Be honest: is SCing on a long trip annoying?

[Snerruc]

That's crazy. Do you enjoy paying speeding tickets? Just FYI, don't try that in Virginia, anything over 80MPH is automatically Reckless Driving, and our judges like to start handing out jail sentences at 90MPH.

I typically do 5 over, and never intentionally exceed 10 over. Anything more is just asking for The Man to give you unwanted attention, and how much time will that cost you?

+1 on this. Va also uses pop up radar and troopers will let you put your detector under your front tire and drive off if they spot one.

 

[neroden]

For those who've done significant long distance trips, doesn't this get tiring/annoying?

Absolutely not. I hate the gas station stops in an ICE car, because of the stink of gasoline. The Supercharger stops are *relaxing*.

Of course, it is unsafe to drive for more than 2 hours without taking a break. (Or switching drivers.) You can easily find information to this effect. A form of road hypnosis starts to set in. Your butt also starts to hurt. So I was already stopping the car every 2 hours for a 5-10 minute break or a driver switch.

 

[neroden]

On the flip side, those who do a lot of supercharger trips are probably more likely to get a little tired of constantly having to work around the car's schedule since its more old hat. They're also more likely to be honest about what its like to stop at the same old supercharger trip after trip or how inconvenient it is to spend a few more (or many more) hours on the road than an ICE.

If I had a magic car which never had to be refuelled, Supercharging might seem tedious or inconvenient.

But I'm not comparing a Tesla to a magic car; I'm comparing it to a gasoline car. Gasoline cars have to stop and refuel too, and at miserable locations which stink. I've repeatedly had to work around a gasoline car's schedule. I remember going at least 10 miles out of my way to find a gas station when I got low on gas in the vicinity of Allegany State Park. One of my most nervewracking drives in an ICE car was from Minneapolis to Chicago, where due to flooding none of the gas stations in Wisconsin were operative; I needed to rely on range to make it to the first gas station in Illinois. The gas stations were closed... but they had electricity. I have also had ten minute waits in line at gas stations. Long ago I remember a road trip where we had to skip three gas stations because they only sold leaded gasoline (our car was new); that was nervewracking. For a road trip which is even slightly off the beaten path, it's quite common to need to plan to make sure you can reach *the* gas station on the route in time.

Anxiety about being able to find a gas station is a real thing. It will increase, because gas stations are closing; there are fewer every year. Electricity is everywhere.

 

[pdxrajiv]

I am almost afraid to respond to this thread.
I can see both points of view (wimp) because I have experienced both.
When I explore a road trip on google maps and see that it is only 12 hours, I say to myself "I can do this in a day".
But when I use EVTripplanner, I see that the trip will really be 16 hours, I am unhappy.
However, after driving 18K miles in less than a year, (mostly on the SC network), I have to say that I did not really mind the charging (down) time. The charging time can be used to take a nap, grab food or coffee, or whatever you find valuable/useful.

Mileage varies. Just like life. (Mostly on your speed - not your car's. )

 

[Mike K]

So, your complaint seems to be that the vehicle doesn't abet you in your endeavor to egregiously flout the law as much as you would like? There are many here who would consider that a feature, rather than a "bug". "Someone that religiously drives 65mph..."? I never realized that all those speed limit signs were actually religious icons.

I come from a special land of unicorns and ferries known as California. In this special state we have certain stretches of road with higher speed limits. As literally nobody does the posted speed limit basically ever, a 70mph speed limit translates to 85 - 90mph without any fear of legal retribution. Well, maybe 90mph might draw some attention but certainly not 85.

You go on to complain in another comment that the rated miles estimator doesn't take into account that you plan on egregiously exceeding the posted speed limit. I don't find this all that surprising. They will assist you in your endeavor as far as involves staying within legal bounds, but any illegal actions on your part will also require adjustments to your expections to be done on your own part. That seems reasonable to me. Imagine the legal action they would open themselves up to if they didn't do this. "But the fact that the vehicles have settings and estimations for 90mph is a clear indication that Tesla is encouraging drivers to break the law, your honor!" You may scoff at the notion, but believe me, cases have been won with way more ludicrous claims.

