Consumption Test - VW Id.7 vs Tesla Model 3

Check out the channel supporters:
Tronity:
app.tronity.io/signup/BATTERY...
Maingau Autostrom:
www.maingau-energie.de/e-mobi...
My German KZbin Channel:
/ @batterylifede
Become a member for exclusive and early content and behind the
scene info:
/ @batterylife
Merch is out as well:
batterylife.myspreadshop.net/
If you want to support the Channel
/ batterylifeev
paypal.me/batterylifeev
@volkswagen #vw #id7 #hank @tesla #tesla #model3 #highland #2024
0:00 Intro
1:43 Differences
4:08 25% of the way
5:07 Half way
6:01 Almost back
7:26 Arrival
9:30 Analyzing the data
15:30 Charging
My music in my videos is available at Epidemic sound
Referral link:
www.epidemicsound.com/referra...
Links to my spreadsheets of the cars tested:
Charge Curve Comparison
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/...
Charging Curve
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/...
EV Consumption
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/...
Take care

[@teslooja]

Great result for ID7, beating smaller Model 3.

[@patrikespelund6555]

Dont forget that the Model3 has two motors and is 4WD and a lot faster as well...

[@abraxastulammo9940]

​@@patrikespelund6555 Can't it disable front motor like VW GTX, so only higher weight (which is actually lower than ID7) would be of influence?

[@tomiboy1001]

Sorry but even with a good distance, it’s surely a advantage to stay behind

[@pieter85]

@@patrikespelund6555 WOWWW it's a lot faster :O that's not the purpose of this test right? The ID7 is a lot bigger as well... & don't forget the ID7 is a lot more luxurious you get the point :) It was about consumption

[@RobertPuklin]

Results are a fluke, same delta between ID.7 - Model Y LR in previous test and ID.7 - Model 3 LR in this test. This is absolute nonsense and probably caused by the cold Model 3 battery vs warm ID.7 battery.

[@Zedus-rl9hp]

We also had the ID7 for testing as a company vehicle. We had days of around 0-10°C and drove the usual routes that we do - both vehicles preheated with a charger. In a direct comparison, the ID7 was above the Model 3 SR and about the same as the Model Y LR. Was in early morning traffic, motorway between 100 and 140km/h over 40km. The path then diverged for both of them. But based on the detailed recordings that we have thanks to the software interface to our Teslas, we could also see a slightly higher consumption of the ID7 on the rest of the route. We're still waiting a bit before purchasing the vehicle, but for the "old" M3P we'll probably get a Model 3 again, but as an LR. Much more attractive because of the price alone.

[@Dqtube]

I wonder if some of the Tesla fanboys in the comments section will take the opportunity to contact you to do another test drive if they aren't so happy with this one. It's really nice that VW finally made a proper EV without major compromises.

[@vladalex5727]

😂

[@borinvlogs]

must be true if VW says so 😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁

[@jimroth7927]

Speaking as a Tesla Fanboy, I think testing where one car is at 100% charge and the other is at 80% is misleading, since regenerative braking will be effectively disabled for the 100% car. In addition, the VW was driving behind the Tesla, so might have benefited from drafting.

[@Dqtube]

@@jimroth7927 It's easy you or others have the chance to do a new test in different conditions. It's not BL's fault they provided the car almost fully charged for only a few hours when there's traffic on the roads. It's a test on real roads with real traffic so it's a plausible scenario.

[@jimroth7927]

It is not a question of fault, just a fact that his testing method is not reliable. @@Dqtube

[@danpadure]

the kWh went into heating the battery of the Model 3. For sure it heated the battery up. Use scanmytesla or something similar to check next time. and the fans were because the heatpump was running

[@boenill]

I think you should do like you said; get a owner of a Tesla model 3 SR, and take a longer trip, change the driver about every 50-100 km, and go back where you started. Then you will probably have a result you can trust.😉👍🏻 Nice cars both!

[@robertgidaa2705]

Why?

[@birphborph]

Great work from Volkswagen but the comparison is not fair I think. The ID.7 is a rear wheel drive with one motor, while the Model 3 is the Long Range version with two motors. A better comparison would be the Standard Model 3 with 60kWh battery and also one motor with 283PS. Or we wait for the 4-wheel version of the ID.7 ... 🙂

[@abraxastulammo9940]

Interesting, ID7 is also 52k EUR atm and has lots of extras Tesla doesn't have.

[@mmehmed]

like fast battery degradation?

