116MPGe has me on the fence, thinking of RWD now

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Either 3 is more efficient than all the S/X out there, and they seem to be just fine taking road trips and seeing very little battery degradation over years of use.

Is there even any place left in the US where 310 miles (what the AWD/P will get) isn't plenty good enough to get between charging locations?

That sounds like a challenge! (Let's just ignore Alaska for these purposes...)

St John, ND to Plainville, KS.
761 mi. About 12 hours 38 mins

St John, ND to Bismarck, ND (I put it on a Starbucks)
200 mi. About 3 hours 17 mins
Bismarck, ND to Murdo, SD
264 mi. About 4 hours 17 mins
Murdo, SD to Gothenburg, NE
235 mi. About 4 hours 0 mins
Gothenburg, NE to Plainville, KS
150 mi. About 2 hours 29 mins
Total:
849 mi. About 14 hours 3 mins

Added diversion of 88 mi, plus 1 hour 25 minutes, plus additional charging time because of diversions.

Or, just staying north:
St John, ND to Shelby, MT
641 mi. About 10 hours 36 mins

Via Dickinson, ND, Forsyth, MT (Bighorn, MT seems unrealistic), and Great Falls, MT
876.2 mi. About 13 hours, 44 mins

 

[Troy]

310 miles is not the actual score. Looking at MPGe numbers instead of EPA rated range is a good idea because MPGe numbers are not affected by marketing manipulations. In September 2017, Tesla was advertising 310 miles for the Model 3 LR but looking at the MPGe numbers, I calculated that the actual score must be 334 miles. At the time, I created this thread to explain my theory in detail. A month later, EPA released a document that showed 334 miles. MPGe numbers and the actual dyno scores are more important than rated range.

However, instead of comparing the 116 MPGe combined city and highway efficiency, I recommend comparing just the highway efficiency because only the highway range matters. With the P version, you lose 1-112/123= 8.9% range on the highway. The 2018 Model 3's highway score is 123 MPGe (source). Also, check out my thread here that I've updated today: Range of the Tesla Model S/X/3 at 65/70/75/80 mph

 

[Glamisduner]

I wasn't expecting that much of a loss and now I'm thinking of switching to RWD. Anyone else? (Assuming non-P AWD is also 116)

I thought about switching too, power is too expensive here. But then I realized these are just one set of tests, the longer the commute in the real world, the more the increased regen could theoretically balance out the difference. So In the end I'm sticking with what I ordered.

Also for other cars that are beating the tesla, while it's a nice feat it's not really the fair. Would you compare a Prius efficiency to a BMW M3? if it had the same size battery and AWD I'm sure they would not fair quite as well, that's a huge weight difference. You would get the most efficiency having the car as light as possible with the most efficient technology. Meaning a car designed to go 100 miles efficiently should beat a car designed to go 300 miles when we only care about going 100 miles. But the 100 mile car quickly becomes impractical when your commute is 110 miles.

If you want to be most efficient the RWD is probably better, if you want more performance, and better regen get the AWD. Or at least thats what I am thinking, the difference isn't large enough sway my decision yet, and it will depend on your needs, desires and commute.

 

[sperkin]

Both do not actually get the 310. That's just marketing. RWD is 126MPGe

That's true because it get's around 350 plus some left over charge. I think I can get 390mile but I don't want to get stuck on the freeway.

 

[ratsbew]

I'm an efficiency nerd. It's LR RWD for me all the way.

 

[nwdiver]

..... the difference is equivalent to 1 solar panel.....

 

[No2DinosaurFuel]

Keep in mind the 310 is just EPA rating. Model 3s RWD are known to exceed those numbers pretty easily. So it's really a bonus IMO to get the Model 3 RWD in terms of range. For those who needs the AWD, they will get closer to the 310 miles range, though I wouldn't be surprised if some are able to exceed those numbers.

Compared to the Model S, the Model 3 is much more closely matched in terms of range. Very few Model S/X gets same or over their EPA rated miles. Model 3 easily can do it. Hopefully this a trend Tesla continues because combined with battery degradation, it can really mean a severe range limitation a few years down the road.

 

[ord3r]

I ended up switching my order to RWD, and getting Autopilot instead. More efficiency + autopilot > more power and grip for me.

 

[grovny]

What did that do to your delivery schedule, and were you charged a fee to make the change?

 

[ord3r]

I was not charged a fee. Delivery changed from sep-nov to august-oct.

I hope I can keep my free premium connectivity, but that is such a low relative cost (900$ over 10 years), it is not a deal breaker. Shows as order update rather than new order so am hopeful.

 

[WileyTheMan]

No offense, but I'm not certain why someone who is buying a performance vehicle at a premium price would consider a drop in mileage a deal breaker. I would think its a given, considering you get the same drop with the P100D.

