-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I watched part of it, and used fast forward to speed it up even more. Amazing tunnel, even in time lapse AND fast forward, it still takes a while to endure. And you can pass other cars in tunnels? In the many tunnels of Hong Kong, I don't know of any that does NOT have double white lines between all lanes - ie the lane you pick before you enter the tunnel is the same lane you exit.
In all the video, I only notices ONE car passing you (just before Bergen), while you passed quite a few. Are people really driving slower than the already quite low speed limits in Norway? Or are you ... well, you are in a Tesla Model S, I probably shouldn't have asked in the first place
Usually, you're not allowed to pass in tunnels but apparently Lærdalstunnelen is an exception. Probably because it's so long. You can see that you have long broken lines, which means passing is allowed but not recommended, and that the line is yellow means that you have oncoming traffic on the other side.
Last edited:
I suspect it's different in Europe, where drivers are more disciplined, but here I've yet to see anyone not cross a solid line if there appeared to be an advantage to doing so. I think that most people believe the reason for the dashed lines is to save on paint costs.
physicsfita
Member
The pavement markings work a little differently in the US vs. Europe - http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/services/publications/fhwaop02090/uspavementmarkings.pdf
The upshot is that in the US, yellow lines mean there is oncoming traffic on the left. In that case, a solid yellow line prohibits a lane change, and a dashed line allows it. White lines separate lanes traveling in the same direction. In that case, a double solid line prohibits a lane change, a single solid line discourages it, and a dashed line allows it.
It's a myth that overtaking in tunnels are prohibited. As long as there's a dashed line, you're allowed to overtake. Only solid lines (or double solid lines) are restricted. As you can see, many of the tunnels have long straight roads very suitable for safe overtaking (no cars, animals, people, etc can come from the sides).
Anyways, here's road trip video #15 Stockholm. Have a great weekend
Anyways, here's road trip video #15 Stockholm. Have a great weekend
Last edited by a moderator:
40 minutes to 300 for the SC on 85Kwh battery, while the same charge is 1:10 with the 40kW ChaDeMo.
Not too much of a difference, maybe even an advantage for ChaDeMo, if you are watching a movie or having a three course dinner ... or doing some serious shopping tour.
I appreciate the work but comparing charts with different units is a big No No.
At quick glance Chademo looks 3x faster than SC because its numbers are in km/h, and SC's numbers in kW.
How long until some stupid schmuck writes the article how Chademo is clearly superior?
Another nice thing would be three numbers at the end of SOCs showing added range since charging start.
medved
Member
Yeah, but try to charge 85kWh battery to full capacity on a Supercharger and CHAdeMO and you will see that CHAdeMO is basically as fast as Supercharger.
Last edited:
Watching battery current on the CHAdeMO is a little strange. The numbers jump around a lot more than the SC. It seems to bounce around between 105A and 115A at lower SOC, but then it seems more stable around 115A in the middle of the charge session. Is this a DBT (Nissan slim type) CHAdeMO, or some other maker?
islandbayy
Active Member
Unfortunately, on the 6.1 release of the firmware, Tesla screwed around with the displayed units. If you switch it to show energy, like what he had on the 60 and 85kw cars (And my perferred unit of display), instead of showing range, it shows the battery charge %. I prefer the old method, where it still showed rated or ideal range along with the Kilowatt units instead of "miles per hour" or "kilometers per hour". This was not something that Bjorn could have changed if he wanted to without just flipping back and fourth between them. Disappointing pain in the butt in my opinion with that firmware change. If I had known, that alone would have kept me from upgrading to the latest firmware until fixed.
Not quite. Take a look at this video:
Supercharging Tesla Model S 85 kWh to 100 % - YouTube
There I start on 30 km and charge to 100 %. The last 1-2 % took 40 minutes. When I did the CHAdeMO video, I didn't have the chance to start at 30 km or lower for several reasons. One reason was time and the second reason was that I couldn't be sure that the CHAdeMO would be free. I came there two times earlier that day, and they were occupied by Leafs. Therefore I needed a plan B in case the CHAdeMOs were occupied, which was to have enough juice to reach SC about 70 km away.
Anyway, back to topic. Because I knew from before that the last 1-2 % would take awfully lot of time, I aimed for 98 or 99 % only. When the charging power was 10 kW, it finished. Compare that to the old SC charging video and you'll see that SC needed 1 hour 20 minutes to go from 30 km to 98-99 %. CHAdeMO went from 68 km to 98-99 % in 1 hour 44 minutes. Add another 15 minutes if I would arrive with 30 km and the same charging would take two hours. That means that SC is almost twice as fast as CHAdeMO for "almost full" charge.
And what's the point of this "almost full" charge? Well, if you're going on a long trip and you have to do a full charge to reach your next destination, there's no point to wait the last 40 minutes just to gain 10 km/2 kWh. You will arrive faster and have more range left if you reduce the cruising speed and stop charging at 98-99 %. The other case of full charge is if you start off at home and need full charge. Then it doesn't matter if it takes 2 hours or 10 hours to finish the full charge. And the case of CHAdeMO is for leaping between chargers, not starting off with full battery. Therefore, 100 % charge is not relevant.
That's the charger I used:
Yes, my point exactly. I have been complaining for a year now that they should always show kW right under amp and volts. So in this video I had to choose between kW/% and km. And I prefer km because the % doesn't say anything. After all, we relate to km when looking at Google maps, navigations, etc. The same goes for my camcorder. It shows how many minutes the battery and memory card have left. It would be pointless to show battery in % and memory card in MB/GB.
And even though I don't like the average km/hour display when using SC/CHAdeMO, I chose this one because then I would get the km in the main bar. And I knew from charging on the ABB charger that calculating kW and displaying it wouldn't be too much hassle since CHAdeMO have a narrow power span compared to SC. I could of course cover up the km/h numbers for CHAdeMO and put the kW on top of it. But instead I chose to show everything.
I don't think anyone would be stupid enough to only look at the raw numbers without noticing the units and conclude that CHAdeMO is superior based on that. After all, humans are visual. And it's quite easy to see that the SC bars move a lot faster.
For a fair test, I have to record a fresh SC charging from 0 km to 100 % and do the same for CHAdeMO. It will require som planning and also take a lot of time. This is the best I could come up with for now, given the time I have.
Don't get me wrong though. I appreciate your feedback. And I also know that this video was far from optimal. Sooner or later, I have to make an updated video of SC charging from 0-100 %. The old one was with old software which displayed typical different (401 km at max). And I can always borrow the CHAdeMO adapter later to do a proper test. I guess I was in a bit of a rush to push out this video since CHAdeMO adapter is a hot topic nowadays.I'll just say "Thank you" and shut up.
Edit: It was also a bit pointless and maybe confusing to include the 60 kWh SC charging. Some people didn't know it was a different battery pack. And there's another issue with it. The 60 kWh uses 205 Wh/km as typical and my car as of today's software uses 187 Wh/km. I'm not sure about the old video. The numbers could be off. So that means it's almost pointless to compare the km on my own car with the 60 kWh.
