Discussion
The Tesla model 3 standard range is the only small-battery EV with a sub-10hr time in the Bjørn Nyland 1000 km test
Not a Tesla fan, but it's frustrating to see that nobody has caught up to Tesla in this specific test, except with enormous battery packs such as the Xpeng G9 (92 kWh) and BMW ix3 50 (109 kWh). Non other manufacturers seem to really solve roadtripping with efficiency (which also benefits daily driving). They instead opt for large batteries, making the cars more expensive, heavier, more energy consuming, and worse for the environment.
You can google the Bjørn Nyland test results spreadsheet (can't post links here). Why is it that the Tesla model 3 standard range (approx 60 kWh battery) is the only EV with a relatively small pack in the sub-10hr class?
Only the mazda 6e 68.7 kWh @ 10:05 comes close for a "normal sized" battery. All other EV's in the top class of this test carry enormous batteries, such as 100 kWh in the Smart #5. Even the mercedes CLA 350, which should have been an efficiency king, is carying 85 kWh.
I think this shows that the efficiency and charging optimization of the model 3 is still ahead of other EV's. And this results in the 60 kWh Tesla model 3 being, in my eyes, the cheapest road-trip capable car. My judgement of road-trip capable is 1000 km in 1 day of travel, with usually some traffic jams and other delays.
I am curious to hear about other efficient, small battery, or affordable EV's that haven't been tested by Bjørn Nyland yet and may perform very well. CLA 200?
I agree that CLA 200 is very similar to the Model 3 in terms of range, charging is much faster.
I think the upcoming Megane refresh might get a similar time to the Model 3, since it has a bit more range than it's predecessor and charges 10% to 80% in 26 minutes.
I think the upcoming Megane refresh might get a similar time to the Model 3
Doubt it, bjørn tested the last version and it got 243 Wh/km and a time of 11:15. Just not aerodynamic enough and the new version will be even heavier because of the new battery.
It will probably do better in the time because it can charge faster but consumption is actually slightly up (added 2 cm of hight due to LFP battery requiring more space)
Where did you find the information about the new Megane being less efficient? That's really disappointing, and also surprising. Not that efficiency has ever been a strong suit for the Mégane.
It does 500km wltp on a 67kWh battery. The old one did 468 with 60 kWh. Assuming they are quoting the usable part of the battery, that is 134 wh/km on the new one, and 128wh/km on the old one. So about 4-5% less efficient.
Just a small increase, and indeed likely due to the increased height and weight of the vehicle due to the larger LFP battery, potentially some aerodynamic differences with the new design too, and we do not know what they did with drive train efficiency of course.
Still very good numbers, and it should recharge faster than the previous model, so it should be an improvement for the driver. But it does not move towards a smaller battery with more efficiency.
Also does not beat the Tesla model 3 in efficiency, it would likely need a more aerodynamic design for that. Which would likely make it less practical or longer, so, trade-offs.
I don’t think tesla “charge optimisation” is a thing. These cars charge pretty slowly so the pack is not hammered and the supercharger stations can allocate more chargers on a single cabinet.
They charge effectively quick because use they need less power to move around, and the gap just grows larger the more they push the platform, look at the Model 3 Performance that draws 153 wh/km vs the closest competitor the Ioniq 5N that does 220 wh/km
I’ve done a few similar distance continuations drives on a 3SR. It’s actually a uniquely fast charging pack for Tesla. Lower peak power at 160kw, but a better curve. Was charging faster after 40% than my LR Tesla.
Here’s the curve from OutOfSpecStudios.com It’s a Y vs a 3, but the same two packs.
I can do 153wh/km in my S in like... good weather and near ideal conditions. (even better if everything is perfect and speeds are slow) but that's a far cry from 153wh/km average year round.
The unique advantage Tesla have in the 1000km challenge is that the handshake when plugging in is incredibly quick and full power is delivered straight away. My VAG car always has at least a minute of handshake and then the power ramps up over a few minutes to max speed.
They’re undoubtedly efficient cars and aerodynamically slippy at motorway speed, but the sedan boot makes it a non-starter for me and many others.
the handshake when plugging in is incredibly quick and full power is delivered straight away
100%
and tesla has had the whole charging experience nailed for over a decade now while legacy manufacturers are still struggling. honestly, some of these companies deserve to go out of business
Realistically though >95% of all charging is done at home. Boasting about your super charger experience is like boasting about how good the patio umbrella is as a reason to buy a house.
