[cruzer666]

Happy to move on now but would still contend that if you don't use physical brake pads then Adaptive will match or better B. It can't be worse. What you are saying is using B reduces the odds that you drive like a cretin and coast and then apply sufficiently aggressive braking so as to utilise friction pads. I won't argue that there aren't people out there that would do that!

B mode is as described and clearly stated in the manual as the mode with the Maximum power recuperation. It cannot be lesser than in D-Adaptive or any other mode.
I have proven this with screenshots before (and others have crosschecked this with consumption values), you can coast just fine in B-mode, D-low, D-medium, D-high.

Coasting is not a D-Adaptive only feature. In all other modes it takes a bit of pressure and balancing the accelerator pedal and keeping it in a "neutral" zone to "coast". Just because it is more difficult to do, it doesn't mean it is impossible.

In D-Adaptive you just lift your foot off accelerator and if the way is clear, you're coasting.

In terms of energy recuperation, the amount of possible energy recuperation is identical between all modes, D-low, D-medium, D-high, D-adaptive and B modes. You get a maximum of 195kW of energy recuperation in the i4 M50 and 114kW in the eDrive40, regardless in which mode you drive the car. What is different is how different degrees of recuperation are activated:
- in B mode: you lift your foot off accelerator and you get maximum available recuperation possible instantly.
- in D-low,medium,high: you have to lift your foot off accelerator and press the brake to a degree to a certain level, depending on D mode you're in, to get maximum recuperation available. D-high is very close to B-mode, however you still need to slightly apply the brake pedal to get maximum recuperation
- in D-adaptive: if you lift your foot off acceleration without braking, the car decides when and how much recuperation it applies depending on if you have a car in front of you or you're approaching a roundabout, unless you press the brake similar explanation to the other D-modes.

B-mode is what is referred to by BMW and others as one pedal driving, it has nothing to do with efficiency.

Efficiency is dictated purely by the driver ability to anticipate and not brake suddenly to a point where friction brakes engage. Some people, like myself, prefer B-mode because it is better suited to the local driving conditions and my personal driving style, but I won't every claim driving in B-mode is more efficient as a blanket statement. Everyone should try all modes and see what's best for them.

Cheers!

 

[ssh]

I need to put that into a keyboard macro. Right on!

 

[yobro 24]

As we have said before, it is BMW’s clumsy wording of B mode calling it maximum recuperation (which is strictly correct) which doesn't help as it implied that it recoup more than the other modes. Bit like one supermarket stating it has the cheapest bread when they all charge the same - strictly true but a bit misleading.

 

[ssh]

As we have said before, it is BMW’s clumsy wording of B mode calling it maximum recuperation (which is strictly correct) which doesn't help as it implied that it recoup more than the other modes. Bit like one supermarket stating it has the cheapest bread when they all charge the same - strictly true but a bit misleading.

I agree with you. There isn't a simple explanation of blended braking and the reality that recuperation is the same but applied in different ways.

From the manual:

B, gear position with highest energy recovery

Principle

Selector lever position B is the gear position with the highest energy recovery.

General information

Selector lever position B offers the following characteristics:

▷ High level of energy recovery when the accelerator pedal is released.
▷ Major deceleration when releasing the accelerator pedal, if necessary to a standstill of the vehicle.
▷ The vehicle does not drive off when the brake pedal is released.

and...

Strength of recuperative braking

In selector lever position B, the energy recover is high and the deceleration is pronounced.

For driving in selector lever position D, the strength of recuperative braking can be adjusted via Drive.

• Depending on the equipment, adaptive energy recovery: energy recovery and deceleration are automatically adapted to the respective driving situation.
  Adaptive recuperation, recuperative braking, refer to page 283.
• High energy recovery: The vehicle decelerates fast, and more energy is returned to the high-voltage battery.
• Average energy recovery.
• Low energy recovery: The vehicle decelerates more slowly, and less energy is returned to the high-voltage battery.

and...

Driving situations for energy recovery

If deceleration is foreseeable while driving, this can be used for energy recovery.

