Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

All Tesla Models will get Range/Power increase (not just SR+) of 5%

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
You "lost" 10 miles after how many miles driven?

And "loosing" miles could be temperature in Jersey around this time of year, BMS uncalibrated, doesn't have to be real degradation.

But even if real degradation, that is around 3%, this is totally normal(unless you drove only 5000 miles in a year). You can easily expect 7-9% over the course of a couple of hundred thousand miles. That will still be around 280 miles left which is plenty for most people. Didn't you guys research that degredation based on prior S and X?

Besides that, if you drive so little, why are you range anxious? You can plug anytime you want and if you take a longer trip you basically have to stop each 260 miles for a 25 minute break which most people do anyways.

As for Maxwell, I doubt it. The current technology will be around for at least the next 3-5 years. The only way Tesla can achieve more range is to increase motor efficiency and lower the body weight(which they could do, but that would be 5-10% max) or put more kWh If possible at lower weight, but that isn't happening any time soon - it will also mean a couple of thousand more $ for let's say 50-70 more miles.

I think they might go the more expensive/more kWh route, but I doubt this will happen any time soon, because they have a production line that works and Y coming up. I don't think we will see any drastic change in kWh until 2023 or whereabouts.

8000 after a software update a few months ago. My wife's 4 year old model S with 55k miles by comparison has lost only 4 miles. I realize the mileage loss may not be true degredation, but the slope of the line I can see on the Stats app is concerning. We researched degredation and I read many threads about the S & X prior to buying the 3, but was under the impression the new battery cells, advanced BMS, and good charging habits would not show such a trend in the first year.
 
The MR is 63.8kWh, and the SR+ is 54.5kWh. 15% less capacity...

The MR has/had ~264 miles of range, the SR+ has ~248 miles (it was voluntarily derated I think). That's a 6.1% difference in range. Part of the over-performance of the SR+ is due to the reduced weight I imagine. Also maybe they used substantially different coefficients for the dyno parameters? Even 240 miles is only 9.2% different, still higher than one would expect.

Definitely seems like there can be some funny business. Unless there are significant drivetrain efficiency differences between the two vehicles (seems like there wouldn't be - but not sure we know which drive unit was used), I'd expect the MR would be "easier" to make the rated range than the SR+ in the real world.

I got 264 for about 3,000 miles before degradation/software shenanigans kicked in, and now I'm hovering around 250-252.

As to "ease" of making rated: I live in a very hilly area and can make the rated (~242 wh/mi) on my 10 mile commute in the summer, driving ~68mph with the AC running. I can also do a bit better than that on longer trips- maybe hitting about ~220wh/mi with the same type of driving.
 
Thank you, it is a little over 20 miles, maybe a screenshot of the 15 miles would've been better, but I assume your avg in the 21miles run wasn't that much off (there is a hike around the last 7 miles, but is covered by the Regen I guess). Anyways, that proofs the point of the video and what @AlanSubie4Life has been confirming with his tests. That the rated miles are achievable only if you drive below EPA rated consumption.
If you manage to drive at or around the avg of 200Wh/m I predict that you will have around 180 rated miles used out of the 181 miles trip. Which should be about 36-36.5kWh which in turn should be 75-76% battery(you will end up with around 25% left)

Now if you wanna help the cause and the speed limit allows it, you should try and increase the speed to about 70-75, set it to Autopilot, until your dotted line meets the typical line. Then you will burn miles faster, but you should still be fine at 180. At rated EPA consumption you should spend about 4kWh more and end up with 200 miles spent instead of the 180 you should get, if the screen display was accurate - meaning it showed the rated range based on the available capacity and not the full capacity including a buffer, which you can only use below 0%
 
300 miles and my 3 has been getting 11-12 miles less than the advertised 310 one year later (even when constantly driving under the 242wh/mi constant

The driving constant for the AWD is 230Wh/rmi. Do 230Wh/mi, and you will make the rated range.

239 - 240 miles

For the 181 miles to the Barstow Supercharger from Imperial Beach, you will need to do lower than:

239rmi * 209Wh/rmi /181 miles = 276Wh/mi

to make it with more than 0 rated miles left. (Assuming you start with 239 rated miles.) If you want to allow 5 rated miles of margin, you need to do better than 270Wh/mi.