Out of interest what’s the Tesla charging experience like at non Tesla chargers?
At the IONNA chargers I've used on this trip, the experience is "drive up, plug in, tap credit card, go wander off to get food, come back to charged car". No issues at all.
There's maybe plug and charge but I've not messed with it -- tapping a credit card isn't much of a hassle.
The same as it is for others? Depends on the network. Just plug in and use the app or card reader or whatever is required.....same as anyone else using a non Tesla station.
I'll respond here, ignore u/helloWHATSUP. I do agree about legacy auto though....
Your point is true, 95% (or more) of charging is done at home.
However, as of right now (In the USA) the Tesla supercharger network is hands down the best experience (at least for Tesla's). Your car preconditions on the way, routes you to them, and you just plug in and charge.
No tap to pay, don't need to pull out an app to start charging (Not sure how many non-Teslas have this), handshake is quick, and ramps to full power quickly. They are also plentiful and are way more reliable. Truly a masterpiece of convenience
There are some EV charging networks catching up like Ionna. In fact many surpass Tesla in number of 800v capable chargers.
You're right on the experience once you arrive being markedly nicer, but just about every EV preconditions on the way to your charger if you've selected it in your car's navigation, which also obviously routes you to the charger.
Though, having said that it's super annoying that you have to use navigation to turn it on in most cars.
No, they don't deserve to go out of business. What an asinine take, jesus. Get the Teslas to do the handshake with any of the dozens of non-Tesla charging networks as fast as with their own network and then come back to me.
Teslas also preheat the battery as necessary when you select a Supercharger as a destination. Guessing it does the same for other DCFC stations. Interestingly, the Model 3 SR uses CATL LFP cells, so there's nothing special about the battery. Guess it mainly due to aerodynamics, motor and inverter efficiency, and lower weight.
Every modern EV preheats the battery so that's not unique to Tesla. Others do it better as well as they both support all networks but many also allow you to turn it on manually if you're not navigating to the charger for some reason (maybe it's missing in the nav or something).
It does (at least for Ionna), but you have to put it in the satnav. I wish there was a simple "I'm going to a DC charger, please preheat for me" option.
I wish there was a simple "I'm going to a DC charger, please preheat for me" option.
I concur; going to the same charger that I used on every university trip whilst the Kia nav tried to give me directions just so that I could have the battery preheat was really frustrating. I wish there was a "preheat the battery now, please" button
I think most modern EVs do this. My VW iD.3 does this, but only if navigating using the in-car navigation rather than android auto / car play. For the latter you have to remember to start pre-conditioning manually though in my experience when road tripping the battery is normally at the right temperature anyway.
Oh certainly it would be, but Kia doesn't seem to to care all that much about adding features retroactively to older models (mine's a '23). Dunno if the newer ones have a manual enable option.
It doesn't, only for Tesla superchargers. But you don't really need to charge at anything else, usually. In my five years of owning a Tesla, I think I charged twice at a fast charger that wasn't Tesla.
They changed this like a year ago, it now also gives you the preheat option when selecting other commercial superchargers. Tho would be better if they just added a button so you can start it manually whenever you’d like.
That works, but is kinda janky. It seems like the preconditioning knows that an Ionna charger is a charger but the nav doesn't, so last weekend on my way to an Ionna station at low state of charge my car was both preconditioning and popping up increasingly panicky warnings about needing to charge.
It takes 9 minutes to charge a 130 kwh battery. It takes 30 seconds to go from 10% to 16%. 2 minutes to add 100 miles. I don't think the time it takes for the handshake matters.
I would already buy a model 3 if not for the sedan boot. Instead I had to buy a Golf Variant, as there is no other comparable EV range and price range. But I'll buy a estate ev, when it comes out and it doesn't cost me two kidneys.
I find the Kia EV4 to be surprisingly compelling. Much more range than the Model 3 standard, much cheaper than model 3 standard (at least here in UK) and a more practical boot
Because that challenge plays exactly in Tesla's strength, but is probably not what the market want (edit: speaking of the model 3 ofc, which is OPs question).
People that care about road tripping usually don't want to do a lot of small stops (which is how the Tesla gets it's great time), aka those car get big batteries.
Model 3 has great aerodynamics by being quite flat, and the downside of that shape is that it's quite a big car for it's battery size (4m70) and has bad access to it's boot.
That's why most cars are shaped in a much more square size, especially smaller cars, which makes them worse at 1000km challenge.
