Why does Hyundai have a better MPGe?

BMW i3 Forum

Help Support BMW i3 Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

gt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
425
Location
Baltimore
BMW i3 vs Hyndai Ioniq EV:
MPG (Combined) 119 137
City MPG 129 150
Highway MPG 106 122
Engine 170-hp, (electric) 118-hp, (electric)
Transmission 1-speed automatic 1-speed automatic
Drivetrain RWD FWD
Seats 4 5
Length 158.3 " 176.0 "
Curb Weight 2,961 lbs. 3,164 lbs.
Tire width 155-175 205

Despite i3 being smaller, lighter and with narrow tires, it somehow eats more electrons that the Ioniq. BMW has a stronger motor, but does it make it less efficient? I think the electric motors unlike ICEs have similar losses across the powerband.
Another observation- that advanced carbon fiber body doesn't seem to save much weight.
 
gt1 said:
Despite i3 being smaller, lighter and with narrow tires, it somehow eats more electrons that the Ioniq. BMW has a stronger motor, but does it make it less efficient?

The i3 was designed ~4 years earlier than the Ioniq EV. There have almost certainly been efficiency improvements in motors and motor control electronics during that period.

The Ioniq EV likely has lower aerodynamic drag as well.

gt1 said:
Another observation- that advanced carbon fiber body doesn't seem to save much weight.
I have been surprised by the variations in i3 weight reported in various sources. On the BMW USA Website, our 2014 BEV's weight was originally listed as 2,634 lb. I'm guessing that this weight is of the most basic i3 with no options, an i3 that was not sold in the U.S. i3 BEV weights in subsequent models have jumped considerably, partially due to items that were formerly optional but are now standard (e.g., DCFC, heated seats and battery pack), and possibly because they now include the weight of a standard driver, 165 lb. The 94 Ah battery pack adds maybe 110 lb. over the 60 Ah version.

We don't know what the Ioniq EV's listed weight includes, so I think it is difficult to say that the i3's CFRP/aluminum/thermoplastic construction didn't save much weight over the typical all steel construction.
 
It's my understanding that the listed weight will vary based on the country, not so much because of various equipment, but in Europe, the weight is with a driver while in the USA, it is not. Plus, the US tends to get a higher complement of 'standard' equipment than many other places.

If you want an idea of CFRP weight savings, compare it to say a Nissan Leaf...the differences are significant. The addition of the REx, with the motor, muffler, gas tank and heavier springs, narrows that difference, but the Leaf doesn't have that option. The current Nissan Leaf model S has a list weight of 3433#.
 
The listed weight requirements very between the countries, I'm actually not sure how strict they are in US. Fun fact- motorcyclists are more weight aware and OEMs go to great lengths to get to the lowest dry weight- it excludes engine oil and coolant, fork oil and even battery electrolyte.
I think that electric motors have always been very efficient, not much to gain there. Although I may be wrong, I heard Tesla made some progress with the motors. The model 3 MPGe also looks impressive, especially considering its weight.
The LEAF weight seems to be in line with its size.
https://screenshots.firefox.com/BujDEoANSgfDDQb9/www.edmunds.com
 
Yes.
Electronics can have different efficiency.
My latest solar inverter works at 99% efficiency from DC to AC . upto 10KWH models need no active cooling.
Previous gen was listed as 97%


My understanding is the car inverts have lot of scope to improve and hyundai and tesla have done a good job in electronics.
 
My bet would be that IONIQ doesn't have better efficiency compared to BMW i3 in the real world, at least at lower speeds, before the IONIQ's superior drag kicks in.

According to this test https://pushevs.com/2018/07/29/range-efficiency-test-of-10-electric-cars/, IONIQ was able to complete 199 and 224 km on full charge with about 5-8 km remaining. This translates into 8.3-7.4 km/kWh (5.1-4.6 m/kWh) efficiency range including the 8 km reserve. These numbers exceed the official EPA rating for the car (7.14 km/kWh or 4.44 m/kWh), which is quite plausible.

Now, BMW i3 here, having 0.7 kWh smaller available capacity (27.3 vs 28 kWh), managed to get 225 and 237 km in the same very test. The results, even not accounting for the 30 km "reserve", mean that i3's efficiency was 8.7-8.2 km/kWh (5.4-5.1 m/kWh).

