Revamped that feature to match the locations page, out now.
If Tesla had the service level that you do, it would be 1,000x more successful.
Yeah, it requires a network connection. I'm working on a feature where you can manually add drives and charges in cases just like this.
As you can tell by your screenshots, if you use 82, you will have experienced extreme degradation that also puts you way under everyone else's performance. If you use 77.8, what it calculated, your degradation is in line with everyone else and with Tesla's announced degradation stats.
Are the Fleet Averages you are calculating based off of your own "Tessie" data? Considering that most users are probably just using the default that Tessie estimates as the original capacity. That would explain why he would fall below the averages when setting the original capacity at 82KwH.
Here's what I have done. Don't know if it's right or not, still trying to figure it out. I exported my data from Tessie, then found the KwH capacity that closest matched the original rated range and input that as the original capacity of the battery, for my 22 LRAWD Model 3 it was 78.8 KwH.
It automatically adapts the fleet degradation curve to whatever your setting is. He's falling below because the normal curve for that battery at that point is around 4.5%, not 10%. It's really rare to have 10% degradation at 20K miles.
The only way to know precisely what your car was at 0mi would be to have charged or tracked it then and seen what the car reported. Anything else is technically a guess. But since virtually nobody thinks of doing that (myself included) we get the original capacity from others with the same config. It's super accurate except for when Tesla updates manufacturing processes but doesn't update the firmware labeling (rare, but happens), or if you get a defective battery (rare, but happens.)
I've seen evidence on here, that sounds like the 82KwH number was more of a plug number, than what actual cars were delivered with. You and I seem to have pretty similar cars. My best guess on mine was 78.8. If I were you I would choose the 77.8 over the 82.
It's imperative that the service tracks as accurately as humanly and technically possible, so just dropping that data is not an option.Hey, using Tessie now, and noticed that a lot of my drives are... clutter. When I get my car from the garage and put it in the driveway, so we can load it up or load the dog, etc. it counts as a 'drive' even though it's <0.1 miles or even 0.0.
so, in a single day I may have 2, 4, or more. Today was back out. 'park', wife and dog, return, same, so that's 2x.
then I was sealing the driveway, and the wife borrowed my car, but then parked outside, so I had to use the yard to spin around, and unload groceries, so another 'drive'.
While, yes, it's a "Drive" are there any distance filter options, or even on the back end, maybe it's not worth the data if the drive is < 1 mile?
I can't be the only one with a ton of <0.1 mile drives? Sorry, don't like clutter in my data points
even at the car wash, while I'm waiting in line, if I put it in park, I now have like a dozen park drives 0.0 miles
0.2 seems to be my shortest 'legit' drive.
thoughts?
