Wow I didn‘t expect ID.4 to charge that fast. You can easily charge it to 90 % in the same time as Renault to 80 %, so it compensates the smaller battery of ID.4. Compared to the 1st editions which charged in almost 40 min to 80 % it is a huge step forward.
They managed to get speeds up quite a bit for the 1st editions as well through software updates. My launch edition Audi Q4 40 used to charge at around 120kW max, and now I get up to 148kW.
I would for sure go for the Ariya curve, I want consistent, low loss charghing speeds regardless at which SOC i have when I think it is convenient to charge. Peak speeds are very much marketing-driven
@@Arpedk thats why i like the "Tesla peak" more than a "good" flat curve. Because with this I can make this 10 minute "pee break" and/or add the last missing 100km very quickly
This is not a valid metric as you can arrive at any SOC for a pee break. What if you arrive at 60%? Then this isn’t valid anymore. Tesla only has a burst in the beginning, otherwise quite poor charging curve
@@c-fb At 60%, you don't need to charge because you can still drive for another 2 hours. So just go pee when you have to and keep driving - it's not written anywhere that you always have to charge when you have to pee or the other way around 😁 I still find Tesla's charging curve to be the most suitable for traveling (except for 200kW+ flat like the Taycan or GV60): just arrive with 5% and you'll have 100-150km in the battery again in a handful of minutes. This means you can increase the total range from 400 km to 500 km in about 5 minutes. And if you plan a longer break with coffee or even food, it doesn't matter how the curve drops at the end, in 30 minutes you'll be able to continue, no matter which SoC you arrived with.
We have the renault scenic esprit alpine and it's a fantastic car if your having a break the extra 10-15 minutes charging isn't going to upset anyone just have a second coffee job done
If I remember my former times with one of the first ID3 (1kWh/minute was the „fast“ charging average over 75.000km😮) VW has improved the charging in a very good way. I was surprised of the very flat charging curve of the Arya
@@Scrap-press I can report a special curve for the 58 kWh of the 1st edition. But 30 minutes with approx 30kWh was realistic. A peak of 100 kW was not available (with SW 3.0 is was slightly better)
I'd have a suggestion I'm always missing in these charging duels: a real time clock to show how much time has passed while charging and how sped up the futage is.
It's not that slow, depending on your situation it's a non issue. I have my EV for almost a year and only had to fast charge twice. I also don't understand why the Ariya displays a much higher SOC when the kWh are almost the same as the Senic. The 1kWh difference in capacity is not big enough.
It's easy to understand why the Ariya displays much higher SoC, because of the 5kWh hidden usable buffer below displayed 0% SoC, so 10% displayed SoC is less apparent energy than the battery really has.
@@Cosmycal that os very true, the Aryia can take 5kwh between 99% and 100%. This can be a problem if a user ' GOES deep' to 0% and may have a big buffet or may have nothing, will never know...
@@ricardomartins1783Big bottom buffer is always there in the Ariya, the SoC displayed always matches 50% power limit when you just reach 0% SoC, even after that there's plenty range still, like 30Km in case you need it in a hurry. Bjorn and myself have already tested it.
As confirmed by other reviewers Ariya has a faster 10 to 80% than Scenic with less peak power needed, nice charging curve, specially on situations where you can use 100kW chargers only, gives a good speed advantage on that scenario versus other cars that charge slow on the second half. Also Ariya puts about the same energy to ~80% as a Tesla Model Y due to a bigger battery.
That is not true. When the Aria hits the 99% mark. See the charge Energie... They are nearly the same. 73 / 74kWh. depending to 10% more it should be more the 9kWh. Where ist the energy. How it can be possible that the same charged Energie ist suddenly 10% more?
@@dos585You didn't understood my comment, first part, Ariya charges faster from 10 to 80% (or 90% even), second part, Ariya charges a similar amount of energy to 90% than a Tesla Model Y. Don't mix things.