These numbers are very realistic based on my experience. My summer average was 8.64 km/kWh or 5.4 m/kWh, 6.2K km covered, average temperature being 23C or 73F.

As to the BMW i3 EPA rating - I'm approaching the EPA-based efficiency (6.9 km/kWh or 4.3 m/kWh) only now in the end of October. My current efficiency under about 5C / 40F ambient temperature with climate set at 19C / 66F is about 7.4-7.1 km/kWh (4.6-4.4 m/kWh). So the EPA numbers are easily beatable in the real world for i3, and I don't know whether this is the case for IONIQ, have no hands-on experience with it (IONIQ forum participants do report impressive results though, see here http://myioniq.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=73#p495).

My hypothesis would be that not all EPA ratings are created equal. Manufacturers do their own testing according to the protocol, only some tests are verified (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml). Knowing how differently the rated MPG results vary from the real world ones in the ICE world, I wouldn't be surprised that Hyundai were more successful in their IONIQ rating compared to BMW with i3.
 
If you search the internet , many people have confined that the iconic is super efficient. In fact the new Kona , is not super aerodynamic, its tall , but is still super efficient. So its not just the aerodynamics. As said, BMW i3 is becoming 5-6 year old design, with no enhancements. The new systems have hi efficiency electronic and 1 integrated AC/DC inverter iterated within motor itself. Lot of weight savings too , no more heavy cables going back and forth and less losses. i3 has independent components.

Technology keeps changing , and we are in a area of continuous improvements.
Older models can be got in discount , while new ones are in short supply.

Oleksiy said:
My bet would be that IONIQ doesn't have better efficiency compared to BMW i3 in the real world, at least at lower speeds, before the IONIQ's superior drag kicks in.

According to this test https://pushevs.com/2018/07/29/range-efficiency-test-of-10-electric-cars/, IONIQ was able to complete 199 and 224 km on full charge with about 5-8 km remaining. This translates into 8.3-7.4 km/kWh (5.1-4.6 m/kWh) efficiency range including the 8 km reserve. These numbers exceed the official EPA rating for the car (7.14 km/kWh or 4.44 m/kWh), which is quite plausible.

Now, BMW i3 here, having 0.7 kWh smaller available capacity (27.3 vs 28 kWh), managed to get 225 and 237 km in the same very test. The results, even not accounting for the 30 km "reserve", mean that i3's efficiency was 8.7-8.2 km/kWh (5.4-5.1 m/kWh).

These numbers are very realistic based on my experience. My summer average was 8.64 km/kWh or 5.4 m/kWh, 6.2K km covered, average temperature being 23C or 73F.

As to the BMW i3 EPA rating - I'm approaching the EPA-based efficiency (6.9 km/kWh or 4.3 m/kWh) only now in the end of October. My current efficiency under about 5C / 40F ambient temperature with climate set at 19C / 66F is about 7.4-7.1 km/kWh (4.6-4.4 m/kWh). So the EPA numbers are easily beatable in the real world for i3, and I don't know whether this is the case for IONIQ, have no hands-on experience with it (IONIQ forum participants do report impressive results though, see here http://myioniq.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=73#p495).

My hypothesis would be that not all EPA ratings are created equal. Manufacturers do their own testing according to the protocol, only some tests are verified (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml). Knowing how differently the rated MPG results vary from the real world ones in the ICE world, I wouldn't be surprised that Hyundai were more successful in their IONIQ rating compared to BMW with i3.
 
https://pushevs.com/2016/12/04/bmw-i3-vs-nissan-leaf-vs-hyundai-ioniq-electric/

EVMan said:
If you search the internet , many people have confined that the iconic is super efficient. In fact the new Kona , is not super aerodynamic, its tall , but is still super efficient. So its not just the aerodynamics. As said, BMW i3 is becoming 5-6 year old design, with no enhancements. The new systems have hi efficiency electronic and 1 integrated AC/DC inverter iterated within motor itself. Lot of weight savings too , no more heavy cables going back and forth and less losses. i3 has independent components.

Technology keeps changing , and we are in a area of continuous improvements.
Older models can be got in discount , while new ones are in short supply.

