Well, my other option would be to drive all the time with the windows closed and the climate control off. I’m all for science, but that would have been a very uncomfortable 4.5 years with the car!
Unfortunately not close. I've done some of my own informal testing based on just driving 2 miles had a fixed speed in autopilot. That's all you need in your energy consumption tab to get enough of a flat line to get at least close. Don't have time to post that stuff as I'm headed off to traveling for several weeks. But when I land I'll try to pull it together. The notion that your energy consumption is essentially the same or worse at low speeds compared to high speeds is of course from a physical standpoint impossible. It also grossly contradicts Tesla's own software which warns you to slow down when you want to use less battery and your risking coming in on fumes.
I would expect a curve with an optimal energy consumption at medium speed, when you cover the most distance for the least energy, with a nonlinear (n^2) rise at higher speeds, and a linear-ish rise at lower speeds where the non-drive energy consumption starts to be a significant percentage.
Don't think that there's a rise at lower speed rate of consumption per se because rolling resistance is your primary energy drain there and if I'm not mistaken that is proportional to speed not an exponent. But there is a point at which aerodynamic losses are exceeded by rolling resistance but I believe that's like 10-15miles an hour or less. In my own informal testing on the Energy tab I continued to see steady and discernible reductions in Watt hours per mile numbers down to 15 mph. They might have still continued but I didn't feel comfortable going below 15 miles an hour for a mile or more on local streets.
forum.abetterrouteplanner.com
I believe rolling resistance is higher at very low speeds, especially stop and go.
The rise at lower speeds is related to the fixed energy consumption in the car (computer, A/C etc), which become a larger percentage as the car moves at lower speeds, resulting in an increase in the energy driven per mile. Of course, when stationary the energy per mile is infinite
True but I think the computer and all the other stuff pulls about 50 Watts - that's not enough to even move the car at two miles an hour. AC is another story and should never be on if you're trying to do an apples to apples energy consumption map of what the car goes through at various speeds.The rise at lower speeds is related to the fixed energy consumption in the car (computer, A/C etc), which become a larger percentage as the car moves at lower speeds, resulting in an increase in the energy driven per mile. Of course, when stationary the energy per mile is infinite
The computer is nearer 200W if I recall (there are two, one for screen etc and one for driving).
I'm currently running Flow one race spec F2 18x8.5 +30 on my 2023 model 3 performance.
Thanks for that! I am running 245/40/19 on my Aodhan AFF7s and over 12k miles, my wattage mile is around 280w/m. I think a lot of efficiency hit are on the wheels as they are quite open and very inefficient design, IMO, but I love the look. Really never cared about range unless on long long trips.
Well, it's pretty obvious from these posts is that they are great tires. I love them, perfect 3 and almost four season tires! They do it all, except deep snow I guess. Range does take a little hit, but that's all! No hesitation for me to get them again!
+1 on that, and in fact just last week I got my second set.
How do these compare to the Crossclimate 2 in terms of range and snow performance? I live in the Chicago area. For reference I have been totally fine with the MXM4 in the snow so range is a bit more important to me
PSAS4 are not known for being good for range or noise, but is decent for snow and great for dry and wet. Crossclimate 2 will be even better for snow and on par for range, but less grippy in the dry.
Not really. There seem to be an inverse correlation between tire compounds and construction that's good for range and what's good for snow. For range you want stiffer compound, less flexible tread, grooves that expels water well but are quiet. For snow you want softer compound, deeper and wider tread.