This is harder than it seems, since the 2200 feet of elevation gain over 181 miles is going to add about 20Wh/mi to your consumption. (Each additional 100 pounds you add beyond a driver will cost you an additional 0.5Wh/mi over the entire distance.) So before you start going uphill, you need to be seeing less than 250Wh/mi on the trip meter, to be safe. (The high point of Cajon pass is 3700 feet, but the downhill is very gradual on the far side, so you don't need to worry about the regen recapture inefficiency - you won't need to go into significant regen headed into Barstow and waste any energy cramming energy back into the battery - the elevation loss on the north side will just serve to reduce your output power without driving you negative, which is good.) I worry a bit about all the hills between San Diego and LA forcing regen which may make things worse than expected.

an make the rated (~242 wh/mi) on my 10 mile commute

I actually don't know the trip meter consumption constant for the MR. I would guess it is around 220Wh/rmi. There are a few questions here:
1) Measure the constant for a long trip in the MR using the trip meter + battery gauge method. What is it?
2) For a long charging session, on charging screen, swapping back and forth between distance and energy, what is the ratio of added kWh to added miles?
3) Where is the line located on the Energy Consumption screen?
4) Can you get a screen capture of the energy consumption screen, set to 30 mile averaging interval, using "average" range, with rated miles remaining showing (battery gauge), the average consumption showing, and the projected range showing? (That will actually provide the answer to question 2 above since the charging constant seems to align with the number used for these calculations, at least on the AWD.)
 
Last edited:
I actually don't know the trip meter consumption constant for the MR. I would guess it is around 220Wh/rmi. There are a few questions here:
1) Measure the constant for a long trip in the MR using the trip meter + battery gauge method. What is it?
2) For a long charging session, on charging screen, swapping back and forth between distance and energy, what is the ratio of added kWh to added miles?
3) Where is the line located on the Energy Consumption screen?
4) Can you get a screen capture of the energy consumption screen, set to 30 mile averaging interval, using "average" range, with rated miles remaining showing (battery gauge), the average consumption showing, and the projected range showing? (That will actually provide the answer to question 2 above since the charging constant seems to align with the number used for these calculations, at least on the AWD.)

This is at ~242-243, which is why I used that number in my previous reply.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life
This is at ~242-243, which is why I used that number in my previous reply.

That's weird for the LEMR. I would have expected better (lower) but I guess based on the other data we have regarding the battery size and the rated miles it makes some sense (it's rated a lot less efficient than the SR+ - but not sure how real that is). Would be cool to get a picture of that screen with the data in item 4. Would help align things and calculate the constants involved.

I guess based on that initial data I expect charging/discharging constants for the MR of ~237Wh/rmi (used to calculate the projections on the Energy Consumption graph) and ~227Wh/rmi (used for the trip meter to battery gauge relationship).
 
Last edited:
FWIW, I'm coming up on 1 year on my LEMR and at 15k miles, I'm dead on 240Wh/mi for the lifetime. Mostly highway commuting, average speed including waiting for lights and parking is about 47mph across my entire 65mi rt commute. Usually going 70-80 on the highway.

Summer consumption is 220Wh/mi. Winter heating brings it up.
 
The driving constant for the AWD is 230Wh/rmi. Do 230Wh/mi, and you will make the rated range.
Alan - how are you calculating that? I thought the Tesla math was 75kw / 310 mi = 242wh/mi. Are you taking a smaller "usable" number as the kw figure (e.g. 72kw)? I typically get better than the rated range when driving in the 230s, so figured the higher value was accurate (relatively speaking).
 
Alan - how are you calculating that? I thought the Tesla math was 75kw / 310 mi = 242wh/mi. Are you taking a smaller "usable" number as the kw figure (e.g. 72kw)? I typically get better than the rated range when driving in the 230s, so figured the higher value was accurate (relatively speaking).

Simply do a reasonably long drive, and measure the used trip kWh (actually multiply distance by Wh/mi for accuracy rather than taking the kWh displayed), and measure the used rated miles. Divide the two.

Here is an example spreadsheet from my trip:

Trip Report - San Diego to North Rim Grand Canyon

If you look at each trip segment, take the "Used Trip kWh" on each segment, and divide by the segment "Used rated miles," you will see it is always ~230Wh/rmi. Note that the outgoing and incoming halves of the trip were VERY different efficiencies - constant still exactly the same.

As a specific single segment, see I used 63.5kWh @ 225Wh/mi, traveled 282.3 miles, and used 278 rated miles. At 60mph average speed. Downhill. (Constant of 228.5Wh/rmi but there can be up to 2 miles rounding error on rated miles used; in any case it is within 1%.)

