Jump to content

ChrSchaefer

Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks for the reply. I didn’t notice there could be a difference between the models with different battery sizes. I don’t have a live data connection. People having this seem to arrive at rather 150Wh/km. Unfortunately, with the very pessimistic default, new users get the impression that ABRP is not very reliable. Perhaps, if you get more real world data, the model can be improved.
  2. I noticed that the app became unresponsive when a recalculation of the route was required. E. g. we took a break and ABRP thought we are on a road parallel to the motorway. I stopped the app in these cases and let I calculate a new trip. To be honest, if I would have been alone in the car, ABRP would have been useless for navigation. But I was the second driver so I had time to take care of it. Not sure if I will make the same effort on our way back. The charging network on our route is pretty good so I think we can skip the detailed planning and just use normal navigation apps or built-in car navigation. Also I found the reference consumption for our model to be much too high so it made no sense to follow the plan that was calculated by ABRP initially.
  3. See The e-Niro was released with 179Wh/km reference consumption. Currently ABRP sets 193Wh/km by default. I wonder why that has been changed.
  4. Thanks for your reply. I guess ABRP can only learn from your car if you have some data connection established? I was under the Impression from the ABRP blog that they got enough data for a generic model if a car is not in alpha or beta anymore. I would not mind 5% or even 10% deviation, but in the case I described it was 37% deviation in consumption. I believe this can't be explained by driving style.
  5. I also experienced that ABRP becomes slow and doesn't react anymore to inputs after some time in navigation mode, especially when it tries to calculate a new route. I didn't even try in CarPlay because I'm evaluating ABRP premium and we relied on Google and Apple for now. iPhone 12 Pro, iOS 14.7 ABRP version 4.0.46 (460) installed as an app When ABRP became slow the map was still moving (but not in the right position) and the sliding menu was reacting extremely slow or not at all to gestures. I also could not make the UI react to any input, e. g. cancelling the navigation. I also noticed, even if navigation is still responsive, that the two arrows to change the actual SoC up or down are reacting very slowly, like once per second. We do not have any live connection to our car. I also made two posts in the Niro section about accuracy of consumption and charging times predictions. Would be great if you could have a look.
  6. Hi, I noticed that ABRP seems to underestimate charging times for the Kia e-Niro 64kWh. For example attached is the output of ABRP 48% to 83% at a fast charger in 24mins. In reality we had 38mins of charging time for this. I watched the charger (our first time on the motorway with an electric car, so this was exciting ?) and it followed basically the curve as described by FastNed: https://support.fastned.nl/hc/en-gb/articles/360007699174-Charging-with-a-Kia-e-Niro So I wonder if ABRP is underestimating charging times of the e-Niro and therefore is planning too many stops or too early. Best regards, Christian.
  7. Hi, for our first long distance trip with our e-Niro 64kWh I got a monthly subscription for ABRP for iOS. I noticed very early during our trip that we consumed _way_ less power than ABRP estimated. First we had a lot of traffic and had to drive slowly. We than changed our plan from four to three stops. As an example on how much ABRP differed this is our last leg of the trip: https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=4fa026de-d4f9-485c-b0e4-de89a003ec1e We left with 72% SoC in Schweitenkirchen and continued to Inzell where we wanted to arrive with 20%. Weather and traffic were ideal and I could drive at max allowed speed or 120 km/h (this was our setting in ABRP). We arrived at about the predicted time with 107km/h average and 29% SoC. If I use ABRP with default settings it shows we would arrive with 13% SoC, which is a very big difference. With 170 Wh/km reference consumption the result is somewhat better with 20% SoC at destination. To get close to the 29% value I have to enter a reference value as low as 140 Wh/km. I really wonder why the difference is so big. We used normal driving mode, air condition, and electronics as usual.
×
×
  • Create New...