Oleksiy said:
My bet would be that IONIQ doesn't have better efficiency compared to BMW i3 in the real world, at least at lower speeds, before the IONIQ's superior drag kicks in.

According to this test https://pushevs.com/2018/07/29/range-efficiency-test-of-10-electric-cars/, IONIQ was able to complete 199 and 224 km on full charge with about 5-8 km remaining. This translates into 8.3-7.4 km/kWh (5.1-4.6 m/kWh) efficiency range including the 8 km reserve. These numbers exceed the official EPA rating for the car (7.14 km/kWh or 4.44 m/kWh), which is quite plausible.

Now, BMW i3 here, having 0.7 kWh smaller available capacity (27.3 vs 28 kWh), managed to get 225 and 237 km in the same very test. The results, even not accounting for the 30 km "reserve", mean that i3's efficiency was 8.7-8.2 km/kWh (5.4-5.1 m/kWh).

These numbers are very realistic based on my experience. My summer average was 8.64 km/kWh or 5.4 m/kWh, 6.2K km covered, average temperature being 23C or 73F.

As to the BMW i3 EPA rating - I'm approaching the EPA-based efficiency (6.9 km/kWh or 4.3 m/kWh) only now in the end of October. My current efficiency under about 5C / 40F ambient temperature with climate set at 19C / 66F is about 7.4-7.1 km/kWh (4.6-4.4 m/kWh). So the EPA numbers are easily beatable in the real world for i3, and I don't know whether this is the case for IONIQ, have no hands-on experience with it (IONIQ forum participants do report impressive results though, see here http://myioniq.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=73#p495).

My hypothesis would be that not all EPA ratings are created equal. Manufacturers do their own testing according to the protocol, only some tests are verified (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml). Knowing how differently the rated MPG results vary from the real world ones in the ICE world, I wouldn't be surprised that Hyundai were more successful in their IONIQ rating compared to BMW with i3.
 
EVMan said:
If you search the internet , many people have confined that the iconic is super efficient. In fact the new Kona , is not super aerodynamic, its tall , but is still super efficient.
I did paste the link to IONIQ forum confirming just that. And I also mentioned that from my personal experience my i3 is super efficient as well, my averages confirm this, and I’ve never tried to hypermile, just drove it as my ICE car. Granted, I don’t push my i3 hard as some other owners do. That’s just because it doesn’t make sense - i3 is too sluggish compared to my usual summer driver, Yamaha Fazer anyways.

As to IONIQ - all people are hypermiling driving them, there’s just no other option - it’s as brisk as a turtle.

I don’t really buy the idea that advancements in inverters and other electronics give such and edge to IONIQ or Kona, otherwise Hyundai know something Jaguar, Audi and Mercedes don’t. Highly doubt that.
 
@Oleksiy, your consumption numbers are quite incredible. I'm a conservative driver and my average for a 2015 REX is 4.2m/kwh. The terrain here is similar to Kiev's right bank, probably even less hilly. The average efficiency for all REX fleet shown in the BMW app is 3.8kwh/m. The EPA rating is 117MPGe, which is equivalent to 3.47m/kwh. How do you manage to get 5+ m/kwh?
 
gt1 said:
@Oleksiy, your consumption numbers are quite incredible. I'm a conservative driver and my average for a 2015 REX is 4.2m/kwh. The terrain here is similar to Kiev's right bank, probably even less hilly. The average efficiency for all REX fleet shown in the BMW app is 3.8kwh/m. The EPA rating is 117MPGe, which is equivalent to 3.47m/kwh. How do you manage to get 5+ m/kwh?
Before I routinely started driving with the A/C on, our BEV averaged 5.5 mi/kWh according to the old iRemote app. The current BMW Connected app lists our lifetime average as 5.1 mi/kWh which seems a bit low but might not include earlier driving without the A/C.

However, Honolulu offers ideal EV driving conditions with no temperature extremes, only a few miles of 65 mph freeway speed limits, and not many hills unless one drives across the island.
 
