Greetings from Virginia

Nice. Glad you were able to get the car. I love mine. It's a comfortable car that delivers economy without feeling like an economy car. Two full-size adults can sit in front and not touch shoulders, and the back seat is usable. I'd say the car can carry 4 people comfortably.

As a PHEV I think you get the best of both worlds. In my case, my commute is almost always fully electric. So day-to-day I get the electric car experience. But I don't have to worry if I go on a long trip. It's an even bigger win if it saves you from having more cars (one electric, and one gas for long trips).

One last thing: The EV range varies a bit (I believe by car), and by situation. My range is a bit lower than yours but I live on a hill about 1000' and with a steep grade. Folks who live on hills see lower range (the car can't benefit or can't benefit much from down-hill with an already full charge). Other factors matter too, but I find the hill ( or lack of hill) the biggest.

 

If memory serves, it was determined that your hill isn’t as significant as advertised.

We also live at the top of a steep hill which has an 8.8% grade for a half mile. When we venture more than 3-4 miles from the house we typically descend 600’ or more. Our average EV range is mid to upper 30’s in winter and mid 40’s in summer. This is in southern Oregon and you’re in Eugene.

There are a couple of uphill sections on the way down, which could scrub off some charge and allow for a bit of regeneration on the way down. It isn’t likely that would account for a difference of 10 miles in EV range. Maybe a mile or two.

 

The amount of charge from regen going down a grade is nowhere near as much as battery drain going up the same grade. Hills do, in fact, have a noticeable effect on EV range.

 

My range right now is best at 20 miles EV, estimated and actual. For the past couple of years, I never see anything in winter above 24. I don't care about that, but my car driven gently and no freeway at all just doesn't see the range others do. So it goes. I actually don't care about that. I buy a tank of gas about every 2 months. I notice a larger increase in range when I'm visiting family (not on a hill) if I'm there enough days for the GOM to adjust. In my case, the hill *is* the biggest factor.

Flatland range for me, increases by about 10 estimated miles per charge. So if I get 20-24 estimated EV miles at home, I get 30-34 when not driving up and down my hill. I don't know the grade of my hill, but lets just say some cars wheels spin on dry pavement going up it.

 

How frequently do you finish a round trip, in EV mode, at the top of the hill from which the trip originated? As a point of reference, we’ve done it at least 500 times over the past 3 years. Typically, the battery gauge will remain fully charged and there will be little to no loss on the EV range estimate for the first 5 miles. The noticeable effect on EV range when going downhill is that very little, if any, energy is used. And a couple of braking opportunities along the way may restore some of the energy that might have been consumed by acceleration or cabin heat.

On the return trip we will see the battery gauge drop by several bars and the EV range estimate will lose 10 miles during the 5 mile drive every single time. The net result is that we traveled 10 miles, depleted the battery by 3-4 bars and used 10 miles of range while losing 600’ in elevation and then gaining 600’ in elevation. It’s not all about regen going downhill, as you seemed to be suggesting. It’s also important to consider both sections of the hill, up and down.

Maybe Dan’s car burns 5 miles of range while going uphill for 1 mile, whereas we’re seeing a 2:1 ratio. Overall, his car gets about the lowest EV range of any car on the forum, even on flat terrain and in warmer weather. So, his could be an outlier rather than the norm.

 

I agree my car is likely an outlier. No argument there. Still a great car. Luckily my commute on a normal day is about 20 miles, so even in winter I don't use much gas. When I first got my Clarity I spent much time trying to improve EV range, but after driving the car for some years now, I just get in and drive it and enjoy it. And yes do the "bad" things like running the cabin heater in winter. It still saves quite a bit of energy and money over my last traditional gas-only car.

 

Every day. When I leave home, anywhere I go is downhill (live in the foothills). Coming back, usually by the same route, the amount of battery used to get back home is an order of magnitude more than what regen put in the battery on the way out. It's a simple matter of physics that none of us can change. The estimated range for EV when the trip is done is much lower than subtracting distance travelled from the original range estimate.

 

If you are going downhill when you start from your home AND you are starting with a 100% SOC, then your statement is true. This is because there is nowhere for the regen energy to go, and it is wasted. In general (without being constrained by a 100% SOC), when you go down a hill and then back up the same hill, it will not take 'an order of magnitude' more energy to return than what the regen put in on the way down. Yes, regen is not perfectly efficient, but you will capture at least 75% of the energy, so the return trip will indeed take somewhat more than expected, but not by an order of magnitude.

If your initial downhill is severe enough, I think you could demonstrate that you would use significantly less energy for a round trip if you start out with say, 80% SOC, than if you start out with 100%.

