I would prefer at least to have it broken out as energy used with energy gained so I can see how much the car actually regenerated during a drive. Been playing around purposefully getting the next tick of energy used and then trying to reverse it. It is surprisingly not hard, the best I got back was .2 getting lucky with timing of a very long stretch down hill.
I really don't like how energy used to done.
1 - 20 of 63 Posts
Joined
·
1,722 Posts
Regen is nice but I certainly wouldnt want a Ford type of usage wcreen either.
Rather have gas miles and electric miles tallied separately.
This way real metrics can be developed, Fords regen Miles model is used only to inflate their meager ev range moving gas energy to electric.
Rather have gas miles and electric miles tallied separately.
This way real metrics can be developed, Fords regen Miles model is used only to inflate their meager ev range moving gas energy to electric.
Joined
·
13,358 Posts
Stop looking at your DIC, just drive, and quit trying to make it go farther. The volt does an outstanding job of sipping just a little bit of gas and you have to go through heroics to gain just a tiny bit more. As soon as you realize tha regen is not your friend but your enemy, you can get better range by coasting and minimizing regen.
I spent two years driving like a grandpa trying to eek out every electric mile. Then a switch flipped between the ears when I realized I could drive it like a jackrabbit or jeff Gordon and still get better gas mileage than a Prius. I'm much happier now not fretting over range and eating up on pony cars and ricer boys at stoplights. Live a little!! Drive it like you stole it
I spent two years driving like a grandpa trying to eek out every electric mile. Then a switch flipped between the ears when I realized I could drive it like a jackrabbit or jeff Gordon and still get better gas mileage than a Prius. I'm much happier now not fretting over range and eating up on pony cars and ricer boys at stoplights. Live a little!! Drive it like you stole it
Regen is a great way to save your brakes on your Volt. With our 2016 Volt I don't even use brakes most of the time until I have to come to a complete stop of course. With most cars all the energy used to climb a hill once you go down you will have to use your brakes to slow down, all this is wasted energy. The Volt captures not all but a good part of this energy in the form of electricity of course. I think the brakes on our Volt will probably outlast the car...
Joined
·
3,684 Posts
I agree.
If you really want to save a few cents - Drive as slow as you possibly can.
Or better yet, take public transportation.
Joined
·
255 Posts
The screen that would be nice is the one the Bolt has which gives m/kW in 5 mile chunks and for the last 50 miles. It gives me a better idea of what is really left than the gom. I have found my drive to work has some sections where I can get 8 m/kW and coming home is is about 2.5.
Joined
·
13,358 Posts
I contend that using the regen paddle, or coasting in D or coasting in L doesn't use the brakes any less than pressing the brake pedal and decelerating at the same rate as you would have with the paddle, D, or L. You're not saving your brakes by avoiding them sinc ehte car will regen anyway. The beauty of using the brake pedal is that you aren't stuck with only 3 levels of regen, but you get variable regen until you are at the regen cycle and the brakes kick in.
Joined
·
3,684 Posts
Joined
·
6,863 Posts
BINGO we have a winner. I can make my wife sick when I pull the regen paddle only to discover I'm slowing too quickly and have to let off and then finish the stop with the brake pedal, it can set up an unsettling undulation that causes motion sickness in some. So I just leave it in D and use my foot to VARY my regen. Sooooo much smoother.
Joined
·
13,358 Posts
You could move to a place where your commute to and from work is downhill, both ways.
I believe the Bolt in L is more aggressive than the volt's paddle...Yet the whole idea with one pedal driving isn't to remove your foot entirely from the brake pedal but rather ease off of it...Who greenlighted a non-adjustable paddle in the ELR in the first place is beyond me...
I find this to be the biggest issue with using the paddle in particular. With L I can modulate the deceleration fairly well. But the paddle decelerates a lot quicker than I'm used to, and there is also some variability in it, so you never know when to start stopping. And I am really uncomfortable waiting too long to start stopping (you never know when the road conditions may change). So my question is, is there a better way to use the paddle or L more smoothly, and if not, how much regen do you NOT get by using the brakes alone?
Joined
·
595 Posts
You'll never recoup 100% of the energy expended to accelerate via deceleration regeneration, it's against the laws of thermodynamics.
Joined
·
13,358 Posts
You get all the regen, except at the very end of the stop where the friction brakes kick in. The only time you don't get regen is during a panic stop where there is no time to regen, and if you are braking in N. I have always called the regen paddles a gimmick as it might be a selling point while you are shopping, and some people enjoy the spirited driving that paddle regen 'causes' you to do, but to maximize ev range, the paddle regen should have been replaced with a pull-to-coast paddle. Adding a Granny (Eco) mode to force slow acceleration would also have been a nice touch.
I would be interested in knowing the average or typical regen efficiency. Chevy knows all this, but I've never seen any figures in print.
