[wesley]

On the discussion of battery capacity and other areas, I thought the government-certified specs might be of certain interest.

Attached is the “Certificate of Motor Vehicle Emission” approved by the Minister of Environment of the Republic of Korea pertaining to Bolt EV. A copy of this has to be submitted to the local government in order for me to apply for EV subsidy, so I made a scan before submitting.

Luckily for the forum users, much of it is bilingual. Some key values noted are:

Body Type and Use: Hatchback, Passenger
Range
- Normal(20C/68F): City 410.91km / Expwy 349.27km / Combined 383.17km (238.09 mi)
- Cold(-6.7C/20F): City 240.99km / Expwy 297.21km / Combined 266.29km (165.46 mi)
Battery: 350V 174Ah (60.9kWh)
Max Power: 206ps/5,500rpm
Gross Weight: 1,945kg (4,288 lbs)
Curb Weight: 1,620kg (3,751 lbs)
Warranty: Battery, Charger, Motor, Inverter, and Converter @ 8 Years or 160,000km (100,000 mi)

 

[Packard V8]

I'd believe those as they correlate exactly with my experience.

jack vines

 

[Sean Graham]

Eh, so what does that mean about the official EPA filing? Doesn't seem to match.

 

[wesley]

Eh, so what does that mean about the official EPA filing? Doesn't seem to match.

I’m not familiar with the EPA regulations. All I can say is that the listed specs of the battery here are “nominal voltage and capacity” as per the Korean regulations.

Under the same rules, here are the capacities confirmed by the Ministry of Environment:

Hyundai Kona Electric: 64.06kWh
Hyundai Ioniq Electric 2018: 28.08kWh
Kia Niro EV: 64.06kWh
Renault-Samsung SM3 ZE: 35.94kWh (Sold under Fluence ZE by Renault)
BMW i3 94Ah: 33.18kWh
Tesla Model S 75D & 90D: 87.5kWh
Tesla Model S P100D: 101.5kWh
Nissan Leaf (1st Gen): 23.76kWh

 

[Terry Hancock]

I do not believe the line:

"Cold(-6.7C/20F): City 240.99km / Expwy 297.21km / Combined 266.29km (165.46 mi)"

Driving at highway speeds, in the cold, will not, cannot surpass in city hops with all that slow speed and massive regen.

 

[GregBrew]

I do not believe the line:

"Cold(-6.7C/20F): City 240.99km / Expwy 297.21km / Combined 266.29km (165.46 mi)"

Driving at highway speeds, in the cold, will not, cannot surpass in city hops with all that slow speed and massive regen.

Could be due to longer usage of the HVAC (to heat) at slower speeds, covering the same distance, in the cold?

 

[Vertiformed]

I do not believe the line:

"Cold(-6.7C/20F): City 240.99km / Expwy 297.21km / Combined 266.29km (165.46 mi)"

Driving at highway speeds, in the cold, will not, cannot surpass in city hops with all that slow speed and massive regen.

This isn't new, it's been said before, for example in this article from April 2017 with the Bolt's WLTP data. In that test, you see that as soon as you hit 0º C, it's better to drive faster.

When it gets cold, there are two effects: diminished battery performance due to the cold and the cost of heating the cabin. Driving at higher speed increases the discharge rate of the battery which actually helps to warm it up, and causes you to expend time heating the cabin, and thus less energy.

 

[Terry Hancock]

This isn't new, it's been said before, for example in this article from April 2017 with the Bolt's WLTP data. In that test, you see that as soon as you hit 0º C, it's better to drive faster.

When it gets cold, there are two effects: diminished battery performance due to the cold and the cost of heating the cabin. Driving at higher speed increases the discharge rate of the battery which actually helps to warm it up, and causes you to expend time heating the cabin, and thus less energy.

Just does not match my 17 F degree performance on a superhighway course of 83 miles one way, and a return of the same later that day at mid 30s F degrees. That is with the internal cab HVAC off and no steering wheel or seat heat. I have been unfortunate to HAVE to learn what gets us to the hospital and back. *Did not think it was supposed to matter, but my lowest point is 4400 ft and with zero humidity.

