Unexplainable increase in efficiency
- User Feedback
- Subscribe
|
C |
spacec0w |
I don't use ODB but rather have been able to calibrate the base efficiency for my car (Kia e-niro 19-22 64kwh) over many trips, recalculating after the trip so that estimated battery matches actual. It's been working for about a year, but at some point in the last few months i had to make the adjustment from around 140 Wh/km @ 110km/h to 95 Wh/km! It now works accurately for trips but it seems like a bug. I've checked all of the relevant settings i think, logged out then back in, etc but this is still the case as of today.
Mostly I'm worried that I'm not going to be paying attention and one day for a longer trip the calculation goes back to "normal" and I'm forced to stop for an unplanned charge.
Activity Newest / Oldest
spacec0w
This is still happening, it would be nice to have some feedback on this. Today I tried a test without using my user profile, so I loaded the same car, applied the same settings as best as I could (I have a premium account), and the same route returns a very different result with the same ridiculous reference consumption 110 km/h.
Arrive with 13% (my account)
abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=86536cff-4328-4557-b6ac-fd1e41b8c7aa
Arrive with 20% (no account)
abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=37147fc5-5261-418b-aa97-bb7a17a99a3b
The second is what I get in the real world, but as I keep saying, 110 as ref. consumption doesn't make any sense.
spacec0w
So today I finally completed that trip. The first leg I forgot to log, but the second leg, predicted to use 29% of total battery at 100 Wh/km , over 91 km and very hilly (net gain in elevation) actually used 22%. This makes no sense, I drive efficiently but this is really impossible. I actually was not able to lower the reference consumption low enough to make this trip coincide with reality.
Bo_ABRP
What starting point did you have for your second leg?
Also, on the original plan, when we recreate it we get zero charge stops when entering 95 Wh/km @ 110 km/h - this is not how you actually drive, correct?
spacec0w
The second leg was Tremp to Vielha, like this: abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=e70d7942-3512-4faa-be69-2fea6e4d6c5c
And yes, the whole trip I would not need to stop to charge. 95 Wh/km @ 110 km/h is what gives me accurate plans, when before it was 140-- the exact problem. I generally drive the speed limit or a few km/h over (I am not hypermiling or whatever).
spacec0w
Hi, just to be clear all plans are showing this same efficiency. Here's one that I'll be doing soon and I think it more or less matches what I used to get at 140 Wh/km: abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=b9c6c38d-f51e-4b0f-bac8-6256b1f4d8a0
Bo_ABRP
Status changed to: User Feedback
Bo_ABRP
Could you make an example plan and paste the link here where you think the plan would match your actual consumption?
spacec0w
Completed another trip where at 95 Wh/km should have arrived with 49% and the actual drive arrived with 53%. Link: abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=dc76ac8e-d504-459a-872c-36184e8386c1. Something is really wrong here, is there still no idea what it could be? This makes it really hard to trust ABRP plans...