Subaru Solterra Forum banner
1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Lexus rz450e review. Sounds like the same specs as the Solterra. Toyota shares a bit of their logic on battery sizing.
“For many drivers commuting to work or running errands, even 200 miles is plenty of juice, plus smaller battery packs cost and weigh less, provide better dynamics and allow the vehicle to be more efficient. The automaker projects this SUV will be 15% to 20% more economical than rival EVs, consuming as little as 18 kWh of juice per 100 kilometers. However, all this could just be an excuse because Toyota is behind the curve on electric vehicle development.”​

I guess we will find out when we see real worlds numbers.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
593 Posts
The RZ 450e has the 150 kW motor in the front and the 80 kW motor in the back for a total of about 308 hp compared to the Solterra's 215 hp. The Lexus also has the Panasonic battery that charges at 150 kW. I'm sure it also carries a hefty price, and limited this year to about 5300 units. It'll probably lose half of the tax rebate by the time it's delivered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
The RZ 450e has the 150 kW motor in the front and the 80 kW motor in the back for a total of about 308 hp compared to the Solterra's 215 hp. The Lexus also has the Panasonic battery that charges at 150 kW. I'm sure it also carries a hefty price, and limited this year to about 5300 units. It'll probably lose half of the tax rebate by the time it's delivered.
it also has a Lexus badge and I’m sure different colors.

still has a crappy range and a slow charge rate like the toybaru. Time will tell if this is the right strategy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
593 Posts
it also has a Lexus badge and I’m sure different colors.

still has a crappy range and a slow charge rate like the toybaru. Time will tell if this is the right strategy.
Indications are that the RZ 450e charges nearly twice as fast as the Solterra (30 minutes to 80% vs 56 minutes). But, the European Solterra charges that fast too with the Panasonic battery.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
There are two major strikes against Solterra range.

1) Smaller 72 kWh pack compared to 82 used by ID.4, Model Y. Even the Korean twins used a 77 kWh or larger pack.

2) SUV (UN)-aerodynamic shape. Low 70mph efficiency would be 3.0 mi/kWh and high would be 3.8 mi/kWh (Model Y numbers - not happening). This isn’t a sedan like a Model 3 or Lucid Air.

I suspect real world range will be 230ish which is 3.2mi/kWh. That’s RAV4 Prime efficiency.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
I wonder if future models would get a larger pack. At your figures suggested, people could gain 32 miles of range with a pack that was 10 kWh larger. That’s significant. But, perhaps reducing the pack size by 10 kWh lets them produce 1 extra car for every 7 they make, so it’s a manufacturing driven decision.

I believe materials is a limiting factor in production presently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
593 Posts
There are two major strikes against Solterra range.

1) Smaller 72 kWh pack compared to 82 used by ID.4, Model Y. Even the Korean twins used a 77 kWh or larger pack.

2) SUV (UN)-aerodynamic shape. Low 70mph efficiency would be 3.0 mi/kWh and high would be 3.8 mi/kWh (Model Y numbers - not happening). This isn’t a sedan like a Model 3 or Lucid Air.

I suspect real world range will be 230ish which is 3.2mi/kWh. That’s RAV4 Prime efficiency.
1. Smaller pack allows Solterra Touring to be 422 lbs lighter than the AWD ID.4 Pro S. This makes it potentially more efficient. A larger battery down from full means you're hauling around more dead weight. There's a sweet spot for battery size, and the Solterra has probably hit it.

2. Solterra has the same drag coefficient (.28) as the Kia EV6 and VW ID.4, and better than the Hyundai Ioniq 5 (0.288). The RAV4 Prime is likely 0.35 or so, and the Solterra is lower, and therefore a smaller frontal area. So, the Solterra is likely more efficient than the RAV4 Prime. I still want to see the real world efficiency number, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
1. Smaller pack allows Solterra Touring to be 422 lbs lighter than the AWD ID.4 Pro S. This makes it potentially more efficient. A larger battery down from full means you're hauling around more dead weight. There's a sweet spot for battery size, and the Solterra has probably hit it.
now only if they priced it accordingly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
this Article shares more on the Toyota EV philosophy. I think all Of us that read it might get different things from it.
:p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
593 Posts
Range will become mostly irrelevant in just a few years once the charging networks build out.

Charging speed will be the only spec that matters. Unfortunately for the Solterra.
But, the charging speed becomes less important as well with more stations closer together. You can stay in the sweet spot of the charging curve and not have to keep charging after it tapers significantly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
593 Posts
I still don’t want to stop every hour or 90 minutes for 30 more. Gross.
If you prefer to take longer getting to your destination, you can charge deep into the taper zone. Lots of people want to treat their batteries like gas tanks, and will take hours longer on road trips. I think that's gross. There needs to be more user education.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
I would rather not do either, if I was someone that would frequently road trip.

