French Auto website goes 329km in 2017 eGolf

[Zeuser]

http://www.caradisiac.com/video-la-...-peut-on-faire-en-une-seule-charge-160729.htm

The article is in french but here's the important stuff:
1 - The European drive cycle says eGolf goes 300km (186mi). Their driving is a lot more stop and go.
2 - They drove the eGolf around Paris, France for half a day (13 hours) in stop and go traffic. Paris is notorious for its traffic.
3 - They used eco+, B mode braking and averaged 25 km/h (15 mph)
4 - They went all the way to an indicated range of 0km (0mi) on the dashboard and still got an extra 3km (1.86mi) until they had to push it to their office parking lot.
5 - The result was 329km (204mi)

So while it's not likely we'd ever drive that way and get that kind of range, it's good to know that if you really need to push it, it can go much further than the rated 201km (125mi).

 

[johnnylingo]

Driving around the city at a low speed is a lot different from going on the highway though. Speed is the #1 factor that determines range. 9.3 kWh/100km is a weird way of expressing but I assume that's 9.3 km/kWh or 5.78 mi/kWh.

Looks like they also benefited from mild temperate (21C = 69F) so using heat or A/C was not required.

 

[Unbeliever]

Driving around the city at a low speed is a lot different from going on the highway though. Speed is the #1 factor that determines range. 9.3 kWh/100km is a weird way of expressing but I assume that's 9.3 km/kWh or 5.78 mi/kWh.

In the EU, they don't do Distance over volume, (e.g. Miles per gallon), but volume over distance ( liters per 100km ). 9.3 kWh / 100 km is 9.3 kWh per 62.1 miles, or 6.7 miles/kWh.

 

[Carc]

Took the new 2017 on a 90 mile highway drive and used about 2/3 of the battery. Would have been on my last legs on the 2015. Very happy with the range.

 

[nerk]

In the EU, they don't do Distance over volume, (e.g. Miles per gallon), but volume over distance ( liters per 100km ). 9.3 kWh / 100 km is 9.3 kWh per 62.1 miles, or 6.7 miles/kWh.

Canada as well...

 

[JoulesThief]

Took the new 2017 on a 90 mile highway drive and used about 2/3 of the battery. Would have been on my last legs on the 2015. Very happy with the range.

You need to include what your cruising speed was on your 90 mile drive, for any relevance.

 

[RonDawg]

In the EU, they don't do Distance over volume, (e.g. Miles per gallon), but volume over distance ( liters per 100km ). 9.3 kWh / 100 km is 9.3 kWh per 62.1 miles, or 6.7 miles/kWh.

Canada as well...

I've seen both methods used in Canada, but Canada still being part of the Commonwealth would express MPG in terms of Imperial gallons (about 20% larger than US gallons). UK (or at least Top Gear) also express fuel economy in miles per imperial gallon despite being part of the EU (for now).

 

[Zeuser]

In the EU, they don't do Distance over volume, (e.g. Miles per gallon), but volume over distance ( liters per 100km ). 9.3 kWh / 100 km is 9.3 kWh per 62.1 miles, or 6.7 miles/kWh.

Canada as well...

I've seen both methods used in Canada, but Canada still being part of the Commonwealth would express MPG in terms of Imperial gallons (about 20% larger than US gallons). UK (or at least Top Gear) also express fuel economy in miles per imperial gallon despite being part of the EU (for now).

That has nothing to do with it. Canada decided back in the '70s to switch over to metric for everything. They didn't ask the UK the permission to do so. They don't need to. Most of the commonwealth countries have switched over to metric as well. I think it's just Australia and the UK which still use imperial.

There are still some old people in Canada that still say gallons and MPH and MPG. But they're dying off and some of them have even switched to the metric way of saying things because they're forced to. Ex: gas pumps are all in Litres now! The younger generations, Gen X and later, all use metric in Canada.

As for volume over distance (L/100KM), I don't know why they chose this. It's weird because the lower the number, the better the fuel economy. Some metric countries use KM/L (Distance over volume) which makes more sense. But the numbers sometimes end up in the 3 digit range and some old computer and displays only have 2 digits so that causes issues.

 

[RonDawg]

That has nothing to do with it. Canada decided back in the '70s to switch over to metric for everything. They didn't ask the UK the permission to do so. They don't need to. Most of the commonwealth countries have switched over to metric as well. I think it's just Australia and the UK which still use imperial.

There are still some old people in Canada that still say gallons and MPH and MPG. But they're dying off and some of them have even switched to the metric way of saying things because they're forced to. Ex: gas pumps are all in Litres now! The younger generations, Gen X and later, all use metric in Canada.

And where did I say that Canada needed the UK's permission to switch over to metric? Because I can't find where I said such a thing anywhere in my post.

In the pre-metric days did Canada use Imperial or US gallons? If they used Imperial, my point stands.

And while you think you're a fully metric country, even your government still refers to MPG as well as L/100 km in its own fuel economy stickers; look at page 1 of this guide: http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca/files/oee/pdf/transportation/tools/fuelratings/2017%20Fuel%20Consumption%20Guide.pdf That sample shows 9.0L/100 km prominently but with "31 mi/gal" in smaller print below. But that is in Imperial gallons, because 9.0L/100 km only is 26.1 (US) MPG according to Google's own conversion calculator. Setting that same calculator to Imperial shows the 31 MPG (actually, 31.4 MPG) figure.

I've also visited Canada several times and have driven from Vancouver all the way to Winnipeg on the Trans Canada Highway, so I'm very familiar with how the fuel pumps display and how prices are posted.

UK still uses miles for road distances and their car speedometers still say MPH on them, but have gone metric elsewhere. I've been to Australia a few times and they seem to be more "metricized" than Canada as I don't ever recall hearing people there express anything in Imperial measurements.

 

[Verkehr]

mpg or mi/kWh aren't really great (or at least they're not intuitive) measures because they have diminishing returns.

These all save the same amount of fuel on a given trip, surprisingly to some folks:
Going from 10 to 11 MPG
Going from 16.5 to 20 MPG
Going from 33 to 50 MPG