48.12 range boost for P3D with PUP?

[BlueCarNut]

Took my first highway trip with 48.12.1 on Christmas Eve, and on a route where I'd normally expect closer to 300 Wh/mi, I got 264 Wh/mi. I was pleased, since the PUP range penalty is somewhat high, as noted elsewhere. Anyone seen range improvements with 48.x, PUP or otherwise?

 

[beantownrich]

I've noticed some cold weather improvements to range as well. About 30-40 Wh/Mi it could be the software update or it's been a little milder weather here this week.

 

[JeffK]

Range is about the same for me. Trying to be conservative, I had autopilot at 75 mph with the heat off giving about 295-310 Wh / mi. With the heat on @ 72 degrees this jumped to about 330(ish) Wh / mi.

Driving at 75 mph was painful and I was being passed by everybody, would have been more comfortable with 80 mph but I was attempting to be conservative. I had used about 400 Wh/mi on average at 80-85 mph with the heat on on my way up. (58 kWh for 144 miles) for a real world range of around 186 miles at 100% charge (comfortable at my normal speeds).

 

[lolder]

Temperature, cabin heat, headwinds, elevation change, road surface conditions and speed have large effects on usage. To make comparisons between two different trips is almost impossible unless all the above effects are precisely known. The only way to compare is back to back tests under controlled conditions. I recently did that for an aero wheel cover test in a LR RWD. I did three tests over level, straight 3 mile road. The first with covers on, the second with covers off, and the third with covers on again. I did it at three speeds, 40, 50 and 60 mph in both directions to account for wind. The resultant data when plotted was uniform and easily extrapolated to 70 mph where the savings was 2 %. At 60 mph it was 1.5%.

 

[JeffK]

I did three tests over level, straight 3 mile road.

This is not long enough to warm up the battery.

 

[BlueCarNut]

Range is about the same for me. Trying to be conservative, I had autopilot at 75 mph with the heat off giving about 295-310 Wh / mi. With the heat on @ 72 degrees this jumped to about 330(ish) Wh / mi.

Driving at 75 mph was painful and I was being passed by everybody, would have been more comfortable with 80 mph but I was attempting to be conservative.

Ugh, I am aware of the range penalty for driving 75+ and feel your pain. Ironic isn't it, to have a really fast car you have to drive slow-to-moderately?

 

[JeffK]

Ugh, I am aware of the range penalty for driving 75+ and feel your pain. Ironic isn't it, to have a really fast car you have to drive slow-to-moderately?

I got the refund so I didn't want to have to stop and pay to use the supercharger haha.

 

[lolder]

This is not long enough to warm up the battery.

I'm in SW Florida. That doesn't affect wh/m anyway. It's long enough for the trip meter to stabilize. I'm an engineer and it's good data.

 

[JeffK]

That doesn't affect wh/m anyway.

Yes it does, per Tesla, and how the Model 3 warms up the battery. I've even had the battery show cold with limited regen when it was over 70 degrees outside.

Furthermore, 3 miles is also less than the minimum range on the energy graph (5 miles). Did you accelerate to speed in that stretch of 3 miles or were you going that speed when the three miles began? Being an engineer is not enough to prove the test wasn't flawed. The data is probably decent enough though as one would expect better savings as drag increases.

If you want to help out the OP, tell us if you see any improvement with the new firmware.

 

[lolder]

I use the A trip counter. I am up to speed and stabilized before I reset the counter. I have used this many times to measure energy consumption. By the end of 3.2 miles the wh/m isn't varying more than 1 or 2 wh/m. Data taken this way plots very smooth and predictably. Being an engineer lets you devise a good test. The before and after tests with the covers on concur. Measurements are taken in each direction and normalized for any wind. I have a wind app in the browser also which is just forecasted wind but it has agreed well with observed data. At 50-70 mph wind has a +/- 7% per 10 mph headwind/tailwind on energy consumption.