But, if the sweet spot is, say, 0-60%, that's at most, about 225*.6, or 135 miles. At 70 mph, that's less than 2 hours of driving before you have to stop again for charging.

I was not trying to suggest that someone should sit from 0-90 or higher - I am saying that I believe this will be a cause of frustration for drivers that expect to frequently DCFC with the curve as it stands now. Perhaps Toyota or Subaru will figure out a way to fix it - even if by request/TSB - at expense of warranty coverage.

Example - Customer request TSB for charging curve profile reprogramming, agrees to reduced warranty battery coverage. (maybe it'll be 6/60k instead)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
144 Posts
I would rather not do either, if I was someone that would frequently road trip.

But, if the sweet spot is, say, 0-60%, that's at most, about 225*.6, or 135 miles. At 70 mph, that's less than 2 hours of driving before you have to stop again for charging.

I was not trying to suggest that someone should sit from 0-90 or higher - I am saying that I believe this will be a cause of frustration for drivers that expect to frequently DCFC with the curve as it stands now. Perhaps Toyota or Subaru will figure out a way to fix it - even if by request/TSB - at expense of warranty coverage.

Example - Customer request TSB for charging curve profile reprogramming, agrees to reduced warranty battery coverage. (maybe it'll be 6/60k instead)
I have to agree that having to frequently stop on long road trips (thinking out in the north west) isn‘t just a customer education issue, although that’s part of it. It’s also a customer expectation issue, i.e. - once the EV manufacturers have collected all the low-hanging fruit (EV enthusiasts), they will need to start appealing more to those who are looking to do a refresh on an ICE vehicle. The latter will often have road-trip/vacation expectations that align closely with what they were able to get from their ICE cars.

It’s really hard to take features away from consumers once they’ve become accustomed to them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
I have to agree that having to frequently stop on long road trips (thinking out in the north west) isn‘t just a customer education issue, although that’s part of it. It’s also a customer expectation issue, i.e. - once the EV manufacturers have collected all the low-hanging fruit (EV enthusiasts), they will need to start appealing more to those who are looking to do a refresh on an ICE vehicle. The latter will often have road-trip/vacation expectations that align closely with what they were able to get from their ICE cars.

It’s really hard to take features away from consumers once they’ve become accustomed to them.
Well, let's hope that by that point we have an 800V standard that is shared across the industry, making it a quick 18 minute charge to go 0-80% and then give you 200 miles - now that's the ratio of driving to waiting/charging I'm looking for. 1:10 ratio.

Also, for people not familiar with EV life, there's more to charging than just your curve.

You have to navigate from your route to the charger.
You have to connect your vehicle to the charger.
You have to enable the charger (and pay).
You have to charge.
You have to get back to the highway/route from the charger.

These steps add roughly 5-10 minutes to each leg of your trip. So that 18 minute super fast Hyundai/EV6 rate is really like 25-30 minutes by the time you actually factor the "true time" cost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
593 Posts
I would rather not do either, if I was someone that would frequently road trip.

But, if the sweet spot is, say, 0-60%, that's at most, about 225*.6, or 135 miles. At 70 mph, that's less than 2 hours of driving before you have to stop again for charging.

I was not trying to suggest that someone should sit from 0-90 or higher - I am saying that I believe this will be a cause of frustration for drivers that expect to frequently DCFC with the curve as it stands now. Perhaps Toyota or Subaru will figure out a way to fix it - even if by request/TSB - at expense of warranty coverage.

Example - Customer request TSB for charging curve profile reprogramming, agrees to reduced warranty battery coverage. (maybe it'll be 6/60k instead)
We don't yet know how far it will go on 60% charge, since we don't have any real world evidence of the efficiency (mi/kWh) at 70 mph. I suspect it will be quite efficient, since it's 422 lbs lighter than the AWD ID.4 Pro S, and Alex on Autos saw 4 mi/kWh average on the Interstate over 40 minutes in Arizona.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
We don't yet know how far it will go on 60% charge, since we don't have any real world evidence of the efficiency (mi/kWh) at 70 mph. I suspect it will be quite efficient, since it's 422 lbs lighter than the AWD ID.4 Pro S, and Alex on Autos saw 4 mi/kWh average on the Interstate over 40 minutes in Arizona.
I think once you are up to speed, aerodynamics (drag coefficient) will matter more than weight differential. The ID.4 and Solterra seem similarly slippery. The 4mi/kWh that Alex noted for a short highway hop looks promising but I bet it will be pretty similar to other EVs in the bunch for efficiency.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top