结论：续航争议的源头，多数在滚动阻力而不在电池
使用者反馈续航比标称短，企业第一反应通常是查电池容量。电池确实会衰减，但在新车阶段，造成实测与标称差异的主要变量是滚动阻力。
滚动阻力直接决定平路行驶的能耗。它受轮胎类型、气压、载荷、路面状况共同影响，而这几项在试验条件和实际使用之间往往差异很大。
滚动阻力从哪来
| 来源 | 影响机制 | 可控程度 |
|---|---|---|
| 轮胎变形 | 轮胎压缩回弹过程中的能量损耗 | 由材质与结构决定，设计可控 |
| 气压 | 气压低则变形大，损耗增加 | 使用者可控，但常被忽略 |
| 载荷 | 载荷越大变形越大 | 由使用条件决定 |
| 路面 | 松软或粗糙路面损耗显著增加 | 不可控 |
| 轴承与传动 | 摩擦损耗 | 由选型与装配决定 |
| 轮子对中 | 偏斜产生额外阻力 | 装配质量决定 |
第二行是实际使用中影响最大也最容易解决的一项。充气胎产品如果气压低于标定值，滚动阻力明显上升，续航随之下降。而多数使用者不会定期检查气压。
最后一行容易被忽略：前轮或驱动轮如果存在对中偏差，行驶时会产生侧向摩擦，这部分损耗在台架上未必明显，但在实际使用中持续消耗能量。
实心胎与充气胎的差别
这两类轮胎的选择直接影响续航表现。
充气胎的滚动阻力通常较低，乘坐舒适性也较好，代价是需要维护气压、存在被扎风险。实心胎免维护、不会漏气，但滚动阻力较高、减震性差。
从续航角度看，充气胎有优势，但这个优势依赖使用者维持正确气压。 如果产品面向的使用者不太可能定期检查气压，实心胎的实际表现可能反而更稳定——虽然起点低，但不会随时间恶化。
这是个需要结合使用人群来做的判断，不是单纯的技术优劣问题。
对续航的量化影响
滚动阻力的变化会以接近线性的方式反映在平路能耗上。气压偏低、载荷偏大、路面偏差，这几项叠加起来，实际续航比标称值低相当比例是完全可能的。
这也解释了为什么续航是投诉率较高的一项指标：试验条件是平整硬质路面、标定气压、规定载荷，而实际使用往往三项都偏离。
测试时该注意什么
一是气压要按标定值。 送检前确认并记录，这是最基本的一步。
二是载荷要明确。 记录试验载荷，因为不同载荷下的续航不可直接比较。
三是路面条件要记录。 试验表面的类型和状态会影响结果，应当在报告中体现。
四是考虑是否补做实际条件下的验证。 标准试验给出的是规定条件下的能力，如果想了解产品在真实场景中的表现，需要按实际路况另做。
标注时的建议
续航标注容易引发争议，建议处理得实在一些：
标明测试条件，包括载荷、气压、路面、速度；如果可能，给出不同条件下的参考值，而不只是一个数字；在说明书中提示影响续航的因素，特别是气压和载荷；避免用容易引起过高预期的表述。
把条件写清楚，比把数字写大更有价值。 数字大而条件不明，使用者达不到时会产生不信任；数字实在而条件清楚，使用者能自己判断在什么情况下能跑多远。
设计上能做什么
降低滚动阻力的方向包括：选择滚阻较低的轮胎材质与结构；在允许范围内加大轮径；优化轴承选型；控制装配时的对中精度；在不影响功能的前提下减轻整车重量。
其中装配对中精度是成本最低、效果容易被低估的一项。同样的设计，装配质量不同，滚动阻力可能有可观的差异，而这项改进不增加物料成本。
续航测试的重复性问题
续航是重复性较差的一项。同一台车、同一条件，两次测出来的结果也可能有差异，原因包括电池状态、环境温度、驾驶方式的细微差别。
这带来一个实际问题：单次测试的结果不足以支撑标称值。 比较稳妥的做法是测多次取一个保守的值，而不是拿较好的一次去标。
如果用单次结果标注，而这一次恰好条件偏好，后续使用者反馈达不到就成了必然。标注偏保守带来的营销损失，通常小于投诉和退换带来的损失。
温度的影响
环境温度对续航的影响是双重的：低温下电池可用容量下降，同时润滑油脂黏度上升，机械阻力增加。
这意味着冬季的实际续航会明显低于常温测试值，而这一点如果没有在说明书中提示，使用者会认为是产品质量问题。
对于销往温差较大地区的产品，建议在低温条件下补测一次，拿到数据后在说明书里作出相应说明。这既是对使用者负责，也能减少不必要的售后纠纷。
与电池容量标注的配合
续航和电池容量是两个不同的指标，但使用者常把它们混在一起理解。容量大不等于跑得远，中间隔着整车能耗。
实务上建议把两者的关系在说明书里简单说明：电池容量决定能储存多少能量，实际里程还取决于载荷、路面、气压、温度和驾驶方式。把这层关系讲清楚，可以避免使用者用容量去反推里程然后产生落差。
我们的做法
做续航相关测试时，我们会把气压、载荷、环境温度、路面条件一并记录。这些条件不记录，数据的可比性就无从谈起——同一台车在不同条件下测出来的续航可以差很多，而报告上只有一个数字的话，事后无法解释差异。
对于把续航作为主要卖点的产品，建议在摸底阶段测一组不同条件下的数据，形成一个范围而不是单点。这个范围既能支撑更稳妥的标注方式，也能在出现使用者反馈时作为解释依据。
有需要可以把轮系配置和整车参数发过来一起看，或者直接联系：132 4819 8029。检测能力见服务介绍，产品分类见电动轮椅检测与代步车检测，标准信息见标准查询。
English version
Conclusion: range disputes usually originate in rolling resistance, not the battery
When users report shorter range than stated, the first instinct is to examine battery capacity. Batteries do degrade, but on a new vehicle the main variable behind a gap between measured and stated range is rolling resistance.
