Видео

You mean when I tap on the percent and it changes to miles? It says something ludicrous based on as-new EPA rating, like 300 miles. Seriously. It’s completely useless. The Nav gives accurate range projections based on actual capacity. But the battery meter mileage number is wildly optimistic.

@@fastforwardev I have a 2022 M3 RWD and the stated range at 100% SOC was 272 miles and it now states 256 miles; from this I know that my battery has suffered about 5.7% degradation, which is typical for the age and mileage of my M3's battery. Your battery's degradation can be accurately calculated by comparing the current stated range at 100% SOC vs it's EPA rating (which was the range stated at 100% SOC when new). The stated range (256 miles) is not wildly optimistic; I can achieve the stated range when driving on reasonably level ground at 60-65 mph with temperatures between about ~40F-80F. If I drive faster the range will decrease, and if I drive slower it will increase. At 84mph my range will decrease to about 180-190 miles but 160-170 miles leaves me with a safe buffer of 5-10% (and the buffer below zero is about 4-5% ). Winter tires (and ASR tires that are less efficient than the OEM ASR tires) will reduce range as well, often by ~10%. Higher and (especially) lower temperatures will decrease range as will wind. I know all this from research but also because I have driven my M3 across Canada (Vancouver to Toronto and back), and because I drive from Vancouver to SE Arizona, twice a year. Consequently I have been able to range test it on a variety of Hwy range scenarios at steady speeds of 84mph (85mph indicated, 84mph by GPS) and less. Our house in AZ gives me access to 55, 60 and 65mph state Hwys and the I-10 with a 75mph posted limit. I don't recall if you provided the average speeds of your range test, but ~200 miles (if we include the below zero buffer) isn't bad, especially with winter tires, cold weather and adverse winds.

Thanks for all the details, I'm sure your numbers are what you say they are, but so are mine. And my Tesla's stated range at 100% is an unachievable number, in any conditions. There are plenty of possible reasons for the discrepancy, certainly that you have RWD with LFP battery (I assume), and I have dual motor NMP with a higher capacity. Also I don't know what your mileage is, but I bought this in April 2024 with 122,000 miles already on it. ScanMyTesla indicates it was DC Fast charged the entire time before I got it. I believe my pack is 72kWh gross, and somewhere around 68kWh usable as-new. Currently my pack is less than 60kWh usable when full, according to range tests I've done, and the battery test in the Service menu. That test reports 80% SOH, or 20% degradation. The part of the car that simply doesn't seem to acknowledge that is the mileage range under the battery meter. To confirm, I let it charge to 100% again last night, and today I took it out to see how far I could go on 45-55mph roads, in 45 degrees with mild to no wind. The car knows it has 18" wheels with winter tires on it. Despite this, it claims 294 miles of range. This is of course ridiculous. When it got down to 50% it continued its fantasy, claiming 149 miles of range. At that point I had driven 112 miles. When I concluded the drive at 16%, it was still claiming 47 miles of range. I had driven a total of 203 miles, and it would have gone about 30 miles more to get to zero, so 233 miles. Compared to the 294 it claimed. So I'm going to go ahead and continue to ignore that mileage estimate. It's not tied to reality.

@@fastforwardev Yesterday I drove 226 miles from Portal AZ to Sierra Vista AZ, and back. via Hwy 80, at an average ~64mph at ~40F temperatures and used 102% battery capacity. (left with 97%, added 20% in Sierra Vista, and returned with 15%. This involved climbing from ~4000ft to 6000ft at Bisbee AZ, there and back. If I had driven the speed limit or if I hadn't used battery preconditioning when navigating to the Sierra Vista DCFC, I could have done the entire trip on a single charge. According to the EPA both our cars have the same Hwy efficiency (126mpge) despite mine being LFP RWD. I think your tires are reducing your range somewhat. My Erange ASRs are inflated to 42psi cold and increase to ~45psi at hwy speeds even at 40F. Your EPA combined range when new was 358 miles, so you've lost 64 miles or ~18% range, by comparing current stated range vs stated range when new. which is close to your estimate. I think your useable capacity when new was ~78kwh. Also I lost 1-2% by using Sentry Mode during my various stops.

Two minor points: With Sport wheels and tires which mine came with, EPA range when new was more like 346, not 358. And switching to 18" aero wheels and winter tires is a wash at worst, not a reduction in range. It's interesting to note that the stated range was just as delusional when new as it is now, but the point remains. It's not an achievable number and I'm going to continue to completely ignore it.

