Teslarati: Nissan Leaf more efficient than Model 3 on average

but - what does the dot gov epa site indicate ....

 

Note that according to the article, the difference appears to be in typical driver behavior, not the car's actual EPA/CAFE efficiency:

"So what could have accounted for the Leaf group achieving such high levels of efficiency? Recurrent points to driver behavior as the driving factor. Nissan drivers must maximize the range that their vehicle is capable of, which is often a fairly limited total range. Recurrent says drivers are incentivized to drive more cautiously.

On the other hand, Tesla drivers may drive more “regularly”; using air conditioning, accelerating quickly, etc. Each of these factors drives down the efficiency of the Tesla vehicles."

"The clear trend is that driver action, much like in ICE vehicles, is one of the predominant factors determining the efficiency of a vehicle."

So, if you can control yourself and resist temptation to mash the pedal and crank up the climate control, get the Tesla for greatest efficiency. But if you have normal human frailties such that temptation matters, get the Leaf.

 

that's why tesla sells, and leafs don't, among other reasons

 

EPA metrics:

 

The Leaf is certainly more affordable but definitely not more efficient than the Model 3 (EPA or real world). Have had our Model 3 for 3.5 years now and 6 years total of both generation Leafs. The Model 3 does markedly better on the same routes, same conditions, same driving behavior...

The Leaf is a great second vehicle. But the main advantage is cost - if you can get one without a hugh dealership markup.

 

I've also heard the tankless water heat advertisements claiming "efficient" and "endless". I want to respond that users must pick one, they can't have both. Of course, the advertisers won't listen to my clarifications, it conflicts with their message.

The reality is that attaching "very" and "super" to "energy-efficient tankless hot water heater" is misleading to the point of being fraud. These tankless heaters have an Energy Factor that cannot exceed 1.00. While really old electric or poorly installed storage tank water heaters might have an Energy Factor of 0.80, modern Energy Star units in typical household use will score 0.94 to 0.96. Tankless will beat them by only 4 to 6%, not very much.

On the other hand, today's best heat pump water heaters have Energy Factors of 3.45 to 4.00, absolutely crushing even the very theoretical best tankless unit:

https://neea.org/img/documents/residential-unitary-HPWH-qualified-products-list.pdf

 

Right, it's just a clickbait, unscientific (non)study, without any serious methodology revealed - best to ignore.

 

Looking at the Energy Star Water Heater ratings page, I'm seeing the very best gas tankless units have a Uniform Energy Factor (UEF) of 0.96, with a huge product selection of 0.94 and up. The very best gas storage units have UEF of 0.90, but with a much smaller selection, and by the end of the second page ratings are already down to 0.73.

The very best heat pump electrics have UEF of 4.02, with 3 pages of units at 3.75 or higher. Not many years ago, there were still electric resistance storage models on the Energy Star list, with UEFs at about 0.96. But it appears that heat pumps have matured so much that non-heat-pump electrics, both storage and tankless, have been expelled from Energy Star.

 

I'm suspecting that oil-fired hot water heaters are such a small market segment that Energy Star didn't bother defining an efficiency goal for them. So no matter how efficient someone builds one, there is simply no oil-fuel efficiency rating scale on which to score it.

 

• Original Top Gear Prius
• CleanMPG and hypermiling

Whatever cranks your tractor.

Bob Wilson

 

Oh so funny. Clarkson isn’t really a good tester and is a well known Prius hater and bmw lover. I suspect a twisted result

 

Those Nissan Leafs are outstanding. At their price point the Chevy Bolt and the Nissan Leaf are untouchable for the value they offer.

 

It's obvious that the test was skewed to favor the BMW. It played to all the Prius Weaknesses and did not allow any of it's advantages to come into play.

For instance: They used a gen 1 Prius, which has a code in the ECU that runs the engine non stop for 5 minutes when it is a cold start. This is to reduce the pollution from a cold cat converter. The "test" was only 10 laps, and that means the engine never stopped running. It was running 100% ICE. If they made it 20 mile race or started with a warm engine, the results would have changed dramatically.

It was a bit ingenuous to have the BMW closely follow the Prius. They drafted the whole way and most likely never accelerated during the entire test.

And last, of course, is the assertion that the Gen 1 Prius was made for fuel economy when it was actually designed to minimize emissions. It was one of the first to get the SULEV (super ultra low emissions vehicle) designation.