New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

All Jaguar I-Pace related discussions
Delta5
Posts: 398
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2019 1:32 pm
Location: Midlands

Re: New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

Post by Delta5 » Sat Jan 02, 2021 8:20 pm

ANBO wrote:
Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:10 pm
Do you know if the battery reached the 20°C after 90 min?

No idea about temperature it did it’s own thing, car was warm, drove 170 miles with 30 left on the GOM, probably close to the best performance likely in freezing conditions.
IPace SE Caesium Blue, Ivory interior, Air suspension, 18in wheels, Drivers pack, 360. arrived 16th July, very nice.

chrisell
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2020 4:20 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, USA

Re: New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

Post by chrisell » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:54 am

FYI I found this page which confirms the answers about 100% charging and actual usable capacity:
https://qz.com/1447251/jaguars-full-res ... s-battery/
Red 2020 I-pace

Captain.Plummet
Posts: 474
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:26 pm
Location: UK

Re: New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

Post by Captain.Plummet » Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:19 am

chrisell wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:54 am
FYI I found this page which confirms the answers about 100% charging and actual usable capacity:
https://qz.com/1447251/jaguars-full-res ... s-battery/
They neatly avoided the question about transmission losses. The motors are very efficient but the reduction gearboxes not so much. I have no actual data, but my guess is that 20-30 miles real world range improvement will be possible with the new reduction gear units they are using in the new platform. If they could also reduce the drag coefficient to Tesla levels as well the car would make 300 miles real world range in anything but freezing weather. I bet the I XJ will be a 400 mile car when it is finally released. They also have to up the power train efficiency for the Land Rover versions (that will sit on the same platform) as drag is even more of an issue with that line.
The downside of reducing drag is that the car tends to look bland. IMO the Model 3 and Y have no more character than a computer mouse but the I Pace says ‘drive me’ every time I walk out of the house. I think that’s worth forfeiting a little range for.

chrisell
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2020 4:20 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, USA

Re: New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

Post by chrisell » Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:05 pm

Captain.Plummet wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:19 am
chrisell wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:54 am
FYI I found this page which confirms the answers about 100% charging and actual usable capacity:
https://qz.com/1447251/jaguars-full-res ... s-battery/
They neatly avoided the question about transmission losses. The motors are very efficient but the reduction gearboxes not so much. I have no actual data, but my guess is that 20-30 miles real world range improvement will be possible with the new reduction gear units they are using in the new platform. If they could also reduce the drag coefficient to Tesla levels as well the car would make 300 miles real world range in anything but freezing weather. I bet the I XJ will be a 400 mile car when it is finally released. They also have to up the power train efficiency for the Land Rover versions (that will sit on the same platform) as drag is even more of an issue with that line.
The downside of reducing drag is that the car tends to look bland. IMO the Model 3 and Y have no more character than a computer mouse but the I Pace says ‘drive me’ every time I walk out of the house. I think that’s worth forfeiting a little range for.
In my area there are only two I-paces - mine being one. It always gets attention when I park it somewhere, although some Americans don't help the notion of them being clueless. I had one guy ask me "Who makes Jaguar? Is that GM?"
Red 2020 I-pace

Grunt
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:39 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

Post by Grunt » Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:57 pm

Captain.Plummet wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:19 am
chrisell wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:54 am
FYI I found this page which confirms the answers about 100% charging and actual usable capacity:
https://qz.com/1447251/jaguars-full-res ... s-battery/
They neatly avoided the question about transmission losses. The motors are very efficient but the reduction gearboxes not so much. I have no actual data, but my guess is that 20-30 miles real world range improvement will be possible with the new reduction gear units they are using in the new platform. If they could also reduce the drag coefficient to Tesla levels as well the car would make 300 miles real world range in anything but freezing weather. I bet the I XJ will be a 400 mile car when it is finally released. They also have to up the power train efficiency for the Land Rover versions (that will sit on the same platform) as drag is even more of an issue with that line.
The downside of reducing drag is that the car tends to look bland. IMO the Model 3 and Y have no more character than a computer mouse but the I Pace says ‘drive me’ every time I walk out of the house. I think that’s worth forfeiting a little range for.
Could somebody share the content of that link about the batteries?

As for the transmission losses, I did find the attached graph in a ppt from Jaguar. It shows the gearbox efficiency relative to applied power and wheel speed. In the EPA cycle, the declared average transmission efficiency is 95.3%. That is pretty good, and certainly does not leave room for a 20-30 mile (or 10%+) efficiency improvement... The motors and inverter are even better, by the way, with 95.7% and 97.4% respectively for the EPA cycle.