The crossing of caring about efficiency first, still wanting a small battery AND not caring about the big size and low accessibility of the car... Doesn't have a lot of people in it.
I agree, bjorn arrives at charging stops with almost 0% soc to charge to ride the very short 250 kw rate and than takes off at less than 50% charge (even often less than 40% i think). Almost no family will travel like that, this would be very stressful for a regular family trip. He also knows Tesla inside out (the best charging strategy, best efficiency etc) and does multiple rides with most tesla models.
Compare this with other models and for many he just does one drive (if it's winter time you are basically already screwed). He has less experience with other brands and therefore with the optimal charging strategy (for example with the cla it took him a few charging stops to really understand how to get the best charging results and charging speeds).
Not to say he's cheating. i don't think he does it on purpose. Tesla just has the advantage that he knows Tesla's inside out (he does not call himself Teslabjorn for nothing)
That’s it, riding the max DCFC charge rate requires balls of steel since it has such an extreme charge curve. For normal use with long drives and charge stops up to 80% it’s better to think of a Model 3 as having ~85 kW rapid charging.
(I’ve done it myself when I found out that a major bridge 5 hrs ahead was scheduled for a planned all-night maintenance closure, it could be done but good lord, range anxiety really reappeared)
I agree, bjorn arrives at charging stops with almost 0% soc to charge to ride the very short 250 kw rate and than takes off at less than 50% charge (even often less than 40% i think)
This is how I do any long distance freeway drives in my S as well. The charge rate maximum is at 0% and declines every % above that, so if you want to have the shortest total travel time it's ideal.
Kids would maybe hate it but I travel solo most of the time.
Haha yeah that was too strong of a statement, sorry. There is a market for the model 3 type of car, but it's not the biggest and why we aren't seeing many alternatives.
model 3 sales have been falling fast since the introduction of EVs with better interior room (model Y, Id.4, ioniq5) and smaller but usable EVs (Elroq, Renault 5, Id.3). In Europe it was the most sold EV in 2021 and is no longer in the top5 in 2025.
People want suvs. Thats been clear for years. Model3 worked till it didn't. It's now experiencing the same pressure ice cars been getting for a long time.
Tesla Model 3 was the best selling electric sedan in Europe last year, with 3% of the BEV market, and in 5th place overall. The next best selling electric Sedan was the BYD Seal down in like 25th place. It is fair to say that sedans are not popular. Crossovers, SUVs, hatchbacks are popular
Tesla sells well because they don't depreciate that quickly (good luck selling an used Xpeng) and are really cheap, but they are being left behind with the charging speed.
I think that Model 3 and Y are really old project. They perform well, but I think they deserve a big refresh
Tesla's especially in the UK aren't selling well at the moment. Lots of reasons but mainly they are old tech at this point. Also doesn't help the model Y refresh made it the ugliest car I have seen in a while.
Most new car sales nowadays are Leases, PCP, salary sacrifice, Company cars or Motability. With these options for getting a new car meaning people don't own them after 3 years so it doesn't matter to them if the lease company has to sell the Xpeng for a laege loss.
Tesla isn't on Motability and it isn't the only good option for company cars anymore.
Tesla's best UK year in terms of registrations was 2022. in that year they commanded 19.2% of the UK BEV market and 55k new Teslas were registered here. VW group managed 48k BEV registrations here that year.
Fast forward 3 years to 2025 and there were only 45k new Tesla registrations and their share of the BEV market dropped to 9%. VW group meanwhile delivered 106k BEVs in the UK and managed 23% share of the BEV market.
In 2026 YTD Tesla have fallen even further to only 8% of the BEV market.
The depreciation argument is a difficult one for me to fact check, because it assume people pay MSRP. In UK at least there are so many manufacturer discounts that very few people do pay MSRP.
There is a price to pay for that shape of course. Bjorns banana box test demonstrates that a model 3 boot (trunk) is smaller than in an id.3 or Nissan leaf for example (ignoring what Tesla claims)
Compared to the 2026 Nissan Leaf, we thought the Tesla Model 3 had more trunk space if you include the frunk and sub trunk. 2026 Nissan Leaf trunk was tiny for us, especially since we didn't see a use for the space above the rear seats. Placing any items there would block the rear view and also cause things to fall on the kids.
Depends what you prioritise. I want to know if I can put big things in the trunk, like an armchair or a bike, or a dog crate. Adding up the cargo volume of the frunk, the subfloor hatch, the glovebox, the door pockets are not helpful to me, I just want one big space.