 

I'm puzzled by this whole exchange. In my experience with my 2020 Hyundai Kona, hills are a big boost to my range. I used to live in a relatively flat neighborhood. There was on occasional significant hill, but not something I traversed every day. Then, I averaged 4.6 mi/kwh and my range on a full charge (though I of course didn't usually charge to 100%) was 280-290 miles. 2 years ago I moved to a new location, where anywhere I need to go is 5-6 miles downhill, and every trip back is the same amount uphill. Nothing else has really changed that should affect efficiency or range, and I'm now averaging at least 5 mi/kwh and my usual range on a full charge is about 340 miles -- and I've gotten over 350 a couple times.

 

We have gone astray from the original intent of this thread, but this topic is very interesting.

There are some assumptions as to how you can measure efficiency or range. If you make the reasonable assumption that there is no net change in altitude (ie: what goes down must go back up) - or: your home is at a specific elevation and you always return there... If there were no losses, then the energy you gain going down a hill would exactly equal the energy you expend going back up that same hill. This results in a net zero impact on efficiency or range performance. In the real world, there are losses and it is not possible to capture all of the energy that is available when going downhill. So, going up and down hills (assuming that you always wind up at the same elevation in the end) has to be less efficient than travelling that same distance on a completely flat road.

So, although I do not doubt your experience, I feel that there must be an alternate explanation for the range 'increase'... It can't be the fact that now you have hilly terrain, and you didn't before. Is there any change in the average speed, or the percentage of highway vs. city driving, or in the temperature?

 

Highway vs. city has changed only slightly (never much highway, now even less). Temperatures in my new location are warmer, but that's probably a net negative for range. My old location was usually between 50-75F. Now I'm in the tropics -- 60-90F -- and using the AC a LOT more (previously I rarely used heat or AC), which is brutal on range. Driving style definitely hasn't changed -- the car consistently tells me my driving is about 95% "economical." The biggest difference is the physical geography.

 

It seems you are experiencing a range improvement of roughly 20% which is pretty substantial.
The biggest losses are wind resistance (increases dramatically with 'high' speeds), and rolling resistance (function of vehicle weight and tires). Heat and A/C are also important. Unless the vehicle has a heat pump (like a Tesla) the heater is a very large loss. A/C not nearly as bad as heating. Cold temperatures have a significant impact on battery capacity, but your old location (50-75) doesn't seem cold enough to have a 20% impact, but who knows.

 

Why are you fixated on regen? You’ve built a strawman argument. No one said or suggested that the amount of energy recaptured on the downhill equaled the amount of energy consumed on the uphill.

I offered an explanation, based on my observations, to demonstrate why, and how, we’re able to drive 5 miles downhill and 5 miles uphill while using 10 miles of range. Of course, displayed EV range is just an estimate. The results, however, are remarkably consistent.

I can only explain this to you, I can’t understand it for you.

 

Let me help you understand what it was that I said. You have totally overlooked my statement that driving up a grade will use significantly more energy from the battery than regen puts into the battery going down that grade. I'm not fixated on regen, just pointing out that hills have a significant effect on EV range.

Earlier today, I drove about 3 miles to pick up lunch and returned home. I didn't start at 100% SOC, so I was even able to use the paddle to supplement regen on the way out—something I can't do at 100% SOC in my 2018 without the engine starting. At the destination, the EV range estimate was the same as when I left home; a net gain of roughly 3 miles of range. Reversing my route back home, that 3 miles reduced the EV range by 7 miles. I don't know what anyone would consider significant, but going from +3 to -7 is pretty significant to me.

 

Wouldn't it be more correct to consider that your 6 mile trip would have utilized 6 miles of range had it been perfectly flat. But since you had the hill, it utilized 7 miles of range. This is only a 16% loss due to the hill. Perhaps still 'significant' but not as dramatic as you state.

In order to fair, you need to look at the whole round trip. For example, if you started with 20 miles of range and went on a 6 mile round trip (flat) you would return with 14 miles. With your hill, you would start with 20 miles and return with 13 miles (the trip required a net 7 miles of 'range'). The fact that the range first went up, and then down dramatically is not relevant because what you care about is the usage for the overall trip.

 

How did you manage to reach the conclusion that I have overlooked your statement? I referred to it as a strawman argument. Yet, you’re still talking about regen. I fully understand what you said. What you are failing to recognize is that no one is arguing against your statement on regen.

Now you’ve presented information on a 6 mile round trip that is very similar to the 10 mile round trip example I provided previously. You traveled 6 miles and used 7 miles of range.

A deficiency in basic math skills and an apparent lack of logical reasoning has you convinced that you lost 10 miles of range while traveling 3 miles.

Regen didn’t get you to the restaurant, and it didn’t add 3 miles of range. But I have a feeling you’re not going to understand any of that.

 

This is the classic apples and oranges discussion. I'm not talking about total range used up/down hills and you're not talking about going up a hill uses more battery than gets put back going down the same hill. Has nothing to do with math skills or your interpretation of what is being said.

I know you will have to have the last word, so have at it. I'm done with this thread.

 

Clearly, I demonstrated a lack in judgment by responding to certain posts on this thread. My apologies to the other members for engaging with the irrational.