Test VW ID.7 GTX station wagon VS ID.7 PRO station wagon. (Long reading, many details)
Earlier this month, Me and 3 other test drivers tested and compared the ID.7 GTX station wagon and the ID.7 PRO station wagon here in Norway.
On paper, these cars have an almost identical range, only 3 kilometers difference in favor of the GTX - based on what VW states when they state the WLTP range of these cars. (571 KM GTX/568 KM PRO) I thougt that 3 kilometer sounds way too low, I assumed the GTX tourer has more than 3 km extra range compared to the PRO tourer with 9 kWh smaller battery.
The GTX does indeed weigh around 100 kilos more, the 86 kWh battery pack weighs around 46 kilos more than the 77 kWh pack the ordinary PRO editions come with. An additional electric motor also has its weight and the four-wheel drive naturally leads to somewhat more consumption when it is activated. The GTX has an extra 54 horsepower and does 0-100 about 1 second faster than the PRO version. So active driving with Gtx gives somewhat more consumption, but overall I assumed that the difference in consumption is small in practice.
My claim was that VW are far too conservative here - this and more we wanted to find out. What is the real difference in range and what is the consumption of these cars at different speeds and situations? In addition to a full range test, a separate motorway test was planned.
I recruited 3 very experienced and competent test drivers in the norwegian ID. 7 group on Facebook. Three interested EV drivers signed up: Magne Olsen, Luis Betancor and Per Christian Strand. Two of the drivers are experienced ID.4 drivers with respectively 140,000 km and 160,000 km on their cars, both are considering switching to ID. 7. The third test driver is an experienced Tesla Model 3 driver who strongly considers the ID.7 GTX as his next car.
Test 1, RANGE TEST: ID.7 GTX station wagon VS ID. 7 PRO station wagon. Route: Vinterbro – OSLO – Storefjell mountain hotel Golsfjellet 1010 Meters above sea level – and back to OSLO – MOSS – SARPSBORG towards Sweden and back to MOSS/RYGGE to charge. We started about 150 meters above sea level.
First consumption reading Sollihøgda, 50 km driven:
GTX: 16.3 kWh/100 km (90% battery)
PRO: 15.3 kWh/100 km (89% battery)
Second reading Sokna, 100 km driven (15 degrees C):
GTX: 13.5 kWh/100 km (84% battery)
PRO: 12.9 kWh/100 km (82% battery)
Third reading Gol Sentrum 200 M above sea level, 193 km driven (15 degrees C):
(last stop before we climb 800 altitude meters/height meters)
GTX: 13.7 kWh/100 km (69% battery)
PRO: 13.2 kWh/100 km (66% battery)
Fourth reading: Storefjell mountain Hotel 1010 Meters above sealevel, 212 km driven (13 degrees)
GTX: 16.2 kWh/100 km (59% battery)
PRO: 15.5 kWh/100 km (56% battery)
Fifth reading: Back down to Gol City 200 Meters above sea level, 231 km driven (15 degrees):
GTX: 13.8 kWh/100 km (61% battery)
PRO: 13.3 kWh/100 km (59% battery)
Sixth reading: Mastemyr/Kolbotn/Svartskog area, 42 miles driven:
GTX: 13.3 KWh/100 km (33% battery - approx. 2/3 battery used, estimated remaining range 210 kilometers according to the car's "guess'ometer"/the cars calculated/estimated range) . Note: Here we could have secured a range of well over 600 kilometers if we had driven calmly on the motorway in the right lane towards Sarpsborg/Svinesund/Sweden or if we had driven on a number of country roads in the area.
However, we wanted to make the test more demanding and realistic for Norwegians, so we chose to drive actively in the left lane on the motorway towards Sarpsborg/Sweden. Staying constantly in the left lane requires a lot of energy, here the speedometer speed is usually up to 120 km/h. Approximately 100-120 kilometers of such driving significantly increases consumption, but at the same time provides a more realistic example for many when it comes to consumption/range. Some also drive longer stretches on the motorway. What do we end up with when we challenge the cars with such energy-demanding active driving for the next 100-120 kilometers?