[@abraxastulammo9940]

@@mmehmed Augmented Reality Headup Display, Travel Assist with automatic reactivation after changing lanes, 360 degrees camera, memory parking

[@artemmaistrenko1032]

can you share a link to Id.7 with all those extras for 52K EUR? There is only 65K EUR version for Poland and I don't see where are you people getting such prices :)

[@RobertPuklin]

@@mmehmed like draining the battery and bricking the car during OTA.

[@artemmaistrenko1032]

@@abraxastulammo9940 I don't think you get all those options for 52K, it would be too good and be basically a market killer for this price...

[@abraxastulammo9940]

7:13 What a limousine! 🤩 ID7 optimizations for the Autobahn confirmed? 😜 Everything under 20 is fine for me!

[@HSKA384]

You should compare technically related cars! The Tesla has at least 200 more horsepower than the ID.7 and also has all-wheel drive.

[@rutger1101]

The Model 3 SR with only rear wheel drive would have been a better choice for the test.

[@GordonMullan]

There is something very odd going on here. 215wH/km = 342.4wH/mile, which is *very* high consumption for a Model 3, especially a new Highland one. That would be 2.92m/kWh which is more like an old Model S. That doesn't match *any* other test I've seen, even of the old Model 3.

[@hrpzwift945]

Impressive - Nice knowing these things - Thank you for your videos - Drag is maybe just a little benefit for the ID7 - However the Id 7 not having a cold start might also give a little benefit - However still very impressive numbers.

[@wilhelm549]

Actually, this test confirms my consumption observations with Model 3SR. It is very efficient up to 110/120 km/h. But consumption is increasing a lot more compared to other sedans/hatchbacks e.g. BMW i4. when driving faster. I have no clue why this is the case, because from an aerodynamics point of view I would expect the Tesla to perform better. Eventually it is related to less efficient drive train at higher speed.

[@VSEVstudies]

My guess is internal resistance of the battery and / or motors performance at higher RPM. Either LFP is battery in SR+ does not like high power draw or cheaper aluminium rotor is less efficient at higher RPMs. Long Range with LG NMC battery is also less capable than comparable Panasonic NCA chemistry. Panasonic NCA battery for Model 3 Long Range / Performance is now only available for US market and more expensive Modes S and X.

[@isaacmanagil3195]

Great Review...and honest!! Amazing video.

[@babnu]

Great work. Highland efficiency figures seem off compared to other testers. Not sure why. For a bigger ID7 to beat smaller more efficient Tesla 3 would be a miraculous if not one off.

[@Icare51100]

Tesla is known for building efficient EVs however I would take consumption tests done by many reviewers with a lot of precaution. Many so called testers are actually getting big advantages for promoting Tesla products, not even talking about the patronage program with the link in description below the videos. There has always been something wrong with the consumption figures displayed by Tesla’s cars on the screen and everyone knows it. The best consumption test that I know about are performed by a French channel called La chaîne EV. They recently released a video proving that Tesla does not account for all consumption sources, in particular every time the car is stopped even in drive mode (in the traffic, at a red light, etc.) the consumption is not reported anymore…

[@jacobsmedegaard5426]

I think it's because the, id7 is made to be efficient at 130km/h, it was what VW said, so I think it has to do with that, but it seems like the Tesla is more efficient at lower speeds, it was in the other tests I saw at least, but this is the first test I see with 130km/h🙂

[@abraxastulammo9940]

@@jacobsmedegaard5426 I found out the SiC tech makes the cars significantly more efficient at low power demands due to extra low leakage. Model 3 has this from the start, new Taycan also implements it. VW doesn't have it afaik.

[@babnu]

@@Icare51100 sounds like EVGATE. Those links are available to anyone who recommends to buy a Tesla car. Even you can set a Tesla account and give a referral code to benefit you and buyer. Mostly these links are for Tesla owners to refer to friends and family. Since they have not advertised on TV and newspapers etc. Tesla has grown in US not because automobile journalists or consumers report magazine but by loyal customer base. No reason that VW cannot do the same it If they offer great cars at great price like ID7

[@D00MINIK]

​​@@Icare51100 All the consumption which isn't in Park IS shown, at least in our 4 Tesla Model 3 and Y's from end of 2020 to 2023 all with Heat Pump. I think this was true for some older Models so i am curious, could you post the Link of this test? And you write the this manipulating of tests for Teslas as if it's a fact. Haven't found anything by googeling, could you post sources of that as well? Of course it could be true even without proof but other car manufacturers could do that also. Normally others had it very easy in Papers, when they tested vehicles to not be good they could simply buy less add space in this particular paper. But there was no proof for that and as Tesla don't pay anything for advertisements they would be even more unlikely for such things as not long ago many Testers even had to rent the Teslas they wanted to test because no one got one from Tesla for testing.