Would it be possible to also get the curves factoring in efficiency/consumption (at 90 or 120 from the range test)? That would show us that charging speed alone, is that relevant, as the results from the 1000km challenges tend to show. And then, yes, it will show even more how awesome Tesla cars are in that respect.
Probably Renault rathers conserving battery health (ie lesser degradation from rapid charge cycles) instead of being a 10 percent behind (ie a couple of minutes more waiting); which makes sense to me
You forgot Aryia was cheating because the last 98-100% is 9KWH! With that cheat it allows better theoric 20-80% time. At 98% there still 9kWH left to charge. You can see the effect at the end of the graph. This also explain why scenic and ariya have the exact same KWH loaded and still big difference SOC although same battery capacity
I'm somewhat annoyed with the Model Y curve. I rarely go down to 10% on longer roadtrips, especially if I don't know the route very well. Usually I stop and charge around 20%, and at that point Model Y has already dropped from 250kW to around 175-180kW. For my needs, and I believe most others as well, 20-90% would be more useful than 10-80%.
Even on holiday trips I usually go down to 5% - why not?! If you slow down, you can still get 25km range. And in the worst case, with Tesla you can still get at least 25km under 0% But I like to take the peak where you get over 100km range within 5 minutes
To be honest, the Ariya and the Scenic are taking mostly the same amount of energy (kWh) during the charging session. It's just the way the Ariya counts the percentage of the battery that makes the difference look bigger than it is.
It can happen. My id3 pro s with heat pump from late 2022 with 3.2. software managed 184 peak a few weeks ago at a 300kwh Fastned charger. But it really depends on a SOC below 25% and good weather conditions
Dear Bjørn , you are measuring incorrectly. Wouldn't it make more sense to use the charged Energie for comparison? Because as you can see at 4:23, the Senic has 66.3 kWh and the Aria 67.3. However, the percentages are 8% less... Where are the 6 or 7 KWh more in the Aria. They are not charged! Basically they charge at the same speed. Even i think that the Senic is extremely disappointing because it charges very slowly with an almost 100kWh battery. >>>>> How can it be that the Aria shows 10% (100%) more even they charged with nearly the same amount of energy as the Senic. Where are the 9kWh from the Aria. At some point I heard that many manufacturers make the percentages customer-friendly. So the top rises more if you charge. And on very low states its slower. The percentage is usually an indication that is influenced by the manufacturer in order to simulate the fastest possible charge. In the video you can clearly see that percent and charged energy are not 1 to 1 identical.
@@bjornnyland You start with the same charge level. But Senic shows 89 and Aria 99%. But the same power was delivered from the charging station... This means that the Senic has a cooling capacity or compressor power consumption of 8 to 20kW. Apart from that, the cooling usually only switches on a short time later. This could never explain the difference in % charged vs kWh. This is cooling power around 30.000 100.000 BTU If you want to make a comparison then you have to compare the energy loaded into the battery. The consumption for cooling is 1 to 3 kW Than you must have the lowest possible Temperature in the Battery for highspeed charging. You are telling us the the Car takes more energy from the Charger to cool. (old Nissan Leaf don't do it reduces the charging power) but when the Battery is cooler then maybe no cooling is needed in the first 10 Minutes. If you want to see the difference in % vs Kwh you must measure the Energie only in the Battery and the % shown. there is a huge difference.. Displaying percent and energy content in an electric car is a complex matter that is influenced by many factors. A linear representation would be more intuitive, but not realistic due to the properties of batteries.
Sorry, but the commenting in the Video is a bit dull. The ID7 takes 51,5 kWh (12-80 % SOC). In the same time, the Scenic manages to load 48,3 kWh. The difference is not that big. It seems that the Video Creater has some homework to do (if he is Not After clickbaits).
Good point. I think that even Bjørn was not able to "analyse" properly in that moment why Scenic made the 1000 km in 10 hours 10 minutes. Is needed to understand the kWh that you really have available and also to understand the kWhs that you are charging in the same period of time. So maybe, taking into account the energy charged and not the % of battery gained, he could explain more clear why Scenic is surprisingly fast. Seems that he didn't complete the video solving the question mark.