The following driving situations may be suitable for this:
▷ Decelerating downhill.
▷ Deceleration before a red traffic light. Avoid late or strong braking. Instead, decelerate the vehicle using energy recovery.

 

[yobro 24]

I agree with you. There isn't a simple explanation of blended braking and the reality that recuperation is the same but applied in different ways.

From the manual:

B, gear position with highest energy recovery

Principle

Selector lever position B is the gear position with the highest energy recovery.

General information

Selector lever position B offers the following characteristics:

▷ High level of energy recovery when the accelerator pedal is released.
▷ Major deceleration when releasing the accelerator pedal, if necessary to a standstill of the vehicle.
▷ The vehicle does not drive off when the brake pedal is released. I

and...

Strength of recuperative braking

In selector lever position B, the energy recover is high and the deceleration is pronounced.

For driving in selector lever position D, the strength of recuperative braking can be adjusted via Drive.

• Depending on the equipment, adaptive energy recovery: energy recovery and deceleration are automatically adapted to the respective driving situation.
  Adaptive recuperation, recuperative braking, refer to page 283.
• High energy recovery: The vehicle decelerates fast, and more energy is returned to the high-voltage battery.
• Average energy recovery.
• Low energy recovery: The vehicle decelerates more slowly, and less energy is returned to the high-voltage battery.

and...

Driving situations for energy recovery

If deceleration is foreseeable while driving, this can be used for energy recovery.

The following driving situations may be suitable for this:
▷ Decelerating downhill.
▷ Deceleration before a red traffic light. Avoid late or strong braking. Instead, decelerate the vehicle using energy recovery.

Yep. Clear as mud. The bit highlighted below is well written though as it doesn't imply that it is the best for recoup - just correctly states that it is strong when lifting off the accelerator. Can't argue with that.
▷ High level of energy recovery when the accelerator pedal is released.
▷ Major deceleration when releasing the accelerator pedal, if necessary to a standstill of the vehicle.
▷ The vehicle does not drive off when the brake pedal is released.

 

[barty]

I was asked to move this from another thread to this more appropriate venue

19" m50. Live in PA, so it's winter although not a particularly cold one. All local driving for first month and wasn't thrilled with range, 224 miles on the first 100%. Today, Iook it 70 miles on the highway, ranging 65-85mph, mostly at 75mph in 31 degree weather and got an effective 250 mile range. So once it warms up, I remain confident that the stated 271 mile range will be met or exceeded. Given the way I drive, I am sure a more frugal driver would be there already

 

[ssh]

I was asked to move this from another thread to this more appropriate venue

19" m50. Live in PA, so it's winter although not a particularly cold one. All local driving for first month and wasn't thrilled with range, 224 miles on the first 100%. Today, Iook it 70 miles on the highway, ranging 65-85mph, mostly at 75mph in 31 degree weather and got an effective 250 mile range. So once it warms up, I remain confident that the stated 271 mile range will be met or exceeded. Given the way I drive, I am sure a more frugal driver would be there already

How are you calculating "range?" Did you read the OP on this thread?

 

[barty]

How are you calculating "range?" Did you read the OP on this thread?

Ran the car from 100% to 31%. Charged to 79. At a light, noticed it was 48%. 69% use plus 31 is 100%. Had travelled 224 miles. Trip statistics said 35.7kwh/100 miles. At 80kw battery, that is exactly 224 miles. No problem there, right? Next, 70 mile trip then referenced 32kwh100 or (and a fully confirming 28% battery usage) 250 mile range only quibbling would be that I've seen 80
6, 80.7 and 81.6 for battery. I'll stick with 80 and risk beng off a mile.

Notice in my two examples, the usage, stats, and miles traveled matched with precision. I make no use of the range estimator as I feel it has no utility whatsoever

 

[ssh]

I'm not following your math very well (I use mi/kWh), but I think you're doing the same kind of calculation I do. But, 2.8 mi/kWh (your 35.7) is at the low end (weather, etc. contributes). Do you have an M50 or e40? Do you precondition prior to departure?