 

[lolder]

The trip counter seems to poll energy usage about every 6 seconds but distance traveled is probably polled continuously or perhaps on a different schedule. When you reset a trip meter it starts randomly in that 6 seconds so the first few readings are erratic but it quickly averages out and by the end of 3 miles/minutes it is very stable. It's pretty stable after a minute. This is a straight, level, sea level road with little traffic. I had to throw out one run because a rare vehicle passed me and I was in his wake long enough for the data to be affected. I know how to do this stuff and I also know error analysis methods. I think my tests are accurate to about +/- 1%. At 250 wh/m that's 2.5 wh/m. On the road energy anomalies are almost all due to speed, winds, traffic ( moderate traffic is good for a 5 mph tailwind ) and heater use or unstabilized AC drain. It's easy to go 130% over normal with below freezing use of even modest cabin heat as many have attested to.
These cars use energy more like aircraft than cars.

 

[Jason_G]

I just completed a 720 mile road trip with Aeros on my P3D, and averaged ~324 Wh/mi. The average temp was 40F, fairly flat midwestern straight hwy, 77-80mph cruising speed for majority of trip, and a/c set to 67F.

 

[hoang51]

There were times when I saw my energy usage down towards the low 300 Wh/mi rather than mid to high 300 Wh/mi lately, but I think that has to do with tires mostly warming up to 44+ PSI (from 42 PSI), given that everything else was negligible factor (wind, temperature, software, etc...). But temperature is a real killer though. Good thing for free Supercharging. I need to downsize to my 19" wheels asap for further energy usage savings and get off the summer tires from these 40's F temperature weather...

 

[Jason_G]

There were times when I saw my energy usage down towards the low 300 Wh/mi rather than mid to high 300 Wh/mi lately, but I think that has to do with tires mostly warming up to 44+ PSI (from 42 PSI), given that everything else was negligible factor (wind, temperature, software, etc...). But temperature is a real killer though. Good thing for free Supercharging. I need to downsize to my 19" wheels asap for further energy usage savings and get off the summer tires from these 40's F temperature weather...

I just pulled the trigger on giving up my free supercharging for $5000; hoping I don’t regret it!

 

[Promo714]

I just pulled the trigger on giving up my free supercharging for $5000; hoping I don’t regret it!

I don't think you'll regret it. In November I drove from LA to Nashville and back (4,400 miles). My total SC charges was $153. Unless you can't charge at home and rely on SCs on a regular basis, it would take a long time to offset $5k.

 

[lolder]

If you are able to, put HVAC in manual, turn off AC, select top vents, fan speed 2-5 and temp 60-68. If you leave it in auto it will run the heat and AC and that's why you're way over 300 wh/m. That and 80 mph speed. Speed is airspeed. If you're driving 80 against a 15 mph wind that's almost the same as going 95 with no wind. My LR RWD takes 295 wh/m in warm weather no wind at 80 mph. It's below 250 at 70 mph.

 

[Alt168]

Can you explain why it would run the heat and AC at the same time? Just did a trip in my P3D (20") and was having a heck of a time keeping it below 350wh/m at 62mph and 67 set on the HVAC with light rain. At one point I noticed the front vents were blowing cold (expected) and the rears were pumping out heat (unexpected) and it was warm in the front of the cabin and hot in the back.

 

[hoang51]

At one point I noticed the front vents were blowing cold (expected) and the rears were pumping out heat (unexpected) and it was warm in the front of the cabin and hot in the back.

Mine does this. I think the air vents are routed near a source of heat, most likely near the car's battery. So most of the time I have to lower the temp so that the back can have the right targeted temperature. But doing that makes it cold up front, so I have to adjust the vents in the front to not get blasted by colder air.

BTW, quick search with Google shows that it's a well known issue: Rear Vent AC Issues | Tesla

 

[DB-Cooper]

Can you explain why it would run the heat and AC at the same time? Just did a trip in my P3D (20") and was having a heck of a time keeping it below 350wh/m at 62mph and 67 set on the HVAC with light rain. At one point I noticed the front vents were blowing cold (expected) and the rears were pumping out heat (unexpected) and it was warm in the front of the cabin and hot in the back.

This is typical for most cars. AC stands for air conditioning not air cooling. AC dehumidifies and helps with defogging. So it’s common for AC and heat to run at the same time on cars. In fact, on old cars without automatic climate control, often when you hit the defrost button, it’s force the AC on.

 

[stonelance]

I did a road trip over the holidays with 48.12 and from my energy use I really doubt there is any improvement due to the firmware update. I don't have a direct comparison so it is hard to say, but the energy use was WAY higher than it was last time I did the trip in September. I know that is all likely due to heat, and the colder temps, but it was still ridiculously high. (P3D without PUP)