Le Scénic est une voiture pour les Français ! et ne fera jamais des ventes importantes hors des frontières de l'hexagone. L'astuce de la grosse batterie pour rassurer est totalement annulée par la non maitrise du BMS. Faire un produit de marché en se moquant de la Model Y produit Mondial ! Le French Bashing ! Achetons Français, même si les batteries ne le sont pas et voir même si ce n'est pas fabriqué en France. Ridicule.
Wow I didn‘t expect ID.4 to charge that fast. You can easily charge it to 90 % in the same time as Renault to 80 %, so it compensates the smaller battery of ID.4. Compared to the 1st editions which charged in almost 40 min to 80 % it is a huge step forward.
They managed to get speeds up quite a bit for the 1st editions as well through software updates. My launch edition Audi Q4 40 used to charge at around 120kW max, and now I get up to 148kW.
@@sebastiansandvik825 Yea I know that was a great update via Software and now we have the next evolution step.😎
*ID.7 numpad error wrong row
I would for sure go for the Ariya curve, I want consistent, low loss charghing speeds regardless at which SOC i have when I think it is convenient to charge. Peak speeds are very much marketing-driven
All the MEB platform haters.. 😃 they have a great charging curve!
MEB platform isn't the issue for me, the platform itself is actually pretty good, it's just that the interior just doesn't feel right for me.
Yes but MEB cars consume bit more than Teslas so it doesnt matter.
LOL! No, not really. It is still crap, compared to an Ioniq 5, Ioniq 6 oder EV6.
Aren't they all degraded quite much in Björn s Tests?
@@MrKOenigmayeah they have huge degradation in the first months! It slows down a lot over time.
km recharged in 10 minutes for 120 km/h speed:
Scenic 92kWh: summer: 90km, winter:-
Ariya 91kWh: summer: 80km, winter: 70km
ID4 82kWh: summer: 120km, winter:-
Model Y summer: 125km, winter: 120km
@@Arpedk thats why i like the "Tesla peak" more than a "good" flat curve. Because with this I can make this 10 minute "pee break" and/or add the last missing 100km very quickly
This is not a valid metric as you can arrive at any SOC for a pee break. What if you arrive at 60%? Then this isn’t valid anymore. Tesla only has a burst in the beginning, otherwise quite poor charging curve
@@c-fb At 60%, you don't need to charge because you can still drive for another 2 hours. So just go pee when you have to and keep driving - it's not written anywhere that you always have to charge when you have to pee or the other way around 😁
I still find Tesla's charging curve to be the most suitable for traveling (except for 200kW+ flat like the Taycan or GV60): just arrive with 5% and you'll have 100-150km in the battery again in a handful of minutes.
This means you can increase the total range from 400 km to 500 km in about 5 minutes.
And if you plan a longer break with coffee or even food, it doesn't matter how the curve drops at the end, in 30 minutes you'll be able to continue, no matter which SoC you arrived with.
The word disappointment and french cars are often used in the same sentence.
My 2019 model 3 LR is a charging beast.
Well done ID4!
We have the renault scenic esprit alpine and it's a fantastic car if your having a break the extra 10-15 minutes charging isn't going to upset anyone just have a second coffee job done
Bjorn I am realy interested in the 0% range you tested this from several cars. Are you planning to do this for the scenic.
If I remember my former times with one of the first ID3 (1kWh/minute was the „fast“ charging average over 75.000km😮) VW has improved the charging in a very good way. I was surprised of the very flat charging curve of the Arya
1 kwh/minute or 60 kW wasn't the original curve at 75 kW peak for 58 kWh battery?
@@Scrap-press I can report a special curve for the 58 kWh of the 1st edition. But 30 minutes with approx 30kWh was realistic. A peak of 100 kW was not available (with SW 3.0 is was slightly better)
Would be nice to compare to big MEB 91kWh battery with 200kW charging 🚀
I'd have a suggestion I'm always missing in these charging duels: a real time clock to show how much time has passed while charging and how sped up the futage is.
