That would mean no cars ring time counts.
Your standard is not the accepted standard when it comes to this metric.
The Lyrics charge curve is in and......
- Thread starter UncleDave
- Start date
That would mean no cars ring time counts.
Your standard is not the accepted standard when it comes to this metric.
Not talking standard here. What is Bjorns standard? If you want to compare two cars, any two cars they need to be compared at the same time. Simples. You have your Elon standard, I have a standard based in reality.
Where did I say elons standard was mine?
Who publishes comparison to your standard? Id like to see them.
high level - Bjorn Makes 1K runs between major cities sometimes across countries, optimizing charging for each voltage. He records MPPKW, temps, times, and drives at the same speed GPS indicated. Some variances occur and he records them.
Can it be perfect - no.
Can it give you a really good indication of a cars performance - you bet it can.
There is more detail, but anyone here can go look at his huge fleet of videos.
You are now trying to justify less than scientific tests. Just because it’s the best you can find does not make it factual. You try to make it sound factual, it is not. I do not need to provide to evidence to prove that it is not factual. It is self evident.
“Without data you’re just a person with an opinion.” The words of W. Edwards Deming, patron saint of the quality movement, reflect postwar naiveté about the possibility of blank-slate objectivity which in many fields was tinged with outright scientism. In science, you don’t want opinions, you want to look at the facts, and these must be objective. Your opinion doesn’t count.
People seem to assume if you present data you biased towards what the data suggests. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Data is only valuable if you analyze it objectively. Otherwise that's as bad as, "I think" or "They will".
The EV hate is the new Ford vs Chevy. Ha!
People seem to assume if you present data you biased towards what the data suggests. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Data is only valuable if you analyze it objectively. Otherwise that's as bad as, "I think" or "They will".
The EV hate is the new Ford vs Chevy. Ha!
Last edited:
In the Out Of Spec “10% Challenge” the 800v Taycan goes much further than a 400v Model 3/Y. *They haven’t tested a Model S though.*
They start at 10%, charge for 15 minutes, then drive at 80 MPH until 10% again. That big, nearly 300kw blast into the Taycan really makes a difference.
They start at 10%, charge for 15 minutes, then drive at 80 MPH until 10% again. That big, nearly 300kw blast into the Taycan really makes a difference.
Maybe I am missing something, but what are you trying to convey? Are you standing by the academic presumption that 800V architecture is fundamentally superior to 400V, so therefore, any discussion is pointless?
Yes it did. Thats a great test,
Model S is nearest competitor though not the cheap 3, or y.
You don’t get it. I’m only trying to say that whatever “facts” uncledave says are facts are not facts.
I think I see where you’re coming from - you have an issue with his source since the testing approach doesn’t conform to “industry standards.”
It doesn’t conform to any standards. It’s random actually.
I have data.
I never claimed the data was "a standard".
Im happy to look at all data.
Check your math; you are taking credit for the improvement twice.
AT THE SAME ENERGY FLOW, doubling voltage halves current. Doubling voltage at the same current charges in half the time.
Another thing to consider is the voltage rating of the cables (600VAC is common, but there is a lot of 300VAC on the market). Most feel, me included, that 600VAC is good to 850DC which is what the peak voltage will be at 600AC. 1000V insulation is definitely available, but a LITTLE less flexible and a LITTLE more expensive.
Another issue is having sufficient AC voltage to inexpensively rectify and get 800DC. 240AC gets us to practically 400DC but you need 480VAC to the charger (or tricky voltage multipliers or an additional transformer) which isn't in any home I've ever seen.
You can always say that, regardless of the test process. Bjorn Nyland has the most comprehensive analysis available, AFAIK. Until more/better data and requisite analytics are available, this is as good as it gets. Nyland does not do puff pieces; he provides valuable information and speaks to conditions, etc that affect his numbers.
We are all free to believe what we want, but to argue in circles does not forward the conversation.
The only thing that beats science is better science.
Bjorns ”tests” are not comprehensive and that is the problem. Just because they are the best available does not mean they are reliable. It is point blank not science and cannot be relied upon for any reasonable conclusions.
Home charging nails the 800V cars hard.
Trying to keep the ripple zero with such a big jump seems expensive.
Last edited:
Again, you can say that about any test. Until we have more data, better data, improved analytics, it is the best we have.
Like anything else, use it at your own discression. It is absolutely fair to challenge results, processes, whatever. But IMO, a supported point beats the snot outta opinion or no support.
I believe I could challenge @UncleDave and he would reply with a supported position. Just my 2 cents. I have been replied to with far poorer challenges. Ha!
Wrong. Wrong Wrong. Until it is proven it cannot and should not be relied upon for any conclusions. It is anecdotal at best and is not data.
We will have to agree to disagree. I say take it for what it's worth. New and better science always trumps prior science. We can only deal with the best science we have.
No one is saying it is perfect, but I can say Nyland does pretty well with the tools he has. He always supports his numbers with conditions in effect at the time of the test.
Where I struggle with your point is the term "proven". I had a career in data capture and analytics on that data. I tell people the results are as good as I can get until they are not. That's the nature of science.
I have learned to be willing to challenge even my deepest beliefs.