Shoot even half of 83 mpg is good.
New Defender News
- Thread starter blackangie
- Start date
I'm saying real world / actual experienced fuel mileage outside a highly urban use profile will be far less than the WLTP spec. Within the WLTP envelope you will see the advertised MPGe. Once you venture outside that orchestrated profile of WLTP, MPG drops to the inherent capabilities of the primary power source, which for the Defender will be its normal ICE capabilities with the extra payload of the BEV subsystem. That's in the range of 19mpg. So for overlanding, long range and remote touring your actual fuel efficiency will be closer to a pure ICE profile.
Which is why manufacturers are taking a "wait and see" strategy for these products. Will the buyers actually see the benefits and spend the exra money for the feature set? Keep in mind that minimal BEV range cost you payload and towing capabilities.
Last edited:
T-Willy
Well-known member
My understanding is that 83 MPGe is the mileage in hybrid mode. Does not that hybrid system operate continuously, using ICE to power the battery and electric assist? (That's the basic idea of a hybrid, after all.) If it does operate continuously, it wouldn't fall back to its dismal 19 mpg ICE-only power.
If you have plug-in available to you and the use profile matches the WLTP use case then a PHEV might be a good fit. Where it breaks down is once you leave that urban use case and no longer can recharge the BEV.
From 2020 Land Rover Range Rover HSE P400e: Pros And Cons
Con
We’ll say it again: the EPA rates the Range Rover P400e at just19 miles of all-electric range. We topped off the batteries twice during our test, and each time achieved 16 miles in mixed city and highway conditions. So even on your best behavior, 19 is probably as good as it gets. Compared to the P400e’s main plug-in rivals, this figure falls short of the Lincoln Aviator Grand Touring’s 21 miles, and is only just better than the Volvo XC90 T8’s 18 miles.
The Range Rover’s figure isn’t bad within the context of its competitors, but the range isn’t significant enough to make the PHEV a no-brainer purchase. The plus side is the P400e’s combined 42 miles per gallon equivalent (when the batteries are full). This is a much better figure than the base Range Rover’s 21 mpg combined. That said, on gas alone, the plug-in Range Rover is the least efficient member of the family, at 19 combined mpg. The obvious takeaway here is that you have to plug in this car every day to squeeze any sort of value from it. If home charging isn’t available to you, then you should pass on the Range Rover PHEV.
https://www.motor1.com/reviews/409638/2020-land-rover-range-rover-hse-p400e-pros-cons/4876546/
In summary PHEV is very use case sensitive. For the urban use case where you can plug in every day and recharge the batteries, a BEV range of 15 miles and a MPGe of 40+ might be very attractive depending on budget. For our use case, which is the have a Defender/Discovery in the first place, is to load up with payload and tow a travel trailer to a remote location for camping and outdoor life. Plug-in is not available, for days/near a week or more. Blowing up that end of the value equation (reducing tow capability to 5500 lb) pretty much destroys the attractiveness of a PHEV Defender/Discovery. As always YMMV.
Last edited:
Pretty sure you don’t have to plug in. From what I’ve read about plug in hybrids is that they can self charge while driving just like a regular hybrid. The only thing thats different between a standard hybrid and a PHEV is that the PHEV can run in full BEV and be recharged at home or at a charging station. In standard hybrid mode the battery charge should pretty much keep up as long as you have gas.
MPGe is only for electrics and non-hybrids. It's basically used for electric and plug-in vehicles to compare the energy consumption of the vehicle operating in electric mode with that of gasoline vehicles. The idea behind that is, since electricity from the grid takes energy to produce, MPGe allows you to compare the energy consumption required for an electric vehicle to travel for an equivalent gas vehicle. MPGe is tested with a full charge. As electric motors are much more efficient than gasoline motors, MPGe is always much higher than the mpg of the equivalent internal combustion vehicle.