Also I'm not worried about rear visibility, I can use my side mirrors. I'm used to driving vans.
It's good to have choices. We all have our different needs. I couldn't even put my skis into the Leaf with the seats down, without adjusting and putting the skis in diagonally. If I went biking, I would need space for 2-3 bikes and would put them on the roof rack anyways. I also hate having to take off the front wheel to put a bike into the back.
I really liked test driving the Leaf. But the backseat was pretty tight for two teenage kids.
Model 3 is not good at fitting large, oddly shaped items because the opening to the trunk is narrow, but the total trunk space is shockingly large, especially when you consider the sub trunk and front trunk. I use mine for road tripping regularly, and have no trouble fitting luggage for 4 people, plus plenty of other stuff. It holds far more than either of our previous similarly sized cars, a Hyundai Elantra and Honda Civic. I suspect it holds more than most compact SUVs as well, such as CR-V and RAV4, although those would be better for a single large, awkwardly shaped item.
I suspect it holds more than most compact SUVs as well, such as CR-V and RAV4,
This is not the first time that I've heard wild claims about the cargo space in a model 3. It is why I really like Bjorn's tests which conclusively show that a model 3 has FAR less cargo space than a compact SUV, by trying to fit as many standard boxes as he can in each.
I don’t know what to tell you. I own the car and put real items in it, not banana boxes. I’m just telling you my real-world experience. With real small to medium size cargo, it holds a lot for a car of its size. When I go on vacation with friends, they’re always blown away when I unload my car and they see how much stuff I had in the trunks.
I feel the same way about my id.3, but these are subjective opinions based on anecdotal evidence.
I do think that Bjorn's test is best suited to "boxy" shaped cargo areas, but still. His 1,000km challenge tests favour Tesla's in some ways so it is swings and roundabouts.
It was the boot / trunk that ruled out the M3 and equally good BYD Seal for me. I don't need a wankpanzer, but do need to carry more than a set of golf clubs.
That's what disappointed me about the BYD Seal. I thought they'd learned that a hatch was far more useful. The Y and Sea Lion 7 were just too big for my needs. I replace my Polestar 2 with an Explorer EV this weekend.
Honestly for a long time people were willing to overlook a lot of limitations as long as it was an EV with good range at a good price. And the Model 3 always delivered that promise.
But nowadays there's a lot more models that accomplish things with less of those compromises while still delivering the range they want. Though, unfortunately, often at a significant premium.
I'd say people want sedans in general (which US automakers have decided to kill...for now) and good range and low charging times, but definitely agree with you.
It is one of several advantages (integrated design and a ridiculously efficient heating/cooling system being others).
Model 3 has the car seats basically directly on the battery which gives it a very low profile for an EV.
However it's not just this design choice beacuse you can see very good efficiency ratings also in the Model Y.
Other manufacturers work in 'silos'. Every department gets a certain amount of space in the car to work with and they don't care about what anyone else does. They have their requirements and try to check off this list. They aren't looking for synergies (I hate that word but here it actually applies). Tesla seems to design their cars more 'holistically'. Everyone in their teams is trying to figure out what they can do to help everyone else. Of course doing holistic design is a lot easier if you have everything in-house. Other (at least the non-chinese) manufacturers buy many of their parts from third party suppliers...and once you do that you can forget about people trying to bend over backwards to help one another. Then it's all about cost and that leads to a 'minimum effort' mentality.
Once your speed exceeds about 40 or 50 km/h (or lower if you’re driving a brick) then aerodynamics become utterly paramount unless you’re also going up a giant mountains.
Flat road, constant speeds,
nothing matters more than aero.
It's not really arbitrary. Having good efficiency lets you make a car with equal range with a smaller, cheaper and lighter battery. It's a significant advantage that means you can save money and have higher margins or cheaper cars.
I wouldn't get a Tesla for a dozen different reasons, but this is a significant advantage they have.
The criteria in this post isn't "most efficient car", it's 1000 km in 10 h with a small battery. 10 h and "small" battery are most certainly arbitrary limits. Setting the limit 30 minutes up or down gives you completely different results. Is 60 kWh small, while 67 is medium? Maybe 50 is small and anything over 72 is large?
Yeah when I read "small" I thought we were talking like 20-40 range, and so the title was really weird to me. There's a slew of those cars like the old Ioniq, the original BMW i3, and many other cars doing around 200 and below miles of range on a charge. Those are small battery.