 

[Moderatefan]

Do we know if additional regen in AWD is included into MPGe? Otherwise, any data to support the potential change?

Btw, just came across the article, which also points at AWD benefits during the rain, not just snow. Haven't considered this before Tesla Model S Rear Wheel Drive vs All Wheel Drive: The Advantages and Disadvantages | Torque News

 

[Moderatefan]

..... the difference is equivalent to 1 solar panel.....

At retail prices, 1 installed panel is $1K. Btw, just talked to Tesla yesterday re: panels removal, have hail damage to the roof...Asked about additional panels and they don't install less than 8. So, getting 1-2 panels is actually impossible...
And initially they stated they couldn't install more than 10% over the last year usage(per utility company rules)... I'm now regretting I didn't get an extra panel...

 

[SSonnentag]

Either 3 is more efficient than all the S/X out there, and they seem to be just fine taking road trips and seeing very little battery degradation over years of use.

Is there even any place left in the US where 310 miles (what the AWD/P will get) isn't plenty good enough to get between charging locations?

Yep, Las Vegas, Nevada to Twin Falls, Idaho.

494 miles the quick and efficient way.
636 miles via superchargers.

 

[ord3r]

No offense, but I'm not certain why someone who is buying a performance vehicle at a premium price would consider a drop in mileage a deal breaker. I would think its a given, considering you get the same drop with the P100D.

I agree for performance, but the stock AWD trade off wasn't worth it to me. Especially with the leaks (unconfirmed) that the rear SMR motor is software gimped to 500A in the normal AWD. Having the fancy new SMR motor limited makes me sad. I want the full 800 amps out of it!

For my budget, having autopilot was more worthwhile than AWD considering the range reduction.

If AWD were free, I'd prefer the AWD.

 

[dhanson865]

I wasn't expecting that much of a loss and now I'm thinking of switching to RWD. Anyone else? (Assuming non-P AWD is also 116)

Both do not actually get the 310. That's just marketing. RWD is 126MPGe

mpge is such a goofy metric once you are used to an EV

1 MPGe ≈ 0.02967 mi/kW·h

So thats

* 130 mpge ≈ 3.8571 miles per kwh or ≈ 259 wh per mile
* 126 mpge ≈ 3.73842 miles per kwh or ≈ 267 wh per mile
* 116 mpge ≈ 3.44172 miles per kwh or ≈ 290 wh per mile

So we can look at a simple easier to understand unit that compares to what you might already be driving.

 

[goto10]

Just came back from the Formula E race yesterday. We charged for the first time to 100% in the RWD 3. We left with 317 Miles. So although they may have downgraded the LR range, it is only 2% more for us.

The range estimator in the car already takes that derating into account.

The unmodified EPA range for the Model 3 LR RWD is 334 miles. Tesla derated that to 310 and they calibrated the range estimate in the car to the derated value. So when you see 317 you aren't seeing the EPA-measured value, you are seeing a healthy new battery giving you a bit more range than the 310 the car is (de)rated for. If they were going by the EPA value then instead of 317 you'd see 341.

 

[jsmay311]

Do we know if additional regen in AWD is included into MPGe?

Yes. Although the rates of deceleration in the test cycles might be gradual enough that it doesn't make much of a difference.

 

[jsmay311]

Damn. Non-P ratings just got posted online. No better than AWD-P.

Gas Mileage of 2018 Tesla Model 3

If the tested range of the RWD was 334 miles and the AWD efficiency is 11% worse than RWD, I don't get how AWD can still have a 310 mile rated range.

 

[Jedi2155]

I was not charged a fee. Delivery changed from sep-nov to august-oct.

I hope I can keep my free premium connectivity, but that is such a low relative cost (900$ over 10 years), it is not a deal breaker. Shows as order update rather than new order so am hopeful.

I'm still particularly concerned about this aspect. I put my order in on June 30th with the AWD, EAP/FSD and seriously debating switching back to RWD due to the following concerns:

• Efficiency drop of up to 10% in UDDS (this detail may change once we get more highway test results)
• RWD limited to 500A

I'm probably going to wait until August 1st to see what details come out before I finally do the switch and if non-performance AWD is really that much worse. The $4000 cost isn't as big of an issue to me as the efficiency drop....

I'm an efficiency nut that has been driving EV's since 2008 so every bit matters to me and a huge reason why I went AWD in the first place. I was getting 50+ miles ev range on my 1st gen Volt, and my current Spark EV regularly get 5 to 7 mi/KWh (140 to 200 Wh/mile). Switching to an EV that uses 300 Wh+/mile is going to be somewhat painful.