Canuck
Well-Known Member
You're right. I don't know. I should have said "it may still be there", because we don't know if it's an algorithm problem or degradation problem.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
You're right. I don't know. I should have said "it may still be there", because we don't know if it's an algorithm problem or degradation problem.
jeffro01
Active Member
Almost the same exact scenario here, although my 90% is now up to 249.
What are we "supposed" to be seeing at 90%?
Jeff
jeffro01
Active Member
Interesting... I remember the first night or two after we got it home it was 259 then came down from there. I always assumed it was because the car's algorithm was adjusting to my wh/mi driving style and that seems to be possibly supported with the conversation here about a algorithm problem. That being said, I'd like to think Tesla could find and fix the "math"...
I paid extra for the 6% as a "just in case" since the 85 would have been fine for 95%+ of our driving so if I paid extra for "nothing" then I'd certainly like to understand that better... My problem is I don't have the time to complain to my local SC, track the communication of that complaint, etc...
Jeff
Nobody's going to run their car to zero and there's no 100% guarantee that would prove anything anyway. Tesla has said "in writing" that nothing is wrong with our batteries based on their tests and that the update will fix the discrepancy. I say we trust them and if we find out different down the rode we can deal with it then.
Jeff, yes 257-258 (mine was 258) and sounds like yours was too rounding up. My suggestion for you would be the next time you are at the SC you explain the issue and have them document. I assume it will be consistent with what we were told. At least this will cover you down the road. Option 2 would be an email.
Not if you're counting miles, but if you're counting kWh used since a 100% charge and you don't get 6% more than we get on our 85's I think that would prove something. You can disagree which I'm sure is what Tesla wants. I'm certainly glad I didn't pay $3K extra for nothing.
Oh, and since Tesla said all is fine in writing, we should just stop worrying because they've never lied or mislead their customers before. I can't think of 691 other times that they have.
chriSharek
Member
Noob here . . . what is the 1.06 factor in your calculation?
My bad. You were taking the additional 6% of the 85's range. Got it. Sorry.
MarcG
Active Member
FYI - not to muddy the waters - but Tesla had published on their website the EPA rated range for the 90D in early-February as 288 miles, but then changed it a couple of weeks later back to the 85D range with an asterisk that the 90kWh pack provides about 6% more. Not sure why, but there you have it :biggrin:
Specs as of 2/8/16:
Specs as of 2/25/16:
Specs as of 2/8/16:
Specs as of 2/25/16:
chriSharek
Member
That certainly is muddying the waters! 
Seriously, now that they have forced a bunch of orders to choose between taking delivery by 3/31 w/ an 85 or paying to upgrade and take delivery later (I'm in this bunch for mid-April delivery) they really need to get it together if this is a software glitch. Regardless, I'm confident they will make it right one way or another.
Seriously, now that they have forced a bunch of orders to choose between taking delivery by 3/31 w/ an 85 or paying to upgrade and take delivery later (I'm in this bunch for mid-April delivery) they really need to get it together if this is a software glitch. Regardless, I'm confident they will make it right one way or another.The new specs are pretty close if not identical to what it was when I took delivery last September. 6% more than the 85D or 16.2 miles=286 miles EPA rated.
Canuck
Well-Known Member
From my understanding of lithium ion batteries, degradation is worse in the first year then slows after that. So you can't expect the battery to have the same capacity six months later, by comparing that number to when you drove it off the lot. However, you can expect that the loss in capacity will not be as significant as takes place within the first year.
Jool
Member
dmckinstry
Model X 2019
Indicated capacity depends on a number of things including charging history, temperature, etc.
I normally charge to 90% daily for a week or so and then do a max range charge (leaving it only at full charge for 10 minutes or so).
The best I've gotten lately is 231 miles at 90% with 256 miles at max range. My '13 85 has 61 k miles on it. It's sometimes useful (I do it rarely) to drive the to car to 0 miles (I just drive around to block a few times as I get close to 0). Then do a full max range charge to see how much it takes to fully charge it. The last time I tried it the pack took in 75 kWh to full. As I said, charging history and weather conditions have a large effect.
P.S. Remember that driving to 0 miles does not empty the battery.
Last edited:
I guess the question is, if you discovered you lost 11 of the promised 16 miles you paid $3k extra for in the first 8-12 weeks would you feel ripped off? This, of course, is assuming as you are that it's a real loss and not a software issue.
Canuck
Well-Known Member
travwill
Active Member
I posted this in the 90% thread but applies here too. The algo on the car is flexible, learns based on your driving, and no one really drives the idea pattern that original miles are based on. So everyone is going to see their true estimate of rated range go down, and perhaps level off some after a while. Tesla sent me the below a while back:
"
The original ### miles is based on a test of the vehicle’s driving efficiency in ideal driving conditions. Clear sky, no traffic, 60-65 MPH. As the vehicle is exposed to your various driving conditions which can allow efficiency to falter from time to time, the vehicle will soon adapt to the conditions and display a more accurate or real-time estimate of miles based on that history.
Essentially the vehicle’s algorithm that projects usable range has learned your driving conditions/style and thus the apparent loss of range. You should continue to feel confident in your vehicles battery as regardless of what may happen over time you are covered for 8 years Unlimited miles if there is something that comes up with the Battery.
"
"
The original ### miles is based on a test of the vehicle’s driving efficiency in ideal driving conditions. Clear sky, no traffic, 60-65 MPH. As the vehicle is exposed to your various driving conditions which can allow efficiency to falter from time to time, the vehicle will soon adapt to the conditions and display a more accurate or real-time estimate of miles based on that history.
Essentially the vehicle’s algorithm that projects usable range has learned your driving conditions/style and thus the apparent loss of range. You should continue to feel confident in your vehicles battery as regardless of what may happen over time you are covered for 8 years Unlimited miles if there is something that comes up with the Battery.
"
The rated range is not effected by driving habits or projected temperature. The rated range CAN be effected by how cold your battery is when it charges. Estimated range on the other hand takes into account current temperature and driving habits. My rated range never changes from very cold days to warm days. Last month when it was freezing, it charged to 225 at 90% same as it did last week when it was 20 degrees warmer.
Similar threads
- Locked