That's true, but all cars, gas and electric, are getting those nannies. This is specifically about the complaints that the ID.4 (and other recent VW vehicles, gas and electic) have touch buttons instead of physical buttons, and that group of people dissing that one issue has caused VW management to bail on at least 6 years worth of huge investment in hardware and software, and it's just ridiculous. They are planning to replace their electrical platform with Rivian's across the board, and believe me, that's not going to magically fix their problem, which is they themselves didn't continue to iterate on their software stack quick enough. Farming it out won't speed things up, quite the opposite.

Yeah, no. No loaner. And I've got the luxury within the family of access to three EVs, and a Dodge Grand Caravan as ICE comparator. From day one, over two years ago, the ID.4 felt like the minivan off the line. That is to say, not sprinty. Bolt and Model 3 both leap at the start with very little throttle input. The ID.4, when floored from a stop, just sort of leisurely wound up to speed. Now, upon picking it up after this recall, it feels like the other EVs. A little tip of the throttle and it kicks off. It's not a small difference. Now, I don't think it's actually capable of going faster than before, it just gets up to speed from zero a LOT faster than before. Either they changed how much energy they send to the motor(s) at launch, or my front motor was never working at all before the update. Those are my two working theories.

@@fastforwardevOh okay. I had the software recall recently done but noticed no change in torque performance. Same for the infotainment. Little to no noticeable performance. I do see some functions I don’t think I had before: - ability to switch media sources - wifi connectivity beyond phone cellular connection That’s about it. They also upgraded my vehicle to 3.5

Disagree. Cariad is huge. They just made poor technology and software stack decisions and/or don't have the right people.

For what its worth I really like the ID vehicles especially the new sedan coming out. I am actually excited to see them get Rivian's software stack. Hopefully all of Rivian's work into seamless plug and charge will also work its way into ID vehicles. VW's manufacturing prowess and overall build quality with the brain being from Rivian would make in my opinion a top notch EV that would also be affordable. In my opinion this move from VW will actually be a good thing for their EV lineup which already has a soiled reputation. I own a Hyundai Ioniq 5.... every function in the vehicle worked upon delivery.

Same with my ID.4, everything worked on day 1. I'm glad you wrote again, because from the first post I thought you were blanket-hating on old companies, and blessing all startups with magical attributes they do not have. Glad to hear my first impression was wrong. I think it's great that Scout, a startup who didn't have time to wait, was able to leverage money from VW group to get Rivian's electronics and software platform. It makes perfect sense for what they are trying to do - start a whole car company from scratch in a couple of years. But VW should own their technologies. If they wanted, they could take the platform they have on the road now, and re-skin the interface to look just like Rivian. It's not like it's not capable of those features and visuals. My hope is that there is a technology transfer to VW group that lets them be the ones designing and implementing the UI, using Rivian's more modern hardware and software. But if they kill their in-house division and just expect Rivian to do whatever they want for them, it's going to end in tears. Rivian ain't big enough to manage UX for themselves, Scout, AND four or five top European brands. And I simply cannot imagine Porsche or Audi ceding control of their customer experience to a third party. Might as well stop building cars.

@ Not at all hating just to hate. I want these great automotive companies to stop caring so damn much about their stock prices and start engineering and innovating again! Scout is looking really awesome and my buddy who is not into EVs is really excited about getting a Scout Truck!

Thanks for the info. Do you know what software version you had before getting the recall done? I was still on 3.1. I’m guessing my experience is one of two things. Either they changed the throttle response, or my front motor was never on until this update!

I saw the Scout CES videos too and the software sure looks nice. I totally get a new car company (Scout) using another new company’s advanced electronics and software stack. I’m not sold on the idea of the entire VW group switching to it, unless their existing software group is doing the integration work. It also bugs me to think I’ve got an orphaned software-defined car after just two years. 😢

Me too! If I wasn’t underwater on this one I’d trade it in for the new one.

Ok who pinged Walter! Thanks very much! I wish the weather had been better and I agree, a Dennys is a welcome sight for a charge-weary EV traveler.

Thanks. Seems to me the only thing we disagree on is haptic buttons. And we agree that ripping and replacing the electronics and software stack with a third party stack doesn’t fix what needs fixing.

@@fastforwardev Very true, I think they have a working solution today. They need it in all trim levels across the board. Maybe if they are thinking bigger picture and newer platforms and new vehicles that may have some credence, but they didn't seem to indicate what their thinking is. We see other OEMs freaking out and punting to Google. GM went there, I think the Volvo and Polestar are Google. Hyundai/Kia just announced a hookup with Google. Maybe they are just crying uncle and think it is somehow cheaper to let someone else do it.

Thank you, same here!

