Road Trips and Motorways and Miles…

[Vipar]

I was a BMW driver never did or considered doing half the things people say they do. It’s all fiction they might toe it more than a Panda 500 but they pay for it in fuel consumption.

 

[Gadget Geek]

I was a BMW driver never did or considered doing half the things people say they do. It’s all fiction they might toe it more than a Panda 500 but they pay for it in fuel consumption.

Ah, but there is a difference between a BMW owner and a BMW driver. You sound like a BMW owner.

 

[hmadsen]

this is what I do when I am not in a hurry ACC to 60mph and just tuck in behind the first lorry I come across, but on distance setting 1, car will still brake in time in an emergency, otherwise it wouldn't be an option and makes it so that even BMW drivers can't find a gap between you and the lorry

I was under the impression BMW's were not even able to enter the slow lane, unless it had to get off of the motorway. And offcourse no need to signal when changing into the slow lane.

 

[Harry]

Yes i find driving on the motorway very frustrating because the GOM drops drastically if you go 70mph or higher for any distance , the faster you go in an ICE car the more efficient it becomes and it’s the complete opposite in my EV luckily I don’t do much motorway driving .

I doubt that an ICE car does better fuel economy at 70 than it does at 60. In the 80s in the USA during a fuel shortage the freeway speed limit was 56 to reduce consumption. Same sort of thing happened here for a while, too.

 

[Harry]

I was under the impression BMW's were not even able to enter the slow lane, unless it had to get off of the motorway. And offcourse no need to signal when changing into the slow lane.

Funny! - I have a BMW, and thought our reputation had been supplanted by Audi drivers. (On long motorway trips I am almost always in the nearside (slow) lane doing 70, while the Range Rovers blast past in the outside lane at 90. Often I enjoy catching them some time later in a jam when the "slow" lane overtakes the others.)

 

[hmadsen]

Funny! - I have a BMW, and thought our reputation had been supplanted by Audi drivers. (On long motorway trips I am almost always in the nearside (slow) lane doing 70, while the Range Rovers blast past in the outside lane at 90. Often I enjoy catching them some time later in a jam when the "slow" lane overtakes the others.)

Maybe BMW drivers have a different reputation in the UK, but here they still seem to want to verify the reputation, by driving like they owned the road

 

[Alb]

No different, it's a rare example of worldwide unity

 

[Headgas1]

I doubt that an ICE car does better fuel economy at 70 than it does at 60. In the 80s in the USA during a fuel shortage the freeway speed limit was 56 to reduce consumption. Same sort of thing happened here for a while, too.

Maybe I did not explain myself properly I just meant when in 6th gear cruising on the motorway is when your ice car is most efficient when it’s running around town changing gears it’s less efficient right ? and my EV is completely the opposite running around town great get on the motorway and it drains the batteries unbelievably fast .

 

[Maciej]

Maybe I did not explain myself properly I just meant when in 6th gear cruising on the motorway is when your ice car is most efficient when it’s running around town changing gears it’s less efficient right ? and my EV is completely the opposite running around town great get on the motorway and it drains the batteries unbelievably fast .

I don't think running around town is great, Kers help a bit there and with automatic it's less annoying that constant gear shuffling but if you compare stop start in town and driving constant 30 around a race track you will get better efficiency with constant 30.

ICE is also mist efficient at constant speed. Motorway may seem like it's a case because this is most common situation where you don't change speed often but if you could do constant 30 vs constant 60 constant 30 will get you further but obviously will take twice as long.

Start and stop is bad for any car it's just worse for ICE but it isn't really good for EV just less bad.

 

[Harry]

Maybe I did not explain myself properly I just meant when in 6th gear cruising on the motorway is when your ice car is most efficient when it’s running around town changing gears it’s less efficient right ? and my EV is completely the opposite running around town great get on the motorway and it drains the batteries unbelievably fast .

Fair enough - but actually while running around town is more efficient for an ev than an ICE, it is still less efficient than running at a constant speed without slowing down, stopping, starting and accelerating frequently. Each ev will have an optimum speed for maximum efficiency depending on aerodynamics and rolling resistance. Bottom line, though - an ev is always way more energy efficient than an ICE car.

 

[Carrots]

I managed to get myself a new 22 plate ZS short range by luck a month ago after only a 13 day wait. Never done EV before so completely new to all this. So far it’s been pretty much plain sailing but it’s definitely a little different!

This week threw up a little thing so thought I’d see if you more experienced guys could shed a bit light for me. We had to do a little road trip on the M6. Total mileage was 194 miles from home to destination. We had 170 when we left and had done a bit planning for stops on the way. After going 60 actual miles the car had lost 90. This was a pattern whilst on the Motorway and we ended up having to stop twice down and three times coming back (diversion of 30 miles to factor in on the return!). I think Husband drives like he has Miss Daisy on board since we got the car (much to my frustration) so it’s not like we were tearing it up or anything. I guess what I’m asking is is it normal to need 2 or 3 stops on this length of journey? Does motorway driving eat the miles? Or is the car range display just not very accurate?

I think there is about 48.8 useable battery power available and if you check your miles per kwhr you can multiply it out to give an good estimate of how far you might get. Obviously you don’t want to wait til it’s too risky before you charge. I’ll get about 130 miles and have 25% charge left. More if there’s a heatwave

 

[John Sauve Rodd]

You need to stop using the taking the cars range on the GOM as gospel. It's just a guess based on your average/previous trip. If you rarely use a motorway it's always going to over estimate its range when you do.