 

[wesley]

Just does not match my 17 F degree performance on a superhighway course of 83 miles one way, and a return of the same later that day at mid 30s F degrees. That is with the internal cab HVAC off and no steering wheel or seat heat. I have been unfortunate to HAVE to learn what gets us to the hospital and back. *Did not think it was supposed to matter, but my lowest point is 4400 ft and with zero humidity.

Individual experiences may differ due to different circumstances and driving habits. But it's actually quite reasonable to see EVs perform better in expressway driving under cold weather for the reasons Vertiformed mentioned. The certification data for Niro EV showed:

- Normal(20C/68F): City 415.2km / Expwy 347.9km / Combined 385.0km (239.2 mi)
- Cold(-6.7C/20F): City 280.3km / Expwy 332.6km / Combined 303.0km (188.3 mi)

 

[Vertiformed]

Just does not match my 17 F degree performance on a superhighway course of 83 miles one way, and a return of the same later that day at mid 30s F degrees. That is with the internal cab HVAC off and no steering wheel or seat heat. I have been unfortunate to HAVE to learn what gets us to the hospital and back. *Did not think it was supposed to matter, but my lowest point is 4400 ft and with zero humidity.

Have you tried driving that route at 35 mph? If not, it doesn’t seem like you have any evidence for your claim that it’d be more efficient to drive slower.

 

[Terry Hancock]

Have you tried driving that route at 35 mph? If not, it doesn’t seem like you have any evidence for your claim that it’d be more efficient to drive slower.

Simple...if I do not drive 55 or less, in the early morning cold, and then attempt to return, in the heat of the day, at 75, it is not a safe run...in my book. With the 55 at 17 degrees in early am, and the 75 at about 45 degrees (83 miles each way = 166), I arrive home with a comfortable 43 miles left, per the guessometer. If I drive 65 at 17 to 19 degrees in the early am, as were the conditions the very next day, and once again driving home at 75 at about the same high of 45, I have less than 22 miles left per the guessometer. I am not questioning the study. per se, I am just going with my daily instruction by the car. I, of course, realize that I can slow down going home and gain back a lot. The point was my speed, in the early am cold temps at 4400 ft lowest point and super low humidity. I really do not care whether a study is done at the scandinavian level or Korean level. Personally, I would love to go 75 mph both ways, and have done that same foot per foot path that speed in warmer weather. But, I have to go with my car's recent readouts.

NOW, I would be most interested in Canadian input.

Are you truly getting better highway mileage, in extreme cold, by driving much faster than normal?

 

[Vertiformed]

Simple...if I do not drive 55 or less, in the early morning cold, and then attempt to return, in the heat of the day, at 75, it is not a safe run...

55 mph on a freeway is not driving slow from the perspective of EPA/WLTP/etc. tests. In the WLTP test, the “high speed” test is at an average of 60.7 km/h (37.7 mph) and peak speed of 97.4 km/h (60.5 mph), and the “extra-high speed” test averages 94.0 km/h (58.4 mph) and peak speed of 131.3 km/h (81.6 mph). Like your results, in WLTP “high” is indeed more efficient than “extra high”.

At the slower speeds we're talking about (“medium” in WLTP), the test averages 44.5 km/h (27.7 mph), peaking at 76.6 km/h (47.6 mph).

That's why I asked you if you'd driven the distance at 35 mph, because that's the kind of speed where driving slower isn't more efficient.

 

[Terry Hancock]

I still would like to hear real world testimony, by Canadian Bolt owners who do both inner city and between cities on highways in a more constant cold.

 

[Sean Nelson]

Are you truly getting better highway mileage, in extreme cold, by driving much faster than normal?

The only reason you'd get better mileage at a higher speed is because you wouldn't be running the heater for as long a time. Let's say that you drive 75 miles at 75 MPH - that's an hour of heater use, and at a worst case power draw of 6kW that equates to 6kWh.

Driving at 55mph would require you to drive for 1.36 times longer (75/55), so the heater would use up about 8.2kWh, an additional cost of 2.2kWh.

So the question becomes: is the additional power needed to drive at 75MPH instead of 55MPH less then 2.2kWh? If so, you've got a net gain.

In practice you probably wouldn't have that much savings in heater power because the heater wouldn't be running continuously at 6kW.