I typically get better than the rated range when driving in the 230s

If you're looking at the range projections on the Energy Consumption graph, and using that to say you are getting better than the rated range in that case, that does make sense - for whatever reason, that graph uses the charging constant (245Wh/rmi) for its projections. So if you are doing better than 245Wh/mi you will see projected range on that graph is higher than your battery gauge rated miles. But it's not actually the case. You need to be at 230Wh/mi for true equivalency. See that trip segment above - makes it very obvious - I was very close to 230Wh/mi and nearly achieved equivalency.

All numbers for your AWD; not applicable to any RWD vehicle.
 
Last edited:
Saw this comment re: the 10 miles increase. I am not sure is that true or not.

"Chatted with Tesla adviser regarding to model 3 order placed right before the price hike. She said it was a new manufacturing improvement that cannot be applied to older teslas."

Good to see Telsa's social media team is really working overtime to get the story straight on this one. ;)
 
Not complaining... but the 240 number means nothing... Can you actually get 240 miles out of it? I can't, and I'm a lite-foot who wants to hyper mile when possible.

Just back from beautiful fall road trip, 1100 miles, averaged 252 Wh/mi, my lifetime is 241 which obv includes a lot of slow-speed local driving. The car is 'rated' at 225 IIRC, so in real world driving, you're off by 12% or a 214 max from 100%, from 90 to 10, you're looking at 171 best-case effective range in an SR ...
Huh, I think either something's wrong with your car, or you're not as light-footed as you think. My lifetime average in my long range RWD Model 3 (with more battery weight to drag around than a Standard Range Plus) is 230 Wh/Mile, and I do enjoy aggressive acceleration at green lights every once in a while. ;)
 
4) Can you get a screen capture of the energy consumption screen, set to 30 mile averaging interval, using "average" range, with rated miles remaining showing (battery gauge), the average consumption showing, and the projected range showing? (That will actually provide the answer to question 2 above since the charging constant seems to align with the number used for these calculations, at least on the AWD.)

I included the second screenshot because it shows 246Wh/mi as being just above the rated line.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9220.jpg
    IMG_9220.jpg
    433 KB · Views: 57
  • IMG_3693.jpg
    IMG_3693.jpg
    639.5 KB · Views: 51
  • Informative
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life
I included the second screenshot because it shows 246Wh/mi as being just above the rated line.

Thanks.

So for the LEMR:

Pretty consistent (not the same as) with the other cars - line is at ~242Wh/rmi, the constant actually used to calculate rated range on the graph is 5Wh/rmi less, so ~237Wh/rmi (which is the same as the charging constant so could be verified with a sufficiently large charging event), and the trip meter consumption constant is (if consistent with scaling of the other vehicles) is 1/1.047 less, or about 226Wh/rmi (can also be verified through trip meter data, or can be inferred from TeslaFi data, if they are doing things correctly).

These numbers could all be slightly off by 1-2Wh/mi, but further careful data gathering could improve precision. Or access to the API (you can derive it from that data more easily I think but it is not required).

List of current constants:

AWD: 250Wh/rmi line, 245Wh/rmi charge, 230Wh/rmi discharge

LR RWD: ~239Wh/rmi line (?), 234Wh/rmi charge, 223Wh/rmi discharge

LEMR: 242Wh/rmi line, 237Wh/rmi charge, 226Wh/rmi discharge

SR+: 224Wh/rmi line, 219Wh/rmi charge, 209Wh/rmi discharge

Guess we will find out soon if the SR constant changes...
 
Last edited:
  • Helpful
Reactions: leafian
Saw this comment re: the 10 miles increase. I am not sure is that true or not.

"Chatted with Tesla adviser regarding to model 3 order placed right before the price hike. She said it was a new manufacturing improvement that cannot be applied to older teslas."

That makes sense, given the delay in US deliveries right now. I'm surprised to see them putting something like this in during a busy quarter, though. Also, it is surprising that it is only the SR+ and does not seem to affect the LR. It will be interesting to see what changes really happened.
 
What is annoying is that my Medium range (11 months old) now has a range of 247 miles on a full charge (originally 264miles). I'm not sure what Tesla has done with the software, but this drop in range occurred I think when I received software version 2019.28.3.1. Perhaps this "new" SR+ is just the MR with the new software limit of 250 miles?

Yeah I'm in this exact boat, only getting 247 at 100% and 226/7 at 90%. Would love to get back to at least that 260 number. On version 2019.32.12.2 with 11,900 miles.