[@martink.9442]

Überraschendes Ergebnis.

[@jt4403]

at a higher SOC level especially above 90%, most of the slowing down of the car will be done thru' the friction brakes rather than thru' regenerative braking since the battery is quite 'full' to take in additional energy. VW will have the advantage of better consumption rate as it has a lower SOC range thru out this test compared to the Tesla. good attempt and definitely hard work to complete this test and analyse the data.

[@Lorwildrose]

Thanks for this video Chris. Good kWh to km range, looks like a little better than my Mach e but I’m surprised only by .5 kms 5.7km/1 kwh iD7 rwd 5.2km/kwh Mach e awd LFP in whisper. With about the same weather and km/h speed.

[@michaeltuomenoksa3605]

What is the key factor in ID7 low consumption compared to earlier video? Testdrove ID7 today and was very impressed. Still 60 000 € is steep for VW

[@Lascarnn]

Wow, that is really an achievement, congrats VW!

[@Popdog76]

Hey Chris great test - next time check the tesla consumption data that would have perhaps shown battery conditioning or another reason 😊

[@richardikus7216]

It seems all the other efficieny tests differ a lot from yours. How can that be?

[@johnyverstegen3910]

This Tesla has two engines / 4WD and twice the horsepower. So sponsored by VW or meaningless comparison 😅

[@abraxastulammo9940]

@@johnyverstegen3910 So it needs twice the horsepower/kw at 130 or what are you saying? This would be bad.

[@izoyt]

is it maybe because all tesla evangelist are altering figures? not to mention media..

[@izoyt]

@@johnyverstegen3910 here we go. another one..

[@alexk8541]

Charging losses are higher with a high state of charge. AFAIK.

[@kevinn1158]

The price vs the leasing is crazy. Here in Canada the ID4 is a lot more in leasing costs. Like 300 dollars per month more.

[@johnhadlow9345]

This is a great result for VW and I’m pleased. (BTW I have a MS and Fremont M3LR. This ought to help people who don’t want Tesla into a good family EV 😁. This is great for the great transition. I don’t think it’s apples to apples but you can only test what you have I guess. A 1000km challenge winter and summer ought to show the true results but nonetheless the ID7 is now a workable option. I wonder if the software updates will work well?

[@bjrnerlingchristophersen1148]

Teslabjørn has tested ID7. At least 180w/km that gives a max range of 475km

[@abraxastulammo9940]

Already? 🤔

[@christianlinke380]

Wow, that is more than his LR Highland test at 90 km/m giving only 463km.

[@wolf-dieterschulz-engelke8598]

@@christianlinke380 dry or wet conditions, temperature etc. the id7 has abigger battery. 12 km more is wow.

[@christianlinke380]

@@wolf-dieterschulz-engelke8598 you are absolutely right. It depends on many variables. My statement has the same limited value as the initial claim. Hence, my sarcastic reply. However, I wouldnt consider a 2 to 3kwh usable battery size difference between the 2 cars as relevant.

[@wolf-dieterschulz-engelke8598]

​@@christianlinke380 I didn't recognize your reply as sarcastic, sorry. You are right.

[@revanitube]

Nice comparison. ID.7 base price is 61k in NL, pretty high unfortunately. I remember that you did an overview of consumption based on charger (excel 1 year ago?). Tesla MY there had 16% more consumption then what it presented on the board computer. ID.3 was only 6% more based on charger versus board computer. Seems that Tesla showing a bit too positive consumption figures on the board computer?

[@VSEVstudies]

Tesla can take 12 kW for battery heating, while ID.3 doesn’t. Reason of the difference. Take a test after pre-heating battery for fast charging in both cars but check the temperatures via the car scanner / ScanMyTesla. Also, Tesla heats battery to at least 48C in Long Range / Performance or at least 42C for SR/RWD, while such temp would kill ID.3 battery.

[@TheDanishSpaceman]

Was the ID.7 behind the Model 3 all the time?! You have to drive VERY far behind for drafting not become a factor😅

[@JeanPierreWhite]

To avoid accusations of drafting you guys should have changed position every 10 kms or so.

[@Juuythljgrrdwq]

Drafting actually helps A LOT !

[@abraxastulammo9940]

@@Juuythljgrrdwq In formula 1 when passing, but not 50 m back 😇

[@Juuythljgrrdwq]

@@abraxastulammo9940 sure ! Try draft behind a truck it helps a lot. Even 50-70 meters behind it

[@TheBrucifer]

@@Juuythljgrrdwq Not at 100m away

[@abraxastulammo9940]

@@Juuythljgrrdwq Truck/coach bus is big and boxy, ID7 has cd 0.23 so it closes the airflow behind the car somewhat imho. But I will try to draft behind trucks at 88 km/h to get some teslike consumptions in the future. 😎

[@jimroth7927]

How close was she driving behind you? If close, the drafting effect would invalidate your test.

