Edmunds Test: How fast does each EV charge? - Article

[Tooney]

• Edmunds EV Charging Test provides you fast-charging times required to add range to a vehicle's battery
• This independent evaluation of fast-charging speeds counters different automakers' charging speed data
• Hyundai Ioniq 6 Limited RWD tops the list with an impressive 868 miles per charging hour
• The Chevrolet Bolt EUV shows its age, charging at a leisurely 172 miles per charging hour

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-charging.html

Sponsored

 

[CxM]

Interesting results:

Taycan's looks to have the highest tested average charging power.

 

[Caraholic]

Impressive results on the Kia

 

[Dilpo]

This should me much more of a priority than range for the majority considering switching to an EV

 

[SergeyIndy]

I am not following why Taycan would not be the fastest in all categories.

I understand that Kia/Hyundai use 800v architecture, but why are they so much faster, is this due to conservative charging curve for Taycan as it tapers off much more to potentially protect the battery, since software controls the curve, even though the architecture can take a more aggressive and faster charge. I understand that with software updates they are making overall time to charge faster and faster based on the data that they get on how the architecture is responding to fast charging from Taycans on the road.

I think, that explains it, it has 350kw rated charger standard vs. 270kW max we technically get:

I just tried to test charge at our local recently built EA stations and I get 200kw as I start charging at 15% SOC and that is way faster than I need for local driving, so I only use 5 min of this. However, when I drove a loaner Taycan with services not active on it, somehow, I could not get more than 50kw at every EA station I stopped along the way of a 750 mile route, so that was bad.

 

[JIP1080]

I am not following why Taycan would not be the fastest in all categories.

I understand that Kia/Hyundai use 800v architecture, but why are they so much faster, is this due to conservative charging curve for Taycan as it tapers off much more to potentially protect the battery, since software controls the curve, even though the architecture can take a more aggressive and faster charge. I understand that with software updates they are making overall time to charge faster and faster based on the data that they get on how the architecture is responding to fast charging from Taycans on the road.

I think, that explains it, it has 350kw rated charger standard vs. 270kW max we technically get:

I just tried to test charge at our local recently built EA stations and I get 200kw as I start charging at 15% SOC and that is way faster than I need for local driving, so I only use 5 min of this. However, when I drove a loaner Taycan with services not active on it, somehow, I could not get more than 50kw at every EA station I stopped along the way of a 750 mile route, so that was bad.

From my reading it has to do with range added. Because the Kia is more efficient the rate of range added is quicker.
I could be wrong , just how I interpreted the results.

 

[arijaycomet]

From my reading it has to do with range added. Because the Kia is more efficient the rate of range added is quicker.
I could be wrong , just how I interpreted the results.

100% correct -- it is data weighted by efficiency. So while the Taycan might add more kWh (energy) into the vehicle faster/quicker, the energy it has added back in won't take it as far. When adjusted for efficiency, the energy added into the Korean cars is slightly slower, but more useful (range/miles).

 

[Archimedes]

What I find most interesting is the range implied by the consumption they observed in testing for the 4S and GTS with 21” wheels. 210-215 miles. Which is consistent with the experience of most people on this forum.

 

[CxM]

From my reading it has to do with range added. Because the Kia is more efficient the rate of range added is quicker.
I could be wrong , just how I interpreted the results.

100% correct -- it is data weighted by efficiency. So while the Taycan might add more kWh (energy) into the vehicle faster/quicker, the energy it has added back in won't take it as far. When adjusted for efficiency, the energy added into the Korean cars is slightly slower, but more useful (range/miles).

Exactly, that's why I put the second chart there to explain more. Going by the highest "average charging power", Taycan is on the top, but the "tested consumption" affects the "miles per charging hour" results.

 

[Teufel Hund]

Exactly, that's why I put the second chart there to explain more. Going by the highest "average charging power", Taycan is on the top, but the "tested consumption" affects the "miles per charging hour" results.

Yup, it also took me a few min to interpret WHY the Korean cars were listed as faster. Has to do with efficiency. The Hyundai's and Kia's need fewer kW's (24.2 kW's vs Taycan's 39.2 kW) to go 100 miles and having an ALMOST as fast charging system they therefore can get to a 100 miles worth of range quicker.

 

[Jonathan S.]

Maybe this test can be rerun on the new 34-charger CCS1 network currently being installed in Vermont.
All of them 50kW chargers.
In configurations of two stalls each. So might want to add in potential waiting time.
Plus perhaps the half-hour I spent on the phone with Blink trying to figure out why a charger wouldn't work. (Eventually answer: it was already inoperable only a few months after installation, with almost no use so far.) I read a recent checkin that both chargers at that same site are now inoperable.
Such is the reality of CCS1 roadtripping in northern New England. Of which I will no longer partake (despite how much I love my CT otherwise). Which means such tests are cruel mockery for anyone here.

 

[Tooney]

Maybe this test can be rerun on the new 34-charger CCS1 network currently being installed in Vermont.
All of them 50kW chargers.
In configurations of two stalls each. So might want to add in potential waiting time.

At least you get to wait in warmth during winter charging with your improved (post-Feb 2023) cabin heater.

 

[Zcd1]

Edmunds' results are among the most useful I've seen.

"Average time needed to add 100 miles of range" is very enlightening, and possibly surprising for those who don't understand the entire picture of DCFC-ing

 

[Jonathan S.]

At least you get to wait in warmth during winter charging with your improved (post-Feb 2023) cabin heater.

I’ll be driving in warmth. In my A6ar. CCS1 charging is hopeless in northern New England.
Although I am charging right now as I skin up Stratton. At 6.03kW. Mainly out of curiosity to see if the L2 chargers here actually work. Plus three of the eleven plugs are located in an otherwise prohibited parking lot that saves some walking. So that I can preserve all my energy for skinning up the mountain and over again.

 

[Jonathan S.]

Edmunds' results are among the most useful I've seen.

"Average time needed to add 100 miles of range" is very enlightening, and possibly surprising for those who don't understand the entire picture of DCFC-ing

Surprising in the sense of being completely false for CCS1 owners in many regions.

Sponsored