Hyundai will annonce Ioniq EV for U.S. market

[oilerlord]

Just as a point of reference, cars.com lists cars that are In transit as well as those that are in dealer inventory but spoken for/sold.
I haven't figured out exactly where they get their numbers, but it appears they harvest the manufacturer and/or dealer inventory info from the web. The results are variable. As we have seen from previous threads, a car showing in inventory at a a particular dealer may not have arrived at the dealer or may already be sold.

And as to "Is 124 miles enough"? For most the answer will be yes - with conditions.
The biggest market for (and best use of) an EV is as a commuter car (with another vehicle available). 89% of US commutes are <=30 miles each way (60 miles round trip). 77% are <=20 miles (40 RT). The Bolts range of 238 miles would probably cover 99% of all commutes. Ironically, the longer your commute (both time and distance), the more sense an EV makes. The added cost of an EV is recovered quicker with lots of miles due to it's lower operational costs.
Commute data source (as of March 2016) http://www.statisticbrain.com/commute-statistics/

In all but extremely frigid climates, 124 miles of range should provide plenty of range for the majority of commuters with allowance for some battery degradation, side trips, and a decent "range anxiety" buffer (size of the buffer needed decreases with experience and will likely be a wash with battery degradation)

The biggest barrier is lack of awareness, with rampant disinformation a strong runner up.

All fair points.

To your point "The added cost of an EV is recovered quicker with lots of miles due to it's lower operational costs." the key words are "lots of miles".

On another thread, I added up the cost of premium gasoline, and ICE specific (fuel pump, timing belt, oil changes, etc) maintenance on my Audi over the course of 100,000 miles. It came out to about $25,000 vs about $2500 in electricity with my B250e at 0.08 per kWh including poco delivery fees & taxes. Anyone "could" recover the added cost of their EV with miles driven - but since the majority of them are leased, they probably aren't going to see 50,000, much less 100,000 miles in 3 years. I bought my car used, and fully intend to test the limits of the 6-year / 100,000 mile battery warranty.

The combination of my car's depreciated price and future high miles may give my EV a chance at paying for itself. Notwithstanding giveaway leases on certain EV's, I think the second owners of highly depreciated Bolts and Ioniq's that drive them for "lots of miles" are well positioned to have their EV's pay for themselves too.

 

[SparkE]

{...} I think the second owners of highly depreciated Bolts and Ioniq's that drive them for "lots of miles" are well positioned to have their EV's pay for themselves too.

That is why I am now looking at lease-return EVs for purchase.

When 3-year-old, under-25K-mile LEAFs can be had for $8K (and less) and similar Spark EVs can be had for $9K-$10K, it's making more and more sense (to me) to buy one in good shape, drive it for 3-5 years, then re-sell it for a few thousand less (or keep it as the 'under 50-mile trip' 2nd car, if the value is really in the toilet).

 

[SeanNelson]

And as to "Is 124 miles enough"? For most the answer will be yes - with conditions.

124 miles may actually be enough for most commuters, but that's not what's important. What's important is whether those commuters think it will enough.

There's a big, big difference.

 

[DucRider]

124 miles may actually be enough for most commuters, but that's not what's important. What's important is whether those commuters think it will enough.

There's a big, big difference.

Agreed.

200 seems to be the magic number for many, but not all. More than once I heard comments at the Portland Auto Show from people looking at the Model X along the lines of "250 miles? Someday they will have enough range to be useful". I didn't bother to engage those folks in conversation as there were too many people with questions about specific models (or EV's in general).

 

[oilerlord]

200 seems to be the magic number for many, but not all. More than once I heard comments at the Portland Auto Show from people looking at the Model X along the lines of "250 miles? Someday they will have enough range to be useful".

I think 200 is probably the magic number for people that "get" the EV experience, that are the 1% (like us) that buy them. I still visit VW TDI forums, and every so often the "would you buy an EV?" question gets tossed around. Most guys still cite the range objection but reading between the lines, it's more than that. I doubt that even if there was an EV that would do 500 miles on a charge, the TDI faithful would merely say they "need" 700 miles like their cars can do on a tank of diesel. There's always an excuse or objection real or imagined.

I once mentioned that the low cost of ownership of a used $10,000 EV over 100,000 miles really can't be beat, given you live in an area with reasonable cost per kWh's. Those were fighting words. Strange how some guys love pouring money into 20-year old clunkers, and happily defend doing it.

 

[Nagorak]

Exactly, you can look at the EPA figures, but then their actual range is subject to how fast they drive, whether going up hill or not. You can't give them an exact figure without knowing what their situation is. Just like an EV. But on one cares because they know the range will be sufficient and refueling is not a problem.

