[AustinM64]

Hi There,

My wife bought a Fiat 500e last June and I have to say it is a fantastic car. However, one question I have is.... Fiat claims the car's WLTP range is good for 199 miles but when fully charged the dash says the range is 161 miles! Is there some sort of safety margin here?

This has been like this for some time - so when the weather was warmer.

I wonder if any of you can shed some light on this?

Cheers

Austin

 

[LaserTam]

'They all do that sir' . Mine is the same and seems all owners experience the same. WLTP figures are just like the claimed MPG in ICE cars - calculated based on a specific test which is not like the real world. But it is very odd that everyone has range of 161 miles at 100% Soc, suggesting the software has adjusted it. Very read some people saw 190 range when they first purchased the car, I don't recall seeing that personally.

 

[AustinM64]

Okay, thanks. I have a vague recollection of it showing 184 odd when we first got it but as I don't drive it much, I have only noticed the 161 range over the last couple of months.

 

[gladini]

Turn off the climate air con system - including the fan - so everything fully off
Does it go up a tad ?

 

[Cheshirecat]

At the end of the day, the “range showing” is a guess by the car, .

What is the ACTUAL range you are experiencing, eg charge fully and drive it

 

[Jeremy Harris]

I've posted this before, but it is an illustration as to just how different the true range of all cars, no matter what fuel they use, is from the advertised range. In 2005 I bought a Toyota Prius hybrid, and decided to monitor its performance to see how much more efficient it was when compared to other cars I'd owned.

That car is advertised as having a (extra-urban) range of 668 miles (from the official mpg and the fuel tank capacity). That is a complete joke, the very best I ever managed to get out of it was a range of only 607 miles, and in winter that range dropped massively to only 506 miles.

The thing lost over 160 miles of its advertised range in winter. My wife's Yaris was actually worse, that didn't get as close as the Prius to meeting its advertised range. You will find it's exactly the same for ever other car every sold - the specs never come close to reality.

The issue with EVs is that the range is stated in the WLTP testing, rather than the mpg (which has to be divided into the usable fuel tank capacity to get the range). This means that reviews and advertising for ICE vehicles rarely ever mentions the range. As another example, the first few cars I owned were all Minis. The fuel tank held around 5 gallons and they might manage to get 40mpg if driven carefully. That meant that they had a maximum range of no more than about 200 miles, and in reality the range was a fair bit less than that most of the time.

 

[.Tom.]

It's a known fault with the car discussed on the Facebook car owners forum at some length.

As others said you'll know or learn to understand the cars range in certain conditions using certain climate controls.

I still think the i3 is the best at guessing compared to the Nissan and 500e

 

[idiotzoo]

The indicated range is a fiction. The max range is essentially the usable battery capacity multiplied by the car’s supposed efficiency. So if you can achieve 4 miles/kWh and have a 42kWh battery with 37.3kWh usable, then the range is 149 miles.

4 miles/kWh is pretty good this time of year and you probably won’t manage that. 3.5 is more realistic, so the range is then 130.

to get 199 miles from 37.3 kWh usable means hitting over 5 miles/kWh which is… optimistic. Then again it’s a city car by design so in summer, with very careful driving, you might manage it.

More realistic is just 4.3miles/kWh which gives you the 161 range.

The more I think about it, have they massively cocked up and stated the car’s range based on the full battery capacity rather than the usable capacity?

 

[Smitten]

You need a purpose built EV with a slippery outside shape like a model 3 to exceed 4 miles/kWh in winter. Our e208 is giving about 3.3 m/kWh now and it has a 45kW battery. So 199 miles is fantasy from a 37kW battery. Most we have had in the summer is 170 miles of actual driving (150 motorway plus 20 left at journeys end). Which brings me to my second point, you don't drive the car from full to empty. You probably start with 80% or so and end up with 10 to 15% so your range is already reduced.

 

[Lexden]

In many EVs, range in cold weather can be maximised if the cabin and battery are pre-conditioned before departure whilst the car is still connected to an EVSE. As stated above, damp roads and the use of heating; lighting and wipers are a constant battery drain. Cold weather range reduction of 25% is not uncommon in some wet and cold wintry conditions. I have also had days when the GOM range has dropped quickly post departure, only to stabilise and increase as cabin temperature stabilises.

