I thought epa was based on 55 mph though, that’s why I went 50-55 mph to try to get 250wh/mile
I noticed my tires psi is at 37-38 that could be the problem too
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
250wh per pile to get performance rated range of 315 miles
- Thread starter gottagofast
- Start date
I noticed my tires psi is at 37-38 that could be the problem too
There are two test cycles. They are not constant speed. Actually now there are 5 test cycles. But agin, none of them are constant speed. This site describes them
EPA Range testing :: evkx.net
The EPA range testing is the test used in the United States. The United States Environmental Protection Agency defines the tests.
evkx.net
Last edited:
This whole thread is a great example of why the EPA test cycle is so distinctly useless.
- it's such a low speed test. Nobody cares about their maximum range going 45 mph driving around town.
- it's unnecessarily complicated. To even understand it you have to go look at a confusing chart.
- why are there different options of test cycles for manufacturers to pick from?
We should all just move to a simple 70 mph range test. That makes quick mental comparisons easy: faster than 70 mph = worse efficiency, slower = better. 70 mph is a plausible long distance road trip speed for when range matters. Reviewers and testers can easily reproduce it.
(And optionally I wouldn't mind a cold weather test and a towing test, to cover edge cases where range is particularly bad)
- it's such a low speed test. Nobody cares about their maximum range going 45 mph driving around town.
- it's unnecessarily complicated. To even understand it you have to go look at a confusing chart.
- why are there different options of test cycles for manufacturers to pick from?
We should all just move to a simple 70 mph range test. That makes quick mental comparisons easy: faster than 70 mph = worse efficiency, slower = better. 70 mph is a plausible long distance road trip speed for when range matters. Reviewers and testers can easily reproduce it.
(And optionally I wouldn't mind a cold weather test and a towing test, to cover edge cases where range is particularly bad)
We like things simple, but a constant speed 70 mph test would be less useful. Real world driving is never constant speed. A constant speed test would give even less of an accurate estimate as it doesn't test how the car uses energy when slowing down and accelerating, which is what happens mostly in normal driving. This accounts for the vehicle weight as well.
The EPA test is not used by itself. A 0.7 factor is used on top of it to account for more real world driving conditions. I think starting this year, the cold and hot temperature tests are mandatory as well now. Over all these test are great to determine how much energy a car needs driving on actual roads. It tests acceleration and deceleration and different speeds. It sure is on the optimistic side, but feel free to add 20% to match your drive style and you should be good. The EPA tests are also great to compare cars to each other. A 70 mph constant speed test would favor very aerodynamic vehicles and the vehicle's weight would not matter at all.
Except they're not. It's pretty much a universal experience that most people cannot get anything near the EPA ranges with Teslas, but can get something close with other manufacturers (especially the German brands).
WLTP seems to be more consistent car to car, but the actual numbers are dramatically overstated.
Valid points @David99, but I disagree on how much I care about about measuring acceleration/deceleration/regen performance.
I put a lot more value on a simple, comparable range test than I do on fully capturing realistic driving conditions. For long distance travel with sparse chargers when I need all the range I can get I'm mostly driving at a constant speed, or at least as smoothly as possible avoiding heavy acceleration/deceleration (that said, I live in a mountainous region so regen efficiency does matter a bit even at a constant speed).
Not opposed to a variable speed test in principle, but I just don't think it's the most useful. My priorities are roughly:
- constant high speed range test (by far the most important)
- cold weather test
- slower speed and/or variable speed test
I put a lot more value on a simple, comparable range test than I do on fully capturing realistic driving conditions. For long distance travel with sparse chargers when I need all the range I can get I'm mostly driving at a constant speed, or at least as smoothly as possible avoiding heavy acceleration/deceleration (that said, I live in a mountainous region so regen efficiency does matter a bit even at a constant speed).
Not opposed to a variable speed test in principle, but I just don't think it's the most useful. My priorities are roughly:
- constant high speed range test (by far the most important)
- cold weather test
- slower speed and/or variable speed test
2022 Model 3 Performance on 235/45/18 Hankook iON EVO AS tires and T Sportline TS5 wheels.
These tires are just simply magic for highway efficiency. I still don’t know how they do it.
136 wh/mi is the best efficiency I have seen on my 12 mile highway commute. There was traffic today so my average speed was 51.7 mph instead of the 57+ mph I typically see.
I can achieve 237 wh/mi or less as an average with these new tires pretty easily.
These tires are just simply magic for highway efficiency. I still don’t know how they do it.
136 wh/mi is the best efficiency I have seen on my 12 mile highway commute. There was traffic today so my average speed was 51.7 mph instead of the 57+ mph I typically see.
I can achieve 237 wh/mi or less as an average with these new tires pretty easily.
Your lifetime wh is closer to mine, I’m guessing it use to be 270-280 but since you changed tires your lifetime wh have come down to 260
For that the EPA's highway test cycle should give you a good gauge. The window sticker shows city test and highway test separately. The 'rated range' number is a combination of both. Not ideal, but again, making the EPA a simple 70 constant speed test would not fix that issue. Regen braking adds between 6 and 20% of range. It's one of the key advantaged of an EV,. That would be completely dismissed in a constant speed test.
I made a thread about this but I haven’t got any comments so I’ll ask it here
It sounds like I have water trapped in my trunk lid, if I lift it all the way I’ll see a little start dripping out, is this normal?
It sounds like I have water trapped in my trunk lid, if I lift it all the way I’ll see a little start dripping out, is this normal?
Last edited:
A constant 70 mph speed test would be even less useful. It would miss many real world factors completely and would make car to car comparisons even less useful. So that's not the solution.
Disagree. Where range tends to be an issue is on road trips and such, which constant 70mph is a pretty good approximation. For anything else, the range is irrelevant since EVs are topped off at home.
In any case, any test that gives drastically different accuracy between two brands is a useless test.
It's not the test's fault. The nature of the test doesn't favor Tesla vehicles somehow. I don't know how Tesla does it, but the current lawsuit might reveal it. It wouldn't be the first time a car manufacturer gets fined for cheating. Again, a 70 mph constant speed test would miss so many factors. It would make two vehicles look the same that would have very different energy consumption in daily driving. You might not care as you have home charging. The majority of people doesn't, though.
I very much doubt that's the case for EV owners
In any case, unless you're saying Tesla is manipulating the results, it 100% is the fault of a test if it cannot reliably produce interpretable results. And it's not like Tesla is inaccurate and then everyone else is accurate. There's a huge range of discrepancy. It's a *sugar* test.
Last edited:
I'm actually not sure what you are saying at this point. The test does produce accurate and comparable results. They are generally too optimistic, but that's easily adjusted by adding 10% or so. The fact that all Tesla vehicles tend to get higher numbers than all other EV manufacturers is something the court is looking into. There are a few great publications about how Tesla has been able to use the EPA test guidelines to their advantage. Whether that was within the rules or not, we will see. But it clearly isn't the case that all 5 test cycles somehow favor vehicles with the Tesla logo on them. They are not flawed.
Sure. But 80% of EV owners charge at home, so the local range is pointless to the majority. Certainly shouldn’t be the default advertised number.
And few care about efficiency. Most care about *range*. Whether that’s an efficient car with a small battery or an inefficient car with a large one.
That prediction isn’t epa range. It’s what the car actually expects you to get. That’s usually actually pretty accurate, but you’ll never get a prediction that matches epa estimates.Doesn't the energy screen tell you whether the car is above, below or at EPA rated range while driving?
Similar threads
- Locked
