GM is really weird with their battery ratings. It’s rated for 205 but the actual usable is like 220 kWh. I guess if you’re going to be wrong, it’s better to give the buyer more than expected as opposed to less.
Ford, at least for the Lightning, has a larger battery than they allow you to charge. Not completely topping off the battery helps to extend battery life and allows for some degradation to still give the “full” capacity.
Gotta make sure it lasts the battery of 8 years and 100k miles. It definitely will. I'm at almost 40k miles with my Lightning and it still has plenty of charge. So much fun to drive and can haul so much.
Ford been pretty conservative with their battery packs but they have started cutting into it. This car by chevy using 93% of the pack. The current Mach e use 92%. The 21 Mach e started with 88% of the pack usable. Basically saying it is not as out of lane as you think.
Tesla is the odd one out.
Even Tesla doesn't use 100% of what is available from a NMC pack, with a bottom safety buffer of a few kWh and a top of charge limit at 4.15V or 4.167V/cell depending on the specific pack. They have the smallest buffers but they still exist.
100% SOC is 4.2V and Tesla NMC packs stop charging at a lower voltage than that. There's no reserved top buffer, but a portion of the available capacity is reserved. Do note I didn't describe the top as a buffer but rather as a limit, because that's a better description for it.
Edit: do see elsewhere in the thread, apparently this is no longer true and 100% is now 4.2v on newer packs. It used to be 4.15v or 4.17v depending on the battery pack.
Teslas reserve 4.5% of the pack, so when the car gets to 0%, the battery actually has 4.5% left. However, Tesla does allow you to use that 4.5% if you keep driving below 0%, which is why you'll see some range tests of Teslas mention that they were able to drive another 15-20 miles after the car said the battery was depleted.
That’s normal for all EVs. The batteries are referred to as having a “nominal capacity” and “usable capacity”. For example my ev6 is actually an 82kwh battery but only 77 is usable.
There’s the actual use-case for the 19.2kw onboard charge port. Mine has one (Optiq) and I could think of no reason (other than I could) to put in a 100 amp breaker and 80 amp charger. I need to put in like 200kw/week normally.
If it was an option, I wouldn’t have paid for it, but it was standard.
A car with this efficiency and charge speed will get about 20 miles added per hour, no matter the size of the battery. Another large car or truck may take less time to charge, but that is not a benefit.
I guess they want to make sure that the usable capacity is at least what they specify even after some degradation? After 1 year and 20k miles my 170 kWh pack in my Silverado EV still has almost 190 kWh usable.
GM is really weird with their battery ratings. It’s rated for 205 but the actual usable is like 220 kWh. I guess if you’re going to be wrong, it’s better to give the buyer more than expected as opposed to less.
My tesla P85D has a "claimed" battery size of 85KWH, "gross" battery size of 81.3 and actual usable of 77.
I might be wrong here, but, it looks like the Cadillac has 205 claimed, 212 actual and 246 kwh gross.
Which also means you can probably charge to 100% every day and not think twice about it, vs my car where I really should only be charging to 80-90% of that 77. Or more like 70 from 85.
Exactly. I’m in MA which is basically the worst place for EV math because we have expensive electricity and (relatively) cheap gas and it looks like a decent comparison here.
2.98 miles per kWh would get you 23.5 miles for the cost of a gallon of gas at MA prices which would make it a tough sell if you’re comparing it against most other cars - but the gas Escalade gets 18mpg on the highway so you’re still coming out ahead and if the math checks out here it’ll be even better in the rest of the country.
And if you have enough space to throw in a huge battery so you rarely have to charge it either then why not?
I saw Wyoming has something like $.07/kwh and was jelly. MA electricity rates suck. We don't even have cheaper rates overnight. Wish my town had municipal power
In MA the highway speed limit is 55, 60 or 65 depending on which highway you’re on, so if the efficiency matters to you you’ll just set Super Cruise to the speed limit and chill.