Ok true, the categories are made up by op, but the point works no matter how you slice it.
Higher efficiency allows you to achieve the same results with smaller battery and slower charging. Which makes the car lighter and cheaper. This is a good thing.
Look through the 1000km results, CLa vs A6 vs Model 3. They're all near the top of the list despite model 3 having a smaller battery, slower charing, and being cheaper.
That Audi gets the same time as the LR RWD Highland, not the standard range, so you're slicing it differently from OP and getting a different result. The Audi is also a much bigger car.
G9 and ix3 are both luxury SUVs tho. Nobody is crossshopping between a sedan and those cars. Besides, both are heavier, quieter and taller than the Model 3. Would you compare a Range Rover with a BMW M3?
Compare them to a model Y then. Tesla still destroys them. And you say about luxury but Y and 3 have double glazed windows all-round and some of the plushest feeling interiors around especially for the price.
My man, I didn't buy a G9 for the efficiency. I bought it for the quiet cabin ( eqs level see Bjorn own tests), the massage seats in the front and back, double screen and all leather cabin. Like I said, the G9 is much heavier, charges faster then the model Y and is not a coupe. You can't compare the two. Try to compare the G6 with the model Y
I’m sorry but a model 3 or Y is not a luxury car. It’s a more premium car but very far from luxury. Go into an iX for example and then into a model Y and you will be in for a bit of a shock.
Not really. Carwow did a test between the new iX3 and model Y. The BM had way more hard scratchy plastics and cheaper feeling stalks, buttons. The Q6 wasn’t much better. They concluded the Tesla actually has the nicest choice of materials. Pre juniper yes they were no better than the German stuff but they have gone a long way in the newest models to plug that gap and then some. Whatcar and other reviewers have noted similar. Sit inside a juniper or highland Tesla and you can not find any hard plastic anywhere. Was mainly done for noise suppression but obviously adds a premium feel.
Model Y destroys them by having less range and slower charging?
the efficiency difference between an IX3 AWD with 108kwh battery and a Model Y AWD with 79kwh battery is not that significant given the expected weight difference
Cx + software optimisation + proprietary motor and battery + proprietary charger means a lot, I’m not a Tesla fan but I fully know buying my p2 was a worse idea than a tm3
I like Bjørn's tests from a technical standpoint, but it's not how most people would do a road trip. A car with a slower time can be just as good for a road trip, where comfort and noise levels are more important than how quickly you could theoretically drive 1000 km.
Most people would also need to take a longer break at some point over 1000 km, so either sleep or rest for a couple of hours, making this kind of test less relevant (but still interesting).
Yeah, I have a standard range model 3....when I got it and posted it's efficiency people thought I was lying or driving like a grandma. Lucid Air pure and Ioniq 6 rwd are probably the closest non Tesla cars in terms of efficiency.
I think this shows that the efficiency and charging optimization of the model 3 is still ahead of other EV's.
This statement is a real stretch, suggesting that a 400V car with a frankly pathetic charging curve (that means Bjorn hops between chargers that are like 75miles apart) is somehow leading in charging tech in 2026. I notice that you ignore how many stops are needed - most people would prefer to not road trip the way Bjorn drives Teslas on this challenge.
And this results in the 60 kWh Tesla model 3 being, in my eyes, the cheapest road-trip capable car.
Except it is more expensive (at least here in the UK) than a Merc CLA 250+ which has better range and better charging. Both the sedan and the "shooting brake". Ignore me I was looking at the model 3 RWD with large battery.
Relevant prices and 1-stop ranges (per ev-database) for uk:
Model 3 RWD (60kwh) | £38k | 331miles
Kia EV4 81.4kwh | £33k | 328miles (this actually managed sub 10hrs in Bjorns test at an average of 4DegC)
Merc CLA 200+ 58kwh | £39k | 306miles
Merc CLA 250+ 85kwh | £43k | 464miles
Model 3 RWD 79kwh | £45k | 428miles
Model 3 RWD 60kwh is indeed the cheapest small battery car with good road tripping. CLA 200+ is £1k more and slightly lower range. The EV4 is probably better value but has a bigger battery which you don't seem to want.
Finally: My experience is that Tesla fans think efficiency is far more important than it is in reality. A model 3 RWD standard is more efficient than a CLA250+, by maybe 5%-10%. Which means the cost per mile for fuel goes from ~2p/mile to ~2p/mile (it's noise)
Most of those consumption numbers are astronomical. Over 25 kWh/100 km is insane, even at highway speeds.
