When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
From your screen shots, your drive less but stop more. You’re basically sit on the car more than you’re driving it.(red light). That makes your consumption looks so bad. Next time when you drive, look at your consumption and you will see it goes up fast when your stop. But when distance increases, it averages out.
There is some truth to this, I guess think of it as how a computer work, if you keep it running 24/7 it takes less energy and wear to maintain that but if you occasionally turn it on and off, it takes more energy to spin up the hard drive, turn on everything and get things running. There is a reason why servers last so long I guess.
Back to a car, which is why at a constant speed on the highway the fuel economy is better because it is usually easier to maintain speed than gain speed (such as acceleration, and raising the RPM) and less wear and tear too. Especially with cruise control.
That said, this is not exactly applicable to electric vehicles as due to aerodynamics and other factors, it is true for ICE if below 2K RPM and not going at (extreme?) high speeds for example because that is when wind will make the car work harder to maintain the speed.
I gather that preconditioning is making the interior comfortable (either warmer or cooler depending on outside temperature, sun angle, etc.) before one enters the car, correct? For a while, I was under the impression that it was something that would increase the range but it’s the opposite.
cabin preconditioning is what I meant. The battery also conditions automatically before charging and I’ve heard than consumes more juice too.
Incredibly, drove home from the golf course today (going downhill about 500ft from the elevation at the golf course) 22.3 miles, averaged 49 mph in traffic, 4.9 mpkWh. 81 degrees, comfort mode, AC set at 72, Burmester rocking. Shot 83, BTW.....missed a few putts! This car is incredible in warm weather. (Only got 3.4 mpkWh this morning, when it was 59 degrees, going uphill to the course) The heater definitely draws more power than the AC.
I gather that preconditioning is making the interior comfortable (either warmer or cooler depending on outside temperature, sun angle, etc.) before one enters the car, correct?.
No. "Preconditioning" is when the car (automatically) heats up the battery shortly before you arrive at a high-speed charger, so that the charging can begin faster (i.e., with more Amps).
You may be thinking of "Pre-entry climate control", where you can choose to heat/cool the car's interior to a desired temperature before you start it.
I
2) Speed. If you drive above 65 and especially above 70, the range will dramatically decrease.
3) Wind direction and velocity. A strong head wind or crosswind will decrease the range.
I
The range will be linearly proportional to speed. The wind resistance is the coefficient of drag (Cd) times the frontal area. The drag force goes as the square of the velocity (for velocities in air at our speeds of interest), however, your time to destination is inversely proportional to speed so.... things are very linear. Increase your speed by 20%, and you can expect a range reduction of about 20% - assuming all other things are constant. Pretty simple physics.
No. "Preconditioning" is when the car (automatically) heats up the battery shortly before you arrive at a high-speed charger, so that the charging can begin faster (i.e., with more Amps).
You may be thinking of "Pre-entry climate control", where you can choose to heat/cool the car's interior to a desired temperature before you start it.
I agree with the term "pre-entry climate control" as that is what the manual uses. It just is too clumsy a name for forum discussions. The term "preconditioning" is not used by the user manual, how can we say it means battery conditioning for fast charging and not cabin preconditioning? Unambiguous terms would be preferable if we can agree on any. In case clear from the context, I'd accept "preconditioning" for both.
Coming back from the golf course, 22.5 miles, in city traffic and some 75mph highway driving, I am regualrly getting 4.1-4.5 mpkWh on my 450+. And on short trips to the driving range 2 miles from my house I always get above 3.5 mpkWh. Something is wrong with the OP's car, IMHO, unless he is accelerating rapidly from each stoplight or driving in very cold temps.
This is the best gauge for consumption but it’s in watt hours per mile. It shows nearly instantaneous consumption while driving. If you haven’t already tried it, next trip check that one out and see what it says. At 4.5mpkWh, you should be at ~220wh/mi. I have a 580 with AMG wheels and all seasons. The best I have ever seen was 290 driving 25 miles per hour eco++, 68 degrees, no wind, 1 passenger, no cargo, comfort mode.
No. "Preconditioning" is when the car (automatically) heats up the battery shortly before you arrive at a high-speed charger, so that the charging can begin faster (i.e., with more Amps).
You may be thinking of "Pre-entry climate control", where you can choose to heat/cool the car's interior to a desired temperature before you start it.
Yes, I was thinking of the pre-entry climate control. Thank you so much for this clarification. I’m my case the preconditioning takes care of itself since I drive about 10 miles to the EA fast charging station.
The range will be linearly proportional to speed. The wind resistance is the coefficient of drag (Cd) times the frontal area. The drag force goes as the square of the velocity (for velocities in air at our speeds of interest), however, your time to destination is inversely proportional to speed so.... things are very linear. Increase your speed by 20%, and you can expect a range reduction of about 20% - assuming all other things are constant. Pretty simple physics.
