Substantially below WLTP range

MG EV Interest Group
Nagaman
Senior Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed, 20 Nov 2019, 05:17
Real Name: David

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by Nagaman »

navydiver wrote: Wed, 28 Jul 2021, 19:53 HI David
I would could have waited for a much more suitable BEV or FCEV for my needs including towing a large recycling trailer I have for cardboard and paper.
My MG is effective just has not yet done anything like the WLTP it should or is advertised to. It seems odd to me that being honest or hiding my reasonable expectations of getting what we pay for is damaging. Excuse me if you feel this an attack on EVs or batteries. The car has a warranty and will be fixed or replaced. It is simple I feel not meaning to offend or scare people.

Next post will hopefully show my issue was created by buying a demonstrator which may not have had a careful or usual charge/use/charge process for the few weeks prior to it coming to me. Good night
I wasn’t having a go at you James.
It was an observation that dealerships, genuine about promoting the sale of EVs, need to make sure they fully understand their own product and thus avoid such a situation every frightening off potential customers through their lack of basic product knowledge. Didn’t the PDI get done in a professional manner by the dealer ?
Ours strangely alternates between a 263 km range and a 220 at 451V SOC and I don’t know why and I couldn’t explain it to anyone wanting to learn about EVs.
FyKnight
Groupie
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon, 01 Feb 2021, 17:09

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by FyKnight »

Nagaman wrote: Thu, 29 Jul 2021, 14:29 Ours strangely alternates between a 263 km range and a 220 at 451V SOC and I don’t know why and I couldn’t explain it to anyone wanting to learn about EVs.
Nagaman isn't this determined by whether the "HVAC" is on or off? Toggling that button switches the range shown when fully charged between those two figures for me.
FyKnight
Groupie
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon, 01 Feb 2021, 17:09

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by FyKnight »

navydiver wrote: Wed, 23 Jun 2021, 18:43 Option 1 (Customer drive cycle)
When the customer drives the vehicle the battery performance is optimised and will regain the reduction
in range over time. This will occur at a rate of around 1mv per hr. of HV battery power (driving or
charging).
Wow that's really interesting! So they are balancing as you drive then? No reason not to I guess just surprising.
navydiver wrote: Wed, 23 Jun 2021, 18:43 Option 2 (workshop static cycle)
The vehicle can be placed in a static position in the workshop with the vehicle ignition is in ready state
and the A/C on full speed to discharge the battery. The Vehicle can then be plugged in to the supplied
vehicle charger (AC type) for slow charge.
This process will allow the HV battery to discharge and re-charge simulating the Customer Drive cycle
without driving the vehicle.
It is expected the battery cell voltage gap will reduce by around 20mv per charge.
So the normal top balancing gives you a 20 mV reduction. Great to know!
navydiver
Groupie
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon, 03 May 2021, 20:05
Real Name: James

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by navydiver »

Followed that process for weeks over 3000km switching AC then DC charge. Last charge a week ago still showed just 210km range after full charging ( DC CCS)

car is back with dealer trying the dealer side process I think. Of interest was they lent me a brand new MG XS EV. Lent to me with just 330 km on the odometer. It was fully charged by dealer. Oddly showed max range of just 224km?

The loaned car seems to be getting exactly the range suggested which is good. If it was the stated WLTP I would be a lot more happy.

Did 184km in the new loaned car and then charged it fully (AC 7KwH charge) Oddly again the range suggest was less than the first 224 down to 210? I am baffled by this one as well perhaps. I did not find a full charge to empty in under 60km like I had so much more comfortable and relaxed.

On a bright note I think the lane keeping auto steering I had not noticed on mine if rather cool. It is suttle and almost exactly tracks what I was doing so it took me a while to notice it. It adds a very audible warning to keep hands on the steering wheel. I started holding the wheel very loosely to watch the auto lane keeping :D :D :D

MG and dealer will try and recover my battery balance. A very bright Electrician working on my Work electrical system on Friday night and I had a good chat about this. We both think the BMS software is the issue. Assuming the electrician and I are correct BMS software can be fixed and will be quickly as clearly others are and will be impacted if it is not. The Sparky is a expert in my work BMS redflow ZBM batteries so I suspect he is on the money :D
FyKnight
Groupie
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon, 01 Feb 2021, 17:09

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by FyKnight »

I'm glad you've had a bit of a better experience with the loan car.
navydiver wrote: Mon, 16 Aug 2021, 15:42 Followed that process for weeks over 3000km switching AC then DC charge. Last charge a week ago still showed just 210km range after full charging ( DC CCS)

car is back with dealer trying the dealer side process I think. Of interest was they lent me a brand new MG XS EV. Lent to me with just 330 km on the odometer. It was fully charged by dealer. Oddly showed max range of just 224km?
Can you confirm that the AC ("HVAC") was totally off when you read that 224? Including the fan? I'm talking about the button in the bottom left, was it lit up?