[@NeilBlanchard]

Heat pumps are best at 7C and above.

[@heinim2]

Tesla only heats where you sit, not the whole car. Also it is not heating if nobody is inside. Also Tesla measures the trunk size differently, so it could be bigger from the numbers but smaller in real life. Overall impressing results for the ID.7. Bigger car with more and better assistants and more or less same consumption.

[@wzDH106]

As a VW ID4 owner, who watched other ID7 comparison reviews, why do your comparison results differ so drastically from other outlets? I understand the motor is more efficient compared to previous tech. Are you not testing apples to apples here? edit: Heat pump, assuming air source, should be very efficient in that temperature range. But as you mentioned, the sunny day most likely kept cabin temperatures elevated for such mild temperatures.

[@bugzeman]

Great video! Wow, the energy consumption on that model 3 is quite high, my guess is that winter tyres and coldish battery. I have a 2022 Model 3 RWD, and over 35000 miles I have an average of 229 Wh/Mi (56000 km - 143 Wh/km)

[@pedromiguelareias]

123 Wh/km Highland RWD in 7500 km

[@vladalex5727]

if you watch this guy for enough time will see that he is very into pretty much all EV s but not Tesla.. its somehow obvious...😈

[@abraxastulammo9940]

Enyaq 50 158 Wh/km in 2300 km (last 3 months), all season tyres rated "B"

[@tylovset]

So if heat pumps are as efficient as everyone claims, an ID.7 with heat pump would have beat M3 with 8% ? 10°C should be quite ideal.

[@wolf-dieterschulz-engelke8598]

the heatpump from VW (ec for ID3) was terrible..

[@RobertWilliamson91]

Any comments on VWs cock up with the battery modules or we just brushing it under the carpet?

[@gaborsz.7266]

These cars are the most important models of the new EV lineup. It deserves a much longer and detailed test with charging too. This one has a very short distance to see the real result of the consumption. I think in a long trip with higher or significantly lower temperature Tesla will way better effiecient. By the way ID.7 has a great range and a very effiecient car! Thank you for the test Chris!

[@BatteryLife]

If you give me one, I can do it.

[@VSEVstudies]

Sorry, but you’ve got battery size for Model 3 too low. It was LG 78.8 netto kWh battery minus 3.2..3.5 kWh buffer below zero. And you can have some heat losses as Bjorn calls this measurement error of about another 1 kWh. It should have been around 75 kWh available from 0 till 100%. Model 3 had something on the front passenger seat so activated second (passenger) heating zone. You need to ensure that nothing is pressing on the seat exit and enter a car again. Also, if you charged your car, but Model 3 battery remained with cool or even cold battery. Have you used CHILL mode? It sucks a bit more heat from the battery to climate and brings lower consumption at colder weather.

[@alexk8541]

Very good summary. I am looking forward to see Bjørn testing this ID7 in Norway. This car is at least efficient under warm conditions, great job.

[@filippxx]

Are we really surprised that a car with 200 HP less is a bit more economic. Wow! Can't wait for the test where the 1.0 TSI Golf is more economic than the Golf Type R.

[@ID.SuperFan-tq8xi]

I'm definitely getting the ID.7 over Model 3. It's a real car after all.

[@runeg286]

SOC of 100% prevents the Tesla from regenerative breaking, so it will loose some energy when breaking, especially in the beginning.

[@sternskov2629]

Der Tesla-Motor ist ein Wechselstrom und der VW ist ein Gleichstrommotor. Das bedeutet, dass Tesla bei höheren Geschwindigkeiten mehr Energie verbraucht und bei niedrigeren Geschwindigkeiten, wie z. B. im Stadtverkehr, weniger Energie verbraucht als VW.

[@D00MINIK]

Tesla does preheat the Battery also at 68% because even while it is charging rather slow at this SoC, it would be even slower or more harmfull to the battery if it is too cold and if you're driving further so you probably have a use for the Heat anyway, problem is that if you didn't navigate to a Supercharger it heats inefficient with its Motors fast with 7 to 8kw while charging (waste energy, like a ptc heater) and not with the Heat Pump what it would use if it knew it has enough time. The fan noise is no indicator if it's hot or cold for the car. Don't know why but it even is in the manual: "Model Y is designed to automatically maximize efficiency; therefore, your air conditioning compressor and external fan may run and make noise even when the outside temperature is cold and your vehicle is heating or supercharging."