The drag coefficient of the I-Pace is 0.29 with 18in wheels. (I estimate that it lands at 0.32 with the 22in...I suspect that some gains can be had from a more efficient wheel design. Jaguar simply took existing designs, which are certainly not optimised for aerodynamic efficiency. )

The frontal area of the I-Pace, the other factor dictating aerodynamic drag, is around 2.465m². Not bad, somewhere in the middle between saloon=type cars (2.2-2.3m²) and optimised crossovers, like the eTron at 2.56.

Neither drag factors of the I-Pace could be reduced to Tesla levels -CD .23-.24 and Frontal Area of around 2.2-2.3m² for their saloons. It would require a completely different shape - as you say, more looking like a computer mouse...

A Jaguar XF, for instance, is a much better shape - already achieving 0.25, without dramatic optimisations. I would expect an electric XJ, really optimised, to land around 0.22 with a frontal area of 2.3m², matching a Taycan 4S. The resulting CD(A) of 0.51 would add more than 20% to the effective motorway range compared to an I-Pace. 350 mile WLTP range is feasible, 400 mile would remain out of sight without increasing battery capacity - or other changes.

If you want further improvements, you want to reduce weight, reduce alternate consumption - especially from HVAC -, optimise drivetrain for slow-speed running (e.g. replace the front motor by a non-permanent magnet motor), consider adding a gearbox with multiple ratios, tweak the setup for the test regimes (e.g. start by default in ECO mode), design the suspension for a higher tyre pressure etc.

I-Pace Gearbox Efficiency.jpg


scm
Posts: 1184
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 1:11 pm
Location: Southampton

Re: New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

Post by scm » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:41 pm

Grunt wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:57 pm
I would expect an electric XJ, really optimised, to land around 0.22 with a frontal area of 2.3m², matching a Taycan 4S. The resulting CD(A) of 0.51 would add more than 20% to the effective motorway range compared to an I-Pace. 350 mile WLTP range is feasible, 400 mile would remain out of sight without increasing battery capacity - or other changes.
An XJ would have a lot more chassis space for extra batteries .... ;)

chrisell
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2020 4:20 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, USA

Re: New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

Post by chrisell » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:43 pm

@Grunt: This is the relevant section from the article where they talk about the battery: (from this article, for future google search completeness: https://qz.com/1447251/jaguars-full-res ... s-battery/ )

3. Does the I-PACE on purpose program its battery to avoid full depth of discharge? For example, is the EPA range only for say 20% to 80% of battery capacity?
The I-PACE has a nominal capacity of 90kWh and a useable capacity is 84.7kWh. Like the traction batteries in all electric vehicles and hybrids, the I-PACE’s pack cannot be charged to 100% or run down to a real 0% state of charge because this is detrimental to the cell’s state-of-health and therefore the battery pack’s performance and durability. We manage the depth of energy discharge based on a great number of environmental and driver inputs, primarily to maintain cell state-of-health and consistent performance of the pack over its lifetime.

The battery pack uses state-of-the-art technology, and just like the I-PACE itself, has been engineered and tested to the same exacting standards as every Jaguar and Land Rover vehicle. This is why we have the confidence to protect and reassure our customers by offering a highly competitive 8-year, 100,000 mile/160,000km battery warranty: the battery must retain minimum of 70% state-of-health within the warranty period.
As you mentioned the e-Tron, wanted to just side-track for a minute and tell you why I didn't choose the e-Tron during my test drives. It's their regen. The software logic is bonkers. The car itself was great, but it has a super light regen by default. There are paddles behind the steering wheel that you can use to change the regen strength though. Great! So I paddled-up to get the regen where I wanted it and it transformed the drive. Until I stopped at a traffic light. The e-tron then resets the regen to the default super-light setting. Every. Time. You. Stop. That was an absolute dealbreaker for me. There was no menu option to change it, and the Audi guy confirmed that was how it worked.
Red 2020 I-pace

Captain.Plummet
Posts: 474
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:26 pm
Location: UK

Re: New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

Post by Captain.Plummet » Tue Jan 05, 2021 5:20 pm

Grunt wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:57 pm
Captain.Plummet wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:19 am
chrisell wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:54 am
FYI I found this page which confirms the answers about 100% charging and actual usable capacity:
https://qz.com/1447251/jaguars-full-res ... s-battery/
They neatly avoided the question about transmission losses. The motors are very efficient but the reduction gearboxes not so much. I have no actual data, but my guess is that 20-30 miles real world range improvement will be possible with the new reduction gear units they are using in the new platform. If they could also reduce the drag coefficient to Tesla levels as well the car would make 300 miles real world range in anything but freezing weather. I bet the I XJ will be a 400 mile car when it is finally released. They also have to up the power train efficiency for the Land Rover versions (that will sit on the same platform) as drag is even more of an issue with that line.
The downside of reducing drag is that the car tends to look bland. IMO the Model 3 and Y have no more character than a computer mouse but the I Pace says ‘drive me’ every time I walk out of the house. I think that’s worth forfeiting a little range for.
Could somebody share the content of that link about the batteries?