If you only had a 2 gallon tank in your Jetta you'd be well aware of every little thing that impacts your gas mileage too. Just getting 20% less from running the AC would reduce your range from 80 miles to 64 miles-- a pretty big difference-- just like in an EV.

Huh?

Last January (winter where I live), my VW's average FE was 36.4 MPG. That missed the EPA number by 0.5 MPG. That is NOT "Just like an EV". This January, I had trouble getting 40-50 miles out of my "EPA: 87 mile range" B250e. Huge difference.

Believe me, people DO care about MPG ratings on cars - regardless if gas stations are just around the corner.

As I said, there is an issue with heating. If you exclude that, I think the changes in range are in-line with different gas mileage you'll get with different driving styles/terrain. But what my point was if a car was getting 300 miles of range under ideal circumstances, then even if it drops to 150 it doesn't matter that much. The problem is the range under ideal circumstances is already borderline, so anything that reduces it is a serious issue.

Heating is a serious issue for EVs, there's no doubt about that. Ideally no car should even sell without a heat pump, but even that isn't ever going to fully make up for the extra draw. Combustion creates heat so the average car engine is running at around 200 degrees. It makes it so that a gas car basically has a free heater, which is missing in an EV.

To be clear, EVs currently have some significant shortcomings that need to be overcome for there to be mass acceptance, and it seems like the situation is worse in colder climates. I just think that bigger batteries go a long way toward solving a lot of those problems.

 

[Nagorak]

EPA numbers are far more accurate with ICEV's than they are with EV's.

This much is undeniably true. In a large part, it's due to the fact that the tests have been fine-tuned for decades to better align with real world conditions for ICEV's. The same is not true for EV's. It will take a while for the EPA to come up with tests that more accurately describe EVs' performance. And maybe that doesn't result in a single number. Maybe two or three scenarios, similar to Nissan gave me when I first got my Leaf. It was something like:

* 60MPH steady highway cruising at 75F
* Mixed driving with A/C on, outside temps 95F
* City stop-and-go driving with heat, outside temps 20F

No doubt, conditions affect EVs more then ICEVs. That's in a large part due to the much higher efficiency of EVs, in particular not having all that "free" waste heat in the winter is a big one.

I don't know how they can effectively make adjustments for the huge load that heating requires. It's such a huge draw that it will drastically impact range when it's used, but how often its used varies wildly depending on where you live.

Where I live I basically barely need heat at all. I could get by with nothing but the heated steering wheel/seat, and even then I could do without those and just wear a sweat shirt. It's rare that it even gets anywhere near freezing, even in the dead of winter. So, if you adjust the ratings way down to account for heating, it's going to be way below what I can expect to get, even in the worst case scenario. But then those ratings won't be remotely correct for winter performance in the North.

Maybe they need separate cold/warm climate ratings? Or at least separate range when running heat vs not?

 

[Nagorak]

Back on the topic of the Ioniq. I think the range is sufficient for my needs, but honestly there is something to be said for having ample range so you just don't have to worry about it. It's not so much that people actually need the range, as it is that they can not even consider the range. Outside of going on a road trip, a Bolt should never be in danger of running out charge, unless you just don't bother charging it. With even 130 miles of range, there's still a non-insignificant chance of running into a situation where you're running low.

For that reason, I don't think the aversion to low-range EVs is entirely irrational. I suspect as battery costs drop, we simply won't be seeing any EVs with less than 200 miles of range. I doubt there's ultimately going to be enough demand for manufacturers to bother making short range variants of their vehicles.

 

[oilerlord]

I don't know how they can effectively make adjustments for the huge load that heating requires. It's such a huge draw that it will drastically impact range when it's used, but how often its used varies wildly depending on where you live.

Where I live I basically barely need heat at all. I could get by with nothing but the heated steering wheel/seat, and even then I could do without those and just wear a sweat shirt. It's rare that it even gets anywhere near freezing, even in the dead of winter. So, if you adjust the ratings way down to account for heating, it's going to be way below what I can expect to get, even in the worst case scenario. But then those ratings won't be remotely correct for winter performance in the North.

Maybe they need separate cold/warm climate ratings? Or at least separate range when running heat vs not?

It isn't just about running the heater either. While the heater can draw up to 5kW while operating, Cold air is dense. As air turns colder, the effects of aerodynamic drag increase. Further, lithium ion batteries perform poorly in cold, especially in freezing temperatures. Add to that we may be driving through snow, so rolling resistance is increased.

