EV general discussion

[b0rn2sk8]

Man this comparison video would have been great if it was done by competent people. It's like how can we choose the stupidest things and do those was the actual challenge.

I didn’t think it was that bad.

Realistically, you aren’t going to turn up at a hotel with no charging with a low battery. So to get there with a minimum of 30% isn’t unreasonable and probably what most people would do.

That said, the issue here is that the Tesla ‘had’ to go out of its way via the one charger in the area rather than charging at a more convenient location. But they wouldn’t have been able to use the ‘yeh but the super chargers are cheaper’ line if they didn’t actually use them.

Not sure why they assumed the ‘At home’ charging was done at the price cap mind.

I didn’t clock where the start location was but they mentioned south of London. That’s a 5 hour drive up to Scarborough. I’d expect most people would have stopped on that trip anyway due to the time it took. If they went down that route for the script, it probably would have nullified the BMW’s battery capacity advantage as you’d charge when you took the inevitable pee break.

 

[Mysterae_]

To get back on to the subject of EVs, how about some money talk .

I was perusing the Hypervolt app and wondered how much I'd spent on electricity since getting my EV. So according to the app:

2025 - September to December - £192.63
2026 - January to today - £243.99

Those numbers don't count public charging of course but that's been about 4 times if I recall rightly. Also since April the overnight cost has halved but I didn't update the app.

I used to spent almost £200 a month on diesel.

 

[tom_e]

To get back on to the subject of EVs, how about some money talk .

I was perusing the Hypervolt app and wondered how much I'd spent on electricity since getting my EV. So according to the app:

2025 - September to December - £192.63
2026 - January to today - £243.99

Those numbers don't count public charging of course but that's been about 4 times if I recall rightly. Also since April the overnight cost has halved but I didn't update the app.

I used to spent almost £200 a month on diesel.

I think I've just crept over 2 months worth of just 1 cars petrol costs after charging 2 cars since August last year .

Public charging has been free due to referral bonuses.

 

[nsmalley]

I didn’t think it was that bad.

Realistically, you aren’t going to turn up at a hotel with no charging with a low battery. So to get there with a minimum of 30% isn’t unreasonable and probably what most people would do.

That said, the issue here is that the Tesla ‘had’ to go out of its way via the one charger in the area rather than charging at a more convenient location. But they wouldn’t have been able to use the ‘yeh but the super chargers are cheaper’ line if they didn’t actually use them.

Not sure why they assumed the ‘At home’ charging was done at the price cap mind.

I didn’t clock where the start location was but they mentioned south of London. That’s a 5 hour drive up to Scarborough. I’d expect most people would have stopped on that trip anyway due to the time it took. If they went down that route for the script, it probably would have nullified the BMW’s battery capacity advantage as you’d charge when you took the inevitable pee break.

Stupid review IMO. Anyone can stick a huge fuel tank in a car and say.. look for far it go. The must have 30% thing was purely put into to favour the BMW as realistically, you are not going to often drive more than 4 hours without a break and when you do stop for a pee. Charge.

Added to this a home charger is only going to add about 40Kwh at cheap rate overnight, meaning the BMW is going to need 66Kwh (21 quid extra per fill up) and an additional 7 hours to fill up, thus making it totally impractical and substantially more expensive to run.

In the real world and away from car review land and top trumps games. greater efficiency using smaller battery packs are where it's at.

 

[ICDP]

Not strictly true. You could conceivably use that BMW as a daily with ~65% of the battery and charge the rest if needed. It is better to have the option than not.

I have owned/driven good efficiency EVs and terrible efficiency EVs and I can say from experience both work perfectly well as daily drivers. Having more efficiency did not transform my EV experience AT ALL and the extra few quid savings per month was negligible.

If all you get is 40kWh in a charging window, then even a reasonably smaller battery EV at 64kWh - 77kWh has to charge in shifts on those limited time tariffs.

It’s why most experienced EV owners would probably aim to not fall below 30% if it can be avoided. Most of us know it is a risk to have an EV sitting at 30% SoC or less if their home charger was available.

 

[tamzzy]

My fuel costs for the last 9 months (since I bought my TM3)

 

[ICDP]

My fuel costs for the last 9 months (since I bought my TM3)

That highlight what I mean regarding efficiency not being the big metric some make it out to be. If your EV was half as efficient it would still be considerably cheaper than fossil fuel.

