?
Not sure anyone's suggesting a direct equivalence between mpg and Wh/mile, simply that BEVs are most efficient over low speed (typically shorter distance) journeys while the converse tends to be broadly true for fossil cars (though sustained high speed will obviously hit mpg). So estimated range will be greater if a BEV has recently been used for lower speed trips. And mpg and Wh/mile are simply the most convenient units to use when looking at the trend in efficiency with speed.
What, effect of temperature on BEV efficiency/range you mean? I don't _know_ but wouldn't expect it to be anything like 50%, but it would depend on things like the battery having a well-engineered liquid cooling & heating system so that it can adapt quickly to ambient conditions (and not eg a Leaf). I think the most efficient temperature for a BEV is reckoned to be low 20's C when there's less demand for battery conditioning or cabin HVAC. But low temperatures often seem to have other factors in play as well like wet roads and hence more rolling resistance, head winds etc. These factors affect fossil cars too of course but we just don't think about them.Also, my feeling is temperature is a bigger impact than you state johnd, although I grant not so much in this country but in Scandinavian country I would expect it to be near 50% hit in winter on £/mile. Anyone know
. (still less than petrol? 
) I would be very happy with a electric as a run around because it would be at the 15p/whr most of the time 
but I am not there with it for longer trips or for motoring pleasure. -------- this is the sort of discussion where one needs to have a beer in ones hand Just to be 100% clear, my comment about different efficiency regimes vs journey type for BEV and fossil cars was purely an explanation of why the reported range appeared to degrade on the I-Pace in that video. It was nothing to do with economics, which is a completely different matter.
Well, remember that I-Pace performance is roughly on a par with a Macan Turbo (0-60 4.5s) and that the £88K figure was a well-optioned example with plenty of expensive bling. Not difficult to get a Turbo to the same price point even without going mad on the options list. Whether you'd consider the two as equivalents is a more subjective question of course. The I-Pace is perhaps the closest thing to a Macan Turbo EV around at present in terms of size, performance, premium finish (and has some extra features like HUD), but no it's not a Porsche.
I just specced an Audi Etron 55 S line to £76.4K. so I suspect by the time Porsche has added its premium a Macan E is going to the £80k''s. "Harry" did say the Ipace spec was a bit over the top. When I specced up an Ipace into 2018 it came to very similar to the Audi at £76.5Kjohnd wrote: ↑Sun Jan 26, 2020 9:13 amWell, remember that I-Pace performance is roughly on a par with a Macan Turbo (0-60 4.5s) and that the £88K figure was a well-optioned example with plenty of expensive bling. Not difficult to get a Turbo to the same price point even without going mad on the options list. Whether you'd consider the two as equivalents is a more subjective question of course. The I-Pace is perhaps the closest thing to a Macan Turbo EV around at present in terms of size, performance, premium finish (and has some extra features like HUD), but no it's not a Porsche.
The other part of the picture is that JLR are only tooled to make something like 20k examples/year so as long as there's sufficient demand to sell that many cars at or near list then the price can be justified. Remember also that AFAICR the £88K figure doesn't include the the £3.5K government EV grant and that smallish (4-5%) discounts are available from brokers.
