Yep. I can't wait. Unfortunately for those of us on FSDb, we are stuck with 2022.20.x for some time.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
2022 Model X (Plaid) Energy Graph
- Thread starter Seegem
- Start date
FirstInTown
Member
Yes! I haven't taken an update for months, because my version still has the graph via voice commands. Hate having to cancel the update multiple times a drive. Bring on version 36!
Thanks to this forum, I think that my brand new MX long range w 83 miles on it doesn’t have the energy graph. Says I’m 2022.23.101.284b. Is this correct? I was learning how to use the energy consumption to determine remaining range prior to receiving car after 15 months. Please advise if energy info is going to come back.
Rumor going around is a much improved version will be part of 2022.36 and beyond. If you are navigating somewhere, % remaining upon arrival is available. Also Settings->Trips will show you consumption information. But right now, that is all there is.
Art VandeIay
Attractive Membrane
@OilSucks mentioned on another thread having 2022.36 on a 2022 Model S LR, but either that was a typo or was NDA'yed hard!
I don't think it's been released yet. At least no one on TeslaFi has seen it yet. Granted that's a small sample size.
Attachments
Any ideas when this comes back? I've owned a Y for a couple months and just got my X last week. Likewise I found the energy chart missing. Also Caraoke? Also also, the right scroll wheel can't be pushed left and right to adjust autopilot follow distance. So strange that the Y has all these things and the X doesn't.
Yea there could be more parity between 3/y and s/x interface. The y interface is simple, just what you need, out of the way.
The x is a mess on the dash, looking from left to right you have directions and huge volume, then a car that’s doing *sugar* then speed. Moving to the big screen you’ve got more, larger nav, music and other stuff.
When you sweep the gauges with your eyes you see 3d person view of car but it’s a mess, the design language of the 3/y interface is newer and more cohesive imho. I always known to look somewhere for info. In the x, take your pick cause *sugar* is everywhere.
It was a good idea to get rid of drivers screen, they should kill it all off unless they give us more customizations for that screen. If I could set up that screen up in my profile I could put what I want there and not bother with main unless changing hvac maybe.
The x is a mess on the dash, looking from left to right you have directions and huge volume, then a car that’s doing *sugar* then speed. Moving to the big screen you’ve got more, larger nav, music and other stuff.
When you sweep the gauges with your eyes you see 3d person view of car but it’s a mess, the design language of the 3/y interface is newer and more cohesive imho. I always known to look somewhere for info. In the x, take your pick cause *sugar* is everywhere.
It was a good idea to get rid of drivers screen, they should kill it all off unless they give us more customizations for that screen. If I could set up that screen up in my profile I could put what I want there and not bother with main unless changing hvac maybe.
FirstInTown
Member
Any news on if 36 has the graph on the refresh S/X. Implied it is there but haven't seen confirmation. Would like before I take an upgrade from 16 and hate to loose it.
Edit: according to the S forum, the new graph IS on the refresh center screen. Still nothing on the binacle, like the older S/X, but hey that is probably asking too much. Should just be glad we got something even if still not at the level of the old cars. Only took the S from July 21 to Oct 22 to bring back energy graph and Caraokke. Impressively fast software dev.
Edit: according to the S forum, the new graph IS on the refresh center screen. Still nothing on the binacle, like the older S/X, but hey that is probably asking too much. Should just be glad we got something even if still not at the level of the old cars. Only took the S from July 21 to Oct 22 to bring back energy graph and Caraokke. Impressively fast software dev.
Last edited:
Yea I wish they’d better utilize the left side of drivers screen.
Agree on better utilizing the left screen. The Energy chart is in 36.1, as well as a fix to stop the high pitch whining (when Idle) that was introduced in 28.1.
It is on the main screen. There's a lot to it. Totally redesigned. Makes sense to me to have it on main screen due to all the information, although would have been nice to have just the graph on the left screen.
It is on the main screen. There's a lot to it. Totally redesigned. Makes sense to me to have it on main screen due to all the information, although would have been nice to have just the graph on the left screen.
It's not a replacement for what they took away. The previous non trip graph showing wh/mile over various selectable sliding distance windows is not there. Instead, the only graph is a graph of SOC at each mile. It's the integral of the previous graph and is not as useful.
That said, I do like the breakdown of the different usage categories. But there are bugs. Note, that the climate usage is 0.0% and in the mini legend better than expected (green to the left), but the tip says I could have save 0.8% of the entire battery by setting the climate to 72F. How can that be? I use no energy on the climate. AC was turned off and the vent was open.
I did 7% better than projected for the trip at the time of the screenshot (53% when I actually pulled into my destination). At the time of the screenshot (near the end of the trip), I was at 291 wh/mile which is EXACTLY rated yet the consumption chart shows way higher usage than it says was expected. So what is expected? I did way better, green, for the trip graph by beating it by 7% of total battery capacity and the actual consumption was 291 wh/mile in the trips which INCLUDES everything else as well and is not broken out by category, yet the drive only portion in the consumption graph is like 5% above expected. WTF????