This doesn't mean that the PHEV gets 80 mpg once it uses up its electric juice. In fact, it's probably fairly close to 20 mpg when it does. For PHEVs, the EPA releases separate city/highway mpg figures for when the vehicle is depleted of its plug-in reserve. However, we don't have that here since the Defender PHEV is not yet currently available in the US.
This doesn't mean that the PHEV gets 80 mpg once it uses up its electric juice. In fact, it's probably fairly close to 20 mpg when it does. For PHEVs, the EPA releases separate city/highway mpg figures for when the vehicle is depleted of its plug-in reserve. However, we don't have that here since the Defender PHEV is not yet currently available in the US.
Isn't technology discontinuity/transitions fun! Here's my take, at least today:
PHEV - close to a full EV but with a small ICE engine for when the battery is depleted.
There are two basic plug-in hybrid configurations, according to the Department of Energy:
MHEV - 48V hybrid where the primary transmission power is the ICE engine. The 48V "hybrid" subsystems are for efficiency improvements, not primary power.
As noted MPGe is a measurement spec, not a technology implementation. The issue is the product capabilities are different than the WLTP spec workload profile. Many products can't run pure BEV for the duration of even the short WLTP test, hence the MPGe spec that attempts to provide the prospective customer with a metric to compare the PHEV product to standard ICE only products.
The core issue is that the rather use case limited definition of WLTP and the resultant MPGe mapped onto a variety of product technology implementations can be confusing. Where this conversation went sideways is the limited use case of WLTP vs the typical "Overland" / "Outdoor" use cases. They don't map onto each other very well and therefore are a poor choice to judge products.
PHEV - close to a full EV but with a small ICE engine for when the battery is depleted.
There are two basic plug-in hybrid configurations, according to the Department of Energy:
In series plug-in hybrids, or extended-range electric vehicles, only the electric motor turns the wheels and the gasoline engine generates electricity. Series plug-ins can run on electricity alone until the battery runs down. The gasoline engine then generates electricity to power the electric motor. These vehicles might use no gasoline at all for short trips.
In parallel or blended plug-in hybrids, both the engine and electric motor are connected to the wheels and propel the vehicle under most driving conditions. The electric-only operation usually occurs only at low speeds.
MHEV - 48V hybrid where the primary transmission power is the ICE engine. The 48V "hybrid" subsystems are for efficiency improvements, not primary power.
As noted MPGe is a measurement spec, not a technology implementation. The issue is the product capabilities are different than the WLTP spec workload profile. Many products can't run pure BEV for the duration of even the short WLTP test, hence the MPGe spec that attempts to provide the prospective customer with a metric to compare the PHEV product to standard ICE only products.
The core issue is that the rather use case limited definition of WLTP and the resultant MPGe mapped onto a variety of product technology implementations can be confusing. Where this conversation went sideways is the limited use case of WLTP vs the typical "Overland" / "Outdoor" use cases. They don't map onto each other very well and therefore are a poor choice to judge products.
naks
Well-known member
Pirelli Develops Special Tire For Land Rover Defender: https://carbuzz.com/news/pirelli-develops-special-tire-for-land-rover-defender
"... the Italian manufacturer has partnered with Land Rover to produce a special tire just for the new Defender. Pirelli says that the new tires offer best-in-class rolling resistance, which is always a benefit when you're trying to make vehicles as efficient as possible. ...
Pirelli says that its new Scorpion Zero All Season ultra high performance tire is "designed to deliver excellent levels of comfort and safety" and reduces noise while providing maximum performance throughout any season, whether the road surface is dry or wet. New materials were used for the structure and compounds of the tire, and to ensure optimal performance, Land Rover tested the new tires "both uphill at a constant speed as well as sideways across the slope in order to assess lateral grip on wet grass."
A new shoulder design and a double tread block help improve traction on mud, grass, and snow - something that Landy enthusiasts will surely appreciate.
