[bro1999]

Took a road trip to Shenandoah National Park yesterday. Charged to 100% the night before, and had 201 miles of estimated range. Total trip would be 260 miles.....could I make it on a single charge??

Temps were in the 60s, so almost perfect conditions.

I ended up charging (for free) at the station in front of the Byrd Visitor Center, but turns out I didn't need the charge to get back home. Averaged 4.8 miles/kWh overall. 4 people in tow, no HVAC, 55-60 on the highway, 35 in the park. Went to Big Meadows and back.



Nice 3k foot climb up the mountain.

 

[Ziv]

Very cool! I stayed at Skyland Resort a couple years ago. Skyline is a great drive! I bet the altitude changes made for some interesting changes in the charge state of the pack.

 

[wws]

Nice trip. How many miles were left on the GOM when you finished the trip?

As an aside, I really enjoy reading these trip reports. It would be nice if the site moderators would implement my suggestion of adding a separate 'road trips' sub-forum so they are all in one place...

 

[bro1999]

Nice trip. How many miles were left on the GOM when you finished the trip?

As an aside, I really enjoy reading these trip reports. It would be nice if the site moderators would implement my suggestion of adding a separate 'road trips' sub-forum so they are all in one place...

Well, 125 since I filled up 18 kWh at the charging station.

The trip down the mountain was interesting. Started out with 153 miles on the GOM, and by the time I completely descended the mountain 25-30 miles later, the GOM read 211. I think I used less than 1 kWh to travel those 25-30 miles.

 

[DonC]

The trip down the mountain was interesting. Started out with 153 miles on the GOM, and by the time I completely descended the mountain 25-30 miles later, the GOM read 211. I think I used less than 1 kWh to travel those 25-30 miles.

My experinece in the mountains is that the mi/kWh goes up to reflect the recent driving history. So you may have used more. Could figure it out probably. Find the energy released with the vertical drop by taking the mass X vertical drop X gravitational constant. Then divide by 3 mi/kWh, which is a pretty good number for how much energy you lose to friction (air, road, drive train).

 

[bro1999]

My experinece in the mountains is that the mi/kWh goes up to reflect the recent driving history. So you may have used more. Could figure it out probably. Find the energy released with the vertical drop by taking the mass X vertical drop X gravitational constant. Then divide by 3 mi/kWh, which is a pretty good number for how much energy you lose to friction (air or road).

ACcording to my Torque PRo logs, my SOC was the same at the bottom of the mountain compared to when I started the descent (25 miles total)

 

[jcanoe]

During your descent did you use L or D?

 

[Ladogaboy]

Nice trip. The elevation changes do play an interesting role in range estimations.

 

[bro1999]

During your descent did you use L or D?

L all the way.

 

[gpsman]

ACcording to my Torque PRo logs, my SOC was the same at the bottom of the mountain compared to when I started the descent (25 miles total)

Ops, I thought you meant your round trip up and down.

I noticed this on steep hills around San Francisco.
"apparent perpetual motion" I call it.

I go up a steep 18% hill, 3 miles come off.
I went down the same hill, 3 miles went back on.
Amused, I did it again. 12 miles later, GOM is in the exact same place.

Why it is getting fooled, I don't know.

However, steady state driving on the highway it is pretty darn accurate.

I also did a weekend road trip.
My Bolt will easily go 270 miles at 60 mph.

I am thrilled Chevy was 'conservative' on their publicity of 238.
238 mile is not "best case, hypermiler scenario". It is truly what the average person will get in mild weather.

 

[bro1999]

ACcording to my Torque PRo logs, my SOC was the same at the bottom of the mountain compared to when I started the descent (25 miles total)

Ya, and obviously untrue.
I noticed the same on steep hills around San Fancisco.
"apparent perpetual motion" I call it.

I go up a steep 18% hill, 3 miles come off.
I went down the same hill, 3 miles went back on.
Amused, I did it again. 12 miles later, GOM is in the exact same place.

Why it is getting fooled, I don't know.

However, steady state driving on the highway it is pretty darn accurate.

I also did a weekend road trip.
My Bolt will easily go 270 miles at 60 mph.

I am thrilled Chevy was 'conservative' on their publicity of 238.
238 mile is not "best case, hypermiler scenario". It is truly what the average person will get in mild weather.

How is it untrue? It makes total sense that going 3000 feet down a mountain (mainly coasting via Regen) would end up using net 0 energy. I'm only talking about the run DOWN the mountain, not up and back down. Obviously going up uses more energy than energy gained going back down.

 

[freshcut]

I think the 238 was based on the average driver who isn't as conscious about energy usage as someone who has more experience with an EV or even hypermileing techniques. Like any car, you can always exceed the rated mileage with careful use of energy. If they were to advertise the Bolt was capable of 300 miles range, yet the average person is getting just over 200, you can bet there would be lawsuits for false advertising.

 

[Ladogaboy]

The 238 was based on the EPA testing cycle, which as I understand it GM has no control over. It's supposed to provide a standard baseline for consumers to compare vehicles. This is why companies like Ford, Nissan, and VW have gotten in trouble recently; they tried to game the test or results. It's also why the Bolt EV with a Cd of .308 has the same EPA highway mileage as a Model S60 with a Cd of .24. The testing is supposed to expose any marketing gimmicks.