{"id":14429,"date":"2025-08-16T10:40:39","date_gmt":"2025-08-16T08:40:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/advancedfleetmanagementconsulting.com\/eng\/?p=14429"},"modified":"2025-08-16T10:40:39","modified_gmt":"2025-08-16T08:40:39","slug":"electric-cars-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/advancedfleetmanagementconsulting.com\/eng\/2025\/08\/16\/electric-cars-3\/","title":{"rendered":"Up to 23% less: an official body announces the actual range of five electric cars"},"content":{"rendered":"

Independent tests by the Australian Automobile Association (AAA) show that all EVs have less range than their official ratings.<\/span><\/p>\n

Approval cycles have always tended to be inaccurate. This was the case in Europe with the NEDC, which was replaced by the WLTP to provide more realistic consumption figures, while in China the CLTC is, to say the least, rather optimistic. When it comes to electric cars, this results in ranges on paper that have little or nothing to do with reality.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Australian Automobile Association (AAA) has sought to solve the problem and has launched its own program of real-world testing to provide Australian drivers with more realistic data so they can make more informed decisions when choosing between different models.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\"Smart<\/span><\/p>\n

The Smart #3 is the model that differs the least from the certification.<\/span><\/p>\n

All have less range than advertised<\/span><\/strong><\/h5>\n

Five different models participated in this new round of testing: Tesla Model 3, BYD Atto 3, Tesla Model Y, Kia EV6, and Smart #3. The result is not surprising: each and every one of them recorded a range in real conditions that was lower than that declared in the laboratory, although the decrease varies considerably, ranging from 5% to 23% depending on the model.<\/span><\/p>\n

Going from best to worst, the Smart came out on top in the test. On paper, it claims a range of 455 km, but in the tests it managed to travel 432 km, so the difference is only 5%. In second place there is a tie. On the one hand, there is the Kia EV6, which reached 484 km out of the official 528 km, a decrease of 8%. The Tesla Model Y recorded the same percentage decrease, falling from the advertised 533 km to 490 km.<\/span><\/p>\n

Behind it is the Tesla Model 3, which, from an approved 513 km, was only able to travel 441 km, a decrease of 14%. However, the worst performer was the BYD Atto3, which claims a range of 480 km but only managed to travel 369 km, i.e., 23% less, almost a quarter of its stated range.<\/span><\/p>\n

These results are mainly due to the fact that the vehicles analyzed have higher energy consumption than stated, so the battery runs out sooner. However, among all of them, there is one that has achieved less real range than advertised, even though its consumption on the road has been lower than in the laboratory. This is the case of the Model Y, which on paper consumes 16.9 kWh\/100 km, but in the tests remained at 16.7. Despite this, it achieved a lower range.<\/span><\/p>\n

After that, the best result was achieved by the EV6, with consumption increasing by 1% from 16.5 kWh\/100 km to 16.6, followed by the Smart, which went from 16.3 to 17 kWh\/100 km (+4%), then the Model 3, which rose from 13.2 to 14 kWh\/100 km (+6%), and, once again, in last place was the BYD, which from the advertised 14.9 kWh\/100 km actually recorded 18, an increase of 21%.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>

<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n
\n
\n
\"Tesla<\/span><\/p>\n

The actual consumption of the Tesla Model Y was lower than the certified consumption.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tests that aim to help drivers<\/span><\/strong><\/h5>\n

AAA CEO Michael Bradley said: “As more electric vehicles enter our market, our tests will help consumers understand which new competitors offer the same battery range. Our program will give confidence to Australian fleets and families looking to buy an electric vehicle.” Launched in 2023, the Real World Testing Program has already analyzed 114 cars with different types of combustion systems, and the conclusion is clear: consumers cannot always rely on laboratory tests carried out by manufacturers.<\/span><\/p>\n

Its modus operandi is simple: it tests vehicles on a 93 km circuit, using test protocols based on European regulations and measuring the range of electric vehicles by quantifying both the energy required to drive the test route and the energy required to fully recharge each vehicle’s battery, as well as the energy consumption of each vehicle.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n