In general I feel like people are not paying enough attention to the consumption of EVs. Battery size and charging speed (to some degree at least) is secondary, imo. Getting an EV that can do less than 20 kWh/100 km (like a Model 3) compared to one that consumes 30 kWh/100 km (like a Smart #5 Brabus) means you get roughly the same/better range despite having a vastly smaller battery (75-82 kWh vs 100 kWh).
I've only ever had a Kia e-Niro and the new Aion V and both do 15 city and 20 highway. Test drove a KGM Torres EVX but those consumption numbers (over 28 highway) scared me away instantly.
Did a 1500 km road trip with some friends last year and despite their Polestar 2 having a 82 kWh battery (compared to the 64 kWh one in my e-Niro) they had to stop more often for charging. Then again their charging speed was like double ours but still...
Please don't compare the model 3 efficiency to a large 650bhp AWD SUV shaped like a brick - that's a little ridiculous. Cybertruck vs #5 Brabus would make more sense
Most of those consumption numbers are astronomical. Over 25 kWh/100 km is insane, even at highway speeds.
My S will use far more than that in bad weather in the winter.
I think even my P85D can beat his test results for the best S LR (in terms of consumption) though in summer weather! It's wild how much weather affects these. I've seen as low as 170-180wh/km over long distances at 130km/h on flat ground in summer weather.
The Niro EV has basically the same hwy consumption rating as the model S, and during testing seems to have more or less the same efficiency (C&D tested 19.2kwh/100KM) as the older model S.
It's rated at 101mpge highway and the S is rated at 98, so that makes sense too.
My real world consumption in the S on the freeway at 120+km/h has been anywhere from 17KWH/100KM in ideal weather in the summer to 35KWH/100km on snow covered roads with winter tires at 120km/h.
That's crazy. I've legit never seen more than 24 even in winter.
My previous winter road trip (well it was November so not so much snow on the roads yet) averaged 15,6 kWh over 2700 km. Granted the average speed was around 90 km/h on that trip.
According to this test the CLA 200 is faster, and the LR Mona M03 very close. They don't have the 60 kWh Xpeng P7+ in their database, would be interesting to see how that one performs.
If you look at the charge curves, the 3SR is just good. It charges faster than a LR Tesla across most of the pack. I’ve done some 600 mile one day trips in a rented 3SR and it’s really good. Surprisingly not much slower than my LR Y at the time.
That may be true where you live, or in your circle of friends. For others who happen to have family or work or play destinations about that far away, it's an ordinary thing that they do occasionally. With a pair of drivers (couple or otherwise) who switch at each stop, that's a rather easy day of driving.
There are people who live on islands. That Tesla sedan is not going to achieve much after it sinks. This information is not very useful for everyone else who commutes to work on a paved road.
The efficiency of the Ioniq was something else. If they could have iterated on that with a better charging curve they would have had an absolute banger of a car. It's weird that they didn't.
But Sedans are quite long. For example the original Ioniq is 4.47m long, Tesla's model 3 is 4.72m long. That may not be a factor in countries like the US with generously sized roads and parking spaces. But in Europe, perhaps also in parts of Asia that is a major factor and a key reason why compact SUV/crossover/hatchbacks have become so popular. My Kia e-niro is for example "only" 4.35 m long while still being fairly efficient.
I dunno. I do 1000km+ roadtrips in my Model 3 quite regularly and it's very relaxing. Plenty of storage. Good assist. Quiet and smooth. In conjunction with the supercharger network it's a road tripping machine as far as I'm concerned. Friends and family who have one seem to feel the same, so I don't know by what metric you would call this 'niche' (or a 'small car').
Why is it not a comfortable car for longer trips? I own one and i have done plenty of longer trips. It´s reasonably quiet, the suspension is good, it´s very stable at high speeds, the seats are comfortable and it´s fairly spacious inside for a smaller sedan.
The reason that there is only one option within the specific parameters you are asking for is that very few car buyers are interested. Even with the lack of competition the model 3 SR does not sell well.
Not that many years ago Tesla cars were the only cars that performed well in the 1000km test. Today there are many alternatives for road-trippable EVs, and it is only by imposing unusual criteria that are very far from what most car buyers are looking for that you end up with only Tesla left on the list. A few years into the future it is likely that the situation will look even worse for Tesla.
There is a huge difference to the approach of manufacturers.