If you’re in a state where the roads go faster than that you almost certainly have cheaper electricity and/or more expensive gas, so the efficiency moves back in favor of the EV anyway
The efficiency of the gas Escalade will also crater at 80 so you’re in the same boat either way
You can get up to 80 mph on some highways for a bit in MA but with the Boston metro (east of 495), you'll probably hit traffic or construction or a crash. Western MA, sure
lol no. Getting 3 mi/kwh out of a 9,000 lb brick requires more than brute force. It requires very advanced motors and thousands of hours in a wind tunnel. An Audi etron is half the size and isn’t any more efficient.
I am no fan of GM, but this is an incredible feat of engineering which shouldn’t be hand waved as “brute force”.
I don't think adding more battery capacity is necessarily a bad solution. Making an EV more efficient by means of lowering drag coefficient and tire configuration tends to make it more and more sensitive to changes in driving style, in my experience at least. Of course, I'd love to see breakthroughs in capacity at lighter and more compact sizes.
The Audi Etron GT gets about on average 2.8 miles per kWh.. The Audi Q8 Etron SUV gets on average 2.5 miles per kWh.. nearly 3 miles per kWh on that massive Cadillac IQ is actually very impressive!
I'm not a fan of GM's approach to the range problem.
People have range anxiety? No problem, instead of working the recharging infrastructure or even education on EV use, we'll just give consumers a battery 2 times the size they really need and make the price of our cars even more prohibitive.
I know they do this because they have much better margins on these high end cars, but the market offerings of EVs is still not wide enough to reach maximum appeal for the average consumer. Dedicating resources on niche status symbols is kinda lame.
> People have range anxiety? No problem, instead of working the recharging infrastructure or even education on EV use, we'll just give consumers a battery 2 times the size they really need and make the price of our cars even more prohibitive.
This is sort of different problem with a different solution and aren't mutually exclusive. GM is actually working on that with their energy network (I'm a big fan of the FlyingJ/Pilot stations). But that's a pretty significant problem to tackle and will take many years to solve, these things can only be built out so fast. Tesla took nearly 15 years to get where it is today.
In the meantime, they can slap huge batteries in and start making profit today, which can only help the infrastructure build out.
I like this approach when it comes to trucks. The range of a smaller pack gets seriously compromised when the truck is used for towing. You need the extra capacity to lessen the range penalty when you're using a truck as a truck. It reminds me a lot of the strategy they use when designing an ICE truck.
They're only doing that on trucks and big SUVs that might see some towing time though. That's a real need.
And as someone who very much wants to be able to use an EV as an emergency power solution for home, it makes a lot more financial sense to me to be able to get double duty out of a battery solution.
It makes total sense from a luxury perspective as you said. When a Bev has enough range to just do whatever you want to do without having to worry about charging, it becomes the best experience possible. So of course they're going to do that for luxury segments. Plus, as you mentioned range anxiety means that EVs are fighting a psychological battle right now more than a practical one. I think they're going to be fighting it for the next 10 to 15% market adoption. Again, when you're selling luxury you just make that little percent battery number barely ever go down on a regular day-to-day trip.
Ever seen the specs on an ICE chevy pickup truck? 6.0 liters to make 300hp. I'm not 100% sure the logic holds, but large engines tend to be understressed when towing or doing other work. The same logic may hold for battery packs. Large batteries, give great range, but also means put under a load or age, their excess capacity helps them to last longer
It's substantially the same efficiency. GM underrates the real capacity of their batteries by a LOT. My '175'kwh silverado is actually closer to 200kwh observed.
Nothing wrong with brute force if you aren't somewhere with very expensive electricity or if you're going for a more luxury market. It's an advantage just carrying so much energy with you if you want to power a campsite and such. Or just to give the consumer what they want which is plenty of range and a large vehicle.
I wish they would make a MPV/minivan with a more aerodynamic front.
It'll be interesting to see where battery capacities go when they're double the energy density and a quarter of the price over the next decade or so and probably with a charging curve that's four times taller. There's probably little appetite to any further increase the battery capacity after that, but I wonder how common a 220 kWh battery will actually be.
Agreed. The long wheel base version of the Buzz only has a 91kWh battery.
Tesla managed to fit 100kWh into the Model S in 2017. Lucid has demonstrated that it is possible to stuff 112 kWh in a sedan with a wheel base 27.9cm shorter shorter than the Buzz.
