When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I'm no expert, but comparing the e-tron to an i3 is like comparing a Lambo to a Kia (no offense Kia owners). The e-tron is heavier and more powerful. Another perspective, my Q5 drinks about 20MPG @$3.40 gallon (in my area). 20 miles @ 0.5 KW per mile is $1.10 (I pay 11 cents per KW). A third the cost of fuel. Or $22.00 per electric fill up for 400 miles versus $68.00 for my 20 gallon/400 mile fill up in my Q5. Works for me! I know you Tesla folks will say the Model X is a good comp for the e-tron and you could make that case. And the X will be more energy efficient. Then it becomes a fit and finish discussion over efficiency. To each their own.
I totally agree. Similar to my purchase decision on a Land Rover LR3 with 17 mpg ( 6000 dry weight) , or I could have bought the Honda Element probably for less than half the price and get double the mpg.
- BMW i3 vs my Edition 1 decision has very similar reasons: Luxury/Comfort, 4WD, high riding, assistive tech, air suspension, Not because of the MPG, not the MSRP.
2.36 mi/kWh my bmw i3 was 4.9 over 51k miles - it obviously is huge compared to an i3 and I knew it was going to take more energy to move it the same distance, but now I have 1 car and no ICE vehicle and can do some trips I wasn’t comfortable doing in the i3.
I've been consistently getting 2.3 mi/kWh on my commutes this week. 421 miles worth of driving.
Achieved 2.5mi/kw in this morning's commute after enabling "MANUAL" regeneration, and pulling the "-" regeneration paddle twice on the start of the commute. This is a good improvement from 2.0 <-> 2.2 mi/kw.
A far distance from the 4.7mi/kw I've achieved on 51K miles in our BMW i3 (REX so it's the heavier model), and what Tesla achieves on a Model 3, at 3.8mi/kw. I couldn't find stats on the Model X which is a closer comparison to the eTron.
In practical terms, I appreciate the eTron is heavier, and larger than our BMW i3, however that is our reference point. Hence it takes twice as long and costs twice as much to charge the car for the same # of miles driven on a Level-2 charger.
The energy use has to be down to the thermal management system.
Reading the owners manual there are 3 dedicated fuses and 1 shared fuse just for the thermal management system. The maintained battery temperature is 77f-95f which is an astonishingly high and tight temperature range. This is what allows immediate rapid charge @ 150 kw with low taper. I suspect that a large fraction of the power drain is to enable fast charging and tight battery thermal management. This will also mean a much longer life for the battery with less degradation.
If there was a way to measure the watts flowing through those fuse pins we would know for sure.
But just Large Heavy SUV is also a large fraction of the electricity use. Personally I think Audi made the correct decisions here. No short cuts.
You also have to take into account that Audi does not use 100% of battery capacity. I can't say what BMW uses...Tesla uses all of theirs.
The thermal system on the car is pretty amazing, and what gives it such a broad operating spectrum in terms of outside temps without loss of range
I imagine all of the e-Trons on the road are edition 1, with 21 inch wheels. Anybody out there withe the 19 inch aero wheels? Curious to know if the 19 inch wheels can squeeze out more mi/kWh.
Driven 132 miles to day and projected range of 240 mi.
Start off with 100% charge at home. Edition-1 with stock 21 in wheel!
Drove from southern CT to Sheepshead bay Brooklyn. Ambient temperature first leg 74F at up to 65 mph in CT then really bad traffic jam starting at CT/NY border. Alternate AC in econ mode and seat fan only.
Return trip 64F-58F, with light rain, Belt parkway is jam packed with stop-n-go then hyper-milling w cruise speed at around 60mph ( from whitestone to home) - it was close to mid night with little vehicle on the road; otherwise not safe to cruise at 60mph !
Climate control on at 72F
Round trip total 132 miles SoC at 45%( consumed 55%) projected range 132 / 55 * 100 = 240 miles ( 55% is about 46 kWh; thus, 46 kWh / 132 equal to 34.85 kWh/100 miles )
Short term memory for first leg 34.8 kWh/100;. Return trip: 36.2 kWh/100 ( coincide with the calculation above of 34.58 kWh/100) First leg Return
05-09-2019, 01:23 PM