It's not that slow, depending on your situation it's a non issue. I have my EV for almost a year and only had to fast charge twice. I also don't understand why the Ariya displays a much higher SOC when the kWh are almost the same as the Senic. The 1kWh difference in capacity is not big enough.
It's easy to understand why the Ariya displays much higher SoC, because of the 5kWh hidden usable buffer below displayed 0% SoC, so 10% displayed SoC is less apparent energy than the battery really has.
@@Cosmycal that os very true, the Aryia can take 5kwh between 99% and 100%. This can be a problem if a user ' GOES deep' to 0% and may have a big buffet or may have nothing, will never know...
@@ricardomartins1783Big bottom buffer is always there in the Ariya, the SoC displayed always matches 50% power limit when you just reach 0% SoC, even after that there's plenty range still, like 30Km in case you need it in a hurry. Bjorn and myself have already tested it.
As confirmed by other reviewers Ariya has a faster 10 to 80% than Scenic with less peak power needed, nice charging curve, specially on situations where you can use 100kW chargers only, gives a good speed advantage on that scenario versus other cars that charge slow on the second half.
Also Ariya puts about the same energy to ~80% as a Tesla Model Y due to a bigger battery.
That is not true. When the Aria hits the 99% mark. See the charge Energie... They are nearly the same. 73 / 74kWh. depending to 10% more it should be more the 9kWh.
Where ist the energy. How it can be possible that the same charged Energie ist suddenly 10% more?
@@dos585You didn't understood my comment, first part, Ariya charges faster from 10 to 80% (or 90% even), second part, Ariya charges a similar amount of energy to 90% than a Tesla Model Y. Don't mix things.
Would it be possible to also get the curves factoring in efficiency/consumption (at 90 or 120 from the range test)?
That would show us that charging speed alone, is that relevant, as the results from the 1000km challenges tend to show.
And then, yes, it will show even more how awesome Tesla cars are in that respect.
Probably Renault rathers conserving battery health (ie lesser degradation from rapid charge cycles) instead of being a 10 percent behind (ie a couple of minutes more waiting); which makes sense to me
You forgot Aryia was cheating because the last 98-100% is 9KWH! With that cheat it allows better theoric 20-80% time. At 98% there still 9kWH left to charge. You can see the effect at the end of the graph. This also explain why scenic and ariya have the exact same KWH loaded and still big difference SOC although same battery capacity
Renault says they are more conservative for the battery health...
I'm somewhat annoyed with the Model Y curve. I rarely go down to 10% on longer roadtrips, especially if I don't know the route very well. Usually I stop and charge around 20%, and at that point Model Y has already dropped from 250kW to around 175-180kW. For my needs, and I believe most others as well, 20-90% would be more useful than 10-80%.
Even on holiday trips I usually go down to 5% - why not?! If you slow down, you can still get 25km range.
And in the worst case, with Tesla you can still get at least 25km under 0%
But I like to take the peak where you get over 100km range within 5 minutes
@@Arpedk Nothing to do with fear. Just that I tend to always plug in when stopping, and my wife and 3yo can't go too far without a pee break.
Ariya charging curve is surprising! Even overtaking Model Y at the end. Scenic seems to be better for shorter charging sessions
To be honest, the Ariya and the Scenic are taking mostly the same amount of energy (kWh) during the charging session. It's just the way the Ariya counts the percentage of the battery that makes the difference look bigger than it is.
@@Alberto-mq7gwCorrect, it's due to bigger buffer at the bottom, about 5kWh usable below 0% SoC.
The graph shows ID7 not ID4? Or does the new ID4 charge the same as a new ID7?
its the same batterytype
The ID4 with the new battery released recently charges quicker than the previous one.
not very cutting edge, is it?
Model Y RWD 60kWh is a lot faster than the 82kWh. When at correct temperature, it will maintain 170kW until over 50% SoC.
Charging speed is good, but I prefer battery health.
