-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
22’ LR range - 1000km return trip…real world range.
- Thread starter Destiny1701
- Start date
travis3000
Member
Weird. Ive had my car over 15 months now, put 30,000KM on it. My 100% charge remains the same at 565-567km.
Jesus. Same experience here! But on m3 rwd. I don't even go by the km range but switched to percentage long ago. It's a shame tesla won't adjust the km display to something more smart and predictive given it knows it's total scam. Still. Out of my "official range" of 430 km, I'm lucky to get... 250! Which is exactly what you've said (60 percent! Down to a penny!) . Phew. Yeah sucks as hell but I sort of expected the posted numbers to be off by a massive factor (no need to discuss why, just a fact). Yes, tesla! Please fix the km display to real world range! And stop posting 430km as est range online on the purchase site. Post 300km to be more honest with everyone! And state, that one i a million years you might hit 400.
The main issue here is that you think you have a car that does x km... What you have is a battery that holds ~75kWh, give or take a few. The battery doesn't hold kilometers. Think about it like having a gas tank of 11 gallons or whatever. The speed at which you go is absolutely critical, and heating in winter will cost too. If you drive as the EPA test (flat terrain, under 55mph, no wind etc), you will absolutely get that announced range and probably more. It's all in your drive, and the same for ICE cars although the effects are worse on an EV because all the rest is so efficient. You can blame the EPA for not providing a test that mirrors your particular real world driving.
The "battery doesn't contain units of distance" is an amazing way to put it, that's going in the toolbox for discussing these things with people who still can't get their heads around why it can be so variable
That is the main thing. People need to stop thinking in terms of kilometers / miles. They have energy stored and they spend energy doing everything, including heat/AC, lights, music etc. Most of those thing are really smalls draws though so we tend to skip them, but heating and AC is major.
However, I don't have a perfect replacement to suggest. We didn't think in terms of gallons/liters before either. We drove until we needed fuel and there was always fuel except in the most remote of locations. As charging becomes common these things will disappear. In most cases we don't need 800 mile batteries, we need to charge anywhere, relatively fast.
The other is that the drivetrain is 85% efficient (give or take a few percent) so any augmentation in drag, from going faster, has a bigger overall effect than on an ICE where the engine is 30% efficient and all the rest is already lost in excess heat and friction. You're applying a reduction on the 85%, not on the 30%.
However, I don't have a perfect replacement to suggest. We didn't think in terms of gallons/liters before either. We drove until we needed fuel and there was always fuel except in the most remote of locations. As charging becomes common these things will disappear. In most cases we don't need 800 mile batteries, we need to charge anywhere, relatively fast.
The other is that the drivetrain is 85% efficient (give or take a few percent) so any augmentation in drag, from going faster, has a bigger overall effect than on an ICE where the engine is 30% efficient and all the rest is already lost in excess heat and friction. You're applying a reduction on the 85%, not on the 30%.
Normally agree but come on Tesla 40-50% less than efficiency rating? And again 18c, no fam or AC running at all. Highway 125kph avg.
I could do the same drive on a late model new ice and get probably 95% of the highway epa.
If this was winter or heat on…I can’t even imagine …
There's something you're not understanding, or you don't want to understand. Do the same with another EV and you'll get similar results. All EVs are inherently very efficient in transferring energy into movement, in the 80% range easily. All ICE cars are at most 30% efficient, burning 70% of the fuel without producing work. If you go faster in an ICE, you're only augmenting that 30% that serves to do real work. Double it and you only add say 15% to the total. IF you double the 80% that does work in an EV, you're adding 40% to the total.
Said another way, the biggest thing your car works against to move is rolling resistance and that goes to the square of your speed, something like that. Going faster is absolutely disastrous real quick. Again, it's bad in all cars but you will see a bigger difference in EVs. ALL EVs.
Said another way, the biggest thing your car works against to move is rolling resistance and that goes to the square of your speed, something like that. Going faster is absolutely disastrous real quick. Again, it's bad in all cars but you will see a bigger difference in EVs. ALL EVs.
I fully understand this buddy no worries there.
It’s just astounding to experience it first hand.
Not sure 30 Vs 80% in energy transfer is felt as a real world metric lol. I understand the physics of it all. Which is why at the end of my OP, I mentioned having an ice for long distance highway travel may still be more comfortable and real world feeling ‘efficient’ in terms of what the ‘mileage remaining’ indicator says to what you actually get in real miles/Km.
When I fill a tank on a highway trip and my indicator says 450miles remaining, likely I’m getting 450 actual miles. Doesn’t matter to me if power efficiency to the wheels is 30%. If that cost me $80 then ok. I know what I’m paying for. In this example .177c/mile by the end of the trip.
With Tesla, when you supercharge…you pay for Kw at a prescribed rate which then translates to some algorithmic ‘range available’ number. I paid $25 for ‘320 miles’ indicated. I actually received 190 miles. Was supposed to cost me ‘.078c/mile’ but actually ended up at .135c/mile once I complete the trip.
Not at all arguing cost of gas Vs hydro as it’s diff per locality and obv which is cheaper. Just not as much on longer trips vs some efficient hybrid or diesel ice cars. Yes I get the EV efficiency issues at speed.
The energy graph will tell you exactly the same thing as your ICE, it will say the number of kilometers / miles it thinks you can make, depending on your previous driving and your destination. It is only the "fuel tank indicator" which is EPA-based and does not represent your driving. Set it to percentage, like an ICE fuel tank indicator (empty - full). As in your ICE, look at an alternative display that does show a proper estimate of range remaining.
What you explain at the supercharger is exactly why I think charging should NOT be presented using miles as a unit. You have actually paid for kWh of energy, not miles. Just like you pay for gallons of fuel, not miles on an ICE.
What you explain at the supercharger is exactly why I think charging should NOT be presented using miles as a unit. You have actually paid for kWh of energy, not miles. Just like you pay for gallons of fuel, not miles on an ICE.
I put it another way too. This is the inherent problem with something having really high efficiency. It's up on a pedestal when conditions are good. It has farther to fall, and a little push will bring it down more than something that's so bad it's already lying on the floor.
On my M3LR energy graph, the solid horizontal line is (I assume) the EPA estimation of kw per km (or miles)...when your actual consumption (the dotted line) overlays the solid line you can read the actual figure. In my case that is 140 wh per km. My long term use after 18 months is (only) 14,500 km and my average is 138 wh per km. So I can reach the EPA...but that does not mean I can go on a road trip and guarantee over 500 km between charges...but over my ownership period I do
Driving dynamics has a lot to do with range. Are you using AP or cruise control? Are you constantly accelerating and decelerating (lead foot syndrome)?
Here's a real world example on a fairly empty highway:
On our recent drive 2000 mile to SE Arizona from Abbotsford BC, we averaged 267 whr/mile and I typically drove +9 mph over the posted limit when on divided Hwys (mainly I5. I8 and I10) for a real world range of ~213 miles. The first 800 miles were with temps in the low 30sF to low 40s. The % decrease in range is very similar to what I experienced in my 2020 Prius Prime when driving at the same speeds.
Here's a real world example on a fairly empty highway:
On our recent drive 2000 mile to SE Arizona from Abbotsford BC, we averaged 267 whr/mile and I typically drove +9 mph over the posted limit when on divided Hwys (mainly I5. I8 and I10) for a real world range of ~213 miles. The first 800 miles were with temps in the low 30sF to low 40s. The % decrease in range is very similar to what I experienced in my 2020 Prius Prime when driving at the same speeds.
Yes. With no heat running and fan off, you need something to stay warm. 17-18 not exactly room temp 21-22c.
Similar threads
