Motorway efficiency test MG4 Trophy

[Deleted member 9692]

As a rule I wouldn't normally, but if it allows me to fo an extra 30 miles on a long trip and avoids an expensive top up then it's good to know you've got the option.

For example I'm 220 miles from the Scottish border and probably wouldn't be able to reach those nice cheap chargeplace Scotland points going at normal speeds on a full charge.

Makes complete sense in your scenario. I was thinking more about the people that don’t really need to “hyper mile” or freeze/roast with no HVAC but still do. I am Scottish and I think maybe living down south so long has made me go soft!

 

[JimB]

The problem on forums like this is the people want to drive for fun all the time (who doesn't) but simultaneously moan about how poor the car's range is compared to the manufacturers claims.

These will also have moaned incessantly when their ic car failed miserably to achieve anything like the claims for that.

56 mph (not 60!) has for decades, possibly forever, been the most efficient compromise between progress and cost, and probably always will be so if there is a discussion about how to exact maximum range from any vehicle with any type of power source there is no need to look further.

Why do you think Bjorn does his 90 kmph tests on everything? (And he, like most people, keeps the heater or a/c on plus any other car features he wants to use)

Here's why;

90 Kilometers per Hour =
55.923407 Miles per Hour.

It's not compulsory, just a fact, so if you're getting low on juice maybe speeding up to get there before it runs out might not be the best decision, even though it might be fun while it lasts?

Any vehicle creates a vacuum behind it when moving and it's in that area that slipstreaming takes place. In my opinion to take advantage of that you would be driving extremely dangerously.

 

[Ian Key]

Hyper-miling in any car irrespective of the power source uses the same techniques. No A/C or heating, light right foot and good anticipation. Also the weight of the vehicle makes a difference so no spare wheel, no electric seat controls, no using the radio etc. and no fun
To be honest I'm to old to sit in a cold car with no music and acting as a mobile road block so A/C on full, radio on, heated seat on and enjoying the occasional traffic light GP

 

[Deleted member 10041]

Hyper-miling in any car irrespective of the power source uses the same techniques. No A/C or heating, light right foot and good anticipation. Also the weight of the vehicle makes a difference so no spare wheel, no electric seat controls, no using the radio etc. and no fun
To be honest I'm to old to sit in a cold car with no music and acting as a mobile road block so A/C on full, radio on, heated seat on and enjoying the occasional traffic light GP

100% agree

 

[Deleted member 9692]

Any vehicle creates a vacuum behind it when moving and it's in that area that slipstreaming takes place. In my opinion to take advantage of that you would be driving extremely dangerously.

I see so many people in cars on motorways who choose to be in close proximity to HGVs driving at 56mph ish for mile after mile. Not for me, TYVM. As long as I am not in an extreme and critical range anxiety scenario I will be staying as far away from said HGVs as is safely possible and before anyone pipes up with "if you had the skills you could" - I am an ex coach and HGV driver!

 

[Kithmo]

I see so many people in cars on motorways who choose to be in close proximity to HGVs driving at 56mph ish for mile after mile. Not for me, TYVM. As long as I am not in an extreme and critical range anxiety scenario I will be staying as far away from said HGVs as is safely possible and before anyone pipes up with "if you had the skills you could" - I am an ex coach and HGV driver!

I suspect Autoglass sees many of the same people too.

 

[siteguru]

Well, I suppose if anyone can, Shengis can.

I see what you did there ?

 

[JimB]

I see what you did there ?

Well, they can't stop us laughing - although they're having a bl**dy good try! ?

 

[jamesfromwales]

Have you driven the mg4 any distance? It’s not efficient on motorway runs unless you want to pi55off the lorry drivers, which I’d suggest isn’t a great advert for EVs.

3.8mi/kWh is good going at 63-65mph.

It’s my 4th EV in 10 years and efficiency on par with my old 24kWh Leaf, things really should have moved on. I don’t think they’re bothering, just sticking in bigger batteries, which is a real shame.

We drove our IONIQ 38 alongside our MG4 on several routes and it averaged out at 5.2mi/kWh vs 3.8 for the MG. Cross country A/B roads it was 6.2 v 4.5 on our last dual drive over 60 miles, round trip. Yes…….the Ioniq is powered by Fairy/Unicorn/Rocking Horse poo/magic etc and lighter and more aero……but I still think for a smallish hatch the MG4 should do better.

perhaps they will when the undertrays aren’t acting like windbreaks hanging down.

If you had to buy mg 4 or ionic 38 again which would you get and why?

 

[BugEyed]

You don't need to get close to trucks at 56 mph.

I've just done a return trip from Chesterfield to Liverpool in my Outlander phev brick, 77 miles each way with 23 miles electric range outbound and 1 mile range at the start of the return.

Plenty of hills at the Derbyshire side.

Regen contributed enough for 66% of the outbound to be ev and 50% on the return with electric efficiency 4.2miles per kwh.

Much of the trip on motorway at 56 plus excursions into higher speeds to pass vehicles travelling at 56 on over-reading speedos rather than gps, and on minor roads matching general traffic speeds.

If you can't better 4 miles per kwh with an MG4 you're doomed as an ev driver, doomed I tell ye ??

Firstly, thank you for your continual trolling.

Your efficiency figures for your PHEV are not produced on an equivalent basis to those for an EV, therefor are irrelevant as a comparison.

The MG4 is not a paragon of efficiency in comparison to either SK produced cars or Teslas yet. But MG are improving rapidly.

 

[JimB]

First of all, I don't troll..as far as I'm concerned I simply take part in some conversations.

