But its perfectly possible to optimise just for the test and it no longer matches real life, this is exactly what VW did.
You just said this is not what VW did. Because it isn’t. VW cheated by changing the parameters strictly while the test was running. That’s not what’s happening here.
I don’t really buy the Edmunds test for this as it seems to be a sole one at the moment.
It is definitely not. I’ll try and send you a bunch later. There are at least a dozen that all came to the same consensus.
Where did I say VW didn’t cheat? I went back to check and I clearly said they did.
Only ones i have seen are quoting Edmunds that are standardised. If its not standardised then its garbage as its even easier to game. Even basic things like a heavier right foot, more use of the break pedal, turning down the regen, turning up the aircon all have an mpact.
Even with the Edmunds one I really have my doubts over the methodology as it would need to break 4 miles per kwh over actual mixed usage. Breaking 4 with hypermiling is easy, breaking it while driving completely normal in that size for car? Not easy.
The fact that I put in in italics and suffixed it with a no sir coupled with the fact that I have been very clear that they are always miles off should have given it away that I was being sarcastic, next time I will use a /s. But this is straw clutching at best as I have been consistently hammering them over their larger than average difference on range, how would this be happening without cheating?
The standardized tests are just that, standardized using an actual published method that’s auditable. The issue is if the manufacturer is cheating, but outside of that you have confidence that the test is applied the exact same to all cars . If the test is suitable is irrelevant at this point, as its applied the same to all other cars so the same variance exists for all.
Whats wrong with “real” world tests is the lack of auditability and accountability for the ones I have seen. This single test has been spread far and wide, I notice you haven’t shared other sources yet for this. It just smells of a cooked or lucky test. Lets be clear here, the car has to be doing close to 5 miles per kwh to achieve this amount of range with such a small battery, they are claiming 339 miles for the standard, that has a 60kwh battery.
5 miles per kwh with normal driving (which is what the test is advertised at), doing 70mph motorway speeds in a medium sized car is frankly unbelievable. Getting 5 miles per kwh out of a tiny EV doing low speed cruising in favorable weather is hard, not unachievable, but hard. Getting this out of that car for normal driving? I have massive doubts.
I understand that. You’re not understanding that “this”= Tesla. As in, they’re not doing what VW is doing, which you said, but then also implied otherwise in the next comment.
have been consistently hammering them over their larger than average difference on range, how would this be happening without cheating?
And here you’re doing it again. There’s no cheating. It’s a fixed set of criteria. They can optimize for those criteria in a way that might not reflect the “real world”.
Whats wrong with “real” world tests is the lack of auditability and accountability
I understand they’re not perfect, but clearly the standardized tests are even less perfect, because they’re even less reflective of real world experiences that are reported by actual drivers. And you can’t disagree with that, because that was the entire premise of your argument.
Getting 5 miles per kwh out of a tiny EV doing low speed cruising in favorable weather is hard
Not really hard in a vehicle that makes the necessary sacrifices to achieve it. Low roofline, low to the ground, LRR tires, 2 seats, sufficiently aerodynamic profile, efficient thermal management, etc. Something like the old Honda Insight could achieve this easily, and I expect Cybercab will as well.
Then explain why they have consistently been miles more optimistic when compared to their competition with their advertised range vs. both EU and US tests? Its always been a huge difference.
The car has not fundamentally changed shape with the latest model, its not suddenly had an improvement of more than 1kwh per mile, which is what would be needed.
Its a complete fantasy I am afraid as that sort of improvement is unheard of in modern EVs mid generation refresh, which this is. Other people would have reproduced the test results by now and be shouting it from the roof tops, do you have such results? As I see a distinct lack of them so far.
You really haven’t, VW demonstrated its easy to set a custom run routine because its a set criteria if you apply your mind to it. EVs are no different at all to diesels in that they can be optimized. All you’ve done is hand waving, “no they didn’t”, which isn’t exactly proving anything. Meanwhile they have the furthest out set of results of any EV, so I know what we have more evidence for.
Its the latest model of the Tesla that’s beaten the EPA mileage, the one you have referenced here:
You are looking at old reviews. Ones in the last year or so show the opposite.
and you said you would get more reviews for, but failed to do:
It is definitely not. I’ll try and send you a bunch later. There are at least a dozen that all came to the same consensus.
You need to show how a mid life refresh can result in an easy 25% improvement in efficiency from previous tests from the same tester, because to me thats just more hand waving using completely different cars. We are talking about Tesla here
They can optimize for those criteria in a way that might not reflect the “real world”
VW demonstrated its easy to set a custom run routine…EVs are no different at all to diesels in that they can be optimized
I’m so confused. VW did not “optimize” anything, they cheated. You started out saying Tesla was not cheating (like VW) and now you repeatedly seem to suggest that they are. Which one is it?