[@marsroth]

kleiner Tipp: Das Handy in der Hand zu halten während der Fahrt kann schnell zu einer Strafe führen, würde ich in einem öffentlichen Video nicht machen.

[@BatteryLife]

Danke

[@mikapeltokorpi7671]

+5 .. +10 °C is optimal external temperature range to a heat pump

[@peterwilliamson1825]

Trunk space is always calculated for the area below the luggage cover on ALL cars. This might be why you were surprised the trunk in the ID7 showed to be smaller than the trunk in the Model 3 Space above the luggage cover is considered unusable as loose items could fly over the rear seat backs and hit a passenger if the car was in a crash.

[@simondehaas8784]

Tesla advertised trunk capacity figures are not remotely comparable with other cars, for either Model 3 or Y. I don't know what drugs their testers take, but they're strong ones.

[@heinim2]

They just use a different method of measuring, not the usual one. M3 is really one class below ID.7 but bigger than the ID.3

[@peterwilliamson1825]

As inconvenient as the truth is, it's still true. Space above the load cover isn't considered usable luggable space therefore it isn't measured in official figures. Surprising as it might be, the Model 3 and the ID7 have almost the same length trunk and the ID7's trunk is about 4 cm wider. In fact, the ID7 actually has a smaller trunk than the ID4 despite the fact that the ID 4 is a smaller car. However the Model 3 probably has twice the space below the trunk floor and is big enough to fit a cabin trolley case into. Having said all that. I'm certain that you could fit more suitcases into an ID7 because you can take the load cover out and stand your suitcase vertically, utilising that space that the manufacturers don't use when they measure load capacity.

[@simondehaas8784]

@@peterwilliamson1825 much of what you say is incorrect It's true that these measurements should only be to the load cover. However your statement that the Model 3 is bigger than the ID7 below the load cover is completely wrong. It's a lot smaller. Tesla used to say approx 400 liters for a M3 and it hasn't significantly changed. The Model Y is similar - they say 850 litres or some such rubbish, but it's actually smaller in the back than an Enyaq (585 litres). Tesla figures are completely out, and not by a small amount. It's really disingenuous.

[@thorsev6960]

Not true, Tesla used the SAE standard (measure all the way too roof) while most other brands (VW included) use VDA (measure to parcel shelf).

[@silviuguseila2552]

Are you sure the Model 3 has 498 horse power? Maybe with the Acceleration Boost

[@raduioanitescu6704]

The extra kwh that the model 3 charged went into heating! Tesla is heating the battery every time you put it on a DC charger. Very annoying.. plug in at 98% if you want to top up .. 6 kwh goes into the battery 7 kwh for heating 🤦‍♂ VW does it better. Best would be to let the user choose and default to the lowest consumption mode. Love everything else about the car.. the heating algorithm is extremely annoying. The WLTP and EPA test does an AC charge. So this inefficiency does not show up in the official consumption figures.

[@David_Polak]

Thank you very much for the insight. Good work from VW. I believe the ID7 will sell well. Note: 2:07 WLTP of the Tesla is 678 km due to the 18 inch rims.

[@abraxastulammo9940]

But did it have the new efficiency summer tyres that are responsible for that number or just some generic winter tyres?

[@wolf-dieterschulz-engelke8598]

ID7 is selling really bad, outside of Germany in Europe and in China. Sorry.

[@robertimrie3710]

Yeah, something is wrong here. Model 3 is highly efficient and the Highland is better still. The VW is 300 kg heavier and has a higher drag coefficient. Weight is less important at high speed but drag is a different matter. I will look for further comparisons that aren't done in a rush before considering this result as anything more than unexpected and needing further investigation. I live in the sub tropics with lots of traffic so I actually get more like 120 to 130 on the motorway in my 2019 3 doing weekend trips. Another observation, German Autobahns very high speeds are not good for the environment and energy. consumption. Far worse for combustion cars obviously.

[@abraxastulammo9940]

19:10 It does exist, I think Tesla sold some from the inventory last year.

[@asaha7547]

Well it did, but I don't think Highland version of LR RWD exists at least currently.

[@ouethojlkjn]

Strange that your consumption test differs from most others I have seen. Our Model Y AWD is about 12 months old and the average is 4 miles per kwh. [6.44 km per kwh] Assuming 75kwh usable this is 483km. A model 3 will easily do more than this. The ID7 is a very nice car but it just has to be cheaper to compete - similar to PoleStar.

[@sebvv5219]

I don't get why everyone keeps testing and comparing the ID.7 vs the model 3. It's not a Model 3 competitor, but rather a premium electro Passat - in other words a company car. It would make more sense to compare it to the model S instead.