That said, I do like the breakdown of the different usage categories. But there are bugs. Note, that the climate usage is 0.0% and in the mini legend better than expected (green to the left), but the tip says I could have save 0.8% of the entire battery by setting the climate to 72F. How can that be? I use no energy on the climate. AC was turned off and the vent was open.
I did 7% better than projected for the trip at the time of the screenshot (53% when I actually pulled into my destination). At the time of the screenshot (near the end of the trip), I was at 291 wh/mile which is EXACTLY rated yet the consumption chart shows way higher usage than it says was expected. So what is expected? I did way better, green, for the trip graph by beating it by 7% of total battery capacity and the actual consumption was 291 wh/mile in the trips which INCLUDES everything else as well and is not broken out by category, yet the drive only portion in the consumption graph is like 5% above expected. WTF????
As I pulled up to my garage last night:
wh / mile for 124 mile commute home reported at 268 wh / mile (Plaid X with 20" wheels).
To show that I'm not gaming it for elevation, the graph shows a 0.8% penalty for increased elevation.
The first 3rd or so of the 124 commute home was done at the speed limit or a couple miles above. The remainder, green, was done at the speed limit minus a couple mph on average.
Things don't add up exactly. The trips screen used to include usage from climate, lights, etc but appears it may no longer be the case. If I use just the 34.1% for the drive, it comes out to 280 wh / mile. If I include everything else....including "everything else", then it comes out to 285 wh/mile.
Also, the "everything else" category is quite large and was 1.6% of total battery SOC over 36% of the battery used. A 100% to 0% would come out to 4.5% of the battery which is coincidentally about the % of SOC that that the BMS displays vs when the car display 0% in my previous Model S. i.e. Tesla lies by mapping the displayed 100% to 0% to an internal 100% to 4%. When the battery is in good shape, you can continue to drive below 0% displayed until the canbus % reaches 0 which is the point at which you only have the anti brick buffer left. As the battery ages, tesla dips into this phantom reserve on top of the anti brick reserve to hide battery degradation.
The above graph is based strictly on rated while the trip graph below is based on traffic, temp, wind, etc. So I didn't hit rated on the first 3rd, but with the current conditions, I exceeded the predicted on the current trip.
Before anything thinks this is great, keep in mind the MXP is 291 wh/mile rated while my P85D was 310 wh / mile rated. Under the same conditions as last night. Low 70s, very little wind, no climate control, and driving at or very slightly under the speed limit, I could achieve 255 to 258 wh / mile in my P85D or a little over 50 wh / mile better than rated. In the MXP, I'm only getting 23 wh / mile better than rated.
In absolute terms, I used 36.5% of the battery to drive 124 miles which would have netted 340 miles on a 100% charge which is only 9 miles better than the 331 rated.....and this was being REALLY careful.
wh / mile for 124 mile commute home reported at 268 wh / mile (Plaid X with 20" wheels).
To show that I'm not gaming it for elevation, the graph shows a 0.8% penalty for increased elevation.
The first 3rd or so of the 124 commute home was done at the speed limit or a couple miles above. The remainder, green, was done at the speed limit minus a couple mph on average.
Things don't add up exactly. The trips screen used to include usage from climate, lights, etc but appears it may no longer be the case. If I use just the 34.1% for the drive, it comes out to 280 wh / mile. If I include everything else....including "everything else", then it comes out to 285 wh/mile.
Also, the "everything else" category is quite large and was 1.6% of total battery SOC over 36% of the battery used. A 100% to 0% would come out to 4.5% of the battery which is coincidentally about the % of SOC that that the BMS displays vs when the car display 0% in my previous Model S. i.e. Tesla lies by mapping the displayed 100% to 0% to an internal 100% to 4%. When the battery is in good shape, you can continue to drive below 0% displayed until the canbus % reaches 0 which is the point at which you only have the anti brick buffer left. As the battery ages, tesla dips into this phantom reserve on top of the anti brick reserve to hide battery degradation.
The above graph is based strictly on rated while the trip graph below is based on traffic, temp, wind, etc. So I didn't hit rated on the first 3rd, but with the current conditions, I exceeded the predicted on the current trip.
Before anything thinks this is great, keep in mind the MXP is 291 wh/mile rated while my P85D was 310 wh / mile rated. Under the same conditions as last night. Low 70s, very little wind, no climate control, and driving at or very slightly under the speed limit, I could achieve 255 to 258 wh / mile in my P85D or a little over 50 wh / mile better than rated. In the MXP, I'm only getting 23 wh / mile better than rated.
In absolute terms, I used 36.5% of the battery to drive 124 miles which would have netted 340 miles on a 100% charge which is only 9 miles better than the 331 rated.....and this was being REALLY careful.
I can't wait for this update. The high pitched whine is making me lose my mind (I do a lot of stuff in the garage) and missing the energy tab is driving me nuts. And believe it or not...for the first time in a long time the kids wanted to do caraoke last night and we were surprised it wasn't there.