Picking up a new one on Tuesday. We tried all the electric cars and liked the ID4 most. Our priorities where comfort and good cruise control (without automatic steering). I'm stoked and feel confident that we made the right decision.

Good, I hope they continue to sell well! The automatic steering is pretty good too, give it a try!

The Bolt is only capable of charging at a max of 54 KWh, and usually less than that. So it’s not any kind of measure of charge dispenser performance. As to percentage, it largely didn’t matter as I was driving between 50 and 100 miles between stations and I just charged to get to the next stop. As far as cost goes, it was really high. As high as 69 cents per KWh. Making driving an EV on the highway over twice as expensive as buying gas. That has to change if we’re going to make this transition work.

Yeah they had to wait FIVE MINUTES! 😛

Maybe, but I sense he’s kind of annoyed by how many new locations Ohio is getting :)

Thanks for thanks! Lots of questions there. I'll tell you what I think I know, for whatever that's worth. So we've got the same battery and AWD and year. I believe your dealer was referring to the first door handle recall. I also had that done. It was a check, and only replace if issues found. I don't recall if there was a software update with that one, but if there was it was minor. I'm pretty sure yours is still part of the new recall. You are on the same software I was before this new recall was applied. Afterwards you should have 3.5 on the ID software screen, and 1751 (or higher) on the software information screen. I found the link to the recall manual on the VW ID Talk Forum. It's actually hosted on NHTSA's site here: static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2024/RCRIT-24V651-3798.pdf The first US cars that came with the battery preconditioning feature were the 2024 models with verison 4.x. I believe some European ID.4's had it before that, but none in the US. What I really want to know is when we will get the bi-directional charging feature, so we can use our giant battery packs to power other things or even help stranded EV motorists who need enough charge to get to the nearest station. I believe Europe has had that for well over a year, in version 3.x software.

@@fastforwardevthanks for the document link

No, it’s mode independent. I’ve had the car for two years. The modes never felt much different than each other. ALL of them were slow off the line compared to our Bolts and the Model 3. I’ve had it in Comfort mode for months and it still is. Believe me I checked that first thing, assuming they had turbocharged Sport mode and left it in that mode after testing.

@@fastforwardev What would really be amazing is if you're getting something for nothing. In other words, if your car is swifter now but your mi/kWh remains unchanged. I'll be taking mine in for the door handle recall. It's a '24. Are they also getting a software update?

​@@fastforwardevwould you do an update video about the improvements to performance in more depth, and report if the efficiency has improved or stayed the same? Thank you, I'm a subscriber and enjoy your content.

I will definitely try to quantify it in more detail. If it is just a throttle mapping change maybe it’s because they figured out it was no problem for the battery or economy to let the motors have higher power at launch. I don’t expect to see any noticeable change to efficiency in either direction but I’ll definitely be testing that theory!

Yes I’ve been alarmed at how little press the stop sale got as it dragged on for months and months. It felt like the industry (and perhaps even VW) had given up on the ID.4. I’m glad they haven’t. There is so much more they need to do (like bring a second smaller high volume ID to the US) but at least they aren’t dead yet!

For some maybe, but I've had very good luck with my 2023 ID.4 S RWD (62 kWh battery), with no door handle or software issues like some owners have had. It is nice to see the are taking care of the recall issues and I look forward to the software update.

@@BigDaddyInKS I haven’t had any door issues either, and only software issues, besides missing features like pre-conditioning and bi-directional charging, has been one or two lockups requiring reboot. I just was eager to get the recall flag off my car. I didn’t expect the software update to be as big as it was.

Thanks! If I'm remembering correctly, Oklahoma is where Francis Energy first started. Maybe the chargers are older and/or not maintained well enough? These in Ohio are no older than a year, and this one I stopped at is brand new. I hope they hold up, as they are expanding rapidly in 2025 here. I'm also looking forward to Ionna chargers. I believe the two in Ohio have gone 'live' today with the rest of their network, as I see them as a charging option in our My Chevrolet app and that wasn't there yesterday!

Well that's currently our 'winter' here in Central Ohio. If we get a different winter in the new year maybe I'll try again, without the down-to-zero-percent part.

Yes, I looked them up afterwards and found not only do they have six sites up and running in Ohio, four of them are new this year and they are the bulk of the awards for next phase of Ohio NEVI funding. I’ll be posting about them and planning for visiting as many of them as I can.

Chrysler 200? No, that’s a Model 3 Highland.

Ugh, upon closer inspection, you may be right. Now I'm really embarrassed.