[@USUG0]

then, you can argue that the model S is indeed a competitor of a VW phaeton like, or EQE Merc, i5 bmw. The id7 seats in between, where there are no customers! On the other hand, the M3 is a premiumish sedan with equivalent, or larger, interior/cargo space with awd, almost twice the power, cost several k less, etc....

[@Vercixx]

Why someone wanting to buy an M3 wouldn't consider an ID.7? And vice-versa?

[@sebvv5219]

@@Vercixx model 3 lacks comfort, id.7 is not as fast as the model 3.

[@Vercixx]

@@sebvv5219 You think people only buy the M3 for acceleration?

[@sebvv5219]

@@Vercixx no.

[@renebergqvist599]

The model 3 is a dual motor the id.7 is a single motor..... The model 3 SR also has the same power as the ID.7 but will beat it in consumption any day.... but it has less range

[@jacobsmedegaard5426]

And it's smaller to with smaller wheels, why is it that, all Tesla guy's get so annoyed every time the Tesla is not winning, just look at the numbers and take it for what it is, just look at all the many Tesla fanboy's comments, I don't get why you take it so personal, it's just a car🙂 relax a little🙂

[@jkajolin]

Actually model 3 highlander has got many bad reviews lately on poor consumption

[@a4jsa]

@@jacobsmedegaard5426 But more space for luggage in the model 3!

[@jacobsmedegaard5426]

@@a4jsa no, Tesla is measuring all of the luggage room also the useless spaces, where all others are only measuring up to the cover, you can not compare the numbers of the Tesla with other car brands. Plus that it's not a hatchback, so you can't fit bigger item's in the car and you can't have a cage for a dog etc... I mean the VW is still better there, but it's also a bigger car, so it should be, and the cabin is also way bigger, but it also should be, so no surprise there 🙂

[@jacobsmedegaard5426]

​@@a4jsanow you can watch this video and see what I mean by tesla's measurements, they don't measure the same way that the others do, the i id7 has a bigger boot than even the model s🙂 kzbin.info/www/bejne/enuYgoyHfddoftksi=RESoa-WOiQiy7RpZ

[@tesla-spectre]

hm amazing and also weird... because the heavier and less aerodynamic car should have a higher consumption. but well, good for the ID7. 🎉

[@asaha7547]

Teslas always heat batteries until it cools it :). If you saw steam then that was moment when it switched from heating to 55C to cooling.

[@mlepa]

Common... You drove a ID7 from a garage and a cold TM3 from the parking lot. Battery weighing 300 kg and a 10C temperature difference is around 3,5 kWh of heat energy right there. The TM3 has a heat pump, so the fan is working when the car is heating up the battery - Tesla always heats up the battery for DC charging and if you didn't set the navigation to the charger, it couldn't use the heat pump to do that - it had to use the resistivie heating to do it fastest. If you started the DC charging twice, the car had to heat up the battery twice... Man, this whole test is a joke...

[@DerBlauzahn]

Noice

[@FotoFilmEvents]

Bravoooo Tesla!!! I wonder what the consumption would be for ID7 if have 498HP and 4wheel drive like Tesla???

[@sternskov2629]

The Tesla Engine is a AC and the VW is a DC. That means at higher speeds, Tesla will use more energy, and at lower speeds, such as city driving, use less energy than VW. also think Tesla has less weight than the ID7.

[@tymanot]

Oh Oh - how can you do this test. Everyone will yell at you - Tesla lovers and VW meniacs. I will never get this... I simply buy the car that i like and can afford. And where I get the best leasing deal. No clue why people always fight about car comparisons... Strange waste of energy...

[@kevinwalton4538]

Chris you get arrested driving with a phone in your hand in the UK. ,!😊😮😂

[@jonwragg3822]

And in Germany.

[@borinvlogs]

must be true if VW says so 😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁

[@Juuythljgrrdwq]

So the test is invalid ?? 2wd vs 4wd…

[@abraxastulammo9940]

Wow, Tesla 215 wh/km for recharging vs VW only 190 😂 But ok, it is a 6 years old design.

[@sebbbi2]

Was this RWD Model 3 or AWD? This ID.7 is RWD I assume? Two engines adds extra friction.

[@iawdw]

No engines in there ;-P

[@mcherry8010]

the Tesla's RWD Model 3 has got a smaller, about 60kWh LFP batterypack with less horsepower.

[@sebbbi2]

⁠@@mcherry8010yeah. New Model 3 standard range is 513km WLTP range with 60kW battery. Which is great. ID.3 with 60kW battery (58kW usable) is only 420km WLTP. ID.3 still has the old engine (ID4/5 facelifts got the new one) and has significantly worse aerodynamics (cd 0.267 vs 0.219).