 

[Smitten]

In many EVs, range in cold weather can be maximised if the cabin and battery are pre-conditioned before departure whilst the car is still connected to an EVSE. As stated above, damp roads and the use of heating; lighting and wipers are a constant battery drain. Cold weather range reduction of 25% is not uncommon in some wet and cold wintry conditions. I have also had days when the GOM range has dropped quickly post departure, only to stabilise and increase as cabin temperature stabilises.

In a little test recently without pre heating a 6 mile journey used 10% of battery capacity. With pre heating much more efficient.

 

[First Draft]

I found the GOM on the Ioniq (saloon/fastback/not the big boy now being sold) to be pretty accurate.

 

[AustinM64]

The indicated range is a fiction. The max range is essentially the usable battery capacity multiplied by the car’s supposed efficiency. So if you can achieve 4 miles/kWh and have a 42kWh battery with 37.3kWh usable, then the range is 149 miles.

4 miles/kWh is pretty good this time of year and you probably won’t manage that. 3.5 is more realistic, so the range is then 130.

to get 199 miles from 37.3 kWh usable means hitting over 5 miles/kWh which is… optimistic. Then again it’s a city car by design so in summer, with very careful driving, you might manage it.

More realistic is just 4.3miles/kWh which gives you the 161 range.

The more I think about it, have they massively cocked up and stated the car’s range based on the full battery capacity rather than the usable capacity?

Ah, interesting; that explains a lot. I went to Brighton yesterday which for me was about 85 miles. If I couldn't get a charging point I planned a 20 min top-up at Cobham Services on the M25. As 90% of my journey was on the motorway, and they were clear, I spent the majority of that time at 70 mph. The 85-mile journey took nearly 140 miles off the 'range'. In the time I was there, I charged the car back to 85%. On the journey back I stayed at 60 mph and this time the 85-mile journey consumed approximately 105 miles of 'range'.

I drove these journeys in the 'Range Mode' which did help. I note that in 'Sherpa Mode' the car asks you to limit the speed to 50 mph.

It's a learning curve I guess ......but it is still a great car!

 

[MarkyMarc46]

That car is advertised as having a (extra-urban) range of 668 miles (from the official mpg and the fuel tank capacity). That is a complete joke, the very best I ever managed to get out of it was a range of only 607 miles, and in winter that range dropped massively to only 506 miles.

To be fair - 607/668, means you achieved 91% of stated range.

 

[Paul_Moxhay]

Ah, interesting; that explains a lot. I went to Brighton yesterday which for me was about 85 miles. If I couldn't get a charging point I planned a 20 min top-up at Cobham Services on the M25. As 90% of my journey was on the motorway, and they were clear, I spent the majority of that time at 70 mph. The 85-mile journey took nearly 140 miles off the 'range'. In the time I was there, I charged the car back to 85%. On the journey back I stayed at 60 mph and this time the 85-mile journey consumed approximately 105 miles of 'range'.

The indicated range on any EV is only ever an estimate but with most it is an educated estimate in that it adjusts the indicated range based on how the car was driven over the recent past. Many of us call it a "guestimate" and the range indicator we often call the "Guess'o'Meter" or GoM Drive the car hard then not only will you get less actual range but from then on the car will assume that it will be driven hard and the estimate will be lower. Drive the car gently for a period and the car assumes more gentle driving for the future and so the estimate will go up.

Also... the faster you drive the less range you will get so you seeing a drop in indicated range reduction when you drove slower is to be expected.

 

[Jeremy Harris]

To be fair - 607/668, means you achieved 91% of stated range.

That was the very best figure, though. Even under optimum conditions there was a ~9% range shortfall compared with the spec. In winter the range was only about 76% of the specification figure, so about a 24% shortfall.

That's comparable with some EVs. My car has a spec that gives a WLTP range of 292 miles, in reality is does around 270 miles in ideal conditions (an 8% shortfall versus the spec) and about 210 miles in worst case conditions (a 28% shortfall versus the spec). This isn't wildly different to the ICE car variation, is it?

 

[whyone]

The peculiar thing about the 500 is that once fully charged it always claims a range of 161.6 (don't forget the .6!) miles.

All of the other EV's I've experienced (we have a Tesla Model 3 and a VW ID.3 in the household) at least pretend to play the game and vary the estimated range a little after each charge!