Jaguar I-Pace

[daktari]

Come on, you know this is BS

At the moment, Tesla offers the most comprehensive charging solution, more so than iPace, because historically Tesla have had to offer broader support for charging standards in order to be viable.

Things are changing now, and charging networks are only going to get better. Anyone buying a 2nd-hand iPace in 3 years time is going to have a much better experience than the early adopters (who all seem to know exactly what they are signing up to).

No I don't!
SuperChargers are great, but you will encounter scenarios where lack of CCS is a problem. Unless you pack the Chademo adapter. Does it fit in the refreah frunk? I don't have one.

 

[X Fan]

Another review: New Jaguar I-Pace 2018 review

Nice review from this UK-based magazine....

As a small SUV (just about the size of a Macan which drives very well btw) it makes sense that the I-Pace would drive well. I'm sure that Tesla's Y will as well.

this stood out for me:
"Draining the battery is a lot of fun then, but topping it up takes longer than Jaguar will have you believe. A 40-minute blast from a 100kw charger will give you almost 240 miles of range – trouble is there isn’t a single 100kw charger in the UK. A 50kw charger – of which there are 3,178 – takes 85 minutes to achieve the same amount of range. But the majority of buyers will top up at home or the office from a smaller 7kw charger or wallbox, which takes over 12 hours for a 100 per cent recharge."

FWIW: I don't believe a 40 minute charge at 100kw will fully charge the I-Pace's 240 mile battery capacity.

btw: in the U.S., this slow charging will hinder sales greatly....

 

[McRat]

Nice review from this UK-based magazine....

As a small SUV (just about the size of a Macan which drives very well btw) it makes sense that the I-Pace would drive well. I'm sure that Tesla's Y will as well.

this stood out for me:
"Draining the battery is a lot of fun then, but topping it up takes longer than Jaguar will have you believe. A 40-minute blast from a 100kw charger will give you almost 240 miles of range – trouble is there isn’t a single 100kw charger in the UK. A 50kw charger – of which there are 3,178 – takes 85 minutes to achieve the same amount of range. But the majority of buyers will top up at home or the office from a smaller 7kw charger or wallbox, which takes over 12 hours for a 100 per cent recharge."

FWIW: I don't believe a 40 minute charge at 100kw will fully charge the I-Pace's 240 mile battery capacity.

btw: in the U.S., this slow charging will hinder sales greatly....

Nobody has tested it. Best information to date per Owner's Manual:

It charges. There are indicators for status on included EVSE. You must open the door to charge it. You can't drive while charging.

That's it.

The 90kWh battery is 84.7 kWh usable.
It is said to DCFC (CCS) to 80% in 1 hour / 45 minutes / 40 minutes at 100 kW depending on what page you are on the website.
Battery is 388 volts and 432 LG cells in a 108s4p configuration.

Range: Either 220 miles, 240 miles, or 298 miles. No EPA filing. EU filing is 480km WLTP. WLTP matches EPA on the Permanent Magnet, blended brake Bolt EV, which an i-Pace is also.

There is very little official information yet. It can tow 750kg with the factory hitch. There is no factory hitch.

 

[techmaven]

Nobody has tested it. Best information to date per Owner's Manual:

It charges. There are indicators for status on included EVSE. You must open the door to charge it. You can't drive while charging.

That's it.

The 90kWh battery is 84.7 kWh.
It is said to DCFC (CCS) to 80% in 1 hour / 45 minutes / 40 minutes at 100 kW depending on what page you are on the website.
Battery is 388 Volts and 432 LG cells in a 108s4p configuration.

Range: Either 240 miles or 298 miles.

There is very little official information.

The WLTP rating is 298 miles and the EPA rating is currently estimated by Jaguar at 240 miles. I wouldn't be surprised if it came in a hair over 250 miles.

I think Jaguar is still sorting out the charging curve they want to use for higher amperage charging. Various people that should be in the know have contradicted themselves. It's 80% in 40 or 45 minutes, or slightly slower in charging c-rate as compared to a Model 3. The nominal battery voltage is higher so they can better take advantage of 125 amp DCFC... instead of drawing ~45 kW, they should be able to draw closer to 50 kW.

What is troubling is the relatively poor efficiency. But the target market likely doesn't care... it has sufficient range for the likely use cases and the target market is likely to fly for further distances anyways. It is the same tradeoff that Audi is choosing with the E-tron. Poor efficiency that sacrifices range, but sportiness and legacy convention and brand reputation to draw costumers that won't buy a vehicle with a Tesla badge and all the attendant issues. I hope they do well enough to be able to go onto the next big phase.