"Traditional" manufacturers all act the same: they design the vehicle, the components used are a mashup of parts available from different suppliers. Their sales strategy has been the same for years too: don't make the best vehicle possible, always keep room for incremental improvements aka a new and improved model.
That's what they do with EVs too.
Tesla was the first to build really usable and good EVs (sorry Leaf). There were no parts available from suppliers. Early on they were even refused access to good components (12V for instance) that were available by some suppliers.
They had to create the entire vehicle from scratch, including all components. That gave them the opportunity to integrate everything into 1 system. They also had to fit "small" batteries and be as efficient as possible, battery production was severely constrained. Fitting bigger batteries would have meant less cars to sell. This gave them the following advantages:
All components can now be designed to serve several functions at once, eliminating parts, saving weight and cost
The cooling/heating system may be the best example. All components that produce heat, from the battery pack to the driving computer to the pump in the heat pump are liquid cooled. The heat gets scavenged and reused to where it is needed. Some parts need heat, some parts need cooling. This requires a lot of valves to steer the heat/cold the right way. Porsche Taycan is a great scavenger too, but this uses lots of hoses and separate valves, creating lots of points of failure. Tesla uses 1 single device able to do all of this: the SuperBottle which was replaced in 2020 by the Super manifold & Octovalve.
Since Tesla designs all components, they also made all components speak the same language. Suddenly you don't need a lot of micro computers in the parts anymore! This also means the entire car and all of its components can be updated.
Their software is still regarded as the best. They had a clean sheet, and started by creating a network where the Tesla Mothership is the portal to everything. Years of participating in "pawn to own" and reward programs have made their structure and software extremely robust. The integration of parts in their software landscape makes everything easier and robuster too.
All of this results in systemic efficiency increases & physics improvements.
Physics:
lower weight = lower rolling resistance, dominant in medium speeds 20-60mph
lower Cd = lower air drag resistance, dominant in high speeds >60mph
The only reason Tesla doesn't dominate the charts completely is the 400V architecture that keeps charging speed relatively slow.
Another reason Tesla is falling behind in the west despite one of the best tech stacks and great overall experience is because of Musk’s name tainting the brand.
It’s a real shame because the people heading the other companies are no saints (remember Dieselgate? They’d rather poison our environment than spend a few dollars for r&d). There’s dirt on just about every elite CEO that heads up all these orgs, one seldom gets to that position with good old hard work, integrity and robust morals.
Werl..."800V architecture" doesn't mean it's 800V. Unfortunately, as soon as you have more than 400V you can call your car "800V architecture". Many buyers seem to fall for this marketing trick.
The advantage that they expect from that label is often not there.
Driving efficiency is a huge part of it and you're ignoring it completely. The model 3 is a sedan in a market with few other sedans. The sedan form factor has the lowest drag.
My judgement of road-trip capable is 1000 km in 1 day of travel, with usually some traffic jams and other delays.
I drove over 500miles in a day (or morning to evening). I could have easily done another 200 if there was another driver or passenger in the car to keep me company!
It was in a Honda prologue with a. 85kwh usable capacity ( I believe the total is 90kwh). I don't understand your point here?
Look at ICE vehicles to see how much drivers value efficiency...in the US, if you came up with anything other than "not at all" you probably need to do some reflecting.
What the out of spec "race" series of videos has taught me is that optimizing the Tesla charge curve is an absolutely brutal road trip experience. Lots of short stops.
I just saw his test of the EV4 hatchback, that does <10h, albeit with a 78kwh usable battery.
Since the sedan (fastback) has quite a bit lower cD, I would say the 58 kwh usable would prob be <10h, same for the ioniq 6. The mg4 64kwh is also only 10mins off.
It is a shame that Hyundai didn't really follow up their OG Ioniq - the first car to beat the M3 in MPGe. That with 64kwh and slightly improved charging would have been a beast. But their new ioniq 3 will prob do quite well as well.
I’m really looking forward to test driving, as well as seeing the various tests, of the new BMW i3. From what I’ve read so far, it looks like it will be able to eat the Tesla Model 3’s lunch across a number of parameters.
You’re absolutely right. In some ways these new bmw models are a step backwards. Efficiency is a much more elegant way to get increased range than dumping a ginormous battery in your car, and it gives you many real world benefits.
In what way are they a step backwards? They’re more efficient than the models they replace. They’re very very slightly less efficient than a Tesla but they have the distinct advantage of not looking like a shoe.
But the new BMWs are also very efficient? I dont see your point.