My EV with 28kWh battery is EPA rated at 87 miles of range. In summer, I can squeeze up to 110-120 miles on a charge. I've run my own tests in -15F this winter with heater on and off during two identical 30 mile trips at 50 MPH. Both tests were done starting with a full charge, and from a heated garage.

Trip 1.) Heater on - 2.13 miles per kWh - assumes 59.64 miles range
Trip 2.) Heater off - 2.77 miles per kWh - assumes 77.56 miles range

You're making an assumption that avoiding the use of heater restores all of an EV's efficiency and EPA rated range. I'm speaking from experience...it doesn't. Here's a chart for what happens to a Leaf's range as the temperature drops. It is consistent with my experience. You can take steps to mitigate it's effects like storing the car in a heated garage, and pre-conditioning before heading out, but no EV is immune from the effects of the cold - regardless if you choose to run the heater or not.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

I don't know how they can effectively make adjustments for the huge load that heating requires. It's such a huge draw that it will drastically impact range when it's used, but how often its used varies wildly depending on where you live.

That's why I suggested well-defined parameters. If the sticker tells you range with heat at 20F, and it rarely dips below freezing where you live, you can probably safely ignore that number. For me, I can expect a few weeks/year below 20F, and corresponding range presumably below that number. But it gives you a data point we don't currently have.

<span>Back on the topic of the <a href="http://www.myioniq.com/forum" class="interlinkr">IONIQ<span class="tip">Visit the IONIQ Forum</span></a>. I think the range is sufficient for my needs, but honestly there is something to be said for having ample range so you just don't have to worry about it. It's not so much that people actually need the range, as it is that they can not even consider the range. Outside of going on a road trip, a Bolt should never be in danger of running out charge, unless you just don't bother charging it. With even 130 miles of range, there's still a non-insignificant chance of running into a situation where you're running low. </span>

For that reason, I don't think the aversion to low-range EVs is entirely irrational. I suspect as battery costs drop, we simply won't be seeing any EVs with less than 200 miles of range. I doubt there's ultimately going to be enough demand for manufacturers to bother making short range variants of their vehicles.

This is entirely subjective (which I assume you realize). For me, the bolded part is categorically false. Even with my 2012 Leaf, which said "73 miles" on the sticker, there is no significant change of (unexpectedly) running low. I know full well before I leave the house whether I will be pushing the range or will be comfortable.

So going up to 130 miles buys me very little. It's not enough to get to the next city and back, but it's far more than I need day-to-day. The only thing that would change that would be ample DCQC. Currently there are none in my area, although governor Cuomo has announced plans to change that.

For me, I'll be skipping over the 125-150 mile cars, and looking for a solid 200+ for my next car. That's enough to get me off the beaten path into the mountains (where there won't be DCQC for a decade or more) and back.

That's not to say that I think cars like the Ioniq are a waste. There are plenty with much longer commutes than I have, and/or much better DCQC coverage. Having more options is a great thing.

 

[oilerlord]

So going up to 130 miles buys me very little. It's not enough to get to the next city and back, but it's far more than I need day-to-day.

For me, going up to 200 miles buys me very little. I'd rather not pay for the extra battery capacity when we have a second car with unlimited range for the 1 in 100 times I take a longer trip. I do believe that my used EV may one day pay for itself in fuel & maintenance savings. It has a better chance at doing it at $20,000 than it does at $30,000 (Ioniq) or $40,000 (Bolt). When there is a sea of $20,000 low-mileage/lease-returned Bolts and $15,000 Ioniq's, I'd be interested. 200 miles at $20K just might get Joe Public into the game too.

The saving money argument on a $40,000 car that depreciates in half after two years & 10,000 miles is dubious at best. Yes, I know...that's why you lease them, right? There are no incentives and/or attractive leases on EV's where I live. Personally, I don't like leasing anyway. Essentially, the price I paid upfront for the car worked out to the down payment and 36 months of lease payments. The difference is - in month 37 and beyond, I still own the car, with no mileage restrictions, no buyout, and no payments required.

 

[michael]

Over three years ago, when I was first looking into an EV, a co-worker and EV guru told me: Take the EPA range and cut it in half. That's the for-sure, don't think about it range, at freeway speed, in cold weather, after three years of battery fade, arriving with reasonable reserve.

My experience with three years in my Focus Electric supported this estimate.

So in my view, the Bolt is a 120 mile car, absolutely for sure, I'd send my 16 year old daughter out in it to go that far any time in the next three years. That's enough, I'm happy with that.