Rolling resistance directly governs energy consumption on the level. It depends on tyre type, pressure, load and surface condition together, and those differ considerably between test conditions and real use.
Where rolling resistance comes from
Tyre deformation dissipates energy through compression and recovery, determined by compound and construction and controllable at design. Pressure matters because low pressure means more deformation and more loss; users can control it but commonly do not. Load increases deformation and is set by use. Surface condition raises losses markedly on soft or rough ground and is not controllable. Bearings and transmission contribute friction losses determined by selection and assembly. Wheel alignment produces additional resistance when off.
Pressure is the largest and most easily corrected factor in real use. Pneumatic tyres below their specified pressure show a clear rise in rolling resistance and a corresponding fall in range, and most users do not check pressure regularly.
Alignment is easily overlooked. A misaligned front or drive wheel generates lateral friction that may not be obvious on a test rig but consumes energy continuously in service.
Solid versus pneumatic tyres
The choice directly affects range.
Pneumatic tyres generally have lower rolling resistance and better ride comfort, at the cost of pressure maintenance and puncture risk. Solid tyres are maintenance-free and cannot deflate, but have higher rolling resistance and poorer cushioning.
From a range perspective pneumatic tyres have the advantage, but that advantage depends on users maintaining correct pressure. Where the user group is unlikely to check pressure regularly, solid tyres may perform more consistently in practice: a lower starting point that does not deteriorate over time.
This is a judgement that has to account for the user population rather than a purely technical comparison.
The quantitative effect on range
Changes in rolling resistance translate into level-ground energy consumption in a near-linear way. Low pressure, heavy load and poor surfaces combine, and real range falling appreciably below the stated figure is entirely plausible.
This also explains why range attracts a relatively high complaint rate: test conditions specify a smooth hard surface, rated pressure and a defined load, while real use commonly departs from all three.
What to watch during testing
Set and record tyre pressure at the specified value before submission. Record the test load, since range at different loads is not directly comparable. Record surface type and condition, which should appear in the report. Consider whether supplementary verification under realistic conditions is worthwhile, since the standard test reports capability under specified conditions only.
Advice on stated figures
Range claims easily generate disputes, and a more grounded approach helps. State the test conditions including load, pressure, surface and speed. Where possible give reference values under several conditions rather than a single number. Note in the instructions which factors affect range, particularly pressure and load. Avoid wording likely to create expectations the product cannot meet.
Stating conditions clearly is worth more than stating a large number. A large figure with unclear conditions breeds distrust when users cannot reproduce it; a realistic figure with clear conditions lets users judge for themselves.
What design can do
Options include selecting tyre compounds and constructions with lower rolling resistance, increasing wheel diameter within the permitted range, optimising bearing selection, controlling alignment accuracy during assembly, and reducing vehicle mass where function permits.
Alignment accuracy in assembly is the lowest-cost item and the one whose effect is most often underestimated. With the same design, assembly quality can produce an appreciable difference in rolling resistance at no material cost.
How we handle it
For range testing we record pressure, load, ambient temperature and surface condition together. Without these the data cannot be compared: the same vehicle under different conditions can give very different range figures, and a report carrying only a single number cannot explain a discrepancy afterwards.
Where range is a principal selling point, we suggest measuring a set of values under several conditions during preliminary testing to produce a range rather than a point. That supports a more defensible claim and provides a basis for explanation when user feedback arrives.
Send us the wheel configuration and vehicle parameters and we will work through it. Phone or WeChat: +86 132 4819 8029.