Your complaint should be with the EPA, not Tesla. The EPA 5-cycle test for range emphasizes city driving, not highway driving where the range really matters to us. It's a legacy of short-range EVs that are driven primarily in cities.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Your complaint should be with the EPA, not Tesla. The EPA 5-cycle test for range emphasizes city driving, not highway driving where the range really matters to us. It's a legacy of short-range EVs that are driven primarily in cities.
my expectation is the Tesla have managed to make the range measurement more consistent in relation to the criteria they use to define the range.
In the process of which they may have managed to iron out some anomalies where some batteries were reporting lower than others, and some (esp 90Ds) were showing higher than expected degradation.
Time will tell.
The criteria they use is of course an entirely different matter, and probably for another thread (although I expect it has been visited a few times already!)
In the process of which they may have managed to iron out some anomalies where some batteries were reporting lower than others, and some (esp 90Ds) were showing higher than expected degradation.
Time will tell.
The criteria they use is of course an entirely different matter, and probably for another thread (although I expect it has been visited a few times already!)
^ which may well go some way to prove my point that Tesla have managed to find a way to iron out inconsistencies.
Mine was 225 not 235, yours 238 now 238.
Both now very similar.
Of course it might just be a complete fudge ...
Mine was 225 not 235, yours 238 now 238.
Both now very similar.
Of course it might just be a complete fudge ...
That makes sense. The way the range was dropping for some of us, it seems like an error was accumulating slowly for some cars (probably driving/charging style related). Maybe this update resets/fixes the error accumulation, so we're all back on the same page and hopefully don't drift off it again.
AMPUP
Member
All somewhat entertaining considering real world miles (don't drive like your grandma) are Much less than 'ideal' and less than 'rated', so what is this really telling us?
The EPA already gives 2 numbers, for city and highway consumption. Tesla could have elected to at least use this. Not that it would help by that much. Every car sold in the US gets EPA ratings, none that I'm aware of other than the Model S (maybe some other EV's) lists range estimate based on anything other than actual consumption history.
I'm all for defending Tesla when they are right, but it's counterproductive to defend them when they are wrong.
Vince Cobelo
Member
I am pretty sensitive to estimate variations on full charge. I really just want consistency.
I can easily match the ideal estimate on my 25 mile commute in the summer going 65mph (5 miles over the speed limit). That's why I have my displays set to display ideal range.
My record is 218 Wh/mile for the 25 mile trip (I suspect tail wind). Lifetime average is 274 Wh/mi since June 2013.
Exactly my first thought too !
I will be impressed if the range actually increases, but not from seeing a larger number on the display when fully charged...
You misunderstand. Range will NOT increase. This is a recognized reporting flaw and Tesla has addressed it by improving the algo. That is all.
They give 2 consumption numbers, it's on the Monroney sticker.
Here we go again with Tesla cherry picks one thing and we're all supposed buy that it was the best choice. If enough people complain they might actually make the thing work right.
Range been 227-225 miles since I bought the car.
Updated to 7.1 yesterday.
Range 236 miles this morning
Guess this is proof they updated the algorithm as some had been assured by their SCs.
Hopefully the 90D folks will see improved figures too.
There's some nuance here.
I agree that very few updates have actually changed the algorithm (and are "anecdotally documented" to various degrees here on TMC).
Apparently just about any update can/might/will on some cars "forget" the data/measurements for the battery pack installed in the car. When that happens, the UI shows the "default for the pack when new" until it collects current data to feed to the algorithm to get an actual estimate. I've had this happen like 4 times on my Nov2012 Sig P85, and I think once on my Dec2014 P85D.
Similar threads