 

[barty]

19" m50. Do not precondition. Yes, 2.8 using that version of the calculation.

Would love better understanding of preconditioning. If NOT plugged in, how does warming battery while idle improve range? Seems my 2kw run to the grocery store would be 2wh of preconditioning followed by1 kw for the trip, so don't I net lose?

 

[ssh]

19" m50. Do not precondition. Yes, 2.8 using that version of the calculation.

Would love better understanding of preconditioning. If NOT plugged in, how does warming battery while idle improve range? Seems my 2kw run to the grocery store would be 2wh of preconditioning followed by1 kw for the trip, so don't I net lose?

For short journeys, not a big benefit in consumption, although the manual does recommend it for battery life longevity. If you're not plugged in with power available, then it's a trade off. I notice an approximately 10kW impact when I precondition for about 30 minutes without being plugged in (such as when I leave Copper and head home). But, in that case, I'm doing a 90 mile drive, so it's worth it both for the battery conditioning and so I get into a comfy cabin.

All that said, if you precondition with it plugged in, you should see some slightly better consumption especially early in your journey.

 

[barty]

For short journeys, not a big benefit in consumption, although the manual does recommend it for battery life longevity. If you're not plugged in with power available, then it's a trade off. I notice an approximately 10kW impact when I precondition for about 30 minutes without being plugged in (such as when I leave Copper and head home). But, in that case, I'm doing a 90 mile drive, so it's worth it both for the battery conditioning and so I get into a comfy cabin.

All that said, if you precondition with it plugged in, you should see some slightly better consumption especially early in your journey.

Helpful. I'll try it out. I have a 150mi round trip on Friday that I can use for intelligence gathering

 

[Jb31089]

I’m not sure if this was covered before so apologies if so, but do folks think the amount of miles travelled since charging (when you are clicking through the options using the steering wheel button) is accurate? Sometimes I feel like it might be off.

 

[barty]

I don’t think that‘s been asked…I’m a sample size of 1, but a huge numbers geek. I’ve done an embarrassing amount of analysis and found it to be entirely accurate.

but don’t get me started about the range estimator- so bad it should just not be there at all.

 

[LowOnCash]

Why is the car able to correctly estimate SOC if you map but unable to do the same with GOM? I'm guessing the map SOC estimate has more information (estimated speed per mile and maybe elevation change) - where as the GOM is just basing its estimate on recent driving consumption???

Hello - Unlike the I-4's "range accuracy" which has many, many variables such as terrain, driving habits, wind, weather etc, an EV's SOC is generally very accurate since its derived "mostly" from the HV batteries voltage levels. If you were to record the lithium cells low voltage (zero miles cutoff) resting voltage and high voltage (charge cutoff) within the batteries buffer (usable capacity) you could calculate your cars SOC with a voltmeter. However in order for the cars SOC to be as accurate as possible, its important that we tell the processor where 100% or full charge occurs (voltage wise). You do this every time you fully charge your battery since it tells the processor where 100% SOC occurs voltage-wise to re-calibrate the SOC.

For this reason, every week or two you should fully charge the battery to re-calibrate the SOC. Don't worry about fully charging the battery to 100% because there is a buffer is in place that prevents you from ever fully charging or fully discharging the HV battery. While there is additional health (longevity) by only charging to 80%, this level is in place primarily to just protect the manufactures from replacing the battery during the warranty period. If you were to avoid fast charging below zero degrees F, you could charge your battery to 100% each time and your battery would still last 15-20 years with minimal loss.

I don't have a Kia 800 volt voltage /SOC percentage chart handy on this computer but I do have one for automotive and RV lithium batteries showing voltage to SOC relationship to see how SOC is derived.