 

[J1mbo]

No I don't!
SuperChargers are great, but you will encounter scenarios where lack of CCS is a problem. Unless you pack the Chademo adapter. Does it fit in the refreah frunk? I don't have one.

Yes, it does. Easily. It's not that big.

Lack of CCS chargers is a bigger problem (in the UK) than lack of a CCS port...

 

[McRat]

The WLTP rating is 298 miles and the EPA rating is currently estimated by Jaguar at 240 miles. I wouldn't be surprised if it came in a hair over 250 miles.

I think Jaguar is still sorting out the charging curve they want to use for higher amperage charging. Various people that should be in the know have contradicted themselves. It's 80% in 40 or 45 minutes, or slightly slower in charging c-rate as compared to a Model 3. The nominal battery voltage is higher so they can better take advantage of 125 amp DCFC... instead of drawing ~45 kW, they should be able to draw closer to 50 kW.

What is troubling is the relatively poor efficiency. But the target market likely doesn't care... it has sufficient range for the likely use cases and the target market is likely to fly for further distances anyways. It is the same tradeoff that Audi is choosing with the E-tron. Poor efficiency that sacrifices range, but sportiness and legacy convention and brand reputation to draw costumers that won't buy a vehicle with a Tesla badge and all the attendant issues. I hope they do well enough to be able to go onto the next big phase.

Yes, the efficiency makes no sense. Blended brakes, PM motors, and claimed low Cd, should be fairly efficient. Jaguar does have resources when it comes to EV engineers and scientists, and has LG to help them, like the Bolt did.

With a WLTP of 480km (I corrected earlier post) I'm going to guess the EPA combined is 270 miles. We will see come July.

The skateboard for the i-Pace is longer than the F-Pace: 118" vs 113". It is to be a base skateboard for other JLR cars and SUVs.

 

[McRat]

Note, using NEDC? (EU standard), the i-Pace is 336 miles, the MX75D is 259 miles. A 1.30 difference.
Jaguar I-Pace vs Tesla Model X 75D: How do they compare? | DriveTribe
Using that ratio, the i-Pace would 308 miles EPA. Not buying that yet either.

 

[WarpedOne]

Was looking at random YT iPace review and stumbled across this interior shot ,,, look at those uneven stitchings... this is supposed to be Jaguar for Christ sake!
Quality, luxury, style! I expect tomorrow al the internate will war on jag because of this awful miserable quality interiror..

No, I am not being sarcastic, not even a bit!

 

[McRat]

Was looking at random YT iPace review and stumbled across this interior shot ,,, look at those uneven stitchings... this is supposed to be Jaguar for Christ sake!
Quality, luxury, style! I expect tomorrow al the internate will war on jag because of this awful miserable quality interiror..

No, I am not being sarcastic, not even a bit!

View attachment 306500

How were the pre-production Teslas?

 

[kablammyman]

i cancelled my model 3 reservation last night (the model 3 is too expensive for what you get IMO). This is the car I will probably get, depending on a test drive. The positive reviews are the icing on the cake.

 

[WarpedOne]

This is not tesla, this is a Jaguar!
They know how to build cars and everything?

Or do they?

 

[McRat]

This is not tesla, this is a Jaguar!
They know how to build cars and everything?

Or do they?

We will see. I had to make seat covers by hand before, and my stitching wasn't even that nice, and I wasn't using leather either.

 

[WarpedOne]

Am I reading excuses?
For Jaguar's lack of interior quality?

Impossibru...

 

[McRat]

Note, using NEDC? (EU standard), the i-Pace is 336 miles, the MX75D is 259 miles. A 1.30 difference.
Jaguar I-Pace vs Tesla Model X 75D: How do they compare? | DriveTribe
Using that ratio, the i-Pace would 308 miles EPA. Not buying that yet either.

Linked data is wrong. 336 vs 304 or 10.5% higher. So I will stick with my EPA 270 miles.

 

[X Fan]

I went on Jaguar USA and built one.

$92k including delivery charges for one I would spec.

btw: their site says 240 mile range: 2019 Jaguar I-PACE - Our First All-Electric Car | Jaguar USA

 

[techmaven]

Yes, the efficiency makes no sense. Blended brakes, PM motors, and claimed low Cd, should be fairly efficient. Jaguar does have resources when it comes to EV engineers and scientists, and has LG to help them, like the Bolt did.