For the vast majority who only do the very odd long range trip, a long range efficient EV is not the game changer some think it is.

Driving a 300 mile round trip every week, fair enough.

 

[Kenai]

Each to their own though, if you don't like ACC you don't like it - switch it back to regular cruise and job done really.

This is the most frustrating thing with the Cupra - it only functions in ACC mode, you can't revert to regular CC if you don't like the way the ACC behaves. Thankfully it does have a Limiter though, so I tend to use that.

 

[Journey]

Stupid review IMO. Anyone can stick a huge fuel tank in a car and say.. look for far it go. The must have 30% thing was purely put into to favour the BMW as realistically, you are not going to often drive more than 4 hours without a break and when you do stop for a pee. Charge.

Added to this a home charger is only going to add about 40Kwh at cheap rate overnight, meaning the BMW is going to need 66Kwh (21 quid extra per fill up) and an additional 7 hours to fill up, thus making it totally impractical and substantially more expensive to run.

In the real world and away from car review land and top trumps games. greater efficiency using smaller battery packs are where it's at.

It wasn't anything about the costs that bothered me so much, it was the total lack of common sense being used.

As already pointed out, and perhaps more poignant with the BMW, on a 5 hour drive if you stop for a toilet break/leg stretch, you should plug it in if you know you are going to need to charge the same trip that day or the next day. It would have shown just how much energy a modern EV can take in board in a tiny space of time, and more that enough extra to complete the whole thing end to end, without making a long unnecessary dedicated stop.

Basically this missed out showing one of the best features of the car they were testing, very fast charging even if you have a large battery with a good range. One of the biggest issues that I have been told exists for the current car user driving ICE wanting to change, so they made it an issue when it isn't. Talk about backwards.

 

[rodenal]

That highlight what I mean regarding efficiency not being the big metric some make it out to be. If your EV was half as efficient it would still be considerably cheaper than fossil fuel.

For the vast majority who only do the very odd long range trip, a long range efficient EV is not the game changer some think it is.

Driving a 300 mile round trip every week, fair enough.

While I completely agree, this is the kind of logic that I suspect only really comes with first hand experience for most people.

I get many looks of shock / horror when I answer that the MG4 only does c180 miles from 100% in winter, before trying (poorly usually) to explain that it just doesn't matter given the cost of the charge and my regular use pattern.

That's why the inevitably terrible range and efficiency of the Abarth is a compete non issue for us, the thing will only do 5k miles a year, very few of which will be any sort of long drive.

The model 3 will do a long trip maybe 8-10 times a year and even then probably topping out at a few hundred miles, making the standard range perfect (and I expect a decent bit better than the mg4 anyway) too.

 

[jpaul]

like I did at the weekend a trip to see friend 60 miles/1hr, then a 100miles/2hr onwards to a 2nd destination with no destination charging possible,
then returning, both legs; overall a comfortable 5 hour drive, maybe a 1/3tank, but with an ev you'd have to stop.
... in the future if everyone has a home/destinastion charger you can purloin, such trips would be easier.

It’s no different to cruise control - if you were approaching a bend in the road where you wouldn’t use normal cruise, then you’d turn it off.

Same with adaptive - you use it based on the road conditions, same with any driving aids.

which is why you need the HGV style of ACC that looks at the terrain the bends/hills/valleys - egh diddums.

 

[MOOGLEYS]

Upgrade time. 585Hp should do the job until the battery runs out after about 20 miles… lol

 

[Journey]

like I did at the weekend a trip to see friend 60 miles/1hr, then a 100miles/2hr onwards to a 2nd destination with no destination charging possible,
then returning, both legs; overall a comfortable 5 hour drive, maybe a 1/3tank, but with an ev you'd have to stop.

Why do you care? You can't buy an EV as you wont pay a few hundred quid to get your own destination charging installed on your own home, but you expect everyone else to have to. Jog on.

 

[Penfold101]

like I did at the weekend a trip to see friend 60 miles/1hr, then a 100miles/2hr onwards to a 2nd destination with no destination charging possible,
then returning, both legs; overall a comfortable 5 hour drive, maybe a 1/3tank, but with an ev you'd have to stop.
... in the future if everyone has a home/destinastion charger you can purloin, such trips would be easier.