Regards - Mike

 

[barty]

I was asked to move this from another thread to this more appropriate venue

19" m50. Live in PA, so it's winter although not a particularly cold one. All local driving for first month and wasn't thrilled with range, 224 miles on the first 100%. Today, Iook it 70 miles on the highway, ranging 65-85mph, mostly at 75mph in 31 degree weather and got an effective 250 mile range. So once it warms up, I remain confident that the stated 271 mile range will be met or exceeded. Given the way I drive, I am sure a more frugal driver would be there already

Update on this. A balmy 60 degrees in PA today. Did a 22 mile loop of local and highway, but with lights, no freeway. Got back and was stunned to see 4.1 kwh/mi for an extrapolated 328 miles of range! Pretty flat, one 1/2 mile steep hill and back down the same hill, eco pro mode, but several bursts of speed to pass slow trucks and wasn't even thinking about efficiency, just driving along. I did an all freeway 160 mile drive below 40, cruise control set on 71, in February and got an effective 273 mile range. So, as we warm up, I am putting range anxiety in the rear view and very happy with how far I can go between charges.

 

[LowOnCash]

Great news on your range Barty, last week I did a range test of sorts as well. Had a meeting in Atlanta 126 miles away 75% interstate 65 mph 35% rural 45 mph for a total of 252 miles. 34 degrees when we departed, used heat for an hour or so leaving, then AC on the way home. When I pulled into the yard after my 252 mile trip, she showed 66 miles remaining. My e40 RWD averages 3.9 to 4.2 the math generally works out around 300+ mile range.

I dislike the BMW's I-4 projected range protocol where it always low 240-260 miles after a 100% charge, then has to add miles as you start the trip to make it somewhat correct. I much prefer an EV to show full (battery) range after a charge then take extra off as your m/kw efficeny changes. Don't understand why BMW choose this goofy manner, it's simple math for the processor to look at your mile/kw and calculate close to the real range based on the batteries SOC.
The I-4's range protocol is totally opposite of three I-3's Ive owned or in fact other EV's such as the EV6, Iconiq, Ipace which shows initial range based on battery capacity and past driving habits, then adjusts it according to usage. On my I-pace it allows you to re-set the range memory to re-learn driving habits, wish the I-4 offered this feature.

Mike

 

[ssh]

Very cool... I think of this in terms of 70% range, since I want to keep the batteries in the 80-10% range. But at 4mi/kWh, that's more than 220 miles.

 

[LowOnCash]

SSH thanks for the reply - I agree with your thoughts on the 70% it keeps you safe!

Regards - Mike

 

[barty]

Great news on your range Barty, last week I did a range test of sorts as well. Had a meeting in Atlanta 126 miles away 75% interstate 65 mph 35% rural 45 mph for a total of 252 miles. 34 degrees when we departed, used heat for an hour or so leaving, then AC on the way home. When I pulled into the yard after my 252 mile trip, she showed 66 miles remaining. My e40 RWD averages 3.9 to 4.2 the math generally works out around 300+ mile range.

I dislike the BMW's I-4 projected range protocol where it always low 240-260 miles after a 100% charge, then has to add miles as you start the trip to make it somewhat correct. I much prefer an EV to show full (battery) range after a charge then take extra off as your m/kw efficeny changes. Don't understand why BMW choose this goofy manner, it's simple math for the processor to look at your mile/kw and calculate close to the real range based on the batteries SOC.
The I-4's range protocol is totally opposite of three I-3's Ive owned or in fact other EV's such as the EV6, Iconiq, Ipace which shows initial range based on battery capacity and past driving habits, then adjusts it according to usage. On my I-pace it allows you to re-set the range memory to re-learn driving habits, wish the I-4 offered this feature.

Mike

Yes, it's my first EV and range was my massive concern. Real life experience is quickly moving my i4 to "only good things."

I've consistently and repeatedly trashed the projected range. I agree wholeheartedly it should start at say 270 (m50) and adjust for conditions. On mine, it is forever and always 2x the percentage when idle, and then adjusts all over when driving. I just completely ignore and use the % x3 in the cold and now I may be going to x3.5 or even 4 as we warm up.

In any case, if even just the EPA range is met (3.4 mi per kw), I can get anywhere AND BACK without stopping (using only the recommended 10-80%), for me as far as NYC, Baltimore, all Jersey shore points, from Philly, so I'm fully satisfied at this point.