Subaru Solterra Forum banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
There are 3LT and 3RS trims listed too if you scroll to the right.

To compare with Solterra, it’s unknown how much AWD will cost. And I’ll be pretty surprised if the Equinox is any good off road, though it should be OK in snow on road. I currently drive an ICE Equinox AWD and it’s ok. I’d like more ground clearance which is why I’ve been looking at the Solterra. The Equinox EV probably won’t have that.

I feel like it’s basically a Bolt replacement with better charging.

In the States it should qualify for some or all of the tax credit which is a pretty big advantage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
355 Posts
I've been pointing to the Equinox as the most likely [and probably cheaper] competitor to the Solterra for quite a while, but unfortunately the cargo size (57.2 with seats down, which don't fold flat) points more to a Crosstrek replacement than a Forester or Outback replacement.

The 3RS seems to be the only one that has "all the stuff" (especially faster 19.2 kW charging) I would expect of a comparable or better vehicle. We'll see what they do with pricing at that level, but I would estimate it will be around $50K or more. The Blazer EV RS I reserved was quoted at "Estimated MSRP Starting Around: $51,995.00", but if you go to their website it has already been raised to $52,295.

It's already about a year away, but seems like the things you get for waiting an additional year for the 3RS are larger wheels and a 19.2kW charger (and probably a higher price).

| 3RS AWD | 280 miles |
The fully loaded Equinox 3RS has an available 19.2-kW Level 2 charger, which can add 51 miles of range in an hour. Across the board, all Equinox EVs will have a maximum DC fast charging speed of 150 kW, and Chevy says this is powerful enough to add 70 miles of range in as little as 10 minutes.
21" dark aero wheels
Available Super Cruise™* driver assistance technology for compatible roads
Available 19.2 KW Level 2 (AC) charging module
Black-painted grille panel and lower fascia with sporty flow-through rocker molding
Heated flat-bottom steering wheel
Now I'm disappointed and thinking the Solterra is back to the best all-around vehicle, despite all of its drawbacks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
What is the ground clearance of the Blazer?
A very good question. Seems like ground clearance is an afterthought for most manufacturers. They didn't say what it was for the Equinox either. The Blazer top trim has 22" wheels with rubber band tires so clearly off road is not a big priority for it though. It is also my current "plan B" unless it's somehow worse than my current vehicle off road. I'll put in a reservation for the Equinox too if and when they open up. But that one's not showing up for 18 months.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
There are 3LT and 3RS trims listed too if you scroll to the right.
To compare with Solterra, it’s unknown how much AWD will cost. And I’ll be pretty surprised if the Equinox is any good off road, though it should be OK in snow on road. I currently drive an ICE Equinox AWD and it’s ok. I’d like more ground clearance which is why I’ve been looking at the Solterra. The Equinox EV probably won’t have that.
In the States it should qualify for some or all of the tax credit which is a pretty big advantage.
I was wondering about seeing only three Equinox models, thanks.
Some of the info floating around suggests the best model will start at over $50k. I don't know.
Also the EV will be made at a GM plant in Mexico. So no or reduced $7500 tax credit.
That said... I think its great looking, especially the interior.
And it leaves Solterra in the dust on most specs (charging time, range, acceleration) and features. Even has a self-driving mode on approved roads (whatever that may mean).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
I was wondering about seeing only three Equinox models, thanks.
Some of the info floating around suggests the best model will start at over $50k. I don't know.
Also the EV will be made at a GM plant in Mexico. So no or reduced $7500 tax credit.
That said... I think its great looking, especially the interior.
And it leaves Solterra in the dust on most specs (charging time, range) and features.
Even has a self-driving mode on approved roads (whatever that may mean).
Mexico is fine - meets the North American assembly requirement. And the Ultium batteries are all made in USA too I think? Battery materials would be the only question but I thought those provisions kick in later. Not too sure as I don't live in the US.