To ensure that the tires are truly capable in all conditions, a series of laboratory tests were followed by an outdoor program that consisted of tests in the UK's Malvern Hills, where the tires were tested on 66 miles of varied terrain. Following this, snow and ice testing took place in northern Sweden. Land Rover's Gaydon facility in England was then used to test soft handling and comfort while high speed and wet handling testing took place at the Nurburgring and at the Applus and Idiada facility in Spain. Pirelli's own Vizzola test track was also made use of. ... "
"... the Italian manufacturer has partnered with Land Rover to produce a special tire just for the new Defender. Pirelli says that the new tires offer best-in-class rolling resistance, which is always a benefit when you're trying to make vehicles as efficient as possible. ...
Pirelli says that its new Scorpion Zero All Season ultra high performance tire is "designed to deliver excellent levels of comfort and safety" and reduces noise while providing maximum performance throughout any season, whether the road surface is dry or wet. New materials were used for the structure and compounds of the tire, and to ensure optimal performance, Land Rover tested the new tires "both uphill at a constant speed as well as sideways across the slope in order to assess lateral grip on wet grass."
A new shoulder design and a double tread block help improve traction on mud, grass, and snow - something that Landy enthusiasts will surely appreciate.
To ensure that the tires are truly capable in all conditions, a series of laboratory tests were followed by an outdoor program that consisted of tests in the UK's Malvern Hills, where the tires were tested on 66 miles of varied terrain. Following this, snow and ice testing took place in northern Sweden. Land Rover's Gaydon facility in England was then used to test soft handling and comfort while high speed and wet handling testing took place at the Nurburgring and at the Applus and Idiada facility in Spain. Pirelli's own Vizzola test track was also made use of. ... "
plainjaneFJC
Deplorable
He asked "what could go wrong" Well quite a bit in a defender...lol
We Take 3 Iconic Off-Roaders Up A Mountain In a Snowstorm: What Can Go Wrong? - YouTube
We Take 3 Iconic Off-Roaders Up A Mountain In a Snowstorm: What Can Go Wrong? - YouTube
T-Willy
Well-known member
It's painful to watch. They can't get one trouble-free outing.
ChasingOurTrunks
Well-known member
For those who haven't watched the video, the new TFL Defender seems to be throwing some codes that go away after the tried and true "turn it off and back on again". There have been two unique faults, both of which have come back more than once. The first is an AIr Suspension fault which appeared in their initial video on the Blue Defender; that one comes back in this video. The second fault is telling them they have no coolant even though a visual inspection shows them at the max coolant line.
It keeps working, but an $80k vehicle throwing that many ghost codes in the first 500 miles is not ideal. I've been trying to think of theories to explain this. Could it be that there is some sort of adaptive technology at play here where the computer is learning what the normal operating specifications for a given vehicle is? Maybe, but I've only really ever heard of an adaptive system for throttle sensors, not suspension and coolant systems.
They speculated that the low coolant warning might have been due to the angles of the trail, but they also pointed out that neither other vehicles in the test had that code issue despite the same terrain, and the terrain wasn't even that steep to begin with.
T-Willy
Well-known member
Assuming these are ghost codes, I wonder if it can be remedied with a software update recalibrating the computer to sensor data. Still, a new vehicle should function properly.
I have previously reported on my initial shakeout drive in the Defender the same coolant and suspension issues. This was within first 300 miles of delivery back in June this year. No leak whatsoever in the coolant, I believe that LR is using a finicky sensor for the tank as it was slightly topped off and has been fine in the ~7,000 miles since which has included a lot of off-road driving at more severe angles than TFL. There might be something to the above comment about 'adaptive' learning is interesting.
Doesn't excuse the issues (I've noted numerous ones that I had in first few months) for their car and none of these happen in our 2019 4Runner, but after having just driven 15 hours in our Defender I'd much rather have spent wheeltime in the LR than something else!
Doesn't excuse the issues (I've noted numerous ones that I had in first few months) for their car and none of these happen in our 2019 4Runner, but after having just driven 15 hours in our Defender I'd much rather have spent wheeltime in the LR than something else!