I get anything from 197 to 207 on a full charge and I find the GOM very accurate, it reports charge low at 48 miles and I generally charge before the message. My journey to work is 32 miles round trip and I can get to work for 5 days before needing a charge, obviously that will drop as I start using the heater to clear the windscreen and side windows taking around 25-30 miles off the GOM but is still very good.
@Bobby759
Well done on your performance in terms of range and efficiency.
Clearly you figures are as can be expected as MG data shows upto 163 miles mixed driving @ efficiency of 3.3 and up to 251 miles in town driving only.
The issue here is one of some ill informed members trying to claim they know exactly how our GOM works when in actual fact their theories are far from the truth. It is quite important that you do not let them confuse you.
The way the GOM works is that it uses the most recent and current data to make estimations of distance that may achieve on charge remaining.
It is intentionally designed to do that. It does not use acummulated data. For example, there is no benefit in using data acquire in the peak of summer to predict distance you are likely to travel in Winter as conditions of travel differ greatly.
A lot of science and tech has gone into designing GOM. The current consensus on GOM design is that the driving data over a the most recent "X" miles and or "Y" minutes is combined with the battery state of charge to give you an estimate of how far you are likely to travel if the driving conditions remain unchanged.
The system is self updating every minute or less. The exact value of X and Y are trade secrets and manufacturers to not publish it.
The reason it is designed this way is because it is the most scientific way of giving an estimate based on current conditions. Using accumulated summer data to predict what happens in Winter like some are peddling is "bonkers" and should be avoid like the plague along with all the simple multiplication theories that go with it.
It is interesting reading through this thread how many times these bonkers theories have changed...
Just a short list of how these theories have changed....
1. It is was that the ZS EV GOM was basic and had a fixed formula of 4.7 acummulated efficiency times 42.5 (SOC)..... This is absolutely false as multiple factors affected the GOM in a current and dynamic non linear manner.
2. When their own figures did not add up it became GOM is only correct for half of a journey...... This is just false.
3. The latest is that their GOMs have MG5EV software and hence shows values over and above that of a ZS EV..... Well I think you get the trend
It is a pity that some people can not acknowledge their lack of understanding and knowledge about some simple issues. It is their right to hold unto what they want to believe no matter how ill founded but we should not allow them to use this ill founded opinions to confuse others.