With a WLTP of 480km (I corrected earlier post) I'm going to guess the EPA combined is 270 miles. We will see come July.

The skateboard for the i-Pace is longer than the F-Pace: 118" vs 113". It is to be a base skateboard for other JLR cars and SUVs.

Motortrend spent some time in an I-Pace:

2019 Jaguar I-Pace Review: From London to Berlin in an All-Electric Jag - Motor Trend

Apparently the set up in the car is for rated range to be 240 miles. They did get some very high consumption numbers... 418-430 Wh/mile while doing 70-80 mph. 289 Wh/mile when doing 50-60 mph. Their MPGe figures are not comparable because MPGe includes charging losses.

It is interesting that they can offer a 90 kWh vehicle for $70,000, but the efficiency of the vehicle appears to be poor. I'm not sure the target market cares that the efficiency terrible. But it also goes into DCFC... the actual miles charged per hour or per minute is affected by the efficiency of the vehicle. So it's 192 miles of EPA range for 40-45 minutes of DCFC at best case, using the newest CCS EVSE's. For a vehicle closer to Model 3 sized than Model S or Model X sized, that doesn't compare well against the Model 3 LR which picks up 248 miles of range in 35-40 minutes. Again, not sure Jaguar's target market cares... certainly not the initial 10-15,000 buyers that will get one in the first year.

The Model 3 AWD will offer equivalent acceleration performance, equivalent interior passenger room, and dramatically higher range and efficiency for $15,000 less.

 

[X Fan]

^^^^
Motor Trend: That wasn’t the best of reviews beyond the European charging infrastructure challenges .....

 

[McRat]

Motortrend spent some time in an I-Pace:

2019 Jaguar I-Pace Review: From London to Berlin in an All-Electric Jag - Motor Trend

Apparently the set up in the car is for rated range to be 240 miles. They did get some very high consumption numbers... 418-430 Wh/mile while doing 70-80 mph. 289 Wh/mile when doing 50-60 mph. Their MPGe figures are not comparable because MPGe includes charging losses.

It is interesting that they can offer a 90 kWh vehicle for $70,000, but the efficiency of the vehicle appears to be poor. I'm not sure the target market cares that the efficiency terrible. But it also goes into DCFC... the actual miles charged per hour or per minute is affected by the efficiency of the vehicle. So it's 192 miles of EPA range for 40-45 minutes of DCFC at best case, using the newest CCS EVSE's. For a vehicle closer to Model 3 sized than Model S or Model X sized, that doesn't compare well against the Model 3 LR which picks up 248 miles of range in 35-40 minutes. Again, not sure Jaguar's target market cares... certainly not the initial 10-15,000 buyers that will get one in the first year.

The Model 3 AWD will offer equivalent acceleration performance, equivalent interior passenger room, and dramatically higher range and efficiency for $15,000 less.

According to that article, at the lower freeway speeds with some congestion, it achieved 293 miles of range per 84.7 kWh (battery capacity).
To put things in perspective, the city EPA on a Model X 100D is 291 miles. So for congested freeways, the iPace has more range than the X100D. Now that a crazy amount of spread. 197mi at 75mph average, and 96 miles more in normal freeways going to work. 50% more range from 55 to 75? Perhaps.

But we will see in July/August when the Europeans start to report.

The Model 3 AWD does not exist BTW.

 

[X Fan]

^^^^
Seeing this I wouldn't be so sanguine re: range.

"With an indicated 202 miles of range and 160 miles to go, it should be a piece of cake. Germany might have the fastest roads on earth, but the A2 isn’t one of them, with long sections under repair and jammed with trucks heading to Poland and Russia. Four hours later, we pull into our hotel’s parking garage, not far from Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate, with 20 miles of range to spare"

So, it took four hours to go 160 miles and used 182 range miles.....that's an average of 40 miles per hour but yet generated a 14% loss.

As I'm sure you know, a Tesla traveling 40mph under normal conditions (no rain, hills, wind) will go much farther than rated miles. Plus, as you also realize the 3 AWD is right around the corner.....perhaps at same time as I-Pace first shipments.

 

[hiroshiy]

Maybe this is already discussed before, but @scaesare and I briefly talked in one of the invester's threads, that the pack is 108S and the voltage must be 454V fully charged. Scaesare pointed out that unlike CHAdeMO, CCS 1.0 voltage limit is 400V. Will there be a compatibility issue with DCFCs?