Id4 189 kw?? Is this some new software?
ID.4 Pro goes up to 175 kW in terms of data sheet now, but practically it sometimes even goes higher. So probably new battery and new software.
Its id7. He mixed it. See the end you see its not id4
It can happen. My id3 pro s with heat pump from late 2022 with 3.2. software managed 184 peak a few weeks ago at a 300kwh Fastned charger. But it really depends on a SOC below 25% and good weather conditions
@@etenoldsame charging curve with the same software.
Dear Bjørn , you are measuring incorrectly.
Wouldn't it make more sense to use the charged Energie for comparison? Because as you can see at 4:23, the Senic has 66.3 kWh and the Aria 67.3. However, the percentages are 8% less... Where are the 6 or 7 KWh more in the Aria. They are not charged! Basically they charge at the same speed. Even i think that the Senic is extremely disappointing because it charges very slowly with an almost 100kWh battery.
>>>>> How can it be that the Aria shows 10% (100%) more even they charged with nearly the same amount of energy as the Senic. Where are the 9kWh from the Aria.
At some point I heard that many manufacturers make the percentages customer-friendly. So the top rises more if you charge. And on very low states its slower.
The percentage is usually an indication that is influenced by the manufacturer in order to simulate the fastest possible charge.
In the video you can clearly see that percent and charged energy are not 1 to 1 identical.
No, the energy delivered from the charger includes heating, cooling and heat losses.
@@bjornnyland You start with the same charge level.
But Senic shows 89 and Aria 99%.
But the same power was delivered from the charging station... This means that the Senic has a cooling capacity or compressor power consumption of 8 to 20kW. Apart from that, the cooling usually only switches on a short time later. This could never explain the difference in % charged vs kWh. This is cooling power around 30.000 100.000 BTU
If you want to make a comparison then you have to compare the energy loaded into the battery. The consumption for cooling is 1 to 3 kW
Than you must have the lowest possible Temperature in the Battery for highspeed charging.
You are telling us the the Car takes more energy from the Charger to cool. (old Nissan Leaf don't do it reduces the charging power)
but when the Battery is cooler then maybe no cooling is needed in the first 10 Minutes.
If you want to see the difference in % vs Kwh you must measure the Energie only in the Battery and the % shown. there is a huge difference..
Displaying percent and energy content in an electric car is a complex matter that is influenced by many factors. A linear representation would be more intuitive, but not realistic due to the properties of batteries.
❤❤❤
ID.7 in curve. ID.4 in video?
Same battery
Seems Arya has 10 kWh less usable than Scenic ....🤔
There's usable 5kWh hidden buffer below 0% SoC
Its id7 here not id4.
Same battery and charging curve.
Sorry, but the commenting in the Video is a bit dull.
The ID7 takes 51,5 kWh (12-80 % SOC). In the same time, the Scenic manages to load 48,3 kWh. The difference is not that big. It seems that the Video Creater has some homework to do (if he is Not After clickbaits).
Good point.
I think that even Bjørn was not able to "analyse" properly in that moment why Scenic made the 1000 km in 10 hours 10 minutes.
Is needed to understand the kWh that you really have available and also to understand the kWhs that you are charging in the same period of time.
So maybe, taking into account the energy charged and not the % of battery gained, he could explain more clear why Scenic is surprisingly fast.
Seems that he didn't complete the video solving the question mark.
🇱🇹🇱🇹🤝🇺🇦🇺🇦
Le Scénic est une voiture pour les Français ! et ne fera jamais des ventes importantes hors des frontières de l'hexagone.
L'astuce de la grosse batterie pour rassurer est totalement annulée par la non maitrise du BMS.
Faire un produit de marché en se moquant de la Model Y produit Mondial !
Le French Bashing ! Achetons Français, même si les batteries ne le sont pas et voir même si ce n'est pas fabriqué en France.
Ridicule.
oh un Français en train de se plaindre
@@jqhs9769 un français qui ne roule plus en françaises, ni allemandes. Qui râle ok, 🤣