The Ultium battery system is the single biggest reason to ditch the Solterra in my opinion... not only are specs much better right now, it's much more modular and serviceable. Each battery module has its own BMS and could in theory be upgraded to new technology down the road. WAY more future proof. Though in reality, I suppose that never happens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
355 Posts
I'd say the Solterra cargo area is placed between the Forester and Outback, just as Subaru marketing has suggested. The sloped back reduces the total volume, but there's much more usable floor area in the Solterra than the Crosstrek. Someday we'll get measurements, but the height restriction is bugging me less and less.

Full Comparison Chart: (Ducatista, Feb 17, 2022)

Specification2023 Solterra2022 Outback Touring XT2022 Forester Touring2022 Crosstrek Limited2022 VW ID.4 AWD
Cargo volume upper floor position (cu.ft.)27.732.526.920.830.3
Cargo volume lower floor position (cu.ft.)30.3N/AN/AN/AN/A
Cargo volume (max) with rear seats lowered (cu.ft)Unknown75.769.155.364.2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
355 Posts
Your logic reminds me of when I had a first year Jeep Liberty. The seats angled back pretty far making a practically unusable triangle at the back of the cargo area, and the volume of 29.0 cu/ft was calculated with lots of vertical height so regardless of what I carried it all had to get stacked. When the Dodge Magnum came out a couple years later, it had 27.2 cu/ft but it was all horizontal and much more usable, similar to the Outback.

I've had Outbacks since 2014 and my wife got a Crosstrek the same year but in 2017 moved up to a Forester because the cargo space in the Crosstrek was just too small. It's always a shock to her when she opens the back of the Outback and sees just how cavernous it is.

So your skepticism and comparison with the Crosstrek made me go look at the different cargo areas because its always nice to have pictures when talking about stuff. So I added the images here in order of cu/ft. Note the Forester gains 2.0 cu/ft without the sunroof which to me doesn't really translate to more usable space, but that's all part of the difference between volume numbers and practicality.

20.8 cu/ft
Vehicle Car Motor vehicle Automotive tire Automotive design


26.9 cu/ft
Car Vehicle Trunk Motor vehicle Automotive exterior


27.7 cu/ft
Car Vehicle Automotive tire Trunk Motor vehicle


32.6 cu/ft
Car Vehicle Motor vehicle Trunk Automotive design
 

·
Registered
2022 Hyundai Ioniq 5 Preferred AWD LR
Joined
·
31 Posts
I've been pointing to the Equinox as the most likely [and probably cheaper] competitor to the Solterra for quite a while, but unfortunately the cargo size (57.2 with seats down, which don't fold flat) points more to a Crosstrek replacement than a Forester or Outback replacement.

The 3RS seems to be the only one that has "all the stuff" (especially faster 19.2 kW charging) I would expect of a comparable or better vehicle. We'll see what they do with pricing at that level, but I would estimate it will be around $50K or more. The Blazer EV RS I reserved was quoted at "Estimated MSRP Starting Around: $51,995.00", but if you go to their website it has already been raised to $52,295.

It's already about a year away, but seems like the things you get for waiting an additional year for the 3RS are larger wheels and a 19.2kW charger (and probably a higher price).



