NateCrawford
Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2014
- Messages
- 6
I have the opposite commute (Marina del Rey to Irvine), and the original poster has my condolences
I would not rule out the 2015 Spark EV yet. The Chevy page for it just went live a few days ago, and they are claiming identical EPA range and city/highway efficiency numbers.
All of the reports I've seen that claim the battery is smaller reference the "Overall Capacity" comment. I believe this was a poorly-worded refence to the "useable capacity" rather than the total "raw capacity" of the batteries. If not, then the already high charging and drivetrain efficiencies must have increased to exactly compensate.
The increased drive ratio in the 2015 (3.17 was changed to 3.87) is balanced by a reduced torque at the motor (400 lb-ft changed to 327) to give the same max torque at the wheel (about 1270 lb-ft.). The 0-60 mi/h time also drops from 7.6s to 7.2s, but I guess you'd have to see the updated torque/power curves to find out what's going on.
All that said, I would REALLY like to see a highway-speed range test of the actual car before buying.
gra said:Spark EV:
Will work for this commute for at least three and probably four years, but only if you have guaranteed charging at both ends, preferably L2 rather than L1. You'd need to buy it. I'd opt for the CCS QC option for $750, just in case the battery deteriorates more rapidly than is likely; there will be CCS QCs in SoCal, at least 110 in the LA metro area and another 20 in San Diego, over the next three years or so. If you go with a Spark, I strongly recommend getting a 2014 instead of a 2015, even if you'd really like to have a Spark in one of the new colors. Changes to the 2015's battery and transmission ratio will almost certainly reduce its highway cruising range, as well as changing to a less heat-tolerant and lower cycle-life battery chemistry that make the long-term durability more suspect.
I would not rule out the 2015 Spark EV yet. The Chevy page for it just went live a few days ago, and they are claiming identical EPA range and city/highway efficiency numbers.
All of the reports I've seen that claim the battery is smaller reference the "Overall Capacity" comment. I believe this was a poorly-worded refence to the "useable capacity" rather than the total "raw capacity" of the batteries. If not, then the already high charging and drivetrain efficiencies must have increased to exactly compensate.
The increased drive ratio in the 2015 (3.17 was changed to 3.87) is balanced by a reduced torque at the motor (400 lb-ft changed to 327) to give the same max torque at the wheel (about 1270 lb-ft.). The 0-60 mi/h time also drops from 7.6s to 7.2s, but I guess you'd have to see the updated torque/power curves to find out what's going on.
All that said, I would REALLY like to see a highway-speed range test of the actual car before buying.