Congratulations, you drove 320 miles.

Within the range of some EV’s already.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

Stupid review IMO. Anyone can stick a huge fuel tank in a car and say.. look for far it go. The must have 30% thing was purely put into to favour the BMW as realistically, you are not going to often drive more than 4 hours without a break and when you do stop for a pee. Charge.

There are two elements to this.

Fundamentally, it’s reasonable to avoid turning up at a destination with no charging and a low SOC.

However, I agree you’d charge at a natural stopping point en route, assuming there is one. We have assumed they stopped but I’m not sure they said they did. I know I’d need to stop, at least once.

Added to this a home charger is only going to add about 40Kwh at cheap rate overnight, meaning the BMW is going to need 66Kwh (21 quid extra per fill up) and an additional 7 hours to fill up, thus making it totally impractical and substantially more expensive to run.

On Octopus sure. But is it realistic you are doing another 500 mile day the next day? Probably not no.

The worst case sensation if must average more than 7 hours (EDF, eon also has unlimited smart charging) charging per day is Ovo anytime at 14p/kWh with zero impact on your day rate.

In the real world and away from car review land and top trumps games. greater efficiency using smaller battery packs are where it's at.

Except it isn’t. The iX3 is clearly a car much more suited to long distance. Part of the reason it can charge so quickly is its massive battery.

As soon as you stick a bike rack or roof box on a car you delete 20-30% of its range and it also compounds on real charging speed also because of the efficiency drop.

Stick a large trailer on the back and your Long Range Tesla Model Y gets transformed into something with the equivalent performance of a 40kwh leaf. I know this because i actually do this.

My older Y (316 miles WLTP) gets 140 miles 100-8%% with a large trailer on the back and a 30+ min charge back up to 80% gets you another 100 miles. That’s closer to 40 mins if the charge site is congested.

By comparison, the iX3 50 with a big trailer will have equivalent performance to a model 3 standard range from 2022-24. That’s a game changer IMO.

Before you say ‘but most people don’t tow’, I agree and most people are better off saving their cash and buying the 40.

The conversation has certainly shifted for those that do, particularly now the double cap pick up truck loop hole has been changed. All the company car users are piling into this and the EX60 because they have massive batteries.

 

[ICDP]

I think they were trying to showcase there is an SUV EV that has such good range, it can be driven like it’s a performance petrol SUV.

The fact it is doing so with a large battery, decent efficiency and great charging is all a bonus.

 

[rodenal]

I'm interested in the towing as it happens....as I'll occasionally tow a small trailer with camping stuff in the Model 3.

Do you find the trailer weight makes a big difference or just the fact you're effectively towing a brick?

 

[b0rn2sk8]

I'm interested in the towing as it happens....as I'll occasionally tow a small trailer with camping stuff in the Model 3.

Do you find the trailer weight makes a big difference or just the fact you're effectively towing a brick?

It’s almost all aero on a caravan. The difference between my 1200kg 6m van and a 1800kg 8m van has a negligible difference. Twin vs single also seems to be negligible unless it’s hilly (twin has 4 brakes wheels so less regen). Going up to 8ft wide (from from the standard 7ft6 size) has the biggest impact of all.

I’ve only towed a standard caravan and not anything smaller or bigger. 8ft wides are too heavy for my Y. It’s not going to be worse put it that way.

Compact caravans like the Eriba brand which are narrower and lower in height (they have a pop top) have a lower impact. Closer to 170 miles vs 140 for mine on my Tesla.

A small un-braked trailer you are probably looking at 20-30% range loss.

Just be careful with the model 3, they are rated for 1000kg but on the pre-2024 models that was only if they have a tow bar specced at the point of ordering - no retrofits. The refreshed model (highland) can be retrofit.

 

[rodenal]

Ideal thanks will be interesting to see how it plays out, it's a new order so the bar is factory fit. I actually found the rated nose weight confusing in the manual initially (albeit it would always be more than sufficient for what I'm pulling) when reading up.

 

[Yaayuh!]

Would be great to see EVs bring an end to caravans tbh