Now I'm disappointed and thinking the Solterra is back to the best all-around vehicle, despite all of its drawbacks.
Anything more than 10kW level 2 charging seems like overkill on a 70-100kWh battery unless you very frequently take long lunches somewhere with a 22kW charger. You're lucky to find a 10kW l2 charger out and about (I've so far used 2 or 3 in the last 7 months that were faster than 6kW), let alone above 10kW. (I've found one ever that got me the 11.5kW max for my car.) For home charging, 10kW does 0-100% on a 100kWh battery in 10 hours, so easily done overnight, and shorter for the more typical 70-80kWh batteries on small to midsize SUVs. It's a pretty specific lifestyle that demands more than 10kW l2 charging for that battery size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Anything more than 10kW level 2 charging seems like overkill on a 70-100kWh battery unless you very frequently take long lunches somewhere with a 22kW charger. You're lucky to find a 10kW l2 charger out and about (I've so far used 2 or 3 in the last 7 months that were faster than 6kW), let alone above 10kW. (I've found one ever that got me the 11.5kW max for my car.) For home charging, 10kW does 0-100% on a 100kWh battery in 10 hours, so easily done overnight, and shorter for the more typical 70-80kWh batteries on small to midsize SUVs. It's a pretty specific lifestyle that demands more than 10kW l2 charging for that battery size.
Well said! More isn't always better, sometimes it's just more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
355 Posts
The terms "overkill" and "better" are very subjective, and I think most people would agree the end result in evaluating any charging capability is how much range is added by charging for any particular amount of time.

I believe charging time specifics were well argued in another thread, but the point I was making earlier by comparing the vehicle models (the point of this thread) was that waiting another 6 months to a year for the Blazer EV 3RS would net larger hardware to allow the vehicle to accept higher capacity level 2 chargers (which almost doubles the amount of miles added per hour). Just because there aren't many highly-capable level 2 chargers available right now doesn't mean there won't be any in the future. It is likely utility-side charging technology will continue to change/evolve and become more robust over time, but once you buy a car you are stuck with the charging hardware built into it -- which is the point I was making with the comparison.

I also believe the bulk of future charging (not at home) will be level 2 installed in "regular" parking spots across most businesses/stores, and I got curious about the amount of range different level 2 charging capabilities would add. There have been lots of numbers thrown around regarding what to install at home and very wide variations of claims with regard to number of miles added per hour of charging. Since it's all just math, I plotted out some of the most common numbers for both circuit amperage and kW capabilities (so the Y axis isn't linear, it's just selected kW based on either installation amps or vehicle kW capabilities).

Note all the "Charging Power" figures below were using 240 volts, even though the lowest value is more like charging at level 1 (which at 15 amps would only deliver 1.8 kW with 120 volts), and calculated vehicle efficiency is energy used per (1) mile.

Calculations/terms (so someone can correct me if I screwed it up):
V x A / 1000 = kW
Efficiency = miles / kW

Level 1 Charging (120 volts, 15-20 amps)
Level 2 Charging (240 volts, up to 80 amps, which requires a 100 amp circuit)

1108


Font Parallel Number Rectangle Electric blue


Formula References
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Calculations/terms (so someone can correct me if I screwed it up):
V x A / 1000 = kW
Efficiency = miles / kW

Level 1 Charging (120 volts, 15-20 amps)
Level 2 Charging (240 volts, up to 80 amps, which requires a 100 amp circuit)

View attachment 1108

View attachment 1107

Formula References
In the graph and table, you correctly report efficiency as miles/kWh, so I assume the mention in the text "Efficiency = miles / kW" was just a typo/oversight?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
355 Posts
In the graph and table, you correctly report efficiency as miles/kWh, so I assume the mention in the text "Efficiency = miles / kW" was just a typo/oversight?
"Efficiency" kind of got overloaded, that's why I added the statement, "calculated vehicle efficiency is energy used per (1) mile."

So a car getting 3.5 miles/kWh would have a vehicle efficiency of 0.2857 (1/3.5) for calculation purposes.
Then 6.6 kW / 0.2857 = 23.1 miles added per hour of charging.

At least that's how I read it all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
"Efficiency" kind of got overloaded, that's why I added the statement, "calculated vehicle efficiency is energy used per (1) mile."

So a car getting 3.5 miles/kWh would have a vehicle efficiency of 0.2857 (1/3.5) for calculation purposes.
Then 6.6 kW / 0.2857 = 23.1 miles added per hour of charging.

At least that's how I read it all.
Or, simply, 6.6 x 3.5 = 23.1 miles added per hour of charging.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top