264 miles not update from 256

[AlanSubie4Life]

of course not; you already know that; however, the fact that they all ended up at 233 or 232, despite a large temperature range that includes the post-upgrade charges probably eliminates external temp as a significant term; however, cannot go back in time for more trials.

Sounds like maybe they changed the constant then! We will see!

Where is the target line for efficiency in your energy monitoring screen? You have to drive until it overlaps...

 

[baton]

Thanks for the info. I have version 2018.50 7e49f8a. It seems like I don't have the latest software release / update. I believe new software release should come up automatically. Perhaps it doesn't go to all the cars in US simultaneously. I have no idea why there is a discrepancy, but at least there is a clue.

Got the software update yesterday, and yes this morning at 90% charge I got 237 miles for the first time - that is an additional four miles. From the pipesteam info and my experience I can now say with confidence that the latest software update includes the 4 mile EPA increase - from 260 to 264.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Got the software update yesterday, and yes this morning at 90% charge I got 237 miles for the first time - that is an additional four miles. From the pipesteam info and my experience I can now say with confidence that the latest software update includes the 4 mile EPA increase - from 260 to 264.

Interesting (though inconsequential). This would be the first Model 3 that they admit (in rated miles) is more efficient...and according to the rated miles it is the most efficient ever (though it is unlikely to be significantly better that the LR RWD...which never got the constant updated, to give it ~320 rated miles of range).

When you get a chance, check out that energy monitor screen line. You kind of have to drive along until the current average and the line overlap and then you can tell where it is at...which might be at 235Wh/mi or so.

There is nothing that says this line has to move; it is disconnected from the rated miles and battery size, but related...but it is at about 250 in AWD cars and a bit lower in LR RWD cars (I don’t know exactly how low). Maybe it has always been at 235Wh/mi in the MR and the LR - I don’t know...it’s posted around here somewhere...

 

[baton]

Interesting (though inconsequential). This would be the first Model 3 that they admit (in rated miles) is more efficient...and according to the rated miles it is the most efficient ever (though it is unlikely to be significantly better that the LR RWD...which never got the constant updated, to give it ~320 rated miles of range).

When you get a chance, check out that energy monitor screen line. You kind of have to drive along until the current average and the line overlap and then you can tell where it is at...which might be at 235Wh/mi or so.

There is nothing that says this line has to move; it is disconnected from the rated miles and battery size, but related...but it is at about 250 in AWD cars and a bit lower in LR RWD cars (I don’t know exactly how low). Maybe it has always been at 235Wh/mi in the MR and the LR - I don’t know...it’s posted around here somewhere...

I guess I have to familiarize myself more with the energy monitor screen. I’m not really sure what you are asking me to do or how to do it, or if it takes extended time to monitor this graph. Not that it would matter much but I would like to know if it is 240Wh/mi, 235 Wh/mi or some other number that will give you 264 miles at 100% charge. Hopefully Tesla will come up with more specifics in the near future regarding MR .

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I guess I have to familiarize myself more with the energy monitor screen. I’m not really sure what you are asking me to do or how to do it, or if it takes extended time to monitor this graph. Not that it would matter much but I would like to know if it is 240Wh/mi, 235 Wh/mi or some other number that will give you 264 miles at 100% charge. Hopefully Tesla will come up with more specifics in the near future regarding MR .

If the part diagram is correct, you should have 62kWh usable, so 235Wh/mi will give you 264 miles from a 100% charge. This is assuming you do it all at once right after unplugging, and spend no appreciable time in park (then the “since last charge” trip meter in the car will be correct and you will have no vampire losses).

 

[StealthP3D]

It may be a software update that changes it, it may only show on new cars, or it may stay the same. It really doesn't matter, since you'll never get that.

I don't have a mid-range but in warmer weather, I can easily get OVER 310 miles on my LR as long as I have the Aero covers on and keep the speed below 65 mph. So, yeah, it just depends upon the specifics and I'm confident the Medium Range could easily exceed its rating if it were not the middle of winter. We took delivery of our LR Model 3 in mid-May and were super pleased with it's efficiency all summer, well below the consumption predicted by the rated numbers. My wife says the overall Wh/mile is sitting at 232 right now. I didn't take delivery of my P3D until the last day of Sept. and I've gone snow skiing in it 13 times since then with plenty of sporty driving making use of it's insane acceleration and, still, I'm sitting at 277 Wh/mile with no warm weather driving. I drive it a lot harder than my wife drives her long range so I think I would be sitting at 250-260 Wh/mile if I wasn't such a lunatic with the go-pedal.

Even the EPA numbers themselves aren't true.

There's no "true" or "false" with the EPA ratings. Actually, under the tested conditions/speeds/temps, etc., it should get the EPA numbers. The EPA numbers are simply a rating for comparison purposes of what a particular drive cycle will return. All bets are off if your tires have lost air, you have less efficient tires/wheels, you drive really fast or you crank the cabin heat and turn "recycle" off.

I'm constantly amazed with how far these Model 3's go, even on mountain roads.

 

[steve in socal]

Just charged my new mid range M3 to 100% and it is showing 260 miles.

 

[steve in socal]

Just charged my new mid range M3 to 100% and it is showing 260 miles.

When I started the car and moved it to a new space I think it somehow had increased to 262. After moving it a few feet the mileage then went to 261. Ha ha

 

[TJKR]

My Mid-Range was at 254 when I first charged it to 100%. Two months and 3000 miles later, I got 267 with last week's software update. What?!?! I'll take it. Also weather warmed up last week, I've been getting 219 wh/mi in mostly highway driving (70-75 mph). I was averaging 239 wh/mi with some use of heater and seat warmers.