We then drove past Sarpsborg and eventually turned towards Moss/Rygge again to end the trip with charging at the IONITY station at Rygge by Moss. By then the cars had driven 542 km:
Seventh and last reading: Ionity Rygge/Circle K Rygge/Moss, 542 km driven:
GTX: 14.0 kWh/100 km (9-10% battery, changed from 10-9% when we stopped)
PRO: 13.3 kWh / 100 km (2% battery)
Summary Range: Based on today's driving, it can be roughly calculated that the cars with this type of driving (approx. 35% motorway and approx. 65% country road) give the following range on a mostly dry day in the summer season/september , temp. 13-+20 degrees C.:
GTX: 600 kilometers range
PRO: 560 kilometers range
I mean that these ranges are very good, we drove a route that includes a trip to 1010 meters above sea level and with a large proportion of motorway included. (approx. one-third motorway) This shows once again that the WLTP figures are achievable on a mostly dry day in the summer season.
TeslaBjørn has also tested the id.7 thoroughly a number of times, his tests also consistently show that the id.7 is a very efficient car. We could probably have squeezed out a further estimated 10-30 extra kilometers if we had used a test method where you drain the batteries to below 0% until the cars stop. We didn't have a tow truck available, so we chose the method that is more relevant to most people.
Our experience shows that GTX is mostly around 0.5-1 kWh higher consumption per 100 km. The times when the difference is greatest are when there is a lot of climbing or a lot of active driving with accelerations, etc. Such a difference in consumption has minimal effects, here we are talking about a few Euro/GBP a month extra for those who choose GTX if you drive 20,000 km annually and mostly charge at home.
Gtx costs a little more, but can give you up to 40-50 kilometers of extra range compared to the normal edition of the ID.7 PRO (77 kwh). If, on the other hand, you choose the ID.7 Pro S with the 86 KWH battery pack, you get approximately 30 kilometers longer range with the PRO S compared to the GTX, based on our varied tests over a weekend in September.
On snowy/slippery roads in the winter up to the mountains, activated four-wheel drive will probably also lead to somewhat higher consumption on the GTX, such a test will hopefully come in the winter when the cold and snow arrive.
Worth noting: Driving EVs up from 200 to 1010 meters above sea level:The approximately 20 KM long climbing stage from Gol center where we had to drive approx. 2200-2300 kg heavy cars up steep hills and climb 800 meters in height requires a lot of energy! Up at the top behind Storefjell Hotel, the consumption had risen considerably, the battery percentage had been reduced by as much as 10% on both cars. 10% battery drained in just 20 KM of driving, with the ID.7 cars you usually get a range of 50-60 KM when you use 10% of the battery - sometimes up to 80 kilometers if you drive home from a mountain trip.
Please notice: On the way down from the mountain, the GTX regenerated quite a bit and I made it about 40 KM further (from 210-250 KM) before the GTX was down to the same battery percentage as I had at the top of the mountain. This illustrates well how important it is that all car tests have a track that ensures that all cars both get up to the highest point and that all tested cars end up back at approximately the same point/same altitude as where they started. Then you get a more correct comparison.
The long-distance test to Storefjell was run in Comfort Mode with the air conditioning set to AUTO/21 degrees C. ACC was used approx. 95% of the trip. We drove the various cars 50% each and took turns lying in front. The tire pressure was filled to the recommended pressure according to the table in the door of the car. The Pro car had Bridgestone Turanza Eco tires, the Gtx was equipped with Pirelli Cinturato P7 elect. Dimensions were the same on all cars; 20" rims with 235/45 R20 tyres.
Motorway test: We drove the cars from A-B and back to A to equalize headwinds/headwinds and the number of meters of altitude. Drove 50 kilometres. Used ACC.
MOTORWAY TEST at constant 100 km/h (104 km/h speedometer/ACC):
GTX: 15.9 kWh/100 km = approx. 520-530 KM range
PRO stW: 14.5 kWh/100 km = approx. 510-520 KM range
MOTORWAY TEST 2 at constant 110 km/h (114 km/h speedometer/ACC):
GTX: 17.3 kWh/100 km = approx. 480-490 KM range
PRO ST.W: 16.5 kWh/100 km = approx. 450-460 KM range
"ACTIVE MIX" MOTORWAY / country roads. Active driving, no focus on economic driving:
GTX: 19.9 kWh/100 km = approx. 420 KM range
PRO st.w: 17.1 kWh/100 km = approx. 440 KM range
Test summary 130 KM, approx. 110 KM motorway and 20 KM active driving on country roads:
GTX: 17.3 kWh/100 km = approx. 490 KM range
PRO st.w: 16.2 kWh/100 km = approx. 460 KM range
In Norway we have lower speed limits than many other European countries.