Also I thought the manual said it only balanced during AC charging not DC charging (because the OBC is bypassed) but I don't have the latest BMS so I don't know. BMS shouldn't be in the OBC but who knows.
navydiver
Groupie
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon, 03 May 2021, 20:05
Real Name: James

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by navydiver »

The MG australia notice was the instructions followed. I am not at all sure if the rebalancing occurs at the AC only or DC and AC charge steps.

HVAC is set at lowest fan speed and right in the middle. Not hot nor cold. Do you think the HVAC could take 50km of range? That is 18.8% of the 266 WLTP. I appreciate lights radio and heating or cooling use some power.
What does the WLTP mean for motorists?
Grafik: Nummerierung Kapitel WLTP Q & A - hier 06
Even though the WLTP cannot depict the full range of actual vehicle usage, it provides a better basis of information for making decisions when buying a car by providing a greater approximation to real-world driving conditions.
WLTP are always carried out with the air conditioning system switched off. is true.
https://www.vda.de/en/topics/environmen ... -WLTP.html

The WLTP on the other EV here seem to allow for Radio, Nav, driving lights and HVAC with just a few km or % from the range expected. " I will happily leave the HVAC off to test the new loan car. Do note the car is not on when charged and the range estimated should be at 100% SOC from AC or DC.
FyKnight
Groupie
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon, 01 Feb 2021, 17:09

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by FyKnight »

navydiver wrote: Tue, 17 Aug 2021, 04:07 Do you think the HVAC could take 50km of range?
That's exactly what it does on my car for the range display. Pressing the button even with fan on lowest immediately toggles from 260-ish to 220-ish. Do you see that behaviour too?

I wouldn't think that charging would remember the state of the HVAC as you say (so should always show max) but maybe.

But yes with your fan on low and no heating or cooling. it won't take any measurable energy in real life. That fan would be 50 watts or less. So this won't help with real life driving experience.

Also I think it's safer to have the temperature set all the way to cold and leave the aircon function off, rather than be in the middle. I don't know what the rule for turning on a heater is rather than using the excess battery heat (in fact I don't even know for sure if it does have a heater...)
Nagaman
Senior Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed, 20 Nov 2019, 05:17
Real Name: David

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by Nagaman »

I use the recirculate when the heater is on.
Nagaman
Senior Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed, 20 Nov 2019, 05:17
Real Name: David

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by Nagaman »

FtKnight wrote:Nagaman isn't this determined by whether the "HVAC" is on or off? Toggling that button switches the range shown when fully charged between those two figures for me.
Yeah, the range toggles with the heater activation (power) button with temp irrelevant it seems.
navydiver
Groupie
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon, 03 May 2021, 20:05
Real Name: James

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by navydiver »

I'll be blown said ... with the HVAC off during a AC charge and the range showed 260. That is before I moved this afternoon. 220km ago after a full charge it showed 210. I wonder if it is the software range indication which is one of the major error/issues in my car?
MG and Ringingwood MG are being very helpful in investigating mine while I have this new loan one.

The new one with HVAC on did go almost one for one with range estimate to odometer. I did try a full charge on mine and had radio, HVAC and everything off once where it did not get anything like expected range. That was before battery cell rebalancing process I have done and MG/Ringwood seems to be continuing.

Happy to see if I get over 200 with the 60 left. A bit slower during my lock down. I am still at work so a few KMs going on.
Nagaman
Senior Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed, 20 Nov 2019, 05:17
Real Name: David

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by Nagaman »

The so called Pan Asian head unit has battery % we haven’t got .
An app that works also. It’s almost as if they had old stock to get rid off and the west was a best option.
User avatar
coulomb
Site Admin
Posts: 4941
Joined: Thu, 22 Jan 2009, 20:32
Real Name: Mike Van Emmerik
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by coulomb »

navydiver wrote: Wed, 18 Aug 2021, 15:50 I'll be blown said ... with the HVAC off during a AC charge and the range showed 260. That is before I moved this afternoon. 220km ago after a full charge it showed 210. I wonder if it is the software range indication which is one of the major error/issues in my car?
Before you can start blaming the car and its firmware, you have to reset both the current trip and the long-term statistics. This removes the variable of your recent driving activity (was it predominantly downhill, spirited, rain, cross-wind, temperature, etc). Then it's my understanding that if you have the correct firmware and your battery hasn't degraded to any significant degree as yet (i.e. a Bluetooth App will show 100% SOH), then you should see exactly 263 km of estimated range, perhaps ±1 km, assuming that you have the HVAC off, with the default driving mode (Normal) and KERs 3 (default regen setting).
MG ZS EV 2021 April 2021.
Nissan Leaf 2012 with new battery May 2019.
5650 W solar, 2xPIP-4048MS inverters, 16 kWh battery.
1.4 kW solar with 1.2 kW Latronics inverter and FIT.
Patching PIP-4048/5048 inverter-chargers.
Nagaman
Senior Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed, 20 Nov 2019, 05:17
Real Name: David