By the same reasoning, the Hyundai is a 60 mile car. That's not enough for me. I'll take a Volt in preference to that since it's an "infinite" mile car.

 

[LeftieBiker]

Over three years ago, when I was first looking into an EV, a co-worker and EV guru told me: Take the EPA range and cut it in half. That's the for-sure, don't think about it range, at freeway speed, in cold weather, after three years of battery fade, arriving with reasonable reserve.

My experience with three years in my Focus Electric supported this estimate.

So in my view, the Bolt is a 120 mile car, absolutely for sure, I'd send my 16 year old daughter out in it to go that far any time in the next three years. That's enough, I'm happy with that.

By the same reasoning, the Hyundai is a 60 mile car. That's not enough for me. I'll take a Volt in preference to that since it's an "infinite" mile car.

Real world testing and ownership seems to indicate that the Bolt is a 180 mile "for sure" car, and the Ioniq is a 80-90 mile "for sure" car in Winter, with usual range more like 110+. Keep in mind that a new 30kwh Leaf has a "for sure" range of 80-90 miles, and the Bolt has double its capacity, while the Ioniq has much better efficiency.

 

[michael]

These numbers don't account for battery fade. Take another 30% off for when the car has gone 3 or 4 years and 40,000 to 60,000 miles. Neither do they account for being stuck at a standstill in the cold of winter with the heater consuming 5 kW.

Would you send your teenager out on a 180 mile trip in the winter, in a three year old Bolt, with no place to charge up enroute? I wouldn't.

 

[oilerlord]

Real world testing and ownership seems to indicate that the Bolt is a 180 mile "for sure" car, and the Ioniq is a 80-90 mile "for sure" car in Winter, with usual range more like 110+. Keep in mind that a new 30kwh Leaf has a "for sure" range of 80-90 miles, and the Bolt has double its capacity, while the Ioniq has much better efficiency.

I find it interesting how the "real world" seems to become fuzzy beyond the border of California. Clearly you're world doesn't include -10F and 80 miles per hour.

There are already guys (from California) on this board that have reported range under 180 miles on highway drives. I have no doubt that driven on an Alberta highway in winter, a "real world" range of 120-140 miles may result. YMMV.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

Real world testing and ownership seems to indicate that the Bolt is a 180 mile "for sure" car, and the Ioniq is a 80-90 mile "for sure" car in Winter, with usual range more like 110+. Keep in mind that a new 30kwh Leaf has a "for sure" range of 80-90 miles, and the Bolt has double its capacity, while the Ioniq has much better efficiency.

I find it interesting how the "real world" seems to become fuzzy beyond the border of California. Clearly you're world doesn't include -10F and 80 miles per hour.

There are already guys (from California) on this board that have reported range under 180 miles on highway drives. I have no doubt that driven on an Alberta highway in winter, a "real world" range of 120-140 miles may result. YMMV.

I chuckled at this a little, knowing that LeftieBiker lives in NY...

 

[LeftieBiker]

There are a 30kwh Leaf owner or two in Vermont, and they tell us that 90 miles in Winter isn't hard. Of course, they aren't driving like drunken California idiots, either. ;-) It's probably a mistake, though, to assume 30% degradation after three years. With battery thermal management and even Nissan's mediocre current battery chemistry, degradation after three yours shouldn't exceed 10% or so. Heck, I still have 87% capacity left on my 2013 Leaf, last time I checked.

Would you send your teenager out on a 180 mile trip in the winter, in a three year old Bolt, with no place to charge up enroute? I wouldn't.

Would you send them that far, in Winter, in a 10 year old crappy ICE - the kind that many, many American teenagers drive? What you are describing sounds to me like "rich peoples' problems."

 

[SparkE]

There are a 30kwh Leaf owner or two in Vermont, and they tell us that 90 miles in Winter isn't hard. Of course, they aren't driving like drunken California idiots, either. ;-)

I take umbrage at that comment - driving like drunken California idiots ? NO !!!! (driving like stoned California idiots, well, OK.)

 

[oilerlord]

I chuckled at this a little, knowing that LeftieBiker lives in NY...

I stand corrected.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

It's probably a mistake, though, to assume 30% degradation after three years. With battery thermal management and even Nissan's mediocre current battery chemistry, degradation after three yours shouldn't exceed 10% or so. Heck, I still have 87% capacity left on my 2013 Leaf, last time I checked.

Good point. My 5-year old leaf has only lost about 20%, and that's with the really poor original chemistry. Newer leafs seem to be doing better and the Bolt should do better still.