Today it was 35 degrees out and I did a 45 mile out and back (22.5 miles each way) that was 60% highway and 40% city. 500’ elevation change. 20” wheels with Michelin Pilot Sport 4S tires. It was sunny out so I needed almost no climate control. Averaged 246 Wh/mi for the trip. Given that it was 35 degrees and that the M3P is rated at 241 Wh/mi for its 310 mile range, I see zero problem achieving that in better weather with less elevation change...
Thanks for sharing that and it matches my experience once I adjust for the fact that my P3D has Aero wheels and will naturally do a little better in a similar scenario.
There is quite a bit of variation in real-world range depending upon what choices the driver makes and, even harder to pin down, individual driving styles. The driver decides things like what the cold tire pressure is, how warm/cool the cabin is and how much air the climate control system needs to heat/cool. And things like that can make quite a difference.
But the real unknown when someone reports unusually good or bad efficiency is how smooth they are as a driver. I've found the efficiency of the Model 3 to respond really well to a smooth, non-erratic driving style. And subtle differences in driving style can have outsized effects on efficiency, especially at speeds under 70 mph. Let me explain. Some people are naturally in tune and don't make unnecessary throttle inputs (followed by subtle regen). A relaxed, aware and skilled driver has better command of the momentum of their vehicle and the position of their vehicle relative to other traffic. This can pay big dividends over the course of a trip in terms of overall efficiency.
Higher travel speeds are the great equalizer. If you're bombing along at 75 mph, you're gonna be pushing a lot of air and there's not much you can do about that, you're simply not going to get greater than the rated range unless everything else lines up perfectly (elevation, tail winds, etc). Of course, if the route is not flat but instead is in gently rolling terrain, driver style can still have quite an impact on the actual efficiency at those speeds. Because rolling terrain requires good momentum management to avoid going into regen unnecessarily and repeatedly. In rolling terrain, the natural tendency of the cruise control/EAP to hold a precise speed means a good driver can easily beat the efficiency of the computer speed control.
Let's face it, we are all individuals, not machines. Humans have a lot of variabilities and not everyone will be a natural driver. Some people will be able to get major efficiency improvements by learning new skills and habits, some people will be frustrated and find that changing their ways is not really possible. Mostly it's a matter of wanting to change and paying attention and some will not want to be bothered. Those people will just have to live with less range and efficiency. And for most of those people, it really won't matter, it won't be the end of the world as long as their regular driving patterns are compatible with the range of their car as they drive it. And I would say even the Mid-Range Model 3 has more than enough range for the vast majority of people, even those who don't have a naturally efficient driving style.
All I'm really saying is that subtle differences between peoples natural driving styles is the one variable that is impossible to quantify and is the source of a large amount of the variability in reported efficiencies. Speed is a big one too but that is often accounted for and much easier to quantify.
