Much shorter (and summer) for me by I got the car on the 1st July. 1200 miles, 4m/kWh

 

If that is through winter it’s very impressive indeed!

 

The above includes quite a good range of long holiday motorway drives as well lots of local stuff around lumpy bumpy Yorkshire.
tbf I think I did a reset around Feb (I actually have 6200 miles on the clock) so it doesn’t have lots of winter driving in it.
but 4.0 still pretty decent…

 

Mines 3.6, but it was delivered in January so has quite a few short trips in cold weather.

 

No idea how accurate the ‘Long-term’ data value of car efficiency is but what is yours??
Mine is :
Miles: 4322
Mph average: 25
Efficiency; 4.0 mi/kWh
I got the car Dec 2020.

If accurate I’m pretty happy with that! View attachment 147617

Those numbers don't indicate efficiency but merely usage. There are different incompatible physical base units on the top and bottom of the " equation'. One is distance, the other is energy.

 

Surely mi/kWh is efficiency?
I assume it’s calculated when the car’s ignition is on.

 

These are my stats for almost 8k miles since I got the ID.3 on 1 April this year. Car used without much thinking of ecodriving with A/C on almost 90% of the time. I guess half of the mileage is motorway at 70-75 indicated. Data is from my spreadsheet not from the infotainment system but AFAIR it shows similar stats re efficiency.

 

16000 miles in mine, since the middle of last November, long term average of 3.7.

Most of my journeys are long 80-90% of the battery ones, and on fast A roads or motorways.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the measure, all IDs will be doing it the same so as a comparison and for talking nonsense on the internet, it’s valid.

 

Miles per kWh is a useful measurement in that if everyone generally agrees they get 3.5-3.6 miles per kWh sat at 70, on a warm day with the aircon on and someone else says they're only getting 2 miies per kWh doing exactly the same then there's something wrong with their car or their driving technique, useful to know.

 

Efficiency is a percentage of energy in vs out and I think that's point he's trying to make.

It doesn't really matter though, he is technically correct and we're technically incorrect but we are all comparing apples with apples, just calling those apples bananas.

 

Efficiency is a percentage of energy in vs out and I think that's point he's trying to make.

It doesn't really matter though, he is technically correct and we're technically incorrect but we are all comparing apples with apples, just calling those apples bananas.

Exactly. Words don’t exist only in the precise definitions used by physicists and engineers. If the great unwashed decide to give a word a different meaning, tough, the genie is out of the bottle.

 

All I'm getting from this thread is that the ID.3 isn't very good at getting the most miles out of it's battery if your all cock-a-hoot at a miserly 4mpkWh.

 

Congratulations.

 

Consumption is what everyone is comparing.

Mine is consuming around 3.5/3.6 kwh per mile, on average.

I'm not entirely convinced that kwh is the right unit either but then that's what comes out of the wall in a financial unit so I'll live with it.

 

If your average

Consumption is what everyone is comparing.

Mine is consuming around 3.5/3.6 kwh per mile, on average.

I'm not entirely convinced that kwh is the right unit either but then that's what comes out of the wall in a financial unit so I'll live with it.

The other mpg equivalents are based on the price of petrol/diesel vs price of electricity, so it's all a bit flawed really all you can do is compare what you're familiar with. If you're getting 3.5 miles per kWh, charging at a 40p per kWh rapid charger then you're at 55mpg equivalency.

At home on a standard 16p/kWh you're around 130mpg.

At home onOctopys GO is more like 420mpg equivalent.

My old Polo GTI+ had a computer that showed output in kWh. At 70mph, it averaged 35kWh. In an ID3 sat at 70mph, doing 3.5 miles kWh, it uses around 20 kWh in an hour.

 

I would imagine the amount of lumens put out by the headlights would have to be taken into account aswell 😁

 

Frankly when anyone asks me about range, the only figure that I think it worthwhile considering is the range at 70 mph on a motorway and I seem to be getting somewhere around 3.6 to 3.8 miles / kWh which gives around 200- 220 miles of range which I'm happy with, yes you probably get around 250 miles of range driving around town but who ever spends over 10 hours driving around town in a day.

 

The big bladder Red Bull mainlining diesel crew?

 

i have the ID4 and I was getting around 3.1-3.3 on a typical drive. I assumed that was me driving badly (lol) BUT this week I thought I would really try to see if I could match those who were getting 3.9-4.1 range. I made one simple change and was shocked by the difference... all I did was turn off the A/C and over a few days and a couple of hundred miles Im averaging 3.9 without really trying!

So the A/C makes a big difference! Its been essential lately with the heat, but equally it is costing around 20% in efficiency! That's scary because it can make a difference of around 50 miles on a long drive!