Thank you for this physics lesson. It seems to me that at speeds of less than 50 mph, the range is optimal. However, speeds higher than 65-70 decreases the range substantially. I’m stating this without the actual physical equation.
Last edited by AppleFan1; Mar 27, 2023 at 12:13 PM.
The range will be linearly proportional to speed. The wind resistance is the coefficient of drag (Cd) times the frontal area. The drag force goes as the square of the velocity (for velocities in air at our speeds of interest), however, your time to destination is inversely proportional to speed so.... things are very linear. Increase your speed by 20%, and you can expect a range reduction of about 20% - assuming all other things are constant. Pretty simple physics.
If aerodynamics were the only loss (they aren't) then I am thinking that the range would go down with the inverse of the square of the speed.
W=K*V^2*D
E=W
D=E/(K*V^2)
W = Work required to move the car
K= Conversion constant (units, Cd, area etc)
V= Velocity of the car
D=Distance traveled
E= Energy stored in the battery (fixed quantity)
The range will be linearly proportional to speed. The wind resistance is the coefficient of drag (Cd) times the frontal area. The drag force goes as the square of the velocity (for velocities in air at our speeds of interest), however, your time to destination is inversely proportional to speed so.... things are very linear. Increase your speed by 20%, and you can expect a range reduction of about 20% - assuming all other things are constant. Pretty simple physics.
If aerodynamics were the only loss (they aren't) then I am thinking that the range would go down with the inverse of the square of the speed.
W=K*V^2*D
E=W
D=E/(K*V^2)
W = Work required to move the car
K= Conversion constant (units, Cd, area etc)
V= Velocity of the car
D=Distance traveled
E= Energy stored in the battery (fixed quantity)
Thanks for all the suggestions. I have just finished a 800mi+ road trip with the EQS. Average consumption for the entire trip is 2.6mi/kWh. I am pretty happy with the result as about 1/2 of the trip is driving on the mountain passes under freezing weather conditions.
Several things to highlight here:
Considering this is a RWD vehicle, the car handled extremely well in rain/snow. This may have to do with MB's suspension tuning and the linear power output of its electric motor.
It is very comfortable to drive this car for long period of time. I usually have to break down a trip like this into 2 days due to fatigue, but was able to complete this trip in 1 day thanks to its superior ride quality. Even though MB said this car can fast charge from 10-80% in 30min, this is rarely achievable in the real world. There are two types of EA chargers in the US, 150kw and 350kw. Only the 350kw charger can fill up the EQS from 10-80 in 30min. Out of the 4 charging stations I visited during this trip, 3 out of 4 stations 350kw chargers were broken or occupied. Lesson learned: plan your charging session accordingly, do not take MB's statement as the guarantee.
Last edited by po1ntblank; Mar 29, 2023 at 11:45 AM.
...
Out of the 4 charging stations I visited during this trip, 3 out of 4 stations 350kw chargers were broken or occupied. Lesson learned: plan your charging session accordingly, do not take MB's statement as the guarantee.
You think MB should watch after chargers in the field? Is it their fault that my wallbox at home only does 11 kW? Agree on the advice to plan the trip.
For those of you that are afraid to take long trips with the 450/580, May this fact will reduce your fear. I looked at the EA App today and bingo. There are many EA charging stations which will be installed soon. I concentrated my search from the Rockies to Ohio and from the Canadian border down through Kansas. c4004matic I think you’ll be able to take that trip from northern WI to Seattle in the near future at least in the warm time of the year and so will I from Des Moines. One new EA charging station will be located about 1.5 miles from where I live. Needless to say, I’m very happy about this.
2025 Maserati Grecale Folgore and 2024 Jaguar F-PACE SVR
It's amazing to me how much range can vary. 2.6 mi/kWh avg on an 800+ mile trip sux. I'm sill having range considerable anxiety for my upcoming road trip. Watching this video today didn't help. Poor guy needed 90 miles of charge to get home but only had 19. You can literally watch the sun go down as he tries to get enough juice. At one point he goes off on a pretty funny rant tho where he mentions the 10 @$%# apps he has installed. So just for fun I counted mine... 15 apps LOL
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.
Considering this is a RWD vehicle, the car handled extremely well in rain/snow. This may have to do with MB's suspension tuning and the linear power output of its electric motor.
Even though MB said this car can fast charge from 10-80% in 30min, this is rarely achievable in the real world. There are two types of EA chargers in the US, 150kw and 350kw. Only the 350kw charger can fill up the EQS from 10-80 in 30min. Out of the 4 charging stations I visited during this trip, 3 out of 4 stations 350kw chargers were broken or occupied. Lesson learned: plan your charging session accordingly, do not take MB's statement as the guarantee.
LOL