[@mcherry8010]

@@sebbbi2 who wants to buy an iD??

[@sebbbi2]

ID has some advantages over Tesla. Front parking camera, 360 degree (top) parking view, much tighter turning radius, more compact dimensions (shorter car instead of frunk). Those matter in European cities, where parking spots tiny. Also they have classic brake/gas pedal setup which appeals to many older drivers.

[@florus3228]

Now do the same test with a Model 3 RWD which costs about 10k less

[@magnusjohansson5383]

Exactly! Useless test, Tesla wins all categories!

[@abraxastulammo9940]

Or a Model S which costs about 40k more.

[@FrankNolf]

@@magnusjohansson5383 lol the Tesla fanboys are hurt again

[@Juuythljgrrdwq]

And the VW fanboys are sucking SMOG again 🤣🤣

[@FrankNolf]

@@Juuythljgrrdwq I drive a tesla Y, the Tesla fanboys are easily recognized by their childish behavior

[@henvan8737]

I don't believe you truly understand the Tesla operation and how it works. The heater will continue to operate if you don't close the door or you manually click on one of the heating modes. Tesla's ideal charge curve is 20 to 80% you need to get help next time you perform these sorts of tests.

[@pasilehto]

Model 3 had 18" wheels so WLTP is 678km not 629km.

[@alexklemme]

No, it‘s not the measured WLTP range, it‘s the range estimatet by Tesla. That‘s a huge difference.

[@pasilehto]

WLTP is measured with 19", therefore in any case 18" WLTP is not 629km.

[@wolf-dieterschulz-engelke8598]

@@pasilehto but not with winter tyres, Tesla use special 18 sommer tyres to get more range.

[@Marcotra]

Drafting at 130kph last for 5/7 seconds or 200/250 meters it means that 100m of distance gives you a great advantage

[@richardikus7216]

Of course. Absolutely crazy test.

[@Juuythljgrrdwq]

Its not a test…. Its one big mistake

[@gadgetmeister8503]

One car in front for 50% one way, the other car in front for the rest of the way, and the same for the return journey. This is the only way to eliminate any slipstreaming affecting the results.

[@RobertPuklin]

This result makes no sense. Hear me out: In the other video Model Y LR has 10% more consumption than ID.7. In this video Model 3 LR has 10% more consumption than ID.7. This does not compute. Big error by comparing cold vs warm battery.

[@thorsev6960]

Much colder in the Model Y test so the ID.7 will perform worse on that day since it has no heat pump.

[@RobertPuklin]

That's a minor factor.

[@thorsev6960]

@@RobertPuklincan you provide some data to back up that claim?

[@RobertPuklin]

You first. Dependency of resistive heating on temperature should be lower than dependency of heatpump having a source of heat vs. not having a source of heat.

[@RobertPuklin]

I guess we will have to wait for Björn the professional to do some testing.

[@nilfisktun]

Starting at 98% SOC removes regen for the Tesla.. Also drafting. Swap the SOC and lead car, im sure your resaults will change 🤣

[@capadosio]

You should have done the test with the RWD model3, not the LR...

[@pieter85]

Actually with the model S; more apples to apples.

[@michaelblue7852]

Next time please add what model 3 it is in title: "VW Id.7 vs Tesla Model 3 LR"

[@Juuythljgrrdwq]

Or maybe 2wd vs 4ws - first unfair test ! wow

[@christianlinke380]

Or 18in vs19 in or heat pump vs no heat pump....

[@Geon01]

Well, Tesla has way more power and is 4wd. Can't compare these models side by side.

[@christianlinke380]

Why not. Tesla has smaller tires and heatpump. So some properties are in Teslas favor and some for the ID7 when it comes to range and efficiency.

[@vladalex5727]

so 30 % of 77 kWh means 17,4 kwh /100 km and exactly 30% of 74 kwh means 17,5 kwh/100 km ... cool . good math 😈. anyway -all youtubers have better consumption tesla vs id7 - all but you 😂. I ' m waiting Tesla Bjorn to see the real consumption.... come on . good try but no 😂

[@asaha7547]

NAF had similar results for TM3 / ID7...

[@christianlinke380]

Tesla Bjorn 120 km/h test with highland LR gave him 330 km at slightly lower temps. Even Bjorn said the highland is a lot thirstier at higher speeds. So i guess we have to start believing those figures. Especially highway speeds

[@emilianopanzavolta]

Model 3 is AWD... ID.7 RWD...

[@natoftw]

Good job to Tesla, VW should focus more on efficiency. M3 has the same consumption while having 70% more hp and awd.