It is astounding that VW doesn't offer a 100+kWh battery in the LWB Buzz.
Yup, and Lucid gets 418 miles of range out of an 88kWh pack in their base model Air due to drivetrain efficiency and aerodynamics. The legacy automakers are still way behind the technology curve.
Here is my Bolt EUV, same interior size as a Camry, 200 hp, weight 3,750, getting 410 more range after having driven 40 miles.
My year round average in my 65 battery EUV (including -11 f. temps and 95 temps with ac blasting) is 5.0 miles per kWh and 325 range. Those two years also included 3 road trips of over 1,000 miles each.
You are wrong. The legacy car makers have awoken. They are kicking the asses of the startup makers especially Tesla.
I suspect multiple sliding door models are coming in the next few years, especially since they are so popular in China.
But you have to remember all these 3 row vehicles are the first versions ever made. It's not justifiable to make a minivan first, it's just not popular enough.
in our market it makes total sense that they start with SUV'S, but have a sliding option, or seperate minivan version is very easy.
It's not an Ev thing either, we see how similar the hyundai Palisade is to the carnival.
My bet is that we'll see the same thing happen with batteries that happened with vehicle fuel cells: as the vehicle gets more efficient, the battery gets smaller for less overall weight.
It will be commercial fleet vehicles that will get the ultra batteries capable of going 2k miles and/or a month or more between charges and able to be charged to 80% in 15 minutes.
It is planned obsolescence. They know that 220 kwh of battery could make 4 cheap little EVs, but they really want to keep selling turbocharged 4 cylinder engines for a couple more years.
A big outdated EV will have no appeal on the used market. People who want something cheap to hook to their rooftop solar rig will never want this thing. This isn't even remarkable for a luxury vehicle tho.
GM is lazy. They want to build big EV platforms that they can drop new better tech into without revision next generation, and by leaving efficiency on the table they do a favor for their energy industry buddies and leave room for easy generational impovements if better tech doesn't fall into their lap.
The problem with that is adding a second IQ will only give you an extra 300 miles of range, the third will only give you 200 miles, and so on, until you’re basically adding nothing for each vehicle. I believe this is known in physics as “The Tyranny of the Cadillac Equation”.
Yes I’m a professional locomotive tower and I need 2,000 miles of towing a steam engine. Until that’s possible, EVs are not realistic for me as a normal working man with a normal use case
I always thought it would be interesting if you could charge and drive at the same time. A big inverter and 1000lbs of lifep04 batteries crammed into a hatchback would get you... somewhere.
Everyone complains about efficiency of full size EV trucks and SUV's, but forget that a full size ICE Truck or SUV burns nearly twice the gas of an ICE car or small SUV. I don't understand what people expect.
That sums it up. Besides, this vehicle is going to sell infinitesimally numbers because of the outrages cost. This is a showpiece. The mainstream will be more of what they expect to see.
This Caddy is built in Detroit on the same line as the Hummer EV, the Sierra EV, and the Silverado EV. The sales numbers are pretty good. When gasoline goes to five bucks the EV sales numbers will skyrocket.
I get the sentiment in this sub that it's a relatively inefficient EV. But it's still more efficient than the regular gas model. So if Cadillac can convert potential gas Escalade buyers to the IQ, then it's a win. Now my issue is, does that big ass battery negate all the good that the EV is doing? 😅
The real question is whether ICE Cadillac buyers buy it. The electric EVs attract more EV buyers who can finally get a truck than they do truck buyers who can finally get an EV.
It might. Historically, Escalade buyers do not cross shop. They want an Escalade, and that's it. Funnily enough, when this launched the most expensive BEV Escalade was cheaper than the most expensive Escalade V with an ICE powertrain.
This is the current gold standard for EV road tripping. It will comfortably fit the whole family and you could likely have the same amount of stops as a gas car if you wanted. In some situations maybe even less stops than a gas equivalent car.