A more helpful figure is your miles per kw/h figure. Generally, in this sort of weather I've seen 3.5 miles p/kWh , with an average speed of 60mph, where the cruise is set to 67mph. With that sort of efficiency you'd get 171 miles in an SR, so you're clearly using a bit more than that.

Could be for a number of reasons, traffic, cruise control use, driving style.

I wouldn't say there's anything wrong with the car itself.

Headwinds are a problem: I drove Antwerp > Pas de Calais with the wind turnbines confirming that there was a headwind, pretty much all the way; I ahve a Trophy LR fully charged but the miles per KwH were 3-ish and the effect at 100-120km/hr noticeable. FYI I switched to the metric measures and got used to 12-14 Kwh per 100m (good, like 4+ in proper money) and 18+ Kwh/100km in the headwinds. On the return home in still air, terrific mileage.

 

[ATILKURT]

I did my first long trip of 300 miles last week with my ZS EV Trophy, long range.
I always drive in ECO and regen at 3. AC was on and I was always in the fastest lane doing the maximum limit all the time. Following the flow of the fastest lane is always better.
Started with %100 battery and did my first stop after 160 miles. The battery was at %37. Plugged into a fast charger, had my lunch and it was fully charged when I am back.
Most people chose to use regen at 1 on the motorway which I believe is not necessary. I can say I used the break maybe 3 times on the motorway. It is all about training your right foot and changing your driving style, giving more room with the car front. The regen at 3 was all I need when I needed to break on the motorway.
It was a great drive and I am so happy I bought this car. After my Suzuki Sx4Cross, this is a huge improvement in every way.

 

[Jomarkh]

What 'fast' charger do you use to get back to 100% while having lunch? Or was it a rapid

 

[ATILKURT]

What 'fast' charger do you use to get back to 100% while having lunch? Or was it a rapid

it was a rapid charger.

 

[MikeRosoft]

That is Objectively untrue. Mpg drop rapidly at faster speed. You can drive significantly further doing constant 60 vs constant 70. It is less visible on ICE because they rarely give you estimated range to a mile and with larger ranges of 400 to 500 miles hardly anyone cares.

On the other hand my rule of thumb is to drive normally in my short range ZS and just stop after approx 2 and half hours to charge and it worked well for me so far

Objectively My 630i gets around 18mpg in town, but when driven on the motorway at 70 gets 26mpg and during a trip or two to Germany on the autobahn at 85mph gets 32mpg ...... do I guess that your statement is based on some turbo diesel trickery with a particular position of one's body and testing equipment...... anyway still waiting from November for my TLR or LRT or whatever TBA is the next fashion statement.... so definitely NOT driving around with a smug face YET....

 

[Harry]

I did my first long trip of 300 miles last week with my ZS EV Trophy, long range.
I always drive in ECO and regen at 3. AC was on and I was always in the fastest lane doing the maximum limit all the time. Following the flow of the fastest lane is always better.
Started with %100 battery and did my first stop after 160 miles. The battery was at %37. Plugged into a fast charger, had my lunch and it was fully charged when I am back.
Most people chose to use regen at 1 on the motorway which I believe is not necessary. I can say I used the break maybe 3 times on the motorway. It is all about training your right foot and changing your driving style, giving more room with the car front. The regen at 3 was all I need when I needed to break on the motorway.
It was a great drive and I am so happy I bought this car. After my Suzuki Sx4Cross, this is a huge improvement in every way.

I presume that you would recommend not using ACC on the motorway, as when it automatically slows down it brakes with friction - not with regen. I'd be interested to know if anyone has reasonable experience to show they get better efficiency not using ACC than they do using it. What do people experienced with the car think of MG Pilot?

 

[MichaelJHunt]

I presume that you would recommend not using ACC on the motorway, as when it automatically slows down it brakes with friction - not with regen. I'd be interested to know if anyone has reasonable experience to show they get better efficiency not using ACC than they do using it. What do people experienced with the car think of MG Pilot?

ACC is designed to be used for motorway driving, not for country lane driving.

The very small difference to range it make because regen is not used makes that almost irrelevant for motorway driving.

 

[Harry]

ACC is designed to be used for motorway driving, not for country lane driving.

The very small difference to range it make because regen is not used makes that almost irrelevant for motorway driving.

Yes, obviously ACC is for the motorway which is why I asked the question. The test in the video over 14.5 km shows a small difference of 0.1 kWh extra energy used with ACC than without. (He doesn't say what KERS level he used when without ACC.)
I am more interested in a somewhat longer motorway trip - say 300 miles or 484 km. On such a journey there will be much more braking with ACC than I suspect happened in this very short test. With that short test result - over 300 miles that would be a loss of only 3kWh of energy, but as I say in real world long motorway trips I think it would be much more, so I'm not sure how irrelevant it is. Hopefully someone has a better idea from real long trips with a lot of need for slowing down.

 

[MichaelJHunt]

Yes, obviously ACC is for the motorway which is why I asked the question. The test in the video over 14.5 km shows a small difference of 0.1 kWh extra energy used with ACC than without. (He doesn't say what KERS level he used when without ACC.)
I am more interested in a somewhat longer motorway trip - say 300 miles or 484 km. On such a journey there will be much more braking with ACC than I suspect happened in this very short test. With that short test result - over 300 miles that would be a loss of only 3kWh of energy, but as I say in real world long motorway trips I think it would be much more, so I'm not sure how irrelevant it is. Hopefully someone has a better idea from real long trips with a lot of need for slowing down.

I recently did a 1040 miles round trip which was mainly MWay with MG Pilot on. I had no issues with range.

Regen is useful when you are in town or on country roads that are very hilly. When driving on MWays it is almost irrelevant because you are travelling at 70mph and the engine is almost always providing power to the wheels.