My quotes regarding what my Outlander can achieve whilst under pure ev power is just as relevant as references to any other bev, particularly as it must be less efficient than the MG4 under discussion.

The efficiency figures quoted are purely those in respect of the car under electric power and do not include any petrol fuelled miles.

Edit: Of course the flaw in my rather naive wonder at the efficiency of the Outlander is that a proportion of the regenerated electricity used is first created by burning petrol and of course that does invalidate the comparison.

I can only apologise for my stupidity but am thankful that the truth dawned on me before the sun actually came up this morning?

 

[Paulie68]

I suspect Autoglass sees many of the same people too.

Yep, and they're usually the same ones moaning about how crappy and soft their new cars paintwork seems to be as it already has dozens of chips all over the front for no good reason after only a couple of thousand miles! (of such stupid behavior!)

 

[MATTR5]

Hi Guys. I’m thinking of buying the MG4 long range. I bought a Corsa EV claimed range 209 miles - never did more than 160 with a very light foot - but the Worst thing was at eg 70pmh the range dropped to about 120 - I’m told they’ve fixed this a bit with updates/mechanicals
luckily the car broke down twice in the first month so I was able to hand it back
Can anyone say the kWh efficiency at 70mph no ac level road in the MG4 or has anyone done a long distance road trip between 65-70mph (not 56 i Can see it’s ok) and seen what happened to range? it would really help me decide whether to take the plunge - Thanks in advance. Matt.

 

[siteguru]

That's a review of a journey up to Aberdeen, so mostly motorways and 65/70 speeds. At 11:57 I can see that the guess-o-meter (GOM) is saying 3.2 mpkWh ... on the LR MG4 with, say, 55 kWh usable (as you don't want to go below 10% state of charge usually) this would give 55 x 3.2 = 176 miles range.

Use a lighter right foot and the mpkWh may rise - I've seen others say they get nearer 3.9, which would give 214 miles.

Edit: in the comments for that video they say they averaged 3.7 mpkWh including traversing the hills, which would be 203 miles.

 

[JayEV2022]

That's a review of a journey up to Aberdeen, so mostly motorways and 65/70 speeds. At 11:57 I can see that the guess-o-meter (GOM) is saying 3.2 mpkWh ... on the LR MG4 with, say, 55 kWh usable (as you don't want to go below 10% state of charge usually) this would give 55 x 3.2 = 176 miles range.

Use a lighter right foot and the mpkWh may rise - I've seen others say they get nearer 3.9, which would give 214 miles.

Brilliant, thanks for the response

 

[MATTR5]

Hi. I thought I'd spend this nice day seeing what difference it made changing the Regen settings and testing the efficiency at gentle motorway speeds.

I did 2 runs of 27 mile there, 27 mile back along the A46 dual carriageway from North Leicester to Newark. This allowed a clear run with no slowdowns apart from a roundabout at start and finish.

Mode was set to Normal in both cases. Radio off, auto lighting off, maintaining speed between 60 and 65mph. Sunny weather with light winds.

In test 1 I left regen on setting 3, whilst in test 2 I changed it to level 1 in order to give more coasting and less engine braking.

The results are as follows (please don't laugh!)
Test 1: 54.9 miles, 3.8 ml/kw
Test 2: 54.9 miles, 3.8 ml/kw

As you can see from the pics the range decreased by 69 miles during the 2nd run of 55 miles. I reckon this gives a range of 235 miles, though I'll want to do further tests at 56 mph and 70mph to see to what extent speed is a factor. I'll probably also test the eco mode out of curiosity.

That’s great. I forgot to ask when charged fully does it tend to predict the claimed range or is it a bit lower. Last question I promise

 

[WonkoTheSaneUK]

That’s great. I forgot to ask when charged fully does it tend to predict the claimed range or is it a bit lower. Last question I promise

It also depends on your driving style over the last few trips, so YMMV - literally.

 

[MATTR5]

Thanks Wonko and Siteguru - I somehow replied to the wrong person above
Im fairly light footed (I keep my distance to avoid braking etc) but on a very long journey 56mph drives me nuts - if I can get 170 odd miles at 65-70mph which looks hopeful That's going to work for me - Thanks

 

[Nigelleics]

I

That’s great. I forgot to ask when charged fully does it tend to predict the claimed range or is it a bit lower. Last question I promise

I've yet to get it fully charged, so am unsure. I am however going to do another test run this afternoon on the route I used previously, now I've got enough sun juice in.

 

[Nigelleics]

Ok, did a couple more test runs today using the same route which produced 3.8ml/kw with regen 1 and 3 at 60 tp 65mph.

There was quite a stiff wind which gave some interesting results when comparing driving with the tailwind v against the headwind.

Test 1: Eco mode, regen 3, target speed 65 to 70mph. Average trip speed 63mph. Over 54 miles the ml/kwh was 3.3, which was quite a drop from the 3.8 achieved at just 5mph less.

Over 27 miles with a 20mph tailwind I achieved 3.9. The return 27 miles into the wind gave only 2.7

Test 2: Eco mode, regen 3, target speed 55-60mph.Average trip speed 52mph. Over 54 miles the ml/kwh was 4.5

Over 27 miles with tailwind I achieved 5.0. The return leg into the wind gave 4.0

It's clear that speed and wind conditions have an outsized impact on efficiency. Perhaps the mg4 isn't the most aerodynamic car around, and the wind noise probably is a symptom of that.

Over the tests we have:

55-60mph: 4.5
60-65mph: 3.8
65-70mph: 3.3

20mph tailwind can add 0.5 to 0.6, 20mph headwind can take away 0.5 to 0.6 depending on driving speed. Clearly wind effect can be much higher, today was only around 20mph average wind.