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by Nagaman »

The range in ours drops crudely in step with the 8 blocks.
navydiver
Groupie
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon, 03 May 2021, 20:05
Real Name: James

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by navydiver »

coulomb wrote: Wed, 18 Aug 2021, 19:52
navydiver wrote: Wed, 18 Aug 2021, 15:50 I'll be blown said ... with the HVAC off during a AC charge and the range showed 260. That is before I moved this afternoon. 220km ago after a full charge it showed 210. I wonder if it is the software range indication which is one of the major error/issues in my car?
Before you can start blaming the car and its firmware, you have to reset both the current trip and the long-term statistics. This removes the variable of your recent driving activity (was it predominantly downhill, spirited, rain, cross-wind, temperature, etc). Then it's my understanding that if you have the correct firmware and your battery hasn't degraded to any significant degree as yet (i.e. a Bluetooth App will show 100% SOH), then you should see exactly 263 km of estimated range, perhaps ±1 km, assuming that you have the HVAC off, with the default driving mode (Normal) and KERs 3 (default regen setting).
Blame is not my game- Working with MG ringwood and MG who are helping. I want it to do what I expect/require :D MG is clearly aware the BMS has not keep the battery cells balanced and is trying to fix it. I like and have KERs 3 always. makes a lot of sense to me. As a long distance runners cross winds are not a bother. Head winds are PITA and tail winds are cool. Portland Marathon give me all 3 : :? :o :lol:

For example in Changes which MG will make. The BMS in my RFX Flow batteries has evolved over the last ten years dozens of times. Almost all have added significant improvements or enhancements.

You mentioned Bluetooth app? Love to see details. Can we use it here? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW1bWYu5K3Y
User avatar
coulomb
Site Admin
Posts: 4941
Joined: Thu, 22 Jan 2009, 20:32
Real Name: Mike Van Emmerik
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by coulomb »

navydiver wrote: Thu, 19 Aug 2021, 06:14 Blame is not my game- Working with MG ringwood and MG who are helping. I want it to do what I expect/require :D
My bad, I chose my words poorly. What I meant was, to make a meaningful comparison between one car and another, you need to have the HVAC off, N and 3 settings, but also you need to reset both trip and long-term stats pages. Otherwise, many other factors will confound the estimate.
You mentioned Bluetooth app? Love to see details. Can we use it here? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW1bWYu5K3Y
I use the unofficial Thai app, just to read out the firmware versions. I strongly recommend that you do this too, because I'm 90% sure that you have the bad BMS firmware, despite the fact that MG told you it was all updated before delivery, and have checked that you have the latest firmware. There seems to be some glitch with the MG diagnostic software or procedures, such that you sometimes get told that your firmware is up to date, when it clearly isn't. People in the UK have researched many of the firmware versions, and they know which BMS firmware is bad. So if you get yourself the right kind of Bluetooth dongle, then use the unofficial Thai app to read out the firmware versions, and we can figure out whether you have the bad one. Once you have that info, you can go back to them with real evidence, and insist that the firmware gets updated somehow. Then it will still take you weeks to get the battery back to proper balance. Sadly, the longer you run with the bad firmware, the worse the balance gets, it seems.

Have you read this topic carefully? Software has some but not all Comfort 2 features. Find out the right sort of dongle to get from this UK topic: Project OBD2 - Mobile App v1.2.1. It's a long topic, probably no need to read all of it. In partuicular, you need a dongle with "ordinary" Bluetooth (one that you pair with your phone), NOT a Bluetooth LE dongle. The unofficial Thai app doesn't support Bluetooth LE. Some dongles have Bluetooth LE but can also pair; that's OK. Also note: "best to purchase OBD2 device with PIC18F25K80 chipset." I ended up with a Vgate dongle; I posted about it here. I also patched the unofficial Thai app, so that it records one extra firmware version (for the on board charger, which may well be relevant to your situation). Download it from the end of this post.

I really hope that we can get you up and running soon; it's a shame to see a near-new ZS EV with such poor range. I really hope that MG sorts out their diagnostic software/procedures soon too, so that people don't have to suffer needlessly as you appear to be. Unfortunately, you can't buy suitable dongles off-the-shelf, so you have to order them online, and they typically take ages to arrive. There is a place that sells them in Australia, but I could not find out whether it was suitable for this app, and they were not that cheap that I could take a chance, so I didn't order from them.