Any of you in big hilly country: Help me out. Find a long hill. Check kWh on leaf screen at bottom, at speed and location., climb to near top at steady speeds (say, 30 and 50 mph) . Note figures and stop point. Descend at same steady speeds. Stop at bottom. Note Figures. Report here. Thanks.
Any of you in big hilly country: Help me out. Find a long hill. Check kWh on leaf screen at bottom, at speed and location., climb to near top at steady speeds (say, 30 and 50 mph) . Note figures and stop point. Descend at same steady speeds. Stop at bottom. Note Figures. Report here. Thanks.
Some people forget that regen happens in any driving mode, and that your Volt may be traveling on regen battery power even when the battery is fully depleted or you’re in Hold mode.
Are you sure you want to itemize your regen? If the usage display shows you drove your Gen 2 Volt 53 Electric Miles using the 14.1 kWh of grid power in the battery, and the regen display shows you obtained 3.9 kWh of regen power during the drive, then your ev mileage for the drive is actually 2.9 miles/kWh, not 3.8 (53/18 vs 53/14.1).
Increasing the amount of fuel used to drive a given distance will always lower the mileage. The increase in total useable power provided by regen during a trip does not necessarily mean you can drive further - sometimes the difference in terrain that causes the increase in total regen also reduces the overall ev mileage (e.g., regen from downhill driving offset by uphill driving mileage reduction).
Are you sure you want to itemize your regen? If the usage display shows you drove your Gen 2 Volt 53 Electric Miles using the 14.1 kWh of grid power in the battery, and the regen display shows you obtained 3.9 kWh of regen power during the drive, then your ev mileage for the drive is actually 2.9 miles/kWh, not 3.8 (53/18 vs 53/14.1).
Increasing the amount of fuel used to drive a given distance will always lower the mileage. The increase in total useable power provided by regen during a trip does not necessarily mean you can drive further - sometimes the difference in terrain that causes the increase in total regen also reduces the overall ev mileage (e.g., regen from downhill driving offset by uphill driving mileage reduction).
Honestly some of you need to quit jumping to instant butthurt land, I swear there are more snowflakes here than at a Bernie convention.
I want to know numbers, THAT IS ALL. I do not feel the numbers provided are a good way to represent consumption. I would like how much I spent to a number in total, not one modified by regeneration. This would provide a more accurate measurement of how much per mile we spend while driving and expose that side of the efficiency equation.
Hence , at the end of my typical 56 odd mile day it would show "XX used" with "YY" gained. Meaning instead of being showing 12.7 or whatever for used I might see 14.1 used and 1.4 gained from regeneration. I just want honest detail.
As for L/Paddle. Never found either to benefit and if anything one just more detrimental compared to the other for the most part, its like how annoying do you want to make the drive? D is great. Now if our L was similar to the Bolt or how an i3 works it might make sense and with the paddle being on or off its useless to me.
I want to know numbers, THAT IS ALL. I do not feel the numbers provided are a good way to represent consumption. I would like how much I spent to a number in total, not one modified by regeneration. This would provide a more accurate measurement of how much per mile we spend while driving and expose that side of the efficiency equation.
Hence , at the end of my typical 56 odd mile day it would show "XX used" with "YY" gained. Meaning instead of being showing 12.7 or whatever for used I might see 14.1 used and 1.4 gained from regeneration. I just want honest detail.
As for L/Paddle. Never found either to benefit and if anything one just more detrimental compared to the other for the most part, its like how annoying do you want to make the drive? D is great. Now if our L was similar to the Bolt or how an i3 works it might make sense and with the paddle being on or off its useless to me.
So you are implying that the paddle is completely superfluous, and L mode just annoying. I'd like to know if there's any empirical evidence that supports this. My anecdotal evidence says that the paddle generates more regeneration than the brake pedal, and that the friction brakes kick in pretty quick, but it's far from a controlled experiment. Where can we find out more?
Joined
·
1,722 Posts
The regen number would only tell you how much energy was saved and has ZERO to do with consumption
So let's say I used 10kwhrs out of the wall and traveled 50 battery miles on that power
Compare to I used 10kwhr from the wall and regenerate 20kwhr and traveled the same 50 miles
That is an exaggerated version of how regen works, regen does not "create" or use any new energy you didn't already have on flat ground.
It has no bearing on "consumption " it just saves you from using more energy than you need.
So let's say I used 10kwhrs out of the wall and traveled 50 battery miles on that power
Compare to I used 10kwhr from the wall and regenerate 20kwhr and traveled the same 50 miles
That is an exaggerated version of how regen works, regen does not "create" or use any new energy you didn't already have on flat ground.
It has no bearing on "consumption " it just saves you from using more energy than you need.
I understand all this technical logic, but the reality is simply different. Again using an extreme example, if I coast downhill for a mile with the car off and in neutral, I've gotten infinite mpg. 1/0 MPG. That mile still counts, even though I didn't use any power at all.
The only thing you can't do is count regen while using gas, and think that's part of your mpge. That's really part of your gas mpg because you are recapturing gas energy.
1 - 20 of 63 Posts