 

Rough sum worst case I’ve seen stationary is 2kwh with aircon on.

if I can drive 60 miles in an hour at 4mi/kwh without aircon I use 15kw. With aircon on thst becomes 17kw giving 3.6

was seeing 4.1-4.2 with aircon on in hot weather last week at 65 mph with acc

 

As our current loan ID3 is getting anything from 4.5 up to 5.5 with the aircon off (it's not working) and our ID3 was getting high 3s up to 5 on similar runs I'd say turning it off does improve efficiency by 10-20% but I'd rather have it on 😅💦

 

Driven 3.5k and never had the aircon off (except one journey) or bothered to try and be more efficient and average 3.2.

Couldn't care less as it's dirt cheap at either 3, 4 or 20

 

I find it crazy that there are people out there who drive around without the aircon on 🥵

 

It could save you a pound a week to leave it off...there are some incredibly tight people on here, giving huge consideration as to how to get their fuelling costs down from 1.5p a mile to 1.3p per mile!

Not sure why aircon on EVs is so inefficient vs ICE cars. On my string of previous ICE VWs, the faster you go, the more efficient the AC is - more air passing over the AC radiator/heat exchanger the better, to the point that there's almost no fuel penalty for having your AC on while sat at 70mph+.

On the ID3, it doesn't matter whether you're doing 30 or 70mph, the efficiency hit is about the same.

I can only think that the airflow to the aircon heat exchanger must be really poor for aircon efficiency to not markedly improve with increasing speed - the price of efficient frontal aerodynamics?

 

People would happily be uncomfortable and sweaty than spend another half a penny a mile.

 

It would be interesting to see a Range (or efficiency if that's not a can of worms) comparison between driving with aircon on, and driving with the window open. How about open just a finger's-width on the fronts ? When I was doing my Highlands tour, one trip had me find a charger broken when it had worked the previous day, and a 33 mile trip to the nearest Rapid was then in order. The aircon was switched off and the windows cracked to stop death by heat exhaustion.

 

Likewise in the Highlands is when I had a play around with aircon after coming across a failed charger on route.
As I said I found turning up the fan with the air directed at you helpful (either without the aircon on or with it at least at a higher temp)

 

@Monkeyhanger - on an ICE the engine is always turning over (regardless of speed) so let’s say your AC uses X amount of energy regardless. At standing that might be 10% of the ice total energy consumption - at 70mph where it’s using 10 times more energy - that same X amount of energy will become 1% of the total ice energy consumption. The relative difference changes.

As you rightly point out - when the cost of electricity (compared to fuel) is so low - it’s not worth worrying about for me!

 

@Monkeyhanger - on an ICE the engine is always turning over (regardless of speed) so let’s say your AC uses X amount of energy regardless. At standing that might be 10% of the ice total energy consumption - at 70mph where it’s using 10 times more energy - that same X amount of energy will become 1% of the total ice energy consumption. The relative difference changes.

As you rightly point out - when the cost of electricity (compared to fuel) is so low - it’s not worth worrying about for me!

There's more to it than than that. For an unknown reason, driving at higher speeds in the ID3 shows no discernable improvement in AC efficiency. On all the ICE car I've had, when a lot of high speed air is rushing over/through the AC radiator, it is removing the heat that the AC unit is generating more effectively.

On my Polo GTI+ in the "convenience consumers" menu, you could see AC energy consumption (among other things) as a bar with a measure scale and with settings being left alone, once desired cabin temp had been reached and was being maintained, you could see the AC energy consumption bar decrease as car speed increased. To cool to supply the cabin, there's heat generated that is got rid of at the other end of the system via a radiator that dissipates the heat by passing air over it. The more air, the better the dissipation. There is a grille at the bottom of the ID3s front end and a radiator behind it - presumably that's for the AC. If the AC doesn't work any better at 70mph than 20mph, it would suggest to me that the radiator isn't getting much airflow to it, and certainly not an amount that increases in line with vehicle speed.

 

Having had a petrol Golf eTSI (mild hybrid) as a courtesy car while my ID.3 was being repaired was interesting to compare. With the aircon on in slow moving stop start traffic the car rarely turned the engine off and the fuel economy dropped like a stone compared to aircon off where it took every opportunity to turn the engine off, even going down a gently slope. On a longer run at higher speed having the aircon on made little difference.

 

I dad-spreadsheeted a comparison showing, at 8% impact on range, the cost per mile of running aircon is about a tenth of a penny if you're on an EV tariff at home, and about a penny if you're charging out'n'about. Assuming 4 mi per kWh.

 

Sure. But the issue is when people get nervous about range, lack of chargers and have to scavenge.

 

I have had my ID3 for one month. It is a 58 performance. Driving has been a mixture of driving in town and motorway.
I keep air-conditioning on, radio and all the modcons
I am driving aggressively as I like the power.
The only place I have changed is previously on motorways I am driving 80-90, I am now driving 65-70 as I have not been in a rush and conscious of the falloff of efficiency over 56.
My average since start is 3.7, which I consider very good. I did get 4.1 on one charge. Can't remember the type of driving

rgds