I did Scan my Tesla, that’s where I got the expected 64KWh idea from. Sad I only got 58. I just think it’s so weird that after testing three completely different EVs, they all get about 250 in the summer and 200 in the winter.

Thanks. I went looking after finding this one and it appears they have six locations in Ohio. Two opened in 2023 and four more opened in the second half of this year! Looks like they are going to be a big participant in the Ohio NEVI funded rollout. I’ll talk about that more in an upcoming video.

Yeah looks like they are focused on the middle of the country areas that are currently underserved. This is good, I just wish they would think bigger than just 4 ports per site. Anything smaller than 12 is likely to be congested as soon as EV drivers find it.

So it'll learn from your mistakes, keep you on a certain level (say AP Jail) and keep you their, but won't learn from its own mistakes. Ha, what a machine!

@@JohnnyBean78 I understand they plan to go to the camera system to determine if you are watching the road so it won't be losing it's mind screaming at you to apply more pressure to the wheel. But after it has screamed at you to apply more pressure to the wheel it will lock you out. It is ridiculous. So my last road trip I finally got fed up and just used TACC and that is a far less stressful drive. I really do think it is getting worse instead of better with each software update.

I used the GM J3400 to CCS adapter one time last month on a road trip and found the experience underwhelming. I have a SEV RST and the charging was well under 200KW when above 300KW is where most of my charging curve sits at 500 amps which tesla cannot do at this time. The site I visited was littered with trash and 2 of the dispensers were vandalised. But I charged from 19% to 40% and that was enough to get me home. Tesla SCN is only a 2nd option in my book, but I will use it when in a pinch or any other CPO. The adapter worked without issues.

I had thought the Equinox would be the Bolt replacement, but it's actually way larger, so I see where there is room for the Bolt in the lineup. I'll always want there to be a Bolt, no matter what it's charging speeds. One of the most underrated cars ever. But I'm worried it will only be bumped up to 100Kw, and still be way behind the rest of the market.

@@fastforwardev I think it will probably be 150kw minimum considering that they have the capability to do 350kw charging now 150kw is the base standard if you ask me

I agree 150Kw is the 'table stakes' of EV charging. I'm just worried GM will want to differentiate the Bolt from the more expensive cars by opting for a slower charge speed.

@@fastforwardev here is the way I view it the bolt is what is going to pay off the r&d of this new battery platform that is the good thing about using a single platform for every one of those models meaning which ever model sells well doesn't matter once those costs are recouped they can lower the price on all the ev's on every model and become profitable

Hmm, has GM said the new Bolt would be LFP? If so I missed that. I assumed it would be an even smaller version of the Equinox pack, or possibly from the partnership with Samsung, assuming that gets off the ground in time.

@@fastforwardev nothing is official yet, just lots of speculation

@@fastforwardevIt previous investor day it was confirmed going to be LFP

Thanks, that's a good question! I had just turned around at the nearest exit, and it is 9 miles back to the starting exit, and I got between 1-2 miles towards the chargers after that, so 10-11 miles is my guess.

Jane, is that you? You don't have to sneak in to chat under an assumed name, we've been married over a quarter century, we can just talk to each other! (Kidding, of course I talked this over with the Mrs. before execution.) The answer to the question is nothing. In fact I'd been putting work in to the 2020 Bolt up till the moment this offer presented itself, with the plan for it to be around with us for a long time. I'd upgraded the stock speakers, and was planning to add interior accent lighting. Then due to market weirdness it became possible to get a 2-year-old mid-range Model 3 for not much more. So I did. Now instead of a solid front wheel drive econobox we have a (knock on wood) solid AWD spaceship. And a huge jumpstart on seeing how many miles you can get from an EV battery pack.

Yes, the charger plugs in to a standard 110v outlet. Charging from 5% (at which point it won't run the blades any more) to 100% takes 4 hours or less. So I usually do my yard in two stints. An hour or so at lunchtime, then plug it in and finish the job after work.

@@fastforwardev I already bought one, and I am quite happy with it. Thanks for your response.

I have no argument with your math. I do take issue with you claiming I did 'Pikachu face' fake surprise or whatever you meant by that. I never expressed any alarm or histrionics, fake or otherwise. Also, I think you missed the point of the test. It was to see how far you can go beyond 0%. Turns out that the answer on the Bolt is none. You can go none farther at 0%. And you don't get to know where 0% is because it refuses to tell you. And that remains a bad idea, especially since there is no buffer. After this I don't do range tests down to 0%, I'm not going to test buffers ever again. 1-2% is plenty close enough.

Best of luck to you as well. I'm seven weeks and three software updates in, and no service issues.