’re trying to refute the general rule that PEVs with larger battery packs can charge faster?

The point is that when comparing mass produced EVs, the ones with larger battery packs charge faster, in terms of miles added per minute. Bringing up some tech that’s too expensive to use in a mass produced car is rather irrelevant to the subject. Larger battery packs have multiple advantages, and longer range is one of those advantages.

It amazes me that some people are still trying to argue that smaller battery packs are somehow better. Customers have very clearly expressed a preference for larger battery packs. When Tesla first started taking orders for the Model S, only 2% of customers chose the 40 kWh battery pack! Very clearly, nearly all PEV buyers are willing to pay significantly more for bigger battery packs — and longer range.

Difference though is that the petrol cars you refill in minutes. The evs take 30min to refill to 80% and then you don’t want to charge anymore.

Most people plug their smart phones a few times a day. They are use to it so it shouldn’t be a problem getting use to plug in the car.

Most EV owners say it only takes about a minute to charge their car; 30 seconds to plug it in at night, and 30 seconds to unplug it in the morning.

Seems odd that so many focus on the 5% of the time that the average PEV driver might need to charge en route, rather than the 95% of the time they charge at home or work. It’s like claiming gasmobiles aren’t practical because occasionally you might want to haul something too big to fit in one.

Fixed that for you Apkungen:

The difference is that the petrel cars you refill at petrel stations are crashing the Earth’s environment and dooming your children and everyone’s children to a much more difficult lives going forward.

The EVs are recharged at night like your phone, computer, etc and you wake up every night with a full “tank” of fuel and that will suffice for 95% plus of daily driving.

For people traveling long distance, DCFC will continue to improve jut like the batteries and the time needed to recharge will steadily decline until it won’t matter anymore.

Well said, but it’s “petrol” (as in petroleum), not “petrel”.

Again, PHEV saved the day in terms of argument…

But of course EV purist like to keep the PHEV out to keep their stupidity pure while making EVs look worse…

Because only a car without tailpipe is worth to be called an EV

If it quacks like a duck….

My ELR is an EV most of the time. I buy ~8 gal of gas A MONTH. Most commute days are all electric miles.

bogdan said:

“…only a car without tailpipe is worth to be called an EV”

My world is big enough to include many types of EVs, including both BEVs and PHEVs.

Too bad yours is so small.