Our 2014 i3 EV has over the time 13kWh/100km

That includes driving up the hill to the house 300m height from the city.
 
alohart said:
gt1 said:
@Oleksiy, your consumption numbers are quite incredible. I'm a conservative driver and my average for a 2015 REX is 4.2m/kwh. The terrain here is similar to Kiev's right bank, probably even less hilly. The average efficiency for all REX fleet shown in the BMW app is 3.8kwh/m. The EPA rating is 117MPGe, which is equivalent to 3.47m/kwh. How do you manage to get 5+ m/kwh?
Before I routinely started driving with the A/C on, our BEV averaged 5.5 mi/kWh according to the old iRemote app. The current BMW Connected app lists our lifetime average as 5.1 mi/kWh which seems a bit low but might not include earlier driving without the A/C.

However, Honolulu offers ideal EV driving conditions with no temperature extremes, only a few miles of 65 mph freeway speed limits, and not many hills unless one drives across the island.
Not bad at all. What is the BEV fleetwide average reported by the app?
I33t said:
Our 2014 i3 EV has over the time 13kWh/100km

That includes driving up the hill to the house 300m height from the city.
This is 4.8m/kWh in Freedom units. I guess you don't use the heat much?
 
gt1 said:
I33t said:
Our 2014 i3 EV has over the time 13kWh/100km

That includes driving up the hill to the house 300m height from the city.
This is 4.8m/kWh in Freedom units. I guess you don't use the heat much?

Guess use less heat and cooling than most others, also don't spend much time at high speed, only a couple of km @ 100kmh per day
 
gt1 said:
What is the BEV fleetwide average reported by the app?
The community consumption rate average is 4.1 mi/kWh. However, that's almost certainly for all i3's in my region (whatever that is) rather than just for BEV's. I don't have much confidence in the reported averages due to frequent BMW server outages which likely have resulted in lost data.
 
gt1 said:
@Oleksiy, your consumption numbers are quite incredible. I'm a conservative driver and my average for a 2015 REX is 4.2m/kwh. The terrain here is similar to Kiev's right bank, probably even less hilly. The average efficiency for all REX fleet shown in the BMW app is 3.8kwh/m. The EPA rating is 117MPGe, which is equivalent to 3.47m/kwh. How do you manage to get 5+ m/kwh?
Your speed may be higher - that's the only explanation I have in case we are comparing efficiency under similar temperature conditions. My average commuting speed is 27-30 mph (half city, heavy traffic, one third highway where I drive about 50-55 mph, and the remainder - steady driving in my village, about 30-35 mph). Also, I have a BEV, and its EPA rated efficiency is 4.31 m/kWh (81 miles divided by 18.8 kWh).

I also noticed that weekend driving is quite different even if my average speed is similar. I usually have about 0.5-0.7 m/kWh lower efficiency during weekends, and I think that's due to quite rare regen opportunities on comparatively free roads. My October average efficiency went down to 4.93 m/kWh under average ambient temperature of 52F.

Getting back to the subject, check out the latest Whatcar range test here https://www.whatcar.com/news/what-car-real-range-which-electric-car-can-go-farthest-in-the-real-world/n18160 and notice how BMW i3 94 Ah managed to beat IONIQ by 4 miles despite a smaller usable battery (27.3 kWh vs. 28 kWh). The efficiency numbers don't make sense to me, but hope they were right at least in the total range driven - you don't need to do much of a calculus to provide this output really. The only explanation I could think of here - their IONIQ had a degraded battery, and they wouldn't know if it. Otherwise my doubts in IONIQ's efficiency supremacy may have been confirmed again.
 
alohart said:
gt1 said:
What is the BEV fleetwide average reported by the app?
The community consumption rate average is 4.1 mi/kWh. However, that's almost certainly for all i3's in my region (whatever that is) rather than just for BEV's. I don't have much confidence in the reported averages due to frequent BMW server outages which likely have resulted in lost data.
Do you think the community rate is regional? I always assumed it is worldwide, although I have nothing to back it up with.
 
gt1 said:
Do you think the community rate is regional? I always assumed it is worldwide, although I have nothing to back it up with.
I recall various i3 owners in different markets comparing these community averages which were not identical. That led me to believe that these averages are regional rather than worldwide, but I have no authoritative knowledge about this.
 
