2015 MS 90D shows 300 miles range

[Goldswing]

I know this means nothing in reality, but my MS 90D with 95,000 miles still shows 300 miles of range when charged to 100% (like when brand new). In the real world, I average closer to 225.

I have seen most people say that their range shows closer to actual miles with degradation.

Anyone else have this scenario? Anyone know why Teslas act my way and others a different way?

 

[VaztheDad]

Rated vs ideal?

Tesla Range FAQ

Tesla Range FAQ, we answer the commonly asked questions

tesla-info.com

 

[DerbyDave]

I know that Tesla is going to make the range reading much more accurate with implementing weather data and other factors very soon. This will likely be a reduction for everyone in what it shows, and should be more accurate when it is implemented. I am sure they will send out something before this is implemented.

 

[henderrj]

I know that Tesla is going to make the range reading much more accurate with implementing weather data and other factors very soon. This will likely be a reduction for everyone in what it shows, and should be more accurate when it is implemented. I am sure they will send out something before this is implemented.

I thought that was just for the trip estimates? That is to say, the navigation. Are they actually changing the miles they display on the dash as well?

 

[Droschke]

I know that Tesla is going to make the range reading much more accurate with implementing weather data and other factors very soon. This will likely be a reduction for everyone in what it shows, and should be more accurate when it is implemented. I am sure they will send out something before this is implemented.

Only for trip planner.

 

[DerbyDave]

Here is the scoop: Tesla doubles down on better range estimates with tire pressure and more now being taken into account

 

[DerbyDave]

Apparently it is just for trip planning, but I can't imagine NAV saying you don't have enough energy while the car projected range says you do.

 

[Droschke]

Apparently it is just for trip planning, but I can't imagine NAV saying you don't have enough energy while the car projected range says you do.

That's the driver education issue. The "Rated Miles" is based on the EPA tests and if you look at any monroney it says:

"Actual results will vary for many reasons, including driving conditions and how you drive and maintain your vehicle."

 

[Shateam]

Change your miles from “Ideal” to “Rated

Brand new the rated miles for a MS 90D is 294 so if you want to get an understanding of your battery degradation, change to Rated and compare to 294.

 

[DerbyDave]

If you go into Energy, and select Average Range, this estimate is based on actual energy usage for the last XX miles. I would assume this will use the new "Navigation Range" calculation method, and not just use the few parameters is does now. These two estimated range numbers should be the same.

 

[geordi]

I've been on a huge cross-country road trip (just over 9000 miles right now and I'll probably hit 11k before I get back home) and the nav system DEFINITELY is much more pessimistic than the EPA rated miles. I calculated it before but I was losing about 1.3 rated miles for every 1 in road traveled. Starting off in the morning with 250-260 miles rated showing, the nav wants me to stop after no more than about 150, and I will be around 20%-25%

Frankly I think they HAVE changed something with the calculations or the nav has gotten better at accepting MY desire of not pushing down to 10%, b/c when I started this trip it was preferring to navigate down to the teens, but now it seems to plan a stop for around 20%. I'm quite OK with that.

 

[DerbyDave]

The article I linked says the first iteration of changes was in 2022.20.7 and higher.

 

[PCMc]

If you go into Energy, and select Average Range, this estimate is based on actual energy usage for the last XX miles. I would assume this will use the new "Navigation Range" calculation method, and not just use the few parameters is does now. These two estimated range numbers should be the same.

I disagree. They Average Range from the Energy screen and the project SOC upon arrival from the NAV are two different perspectives.

The Average Range in the Energy screen is a backward or historical looking based estimate. It is taking your current SOC combined with your average energy consumption for the last XX miles and using that to project your range "if you continued to drive in conditions and environment just like the last xx miles".

What is shown in the navigation system is a forward looking based estimate. It it looking at what the project future energy demand will be based upon the projected route, including factors like elevation/grade information, and based your SOC at arrival based upon those conditions.

Consider the driving event of going up a steep grade then down the other side. At the top of the grade the Energy screen is looking backwards, sees you've been consuming a ton of energy to climb that steep grade, and shows what is a substantially reduced remaining range. The NAV screen on the other hand knows you're about to go down a long grade, with expectation of recovery of substantial energy from regeneration, and in turn is basing it's forward looking estimate on a substantially different rate of energy consumption projected in the future.

As the financial disclaimer always states, past performance is no indicator of future results!

 

[Droschke]

but now it seems to plan a stop for around 20%.

I'm glad they are doing that. There are packs in the fleet with unhealthy modules that can shut down at low SOC.

 

[DerbyDave]

@PCMc of course it is looking at the future and all those factors, but what does it base the delta on for the computation? It seems it should include the historical (long term) average energy consumption, and the energy consumption on the trip so far instead of the ideal range as a starting point.

 

[geordi]

@PCMc of course it is looking at the future and all those factors, but what does it base the delta on for the computation? It seems it should include the historical (long term) average energy consumption, and the energy consumption on the trip so far instead of the ideal range as a starting point.

Pretty sure that the nav system is ALSO including the previous xx miles in the calculation, because even though my EPA range might be 293 miles fully charged, it is planning a stop with 20% remaining after no more than about 60% of the mileage showing when I start the trip. So if I start off with 240 miles showing (EPA)... It will want me to stop around 120-140 miles, no more than that. The percentage at arrival might go up while I'm traveling, but that's where it starts off, and it has been reasonably accurate based on the prior legs of this trip where the load on the car includes 200 lbs of tools on the back in 4 boxes on a tray.