This stuff is so cool to see. I worked at the Ford Product Development Center as a teenager in the 90s and got to see where they made clay models of the next Mustang and stuff. It was a thrill then and still cool to see behind the curtain now. Thanks Kyle and Magna (and whoever was behind that camera.)
Honestly better than the 2 cycle vs 5 cycle EPA testing... how in the world is that even legal? We as consumers shouldnt have to research which companies are using one test over the other and trying to deduct some comparison between them. I actually look to OOS 70 mph range tests just to get somewhat comparable results.
Software I suppose. Maybe this is one of the reasons WLTP is not very accurate. I guess the fan is only there to make sure trim and mirrors don't fly off.
Kyle, 85% of the time the EPA does not run the tests. Manufacturers test their own vehicles-usually pre-production prototypes-and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 15%-20% of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory.
Just terrific. I am so pleased that you have really made it and now have more access to inside information that anyone else in on-line RUclips automotive journalism. It is all because of your intelligence and unbelievable devotion to your work. Congratulations.
Ny step dad built car performance test systems in his 1 person company. He sold them to car magazines as well as even Rolls Royce in the 80s. I remember how difficult it was for the car magazines to replicate the same driving conditions every time when you had to do it on the road and not in a controlled environment. Just getting the measurements right. Had different solutions. One would bolt onto the wheel another would have a 5th bicycle like wheel attached to the car. Also measuring gas consumption was hard because we had to cut into the gas line. Well I was just school boy at the time and never really got involved into it but I did design a data protocol in 10 grade to transfer car telemetry over analog radio when on a track. It even could handle drops in transmission. It never really got used. But was fun to design.
Important: Check out GreenNCAP for a more realistic procedure with: AC always on, daytime/lowbeam lights, -7 °C test, 130 km/h test with kickdowns from 110 km/h. The cold test revealed the shocking truth of ID3 consuming double the energy in winter, BMS improvements in Audi Q4 (same MEB platform) showed a clear improvement with only ~50 % more consumption in their test.
EPA ratings are based on very dishonest engineering. Most grid-generated electricity is powered by a massive steam engine. They need to generate over 10,240 BTUs of heat to output one kWh of power. However, there are significant losses in getting that power into the EV battery. The first loss is in the grid itself, distribution losses average 11.5 % so 1000 Watt hrs. drops to 855 Wh. Then there is another 12% loss in the charging equipment which transforms the 855 Watt hrs. at the outlet into DC at a voltage that can charge the EV's battery. So now we are down to 778 Watt hrs. which took 10,2400 BTUs to generate. A gallon of gas contains 120,000 BTUs or 11.7 the amount of heat needed to put 778 Watt hrs. into the EV's battery. Therefore the heat energy in a gallon of gasoline if converted fairly by the EPA would only equal 9.1 kWh. If we use the figures from independent studies regarding a Tesla model 3 reports that they average about 3.39 miles/kWh, provided that the AC and cabin heat is not used. So to be honest a gallon's worth of heat energy will give a Tesla a true mpg rating of 30.8 miles... insideevs.com/news/597460/tesla-efficiency-depends-on-driver/
IT does not matter if WLTP and EPA does not reflect real world numbers. These numbers are for comparing EVs. So if we can see a list of all EVs ranked from least efficient to most efficient, that is all the buyers need to know. Right?
Remember test cycles done with as little as possible extras and likely spare wheel, tow bar , four or five onboard, luggage etc on board will decrease range significantly.
Manufacturers do give a consumption range according to the possible extras, the impact of e.g. sport wheels or a heavy tow hitch can usually be seen live in the configurator.
No. You are wrong. They just TEST it. WLTP is prescribed as standard protocol by Europe Union and it is the same for all. It may not match real range every time, but it is allways the same and it is COMPARABLE (but WLTP ranges CAN be achieved in real world, even a lot batter than WLTP is achievable in real world if the speed is low).
As is the case with most things like this, it is safe to blame the government or the regulating agencies, not the engineers working to a specification. We just do what we are told.
the aim of the test is to have a standard test platform. If 1 manufacturer tests with 150 kg of load at 150 kmph and the 2nd with 50 kg of load at 50 kmph , the results cannot be compared. What could have been done is specify multiple conditions, with low load ,low speed and also average legal speed and average load.
Wltp makes the aerodynamic part of a car obsolete, so the bigger the vehicle , the more the wltp test is just motor testing and has no part to play in the real world , even a brick with a motor would look good. Real world testing that you guys do is essentially much more useful to customers
I have seen several long time displays where the average speed is in the WLTP 47 km/h area, so it is not bad. Remember many people are commuting and long range trips are rather rare.