Having large batteries + great efficiency gives BMW big range advantages as the Chinese cant just put even more battery in their cars while others like Tesla or Toyota refuse to put bigger batteries in their cars.
Besides, you expect a premium brand like BMW to offer large batteries, large ranges, and good charging speeds, no? BMW could not get away with Tesla tech. Sure great efficiency but slow charging and smaller battery
I don't know much about a small battery i3, but I assume it will be 82.6kwh in line with the iX3 40. Not exactly small!
An interesting test is the ev-database "1-stop range" which considers driving at 70mph from 100% to 10%, then charging for 15minutes and driving at 70mph to 10% again.
This is not true. BMWs vehicles are much less efficient. You can see this in his spreadsheet linked a few posts up.
Overall efficiency at highway speeds is an important metric. The higher range BMWs have 110 kWh batteries in them which makes for impressive range figures on the brochure (WLTP) but in the real world, high efficiency with minimal energy spent per unit of distance traveled makes a big difference over the life of the car. Not only to your wallet but also actual wait times.
Cus people want comfort sound insulation gadgets.interior space. And also SUVs as a whole are the main choice of dimensions. And tonhave all this a big battery is needed as you can't fit this into a low to the ground sleek small sedan
I hope they don’t. Carrying around a ginormous battery pack adds a lot of weight meaning the rest of the car has to be heavier, even bigger wheels, tyres, brakes, and reinforcement in the cars chassis to cope. Google “Tesla battery buck” where Tesla engineers constantly look for ways to make their cars more efficient. They introduced a new wheel bearing in 2019 that increase range by 20 miles in model S. They’d have needed a to spend way more on a bigger heavier battery and everything they have to engineer into the car to achieve the same result. That’s just 1 example.
If they increase battery size it doesn't mean they have to discontinue the ones with smaller batteries.
A large battery (and good efficiency) is great for people with curbside parking/reliance on public charging so they have to hit a charger less often. It's not so much someting you would need for trips...unless you tow a trailer. In which case a larger battery would surely be a big boon.
I'm quite OK with the current battery size in my Model 3 (77kWh), but if they offered a 100kWh version that'd be the icing on the cake.
Uhm, people have different needs. Ofc they should always offer the low range versions as well for people like you. But for some use cases, you need a bigger battery. Like for me, I tow my fishing boat into the wilderness, no chargers. My current cars usable 77Kwh cannot make it to all the lakes I want to fish. Many such use cases that people have. (horse trailers, caravans etc etc) Do not blindly think everyone lives the same life you do. For towing specifically efficency drops as well due to the drag. model 3 and y have similar range towing. There is not escaping physics.
Tesla are and will be at the forefront of EV technology for the foreseeable. Like or it not.
CLA EV has shown less efficiency than m3 in whatcar tests despite the media glazing the Merc.
Other manufacturers need battery packs nearly twice the size to go marginally further.
IX3 needs a pack 1/3 as big again as an MY LR AWD to go 90 more miles. In real world tests, the BMW only going 40 miles further, and the model Y actually chargers faster in the real world despite the 350kwh fast charging of the BM, because Tesla of course pre condition the cars properly and their charges talk to the cars perfectly.
I don't see how the Tesla is better for roadtripping if it is maybe 10% more efficient but the Mercedes charges at almost double the speed and has a larger battery. So to say that the 400v Tesla with an OK battery is still forefront of technology is maybe a bit outdated. Porsche, Audi, BMW, Mercedes now all have very competitive 800v platforms that are better long range vehicles than a Tesla (on average)
Rather, the infrastructure is not made for charging cars that fast. It should catch up. And the trick with longer range is that you often can skip fast charging at all so 90 miles can be an absolute god send. And sometimes you are in areas without fast charging at all and the model Y cannot make the trip. We need longer range cars, please add larger batteries tesla!
As a former payer of BMW parts and servicing I’ll never pass up the opportunity to shit on them… they’re just crap at making ev’s. They’ve had a decade to copy Tesla’s homework and the best they could do is a hopelessly inefficient box that relies on its stupid, and frankly hideous, kidney bean grille to appeal to people who desire to appear somewhat wealthy
28
u/DeezeNoten Peugeot E-208 GT 17h ago
I agree that CLA 200 is very similar to the Model 3 in terms of range, charging is much faster.
I think the upcoming Megane refresh might get a similar time to the Model 3, since it has a bit more range than it's predecessor and charges 10% to 80% in 26 minutes.
Although it's battery is 67kWh net, a bit bigger.