Cocijo
Distinguished Member
As you may know the predicted range on the MG uses an algorithm based on a few parameters to predict the expected range. One of these is your historic use of the car and average miles/Kwhr achieved.
Overall this gives a much more accurate prediction of what in the real world the car can achieve. For example in winter on a car that typically achieves around 3miles/Kwhr the predicted range might be around 135miles (ZS) when fully charged.
There are lots of posts from owners who feel hard done by and complain to MG that their cars don’t show anywhere near the 163miles (ZS) that they expected. They judge their cars range based on what is shown as the predicted range, which is a fair comment to make.
Tesla for example, on the other hand chose to display range based on the certified range of the car, less any battery losses. So for example when fully charged a Model 3 might show around 310miles range.
If MG did this, most of the time the predicted range would just show around 163miles when fully charged.
Now whilst this might give owners initially a little more comfort, the reality is that as in the Tesla, during normal real world driving this drops considerably as you drive and the actual range has little or no bearing on the predicted, unless conditions are perfect and match those when tests were carried out.
Which would you rather have?
Is it fair to show an inaccurate prediction?
Has MG set up the predictive range in a way that invites owners dissatisfaction by being too accurate?
Overall this gives a much more accurate prediction of what in the real world the car can achieve. For example in winter on a car that typically achieves around 3miles/Kwhr the predicted range might be around 135miles (ZS) when fully charged.
There are lots of posts from owners who feel hard done by and complain to MG that their cars don’t show anywhere near the 163miles (ZS) that they expected. They judge their cars range based on what is shown as the predicted range, which is a fair comment to make.
Tesla for example, on the other hand chose to display range based on the certified range of the car, less any battery losses. So for example when fully charged a Model 3 might show around 310miles range.
If MG did this, most of the time the predicted range would just show around 163miles when fully charged.
Now whilst this might give owners initially a little more comfort, the reality is that as in the Tesla, during normal real world driving this drops considerably as you drive and the actual range has little or no bearing on the predicted, unless conditions are perfect and match those when tests were carried out.
Which would you rather have?
Is it fair to show an inaccurate prediction?
Has MG set up the predictive range in a way that invites owners dissatisfaction by being too accurate?