Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[enaef]

I need to ask a somehow dumb question ...

The 'Range' (Estimated Range) the display of the SR/F gives, is the estimated range of

a) a fully charged battery (SoC 95%) ?

b) the SoC as it is displayed at the moment ?

I thought it would be b).

But today I started a ride with a fully charged battery (95%) - I did not check the displayed range at that moment.
When I came home after 47 miles (75 km) the displayed range was 162 miles (261 km) at a SoC of 71%.

I rode most of the time 30 to 35 mph, sometimes 38 to 45 mph. Ambient temperature 60 - 72 F, some wind, not too much. Much of it flat but also some elevation and even a small pass.

162 miles with an SoC of 71% seems too much, so I guess it is a)  ?

[TheRan]

It would be option b), option a) wouldn't be as useful as you'd need to divide it by the percentage of charge remaining and it wouldn't account for any changes in energy usage.

With 162 miles estimated at 71% your 100% range would be 228 miles which definitely doesn't seem accurate considering Zero specs the SR/F with a power tank as having a 200 mile city range (so mainly around 30mph and below).

[KuRi]

And the range is calculated based on your past rides too. Some weeks I do a lot of Highway travels and then the next full charge shows me a 110km estimated range xDD

If I do some urban ride I get 160 or 180 km of estimated range at full charges... DSR here BTW

[Crissa]

It assumes you're going to have the same per-mile wattage consumption as you had in the last ride.  It's just like the gas car estimated range... If you driver really efficiently you'll get crazy-high expected range.

-Crissa

[enaef]

If you driver really efficiently you'll get crazy-high expected range.

Seems I drive quite efficiently  . Well, as stated elsewhere - always in ECO so far.
Quite slowly and may be I learn to drive more and more efficient also as I learn to ride the bike.

[Crissa]

Well, yeah, when I go up the hill, it thinks my range is nothing, but I go back down the hill it suddenly things my range is super.  This is pretty much a consistent problem across ICE, EV, range estimations ;

I tend to check my Wh/mi more than anything.  My typical trips are ar 40-60; as my confidence creeps up, so to does my energy consumption.  Going over the hill I end up with 80-90 Wh/mi (including back down) so my total trip will end up somewhere near 75 Wh/mi.

-Crissa

[Richard230]

My BMW F650GS shows a mileage figure of 200 mpg when coasting downhill.   

[DonTom]

My BMW F650GS shows a mileage figure of 200 mpg when coasting downhill.   

I have many bikes that show range. I find such a reading to be very deceiving and  100% useless.

Start out going down hill with the wind pushing you and go far enough that the miles say you can barely get back. You have no chance of making it back, as then you have to go uphill into the wind.

I find the best way is the old way. Just leave the trip odometer on and figure out the rest in your head. You know if you're going down hill and will take a lot more range to get back. The bike doesn't know that. It assumes both ways will be downhill and then will leave you calling for a tow truck to get back.

-Don-  Auburn, CA

[Crissa]

That's why momentary energy consumption is useful, but estimating range off of it isn't.

Now if only A Better Route Planner allowed a bike template...

-Crissa

[TheRan]

Neither is really all that useful if conditions (mainly speed and elevation changes) will vary, particularly if they're unknown.

However, the calculations that Zero makes to estimate range seems to be more complex than just taking the momentary energy consumption per mile and multiplying it by the energy left in the battery, or at least it seems that way. I don't think anyone outside of Zero knows exactly how they do it.

[Crissa]

It's probably a running tally weighted towards newer miles or trips.  That's pretty standard.

But knowing the momentary energy cost is how you know if the hill or speed is costing you.  I love seeing the difference of different gears, weight, and weather conditions have on my Mazda's performance.  The measurements of my Zero are much more difficult, as the consumption can swing wildly more.

Which is probably why the range estimation never really works.  I never really get 500+ miles out of a tank in my Mazda, but if I've been good, that's what it thinks it'll last.  But the variance of an electric motorcycle is much more than ±20%.

-Crissa

[DonTom]

However, the calculations that Zero makes to estimate range seems to be more complex than just taking the momentary energy consumption per mile and multiplying it by the energy left in the battery, or at least it seems that way. I don't think anyone outside of Zero knows exactly how they do it.

When I was in Cottonwood, AZ several years ago, I stayed there quite a while and I was riding my Zero DS 6.5 every day in the town, which had a 15 mph speed limit. My range was saying I had 120 miles left on that 6.5 KWH battery even after I rode the bike around 15 miles. I doubt the thing would get me 135 miles on a 6.5 KWH battery. But if I stayed at less than 20 MPH, it probably really would. But how far do you think I could go on the freeway then? I then had  an 85 SOC left. I think the SOC tells a lot more than the range left does. And we hear stories all the time here about how unreliable the SOC indication is.

Now that was a Zero DS, not a SR/F.

But I don't see how any bike can determine range left accurately unless conditions don't change at all.

-Don-

[remmie]

That's why momentary energy consumption is useful, but estimating range off of it isn't.

Now if only A Better Route Planner allowed a bike template...

-Crissa

It does now! You can select several zero’s as your vehicle (7.2 / 12.5 / 13.3 / 14.4 / with or without powertank

[Hans2183]

Indeed, good find. That's awesome

[Crissa]

Geez, now A Better Route Planner is just crashing on iOS.

Well, at least it let me choose a bike!

-Crissa