The average day can fluctuate with the temperature though. Normally in my ID4, I'd be able to handle 35 miles one way on 10%. Yesterday, I blew through almost 15% due to how cold it was. Having a higher range on the battery isn't a bad thing if they can manage not to compromise the overall range of the EREV as well. That's a branch of why I brought this thread up in the first place, I don't mind having shorter range in day-to-day activities because I only drive 60-65 miles round trip daily, but when it gets cold out and my range is down 15%~, I want to be able to not worry about the base range being just enough for 2 days worth of driving. The gas generator isn't a bad option, but if the battery is cold, am I even going to be getting good efficiency on charging the battery with it? Wouldn't it be nicer to just make it home with a bit more range?
But at 150 miles even if 50% drop that’s 75 miles. That still leaves a buffer of 10miles and worst case you are sitting still the battery is barely using any juice OR you start using gas. Or a larger battery and vehicle costs $10K more to use it 6 times a year. Easier just to charge it nightly
Sure, but then you're putting more wear on the battery by charging it nightly. The gas is just charging the battery via the generator, we don't know much about specs or what the actual rate is, but my guess is it will do a really good job at stretching the battery over the course of that 500 mile trip, but not do as well keeping it going on short term trips (I'd imagine it turns on/off similar to how auto-start/stop works).
Unless you have a dc fast charger at home, you really don’t need to worry about charging it daily n terms of “wear and tear”
The more charge cycles you put on any rechargeable battery, the shorter the life span. Sure, level 2 charging vs DC fast charging isn't going to be as big of a hit, but that repetitive strain will add up over time. Another part is I also don't want to have to charge every night in that hypothetical situation. Even with my old Corolla, I tried to maximize my mileage so I could avoid getting gas as much as possible, specially with how expensive it was getting.
This is one of the reasons that I'm curious if the Harvester version will have a larger "buffer" of battery (ie, the useable KWh of battery is relatively smaller than the gross KWh battery size, to account for battery aging), because they know it is more likely to be charged more frequently, and to a higher SOC (because it has less range).
).
I actually do worry about this. Look at all the battery replacements in Jeep 4xE. The hybrid systems with smaller batteries and frequent charging/decharging is leading to accelerated battery degradation. It is why I think LFP will be the battery of choice in the harvester models.
AFAIK, the PHEV batteries use a much larger buffer, to help offset this (again, smaller net battery size in relation to its gross battery size.
That’s how it should work but the 4xE is not acting that way. I do think it is due to the engineering of the parallel hybrid and likely bad batteries from Samsung. Here is the data to show what is happening:
It’s not actually that simple. If you’re comparing n full cycles to m full cycles, then the smaller number is probably better, but if you’re talking about the same number of miles, and therefore kWh, it’s not clear that one big charging session is better than several small ones.
Sure, when you start with a tiny amount of range (21 miles) AND you couple that with faster degradation at the start of the health curve, I could see how that could appear more worrisome, but we aren't talking about a tiny 17 kWh battery in this case for the Harvester or the Pure EV. For reference, and based on 41,000 miles of driving and charging (mostly L2) to 70%, with a mix of DCFC to 80% on many weekends, I have seen only ~2-3% degradation on a 131kWk LG Pack. Again, this is why warranties will be an important factor in many people's decision to convert their reservation, and I think Scout will have a similar and competitive warranty to 8 years or 175,000 miles, but we will see. I can't imagine buying a vehicle that is begging to be charged and driven, but also having to worry about battery health. That would be a deal-killer for me.
8 year/100k battery is required by the feds. California is 10/150k.
Yes, and great to have the additional mileage coverage to 175,000... I don't live in CA though. Point being, warranty for Scout will be a purchasing criteria, and not all warranties are created equal (after the minimum restrictions)
