Re:Ford's F-150 Lightning, Once in Hot Demand, Lost Its Luster
by bandyaboot on Tuesday February 13, 2024 @09:52PM
(#39365818)
I disagree with this. I find the “range” to be a useful data point especially as the fuel level is getting low. As long as you have a general, realistic understanding of what it’s telling you. I don’t know specifically how the number is calculated, but my assumption is that it has got to be based on some sort of moving average of fuel consumption. With this I can keep an eye on the number and allow my human, good-at-pattern-recognition brain to do its thing and use it as an input to whatever decision I need to make. Personally, I find it a slightly better source of information than a simple fuel gauge that’s getting low.
Re:Ford's F-150 Lightning, Once in Hot Demand, Lost Its Luster
by gnicholas on Tuesday February 13, 2024 @09:17PM
(#39365569)
The variance in range of an EV is very different from in an ICE vehicle. My ICE doesn't seem to vary much based on temperature, whereas my PHEV really does. This is partly because of the way the battery is discharged itself, and partly because cold weather necessitates heating. ICE vehicles have a ready-made heat source, whereas EVs do not.
All this to say: I appreciate the mileage estimate in my ICE, but I've had to learn how my PHEV works to be able to interpret it fruitfully.
Some might argue: Well, nobody cares how much fuel is in their car or how many amp-hours are left, they care about range. Sure, but these systems are not providing range. They're providing wild-ass guesses based on unreliable inputs and incomplete data. Better to not provide the value at all than to give what's essentially a random guess.