Smart 3 2025 News

Driving range is the biggest talking point with electric cars. Range anxiety remains a prevalent road block to potential EV buyers, despite ever-increasing claimed figures.Figures are measured using many different testing cycles, which all have varying degrees of perceived accuracy.  The Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicles Test Procedure (WLTP) is viewed as the most accurate standard available.Its testing figures often come in noticeably lower than the older New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) and the even more generous China Light-Duty Vehicle Test Cycle (CLTC). As much as these systems do their best to mirror real-world driving, they can never be truly accurate because of the different ways people use their cars.The Australian Automobile Association’s Real-World Testing Program has done the ground work to see just how accurate these figures are when they are put to the test on the roads. The testing was completed in Victoria, with each vehicle travelling a route of 93km.We’ve compiled the most- and least-accurate EV driving ranges, according to what is reported and what they actually did on the road.The figures used for this data are the quoted Australian Design Rules figures used for sales approval.Brands base these figures on the various testing standards, and this means the difference in accuracy between reported and actual figures may not be as dramatic as portrayed by the raw numbers. This is particularly apparent for Chinese brands that register a more lenient testing method (NEDC) than other brands, which represents an exaggerated difference compared to real-world figures than what WLTP would show. Topping the list for the most inaccurate figure is the 2023 MG4 all-wheel drive hatchback. The quoted figure for this car is 405km, but it was more than 100km off that calculated in the real world. It only managed 281km, which was a 31 per cent difference. The MG4 has a WLTP range of 350km, making it a less egregious roughly 19 per cent inaccuracy. The theme of Chinese brands continues down the list, with three of the other four cars in the top five all being made by BYD. The BYD Seal sedan has a claimed driving range of 650km, but in the real world it only reached 488km, resulting in a 25 per cent decrease, but that dropped to 14 per cent based on WLTP figures. BYD’s Dolphin hatchback had a 24 per cent drop-off on its ADR figure of 410km, only capable of travelling 313km, but that was only an eight per cent decrease based on WLTP. The Kia EV6 mid-size SUV registered an eight per cent shortfall on its WLTP figure, travelling 484km instead of 528km. Kia's EV5, EV6 and EV9 SUVs also represent 11 per cent shortfalls on their WLTP range figures. The BYD Atto 3 small SUV was also in the top five and had a 20 per cent shortfall on its ADR figure of 410km, only reaching 328km. That was only a 5 per cent decrease based on its WLTP figure. Finally, the Tesla Model 3 had a 14 per cent drop off on what was expected based on WLTP numbers. The Kia EV5 is joined by the Tesla Model Y, with ADR and WLTP figures only representing a three per cent difference at the other end of the scale.The BYD Sealion 7 is one of the more dramatic examples of the inaccuracy of the NEDC system. Its 17 per cent shortfall based on NEDC standards is reduced to just three per cent when based on WLTP. While this data demonstrates how EVs perform in real life, it also provides important insight into how differing testing standards can dramatically alter driving range expectations. WLTP figures remain the most accurate mainstream testing regime, with NEDC and CLTC testing exaggerating potential driving range.

If you think Chinese car brands can't teach Toyota, Ford or GM anything about making vehicles better, think again!

Many so-called “all-new” models aren’t all that new. In fact, a sizeable chunk are reskinned versions of what came before, with fresh sheetmetal over the same general hard points.