CHARGING TEST, was carried out after the long trip we had to Storefjell /Golsfjellet at IONITY's charging station at RYGGE/Moss. The GTX version promises a maximum power of 200 KW and a charging time of 26 minutes from 10-80% (86 kWh battery). The Pro version promises a maximum power of 175 KW and a charging time of 28 minutes (77 kWh battery). See attached charging curves for details. Summary: Both cars deliver times and charging power in accordance with what VW promises. We experienced maximum power of over 200 KW (204) on the GTX and over 175 Kw (189) on the PRO. Time from 10-80% was also within what VW promises. So VW keeps what they promise when it comes to charging power and charging times.
Charging in the winter is of course something else, but the fact that the ID.7 comes with battery preheating also makes charging in the winter months a good match. (Charging in winter has been tested both by the Norwegian Electric Vehicle Association and NAF - preheating of the battery works and charging times in the winter is as promised by VW. Preheating can either be started manually in the menu or by navigating to a charging station)
Some relevant figures: In approximately 17 minutes, you have charged 250-300 new kilometers / 50% of the battery. In around 10 minutes you can charge around 200 new KM! I think these are very good numbers. 26-28 minutes from 10-80%/over 450 new kilometers is also good I think - in that time you barely have time to eat a meal and go to the toilet before you have to move the car from the charger.
Only certain Korean cars in the same price range, as well as some much more expensive cars (including Audi and Porsche), charge significantly faster than this as far as I know. In total, we had to pay for 3.6 kWh more when we fully charged the Gtx compared to when we fully charged the Pro version after the range test. Not much difference on a 542 km trip! (Corresponds to an additional cost of approx. NOK 15 (1,5 Euros/GBP) for fast charging or approx. NOK 6/ 0,6 EUROS at home) Figures including charge loss, there will be some charge loss on lightning charging - perfectly normal!
The GTX was the car most of the test drivers preferred. It was perceived as somewhat more rigid and sporty in the undercarriage and at the same time comfortable. There are many settings you can make in the car's DCC menu for the undercarriage - here there are opportunities to adapt! We Haven't received confirmation from VW that the DCC system is different, but that was our experience. It is not unusual for the DCC to be adapted and programmed to specific models and thus can be set up somewhat sportier on the GTX models. Ground clearance is the same. The Gtx also had significantly more kick-off, but both cars are perceived as nimble enough.
Both cars were praised for comfort, which was particularly noticeable for those of us who drove 8-9 hours on the full range test. None of us felt any discomfort, the ID.7 is simply a very comfortable long-distance car! The menus are a bit gnarly and messy, simply require some time getting used to. The adaptive cruise control in the ID.7 was highlighted by all drivers as being very good - the automatic speed limit sign reader is the only minus - it can easily be switched off if you wish. (In Norway all cars struggle with speed limit sign reading.)
A couple of drivers reported some tire noise on the roughest asphalt, otherwise the cars are very comfortable and quiet. (The Norwegian asphalt is known for being rougher so that it can withstand the harsh winters we can experience here)
Everyone was impressed by the low consumption of such a large car. An interesting detail on the id.7 cars is that VW has finally added lights to the VW logos. Stylish effect in dark tunnels and on dark roads! Gtx has somewhat higher consumption, approximately 0.5-1 kWh extra per 100 km compared to the Pro. In reality, this amounts to very little in expences. If you drive 20,000 km a year, the rough calculation means that you use approximately NOK 40-50 (5 EURO/5 GBP) more per month in electricity by driving a GTX than a Pro with Norwegian electricity prices and home charging.
Many thanks to Luis Betancor, Per Christian Strand (motorway test) and to Magne Olsen for the long-distance test to Storefjell 1010 MOH! And thanks to Møller Follo who lent us 3 cars at our disposal without any kind of guidance or conditions! I am sorry if some of this text is translated incorrectly! English is not my first language, I used Google Translate most of the time.