Meanwhile they have the furthest out set of results of any EV
You are contradicting your own self. How do we know that? Based on “real life” testing/experience? Which you have suggested is useless?
and you said you would get more reviews for, but failed to do:
And I will but I also have shit to do so you’re going to have to wait.
You need to show how a mid life refresh can result in an easy 25% improvement in efficiency
There was no improvement in efficiency. The improvement was in the testing methodology.
You’re just hand-waving the more rational explanation.
You just said this is not what VW did. Because it isn’t. VW cheated by changing the parameters strictly while the test was running. That’s not what’s happening here.
It is definitely not. I’ll try and send you a bunch later. There are at least a dozen that all came to the same consensus.
Where did I say VW didn’t cheat? I went back to check and I clearly said they did.
Only ones i have seen are quoting Edmunds that are standardised. If its not standardised then its garbage as its even easier to game. Even basic things like a heavier right foot, more use of the break pedal, turning down the regen, turning up the aircon all have an mpact.
Even with the Edmunds one I really have my doubts over the methodology as it would need to break 4 miles per kwh over actual mixed usage. Breaking 4 with hypermiling is easy, breaking it while driving completely normal in that size for car? Not easy.
“This”= Tesla.
The standardized tests are the ones giving us garbage ratings. That’s why people make all these “real world” tests.
The fact that I put in in italics and suffixed it with a no sir coupled with the fact that I have been very clear that they are always miles off should have given it away that I was being sarcastic, next time I will use a /s. But this is straw clutching at best as I have been consistently hammering them over their larger than average difference on range, how would this be happening without cheating?
The standardized tests are just that, standardized using an actual published method that’s auditable. The issue is if the manufacturer is cheating, but outside of that you have confidence that the test is applied the exact same to all cars . If the test is suitable is irrelevant at this point, as its applied the same to all other cars so the same variance exists for all.
Whats wrong with “real” world tests is the lack of auditability and accountability for the ones I have seen. This single test has been spread far and wide, I notice you haven’t shared other sources yet for this. It just smells of a cooked or lucky test. Lets be clear here, the car has to be doing close to 5 miles per kwh to achieve this amount of range with such a small battery, they are claiming 339 miles for the standard, that has a 60kwh battery.
5 miles per kwh with normal driving (which is what the test is advertised at), doing 70mph motorway speeds in a medium sized car is frankly unbelievable. Getting 5 miles per kwh out of a tiny EV doing low speed cruising in favorable weather is hard, not unachievable, but hard. Getting this out of that car for normal driving? I have massive doubts.
I understand that. You’re not understanding that “this”= Tesla. As in, they’re not doing what VW is doing, which you said, but then also implied otherwise in the next comment.
And here you’re doing it again. There’s no cheating. It’s a fixed set of criteria. They can optimize for those criteria in a way that might not reflect the “real world”.
I understand they’re not perfect, but clearly the standardized tests are even less perfect, because they’re even less reflective of real world experiences that are reported by actual drivers. And you can’t disagree with that, because that was the entire premise of your argument.
Not really hard in a vehicle that makes the necessary sacrifices to achieve it. Low roofline, low to the ground, LRR tires, 2 seats, sufficiently aerodynamic profile, efficient thermal management, etc. Something like the old Honda Insight could achieve this easily, and I expect Cybercab will as well.
Then explain why they have consistently been miles more optimistic when compared to their competition with their advertised range vs. both EU and US tests? Its always been a huge difference.
The car has not fundamentally changed shape with the latest model, its not suddenly had an improvement of more than 1kwh per mile, which is what would be needed.
Its a complete fantasy I am afraid as that sort of improvement is unheard of in modern EVs mid generation refresh, which this is. Other people would have reproduced the test results by now and be shouting it from the roof tops, do you have such results? As I see a distinct lack of them so far.
I just did that, in the comment you just replied to.
I honestly don’t know what you’re referring to here. The “latest model” of what? “Needed” for what?
You really haven’t, VW demonstrated its easy to set a custom run routine because its a set criteria if you apply your mind to it. EVs are no different at all to diesels in that they can be optimized. All you’ve done is hand waving, “no they didn’t”, which isn’t exactly proving anything. Meanwhile they have the furthest out set of results of any EV, so I know what we have more evidence for.
Its the latest model of the Tesla that’s beaten the EPA mileage, the one you have referenced here:
and you said you would get more reviews for, but failed to do:
You need to show how a mid life refresh can result in an easy 25% improvement in efficiency from previous tests from the same tester, because to me thats just more hand waving using completely different cars. We are talking about Tesla here
I really have:
I’m so confused. VW did not “optimize” anything, they cheated. You started out saying Tesla was not cheating (like VW) and now you repeatedly seem to suggest that they are. Which one is it?
You are contradicting your own self. How do we know that? Based on “real life” testing/experience? Which you have suggested is useless?
And I will but I also have shit to do so you’re going to have to wait.
There was no improvement in efficiency. The improvement was in the testing methodology.
You’re just hand-waving the more rational explanation.