@ vadimus2007 - Europe is much smaller with smaller city streets, freeway is not a large part of their daily driving, even their house don't use as much AC, their WLTP test protocol reflects those characteristics which enhance driving range of EVs. We Americans however jump on the freeway much more frequently, driving longer distance with our suburb layout, blast on the AC, so our range would be less which is reflected in our EPA protocol. "joke", "deception", that's a bit harsh and reflect your provincial thinking.
Why? My VW ID.4 only costs about $4-5 if I have to do a 0-100% charge at home. Maybe adding $20 to my monthly bill. The batteries are recycled when they no longer are functional, but even after they aren't good enough for use in an EV they can be used for stationary power storage. You might want to do some more real research into the topic.
This stuff is so cool to see. I worked at the Ford Product Development Center as a teenager in the 90s and got to see where they made clay models of the next Mustang and stuff. It was a thrill then and still cool to see behind the curtain now. Thanks Kyle and Magna (and whoever was behind that camera.)
WLTP - Well Less Than Probably
NEDC - Not Evan Darn Close
Love that "no photos" sticker on the window.
no photos, but videos are ok🤫☺🤗
Kyle -"we need to make a OOS 'real world' drive cycle"
Magna - "bring your fattest wallet and we will make it happen"
Honestly better than the 2 cycle vs 5 cycle EPA testing... how in the world is that even legal? We as consumers shouldnt have to research which companies are using one test over the other and trying to deduct some comparison between them. I actually look to OOS 70 mph range tests just to get somewhat comparable results.
I’d have liked to know how they factor in the aerodynamic drag of the car that’s being WLTP tested.
Software I suppose. Maybe this is one of the reasons WLTP is not very accurate. I guess the fan is only there to make sure trim and mirrors don't fly off.
Probably through a calculation since they can get the drag coefficient (Cd) of the vehicle from wind tunnel or CFD simulations.
Kyle, 85% of the time the EPA does not run the tests. Manufacturers test their own vehicles-usually pre-production prototypes-and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 15%-20% of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory.
what determines that a vehicle should be lab tested. how is the 20% arrived at/selected?
Love the technical deep dive. Fantastic job selecting content that improves our understanding of the industry!!👍💪
Just terrific. I am so pleased that you have really made it and now have more access to inside information that anyone else in on-line RUclips automotive journalism. It is all because of your intelligence and unbelievable devotion to your work. Congratulations.
IF a manufacturer reports a higher number than what a EPA spot check tests. What happens?? Who pays the owners who were lied to??
This was a fascinating look into an aspect of vehicle development that is not normally shown.
Kyle interviewed Jesus
Ny step dad built car performance test systems in his 1 person company. He sold them to car magazines as well as even Rolls Royce in the 80s. I remember how difficult it was for the car magazines to replicate the same driving conditions every time when you had to do it on the road and not in a controlled environment. Just getting the measurements right. Had different solutions. One would bolt onto the wheel another would have a 5th bicycle like wheel attached to the car. Also measuring gas consumption was hard because we had to cut into the gas line. Well I was just school boy at the time and never really got involved into it but I did design a data protocol in 10 grade to transfer car telemetry over analog radio when on a track. It even could handle drops in transmission. It never really got used. But was fun to design.
Gonna have to change the name to "within spec' motors"!
Big changes since you moved to Colorado 🙂
It would be neat to see a 70 mph range test on the dyno compared to one of the real world tests that you and Tom have done.
Important: Check out GreenNCAP for a more realistic procedure with:
AC always on, daytime/lowbeam lights, -7 °C test, 130 km/h test with kickdowns from 110 km/h.
The cold test revealed the shocking truth of ID3 consuming double the energy in winter, BMS improvements in Audi Q4 (same MEB platform) showed a clear improvement with only ~50 % more consumption in their test.
Where’s the fisker?
This channel has absolutely been killing it lately, especially this and the video at Magna were super intersting.