As to the app in Bjorn's video, that's the official Thai app, which makes use of a "TBOX" computer inside the car. Unfortunately, most markets outside of Thailand don't have that box installed, so there is no app for Europe or Australia. There is an open source equivalent called OVMS (Open Vehicle Management System I think), which has its own app, but there are technical problems getting some things to work. It seems that the UK body computer requires encrypted commands or it sets off the alarm. So until they crack that problem, OVMS will be of limited use in the ZS EV, sadly. The reason that there is no app outside Thailand seems to be bound up with storing information about cars in Chinese servers, I don't understand the full details. Hopefully that will get sorted one day too.
MG ZS EV 2021 April 2021.
Nissan Leaf 2012 with new battery May 2019.
5650 W solar, 2xPIP-4048MS inverters, 16 kWh battery.
1.4 kW solar with 1.2 kW Latronics inverter and FIT.
Patching PIP-4048/5048 inverter-chargers.
FyKnight
Groupie
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon, 01 Feb 2021, 17:09

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by FyKnight »

Totally agree with your suggestions coulumb.

I doubt we will ever see that TBOX comms package in markets that aren't politically friendly to China. MG already have an uphill battle selling "Made in China" here given past associations with poor quality — even though this car is very good so far. (It's just like my dad still thinks "Made in Japan" means poor quality haha... it's a cycle!)

Imagine how much harder it'd be to sell with a component that can phone home inside. They made the right decision to take it out. Now if only they'd give us a clue on how to achieve the same thing ourselves!
navydiver
Groupie
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon, 03 May 2021, 20:05
Real Name: James

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by navydiver »

Happy to say the replacement drive range and range estimate is with HVAC off great most of the time. I did turn in on to defrost the foggy windows once or twice. Just got it down to 50km range remaining can not grumble at all about this BMS/battery. Hope mine is able to be rehabilitated from its less than Stella performance
FyKnight
Groupie
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon, 01 Feb 2021, 17:09

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by FyKnight »

Excellent news! :)
Nagaman
Senior Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed, 20 Nov 2019, 05:17
Real Name: David

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by Nagaman »

I noticed today that the range dropped 30+ kms instantly with fan selection on - minimum temperature no AC , just the lowest fan speed selection. The current draw would be negligible I would have thought.
User avatar
coulomb
Site Admin
Posts: 4941
Joined: Thu, 22 Jan 2009, 20:32
Real Name: Mike Van Emmerik
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by coulomb »

Nagaman wrote: Wed, 08 Sep 2021, 15:37 I noticed today that the range dropped 30+ kms instantly with fan selection on - minimum temperature no AC , just the lowest fan speed selection. The current draw would be negligible I would have thought.
That's the range estimate that drops instantly with fan use. Yes, the HVAC input to the range estimate calculation isn't fine grained at all, sadly. It's all or nothing. How hard would it be to monitor a few more CAN messages and add one or two lines of C code for the calculation?
MG ZS EV 2021 April 2021.
Nissan Leaf 2012 with new battery May 2019.
5650 W solar, 2xPIP-4048MS inverters, 16 kWh battery.
1.4 kW solar with 1.2 kW Latronics inverter and FIT.
Patching PIP-4048/5048 inverter-chargers.
Nagaman
Senior Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed, 20 Nov 2019, 05:17
Real Name: David

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by Nagaman »

coulomb wrote: Thu, 09 Sep 2021, 11:06
Nagaman wrote: Wed, 08 Sep 2021, 15:37 I noticed today that the range dropped 30+ kms instantly with fan selection on - minimum temperature no AC , just the lowest fan speed selection. The current draw would be negligible I would have thought.
That's the range estimate that drops instantly with fan use. Yes, the HVAC input to the range estimate calculation isn't fine grained at all, sadly. It's all or nothing. How hard would it be to monitor a few more CAN messages and add one or two lines of C code for the calculation?
Hi Mike, I’m just hoping that come the annual service I’m not given the standard flick that she’s all done.
I’m seriously hoping that we get a substantial improvement.
I’m also wondering if, at some stage, a head unit modernisation such as Asian countries get, is a possibility…….I suspect they want you to trade up then.
navydiver
Groupie
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon, 03 May 2021, 20:05
Real Name: James

Re: Substantially below WLTP range

Post by navydiver »

Had my car back for a month now. MG Ringwood did say the BMS software update allegedly applied to fix this was required to be re-applied which may explain lots. The battery, BMS and range is looking much better. Driving about locally indicated range loss matches distance traveled which was not even close when I first started this thread.

Dealer was helpful noting it seems likely they are on a learning curve as well. I know MG Australia was involved in helping. I did need to tow a heavy trailer and had to put $120 of fuel in to my old drive parked and lonely on the Driveway. Not adding $$$$ of diesel every two weeks now does make me smile.

In two weeks the lock down here in Vic may allow me to take it for what I feel is a proper 200km+ test run.
Post Reply