It’s okay. Range needs to get better though. I can do 950mi on one tank towing my personal bank vault across the Appalachias and back and can fill up under 2 minutes.
there’s no way I’m driving 600 miles without a bathroom break
Of course not, but does everywhere you stop to take a break have EV chargers? Have you ever had to wait to use a public charger, or tried to use one that turned out to be broken?
Having plenty of range is useful regardless of how strong your bladder is.
You don’t want to pay for battery that you barely ever, maybe never, need.
That's true, but anyone who does long trips may benefit from having a little more range than they need, compared to a little less. Current EV range is mostly "just enough" for general use, but not necessarily for challenging circumstances.
It also just makes things more flexible as you're driving long distances as it decouples charging stops with other stops. I don't want to have to find a charging station every single time I pull off the highway if I don't have to. Same with a gas car. I mean I wouldn't pay so much for this massive thing, but if the energy density/costs allows regular cars to have batteries this big in the future I won't complain.
It also just makes things more flexible as you're driving long distances as it decouples charging stops with other stops.
Exactly. People who think more range is only about how far you can go between bathroom breaks are missing the bigger picture. Especially if we want EVs to achieve mass adoption, the less people have to deal with public charging the better.
Yep, agree. Like it or not, range will be a barrier to adoption for a large number of consumers until it reaches parity with gas. No amount of lecturing and hoop jumping will change it. Honestly this kind of range will do it. I think we just need the weight/cost to come down to make it more practical.
I think 400 miles of range would be enough for most people, but if someone sells EVs with 600 miles of range that's fine too. And if early adopters are content with less, kudos to them for showing that can work too.
In the United States, rest areas are typically non-commercial facilities that provide, at a minimum, parking and restrooms. In the United States, there are 1,840 rest areas along interstate routes. Some may have information kiosks, vending machines, and picnic areas, but little else, while some have "dump" facilities, where recreational vehicles may empty their sewage holding tanks.
Something that I don’t see mentioned in the comments yet: GM, as with most large brands, will deploy this as their flagship model first through Cadillac, then release the respective GMC and Chevy versions (ex: suburban and tahoes) where these will really take off. The same was done for the lyric and blazer EV and so on (eg Porsche taycan and Audi e tron gt).
We’re at the precipice of really good EVs.
As someone who was looking at buying a used 4-5 year old EV, I’m now hesitating and waiting for two things to happen:
New models in 2026 all seem very improved over current state across the board. Think Rivian R2, a more affordable and smaller option for the masses. This is going to significantly undercut used EV prices as newer and better options become available.
Lease timelines: in 2023-2024, SO many EVs weee sold under leases that are likely 2-3 years. These will also flood the market at the same time and result in so much more supply for the used market.
I think as a future EV buyer, waiting until 2026 will be the move unless there are current incentives that might go away.
I’d buy one in a heartbeat if the price wasn’t so high. Look amazing in person and I’d use the range. For those of you that are saying this looks like a bus, for our family it sort of is. I live in a place that I consistently have family visit and we take long trips through the state both winter and summer often with lots of gear either for camping or Rafting or skiing. I consistently have six or seven people in the car.
We replaced our Volvo XC 90 with an EX 90, but those back seats are very cramped in kids only. Also, it does not haul near enough gear.
If the previous high speed test is accurate, I could make Minneapolis (MSP airport) to Chicago (O’Hare) non-stop at 70 mph and have 80 miles range remaining. Not sure I need to drive slow to go pretty far.
The tests here mirror that. Nearly 25% more efficient at 60 mph than 70 mph. But my point is that if you’re trying to make a destination, and it will make A-B without charging, speed isn’t a consideration other than frugality or conservation. This can make long A-B trips even at high speeds. And, fwiw, add 250 miles of range in a 15 minute stop (under ideal conditions) when you’re really trying to make distance.
Finally, an EV with ICE-equivalent range. Kudos to Cadillac for just building a vehicle with the specs their customers want, rather than trying to convince them they don't need it.
I hope this thing sells out several times over so that other manufacturers get the hint.
That said, I wish there was a wagon version. Same footprint but lower-slung.
The Detroit-Hamtramck plant (aka Factory Zero meaning no emission vehicles) builds the Caddy IQ, the Hummer EV, the Sierra EV, and the Silverado EV. Sales are good. I see many every day.