Oleksiy said:
gt1 said:
@Oleksiy, your consumption numbers are quite incredible. I'm a conservative driver and my average for a 2015 REX is 4.2m/kwh. The terrain here is similar to Kiev's right bank, probably even less hilly. The average efficiency for all REX fleet shown in the BMW app is 3.8kwh/m. The EPA rating is 117MPGe, which is equivalent to 3.47m/kwh. How do you manage to get 5+ m/kwh?
Your speed may be higher - that's the only explanation I have in case we are comparing efficiency under similar temperature conditions. My average commuting speed is 27-30 mph (half city, heavy traffic, one third highway where I drive about 50-55 mph, and the remainder - steady driving in my village, about 30-35 mph). Also, I have a BEV, and its EPA rated efficiency is 4.31 m/kWh (81 miles divided by 18.8 kWh).

I also noticed that weekend driving is quite different even if my average speed is similar. I usually have about 0.5-0.7 m/kWh lower efficiency during weekends, and I think that's due to quite rare regen opportunities on comparatively free roads. My October average efficiency went down to 4.93 m/kWh under average ambient temperature of 52F.

Getting back to the subject, check out the latest Whatcar range test here https://www.whatcar.com/news/what-car-real-range-which-electric-car-can-go-farthest-in-the-real-world/n18160 and notice how BMW i3 94 Ah managed to beat IONIQ by 4 miles despite a smaller usable battery (27.3 kWh vs. 28 kWh). The efficiency numbers don't make sense to me, but hope they were right at least in the total range driven - you don't need to do much of a calculus to provide this output really. The only explanation I could think of here - their IONIQ had a degraded battery, and they wouldn't know if it. Otherwise my doubts in IONIQ's efficiency supremacy may have been confirmed again.
Oleksiy, you're right about the speed- the driving distances in US are longer and the roads are faster. It will explain why you're sipping the juice.

So, about the Ioniq. It has a marginally larger battery, but it is a different car. 4 real doors, 5 seats, respectable trunk, normal size trunk. Most importantly- it is heavier, which should have a significant impact on the consumption. The only factor going against i3 is aerodynamics- which can crucial at high speed. I dug up a winter test from Norway https://elbil.no/the-biggest-electric-car-test-in-winter-wonderland-ever/ , and Ioniq is killing i3 even at relatively slow speeds. https://infogram.com/average-consumption-first-test-day-1hxj481kr8v52vg

Do you know what is the story with miles/kWh in the whatcar.com story you linked? 3.1m/kwh and still 121 mile? It means the battery had to deliver 39kwh.
 
gt1 said:
So, about the Ioniq. It has a marginally larger battery, but it is a different car. 4 real doors, 5 seats, respectable trunk, normal size trunk. Most importantly- it is heavier, which should have a significant impact on the consumption. The only factor going against i3 is aerodynamics- which can crucial at high speed. I dug up a winter test from Norway https://elbil.no/the-biggest-electric-car-test-in-winter-wonderland-ever/ , and Ioniq is killing i3 even at relatively slow speeds. https://infogram.com/average-consumption-first-test-day-1hxj481kr8v52vg

Do you know what is the story with miles/kWh in the whatcar.com story you linked? 3.1m/kwh and still 121 mile? It means the battery had to deliver 39kwh.
Indeed, this test shows the edge of IONIQ! And not only, looks like e-Golf does it as well. The performance of i3 was quite impressive for freezing ambient temperature driving, I don't think I'd be able to replicate such an efficiency myself despite my superb summer results.

What is obvious, that the heating efficiency of these cars differs vastly as well. i3 was very efficient for minus 5-8C ambient temperature (23-17F), just 14% short of its EPA rating result (5.78 km/kWh or 3.6 miles/kWh in the test vs. 4.16 miles/kWh EPA efficiency for 94Ah version) - a negligible loss really. But it's beaten badly by IONIQ (95.2% of its EPA efficiency) and especially by e-Golf (98.3% of the EPA efficiency), this is really amazing. Maybe heat pumps and/or resistance heaters in IONIQ and e-Golf are much superior than in i3, or there's something else that comes into play, I don't know.

As to the Whatcar test, I picked up this discrepancy in the FB group thread where I saw the link to the test posted, but someone explained that they measured a full cycle grid to wheels efficiency. This could serve as an explanation, although it differs from my experience - my charging losses are significantly lower even if I take battery preconditioning before departure into account.
 
Back
Top