I was just speaking generally. In either case, OEMs don’t just make these numbers up, they have to be certified by the relevant org. If said org doesn’t have accurate tests, the results won’t be accurate either.
Its been a consistent story with Tesla that they are always miles off regardless of the test, not suggesting that they might be cheating with software as with VW and dieselgate no sir
Optimising for the test is a widespread practice with everything from smart phones to cars
It wasn’t consistent in the first place, EU cars usually had much lower ratings than Tesla, yet would be far far closer to the official EPA rating because Tesla got away with more optimisation before.
Tesla are the same in the EU despite it being a completely different setup thats been revised a few times over years.
No test is going to give accurate numbers, we all drive differently over different conditions with different loads in the car. We can just get closer than we are now, there is still too much space to hypermile in the current tests for WLPT.
What should happen is manufacturers who are clearly missing by a lot should be heavily fined as with VW and dieselgate.
Most quoted ranges from reviewers are considerably under what I get from normal driving so they are no better, I presume they drive with a heavy foot.
Real world numbers from EV database tend to be my starting point
But its perfectly possible to optimise just for the test and it no longer matches real life, this is exactly what VW did. When it gets to that point that the car is detecting the test (or otherwise put into a test mode) then its clear cheating and time for large fines.
I don’t really buy the Edmunds test for this as it seems to be a sole one at the moment. It also has an average speed of 40. Also how are they accounting for environmental conditions as these are massive for EVs? It just feels like PR puff piece to me after Tesla had been slated everywhere for very obvious fixing of their range estimates.
But its perfectly possible to optimise just for the test and it no longer matches real life, this is exactly what VW did.
You just said this is not what VW did. Because it isn’t. VW cheated by changing the parameters strictly while the test was running. That’s not what’s happening here.
I don’t really buy the Edmunds test for this as it seems to be a sole one at the moment.
It is definitely not. I’ll try and send you a bunch later. There are at least a dozen that all came to the same consensus.
Where did I say VW didn’t cheat? I went back to check and I clearly said they did.
Only ones i have seen are quoting Edmunds that are standardised. If its not standardised then its garbage as its even easier to game. Even basic things like a heavier right foot, more use of the break pedal, turning down the regen, turning up the aircon all have an mpact.
Even with the Edmunds one I really have my doubts over the methodology as it would need to break 4 miles per kwh over actual mixed usage. Breaking 4 with hypermiling is easy, breaking it while driving completely normal in that size for car? Not easy.
I was just speaking generally. In either case, OEMs don’t just make these numbers up, they have to be certified by the relevant org. If said org doesn’t have accurate tests, the results won’t be accurate either.
Its been a consistent story with Tesla that they are always miles off regardless of the test, not suggesting that they might be cheating with software as with VW and dieselgate no sir
Optimising for the test is a widespread practice with everything from smart phones to cars
It’s not consistent any longer, as I said, because EPA updated their testing procedures. So no, it is not regardless of the test.
My point precisely. The test needs to be updated and optimized or else the best cheater wins.
It wasn’t consistent in the first place, EU cars usually had much lower ratings than Tesla, yet would be far far closer to the official EPA rating because Tesla got away with more optimisation before.
Tesla are the same in the EU despite it being a completely different setup thats been revised a few times over years.
No test is going to give accurate numbers, we all drive differently over different conditions with different loads in the car. We can just get closer than we are now, there is still too much space to hypermile in the current tests for WLPT.
What should happen is manufacturers who are clearly missing by a lot should be heavily fined as with VW and dieselgate.
Most quoted ranges from reviewers are considerably under what I get from normal driving so they are no better, I presume they drive with a heavy foot.
Real world numbers from EV database tend to be my starting point
This is the entire point of these benchmarks. To remove variables and create a even comparison across models.
Fined for what? Optimizing for the test?
You are looking at old reviews. Ones in the last year or so show the opposite.
But its perfectly possible to optimise just for the test and it no longer matches real life, this is exactly what VW did. When it gets to that point that the car is detecting the test (or otherwise put into a test mode) then its clear cheating and time for large fines.
I don’t really buy the Edmunds test for this as it seems to be a sole one at the moment. It also has an average speed of 40. Also how are they accounting for environmental conditions as these are massive for EVs? It just feels like PR puff piece to me after Tesla had been slated everywhere for very obvious fixing of their range estimates.
You just said this is not what VW did. Because it isn’t. VW cheated by changing the parameters strictly while the test was running. That’s not what’s happening here.
It is definitely not. I’ll try and send you a bunch later. There are at least a dozen that all came to the same consensus.
Where did I say VW didn’t cheat? I went back to check and I clearly said they did.
Only ones i have seen are quoting Edmunds that are standardised. If its not standardised then its garbage as its even easier to game. Even basic things like a heavier right foot, more use of the break pedal, turning down the regen, turning up the aircon all have an mpact.
Even with the Edmunds one I really have my doubts over the methodology as it would need to break 4 miles per kwh over actual mixed usage. Breaking 4 with hypermiling is easy, breaking it while driving completely normal in that size for car? Not easy.
“This”= Tesla.
The standardized tests are the ones giving us garbage ratings. That’s why people make all these “real world” tests.