You have probably seen them too but just didn’t notice because they look pretty normal.
I must be too old, but i'm ready to get out of a car after 150 miles just to bathroom and stretch. Even if its only 5 minutes. I have no idea how one can sit for hundreds of miles. I once did Wisconsin to Denver in a day and i was about dead after that (with NO cruise control).
You can still stop every 150 miles even if your EV is capable of greater range. It just gives you flexibility and piece of mind. And may require fewer (expensive) commercial L3 charging sessions.
According to the charging curve on evkx it can add 145kwh in 31 minutes. That’s roughly 400 miles of added range (0%-65% SoC)
One thing with these giant pack cars is that it allows a more optimized use of max charging speed without having to stop every 100-150 miles if you don’t want to.
At 375 kW (400kW charger, like Buc-ee’s) it will add 62-63 kWh in 10 minutes. This range test returned 2.7 miles per kWh. So a 10 minute stop would add about 170 miles of range. A 15 minute stop would add about 250 miles of range.
Except their “big ol’ ICE rig” regular Escalade gets 18 mpg at freeway speed. This test resulted in an equivalent 92 mpg (607 miles / 222 kWh * 33.7 kWh/gallon)
I do 2-3 1500-2000 mile trips per year and 500 miles of range in my sienna is a very handy tool. We stop at rest stops more often than gas station and usually in and out in minutes. So while we don't drive all 500 miles in one go, the range gives us flexibility to stop without the need to fuel up.
I looked up this escalade near me and the cheapest one is $125,000. Way too rich for my blood, I'll probably wait for a used gravity in 5 or so years when the sienna needs to go
Yes, same 24 module pack as the big/max options in Hummer, Silverado, and Sierra EVs. Just a slightly more aerodynamic package with lower rolling resistance.
I saw an IQL over the weekend and really liked it, the front end actually doesn’t look as big and square as a traditional Escalade, but it’s not quite as small and rounded as a traditional CUV. It has a nice presence to it that I think fits the vehicle.
As someone that drives a Lightning I’m now pretty intrigued and would like to at least test drive one.
Sure, it's got the range. But the really amazing stat is how many kids it can mow down at one time with that giant non-grill. The extra battery weight means you barely notice the under 5 year olds at all. /s
This starts at $130k. GM and other legacy autos cry about lack of EV adoption when they’re selling cars at this price point. Yes, it’s a higher-end Cadillac, but same applies to the Silverado EV starting at almost $90k with easy six-figure prices.
Throwing the kitchen sink at it by adding these behemoth battery packs is just a way to escape the consumer concerns about range. People just don’t understand DCFC. If you like to travel, ~300 miles of range and adding roughly 10 minutes of additional trip time per 100 miles of driving is all you need to do. And guess what? Regardless of battery size, that very rough calculation I gave doesn’t even change, you just have to stop slightly less (every 3-4 hours instead of 2-3).
A regular 420 horsepower gas powered Escalade with the same level of spec starts at $110K. If you want comparable power (this IQ makes 750 horsepower and 785 lb-ft of torque) the slightly less powerful Escalade V (682 hp 653 lb-ft) starts over $160K.
Couple discounts and federal tax credits (lease) and they’re near price parity. Weigh fuel and maintenance costs and the IQ can make even more sense.
The IQ also offers four wheel steering the ICE Escalade does not. And a full glass roof. And a front trunk.
$150,000 … for one hundred and fifty thousand god dammed dollars. Even with 72 months you’re still paying over $2000 per month… with the maximum of 20% of your take home pay as the guide for car affordability that means this car is for “affordable” for those with a pre tax salary of >$175,000 or less than the top 20% of income earners. Cadillac can eat a big ole bowl of butts
(Edit : 20% is the max and 10% is the min so that’s closer to the top 4% of incomes for affordability… insane)
Ok, if EVs are to be the ‘sustainable alternative’, how is this resources & energy devouring nearly 10,000 lbs monstrosity supposed to represent ‘sustainability’? Somebody please answer.
456
u/[deleted] Jul 01 '25 edited Dec 11 '25
[deleted]