As for the transmission losses, I did find the attached graph in a ppt from Jaguar. It shows the gearbox efficiency relative to applied power and wheel speed. In the EPA cycle, the declared average transmission efficiency is 95.3%. That is pretty good, and certainly does not leave room for a 20-30 mile (or 10%+) efficiency improvement... The motors and inverter are even better, by the way, with 95.7% and 97.4% respectively for the EPA cycle.

The drag coefficient of the I-Pace is 0.29 with 18in wheels. (I estimate that it lands at 0.32 with the 22in...I suspect that some gains can be had from a more efficient wheel design. Jaguar simply took existing designs, which are certainly not optimised for aerodynamic efficiency. )

The frontal area of the I-Pace, the other factor dictating aerodynamic drag, is around 2.465m². Not bad, somewhere in the middle between saloon=type cars (2.2-2.3m²) and optimised crossovers, like the eTron at 2.56.

Neither drag factors of the I-Pace could be reduced to Tesla levels -CD .23-.24 and Frontal Area of around 2.2-2.3m² for their saloons. It would require a completely different shape - as you say, more looking like a computer mouse...

A Jaguar XF, for instance, is a much better shape - already achieving 0.25, without dramatic optimisations. I would expect an electric XJ, really optimised, to land around 0.22 with a frontal area of 2.3m², matching a Taycan 4S. The resulting CD(A) of 0.51 would add more than 20% to the effective motorway range compared to an I-Pace. 350 mile WLTP range is feasible, 400 mile would remain out of sight without increasing battery capacity - or other changes.

If you want further improvements, you want to reduce weight, reduce alternate consumption - especially from HVAC -, optimise drivetrain for slow-speed running (e.g. replace the front motor by a non-permanent magnet motor), consider adding a gearbox with multiple ratios, tweak the setup for the test regimes (e.g. start by default in ECO mode), design the suspension for a higher tyre pressure etc.
I don't believe those figures are very precise. Magna already built an I Pace with significantly better motors and transmission. 20 miles on the WLTP would be around 6.5% improvement and I think they have room for that, probably more outside the optimum range curve. As I pointed out and you commented, a car with a greater slenderness ratio, better frontal design and slippier wheels and arches such as an XJ would have a Cd in Tesla territory. Who knows, they might even go for a retro XJ220 front end. Battery temperature management will be better in the new platform too. Adding it all up I think they can improve the range from a 90kWh pack by 20% or so on longer runs which comes close to Tesla legs. JLR already have a 110kWh pack for the larger vehicles which would suggest that very close to 400 miles real range is their target.
The game changer, as always, is battery tech. It remains to be seen just how good the new Tesla cells are and how long it will take for technology available to JLR to filter through, but my guess is that most manufacturers will be two years behind Tesla for the foreseeable future. Trading weight for energy is not particularly economical, but if they manage to incorporate a super capacitor to help with short term acceleration and the initial regeneration surge on braking I think they might achieve their range target without increasing battery size..

kermit68
Posts: 457
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 1:06 pm
Location: Rome / Italy

Re: New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

Post by kermit68 » Tue Jan 05, 2021 5:24 pm

And hopefully JLR will improve the BEMS too othewise a it will be a nightmare to charge a larger battery at 85kw ....
MY20 Yulong White SE, 20", air suspension, privacy glass, black pack and other fine stuffs

chrisell
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2020 4:20 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, USA

Re: New owner with some real-world, no-bullshit range data

Post by chrisell » Tue Jan 05, 2021 5:31 pm

As we're veering off-topic just a touch: 100kW chargers. Do they actually work for us?
I ask because I took my iPace to an ElectrifyAmerica 100kW charger last week and it maxed out at 33kW. Tried another 100kW charger in the same facility and it maxed out at 28kW. Drove 2 miles to the free 50kW charger from a different company (ChargePoint) and the car took the full 50kW rate.
There's speculation in the American forums as to whether (a) the IPace really does support 100kW charging, (b) if it does, it's only when the SOC is below 10% and (c) whether or not ElectrifyAmerica have a problem with their 100kW chargers.
Either way mine is almost always slow-charged at home, but for a long road trip (420 miles from here to Vegas for example) I kinda need to know if I can rely on 100kW chargers and right now, it seems questionable.
Red 2020 I-pace

Post Reply