[@a4jsa]

Comparing a two-wheel-drive with af four-wheel drive .... really?

[@cokyrobes]

Genuine question - why would anyone buy an ID7?

[@kritasto2813]

To drive to work, f.ex.

[@Foersom_]

Because ID7 is large comfortable car with great features. Hires IQ matrix lights. AR HUD. Cockpit display in front of driver. Glass roof with liquid crystal shading. Rear seats with decent sitting height for adults. Front radar to avoid phantom braking. 2 rear radars for rear cross traffic detection. Lift back for carry large cargo. Can preheat battery when driving to charge station of any brand. Working rain sensor. 100% Elon free.

[@andreasburgholzer]

@@Foersom_ Sure, the exhaust manipulators are the best! VW Fanboy with pink plastic glasses 😂. And I'll tell you a secret: AR HUD is a fucking shit! What is it good for?! Maybe when you can't see the road anymore? 🤣

[@Foersom_]

@@andreasburgholzer "And I'll tell you a secret: AR HUD is a" Cute. " What is it good for?" It works great to mark safe distance to other cars in traffic, indicate lane border and for navigation markers. I use the augmented reality HUD daily.

[@Joda5212]

The Model3 is a dual motor version against a ID7 single motor version. Insane . Like apple and pears..Price difference is also obvious. Mod3 have a trunk too. ID7 is more expensive for less performance in all specs. Mod3 Std range is almost cheaper and more efficient to. Its clear a VW promo YT ,-) Fair enough. Mod 3dual motor with superior tech specs, cheaper is on par with a single motor frunkless ID7 ... ;-)

[@timogronroos4642]

RWD against AWD gives a small advantage for ID.7

[@claudiumxg1]

Id7 nees a 4wd variant, till then is not a option against 3 LR

[@hiszpi34]

In the end, tesla model 3 is the better autoss ;) sr will be better result and if id7 will be go first advantage will be even bigger ;) id7 definitely costs to much! :)

[@groovekay3858]

I smell bs these two car trims are not comparable. There is no way it supposed to be more efficient than model 3. All reviewers said something different from yours

[@pieter85]

I've seen almost no reviewer that did a real consumption test (especially the UK ones are lazy). Only Car maniac (vs BWM/Merc) & Battery life comes to mind. It's 4WD vs 2WD & +- same CW coefficient. Tesla seems very thirsty at the charger.

[@simons8564]

Ich hoffe die Polizei wird das Nutzen das Handys während der Fahrt auf einer Autobahn ahnden. Einfach nur Verantwortungslos.

[@BatteryLife]

Aber wenn ich es von einem Zettel ablesen ist alles ok? 🙄

[@simons8564]

Wenn man ein Fahrzeug führt, hat die gesamte Aufmerksamkeit dem Lenken des Fahrzeugs zu gelten, da hat man nichts abzulesen, auch nicht für ein extrem wichtiges KZbinvideo. Abgesehen davon ist das Nutzen eines Handys mit einem Bußgeld belegt § 23 StVO. @@BatteryLife

[@blackcat.19]

You compare by have same battery 🔋 charge and drive until the car drains the battery to 0%. Se which care went the farthest. VW is famous for cheating scandals lol 😂

[@bjrnerlingchristophersen1148]

This test is fraud. ID7pro has not 4wd Tesla has... That's a huge difference. It's like comparing apple and bananas. Tesla without 4wd has much lower consumption. Then do the comparison...

[@alexklemme]

No, it‘s not a „huge“ difference. The front motor is not used and off, when it‘s not needed.

[@christianlinke380]

Why are you not considering the bigger tires and no heatpump in your cherry picking?

[@mirokramarich4972]

She will drive behind me (around 0:55). Do you know anything about drafting (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drafting_(aerodynamics))? Please apologise to viewers, explain that you did big mistake and stop with misleading videos.

[@MartinNyholmJelle]

A distance of 50 meters (approximately 164 feet) behind another car is generally considered too far to benefit significantly from the drafting effect. The drafting effect, which reduces air resistance and improves fuel efficiency, is most effective when vehicles are in close proximity to each other. Therefore, while a distance of 50 meters may offer some slight reduction in air resistance compared to driving alone, it is unlikely to provide a significant drafting effect that would yield substantial fuel efficiency gains. It's generally recommended to maintain a safe following distance of at least 3-4 seconds behind the vehicle in front of you for optimal safety. I do not belive Cindy is a thrill seeker and was driving that close even.. so no it should not matter.. there is no video from the ID.7 in this test

[@richardikus7216]

It seems all the other efficieny tests differ a lot from yours. How can that be?