EPA ratings are based on very dishonest engineering. Most grid-generated electricity is powered by a massive steam engine. They need to generate over 10,240 BTUs of heat to output one kWh of power. However, there are significant losses in getting that power into the EV battery. The first loss is in the grid itself, distribution losses average 11.5 % so 1000 Watt hrs. drops to 855 Wh. Then there is another 12% loss in the charging equipment which transforms the 855 Watt hrs. at the outlet into DC at a voltage that can charge the EV's battery. So now we are down to 778 Watt hrs. which took 10,2400 BTUs to generate. A gallon of gas contains 120,000 BTUs or 11.7 the amount of heat needed to put 778 Watt hrs. into the EV's battery. Therefore the heat energy in a gallon of gasoline if converted fairly by the EPA would only equal 9.1 kWh. If we use the figures from independent studies regarding a Tesla model 3 reports that they average about 3.39 miles/kWh, provided that the AC and cabin heat is not used. So to be honest a gallon's worth of heat energy will give a Tesla a true mpg rating of 30.8 miles... insideevs.com/news/597460/tesla-efficiency-depends-on-driver/
that is the Magna Arcfox
Should've asked about dieselgate
😆 🤣
IT does not matter if WLTP and EPA does not reflect real world numbers. These numbers are for comparing EVs. So if we can see a list of all EVs ranked from least efficient to most efficient, that is all the buyers need to know. Right?
Epa must be standard to 75 mph
Excellent video. By far the best auto review channel out there.
At first I thought he was talking to Arnold Schwarzenegger
Remember test cycles done with as little as possible extras and likely spare wheel, tow bar , four or five onboard, luggage etc on board will decrease range significantly.
Manufacturers do give a consumption range according to the possible extras, the impact of e.g. sport wheels or a heavy tow hitch can usually be seen live in the configurator.
That was Fantastic, Kyle. Thanks for this!
Love geeking out on this kind of stuff!
Fascinating insight, great presentation that answers a lot of questions, nice work 👍
Thumbs up.
Love evs
What is the EV being tested at around 3:15?
Looks like an Arcfox Alpha S.
what is that car on the dyno?
- Arcfox Alpha-S -
This video was truly interesting.
Finally
pertamax
Ohhhhh is that a BYD on test on the rollers?
No
17:30 WLTP not like real life. From the expert
True, BMW i4 40 backroads driving resulted in 670 km instead of WLTP 576 km. 👌
So, these are the guys to blame when real range test doesn't match WLTP
No, these guys must apply a precise cycle. The ones to blames are the people who designed such a poor cycle.
No. You are wrong. They just TEST it. WLTP is prescribed as standard protocol by Europe Union and it is the same for all. It may not match real range every time, but it is allways the same and it is COMPARABLE (but WLTP ranges CAN be achieved in real world, even a lot batter than WLTP is achievable in real world if the speed is low).
As is the case with most things like this, it is safe to blame the government or the regulating agencies, not the engineers working to a specification. We just do what we are told.
the aim of the test is to have a standard test platform. If 1 manufacturer tests with 150 kg of load at 150 kmph and the 2nd with 50 kg of load at 50 kmph , the results cannot be compared.
What could have been done is specify multiple conditions, with low load ,low speed and also average legal speed and average load.
No, it is your driving. Learn how to hypermile!
Wltp makes the aerodynamic part of a car obsolete, so the bigger the vehicle , the more the wltp test is just motor testing and has no part to play in the real world , even a brick with a motor would look good. Real world testing that you guys do is essentially much more useful to customers
Why do you believe that? Aerodynamic drag (as well as other driving resistances) is part of the dyno-setup.
You are too naive, of course it is factored in.
Is it just me, or WLTP looks like a joke? I mean EPA isn't real life too but WLTP is a whole different level of deception...
OK smart guy - please define a 'real life' test? People (drivers) are different - right?
I have seen several long time displays where the average speed is in the WLTP 47 km/h area, so it is not bad. Remember many people are commuting and long range trips are rather rare.
@ vadimus2007 - Europe is much smaller with smaller city streets, freeway is not a large part of their daily driving, even their house don't use as much AC, their WLTP test protocol reflects those characteristics which enhance driving range of EVs. We Americans however jump on the freeway much more frequently, driving longer distance with our suburb layout, blast on the AC, so our range would be less which is reflected in our EPA protocol. "joke", "deception", that's a bit harsh and reflect your provincial thinking.
For the love of god, please stop messing with your hair all the time. In every video. Always.
For me, WLTP or EPA is not really interesting, I'm more interested at highway speed - 120km/h / 130km/h.
Is the room solar powered?
Your electric bill will at least double and what do you do with all those batteries when they're no longer serviceable
Why? My VW ID.4 only costs about $4-5 if I have to do a 0-100% charge at home. Maybe adding $20 to my monthly bill. The batteries are recycled when they no longer are functional, but even after they aren't good enough for use in an EV they can be used for stationary power storage.
You might want to do some more real research into the topic.