Come now. You can't be serious with this can you? So I should only expect that gauges in my vehicle to be accurate within the limitations of the law? So beyond that I should not expect any kind of accuracy? The instrument cluster should just flash a random range and the phone number of the nearest traffic attorney? I detect a hint of seriousness in this so let me give you a serious reply too. Every other car I've owned in recent history takes recent driving habits and uses them to determine current range, regardless of speed. If I'm doing 120mph the car doesn't care. It just displays my range based on my recent average driving. So you're saying by giving accurate information for higher speeds Tesla is somehow legal condoning me to break the law? You realize how absurd an assertion that is right?

And where do you draw the line? I mean would you be equally as snarky if I complained about it not being accurate when I'm going just 10 miles an hour over the speed limit? What about 5? Even at 75mph, a modest 5mph over the speed limit, the trip computer is wrong, always. Every time.100% of the time. And it was no different on my other S. It's working as designed; it's just not designed well.

I'm not trying to jump on my high horse here and hold myself up as some sort of shining example of law abidance when it comes to interstate travel.

Just because you say you're not doing something after you do it doesn't make it so.

Like a good many of my fellow drivers, on long freeway trips I set my cruise control to the standard "upper limit of tolerance" for most LEOs, which is about 8-9mph over the posted limit. What I won't do is demand my personal decision to break the law to be somehow built into the vehicles tolerances and estimations.

I didn't realize asking for reasonably accurate readings regardless of speed was asking for Tesla to actively participate in my breaking of the law. I'm pretty sure it just means I'm asking for accurate gauges.

That's crazy. Do you enjoy paying speeding tickets? Just FYI, don't try that in Virginia, anything over 80MPH is automatically Reckless Driving, and our judges like to start handing out jail sentences at 90MPH.

I typically do 5 over, and never intentionally exceed 10 over. Anything more is just asking for The Man to give you unwanted attention, and how much time will that cost you?

Virginia is notoriously hard on speeders. California not so much. You should come out to LA. It would blow your mind. I moved here from Chicago and it took me a year to adapt. The police can only use radar on 24% of the city's roads and they generally don't even do it on those roads, 4 or 5 cars will blatantly blow every red light and if you're in a decent car in a nice part of town you basically need to be waving a gun out the window with one hand with a handle of jack in the other hand and even then there's a good chance you're not getting pulled over.

Are you looking at "rated" range or "projected" range?

Rated, which I understand to be EPA which is kind of hokey because I don't know of any other car that displays EPA mileage as it's range and not projected mileage based on recent driving habits. If I look at projected in the trip planner it doesn't seem to average in how you were driving before you stopped to supercharge. So the car might tell me I'm going to arrive with 20% SOC at the next charger and then 5 minutes after leaving the charger it determines my current speed is such that I won't make it to the next charger at all which results in it telling me to slow down to 65mph to make it to the next charger. And it figures that out pretty soon after you leave the supercharger. If it factored in an average of efficiency from before I stopped to charge than it wouldn't have that problem and trip planner would be a lot more accurate. It should be a surprise to the car that I'm driving 85mph versus 65 and if it averaged out recent driving it wouldn't come as a surprise to it.

 

[neroden]

It's only annoying when you're down to like 12 miles left on the battery and it's snowy and cold and windy out, and you pull into a supercharger site situated on the grounds of a hotel, and all of of the supercharger spaces are not only ICEd, they are literally ICEd: the ICEs (typically huge pickup trucks) are covered in snow like they've been sitting there all night long, and you have to go in to the lobby of the hotel and try to find out whose vehicles they are and get 'em to move. (I'm lookin' at you, Hampton Inn at the Gallup, NM supercharger!)

Other than that, and other than the additional time it adds to a journey (and you can't get around it: it adds HOURS to a long 500+ mile trip),

I agree that getting hotel management to track down ICE car drivers and make them move out of the charging spots can add HOURS! Many hours! Had that happen with a 70 amp charger at a hotel once.

 

[wdolson]

...And the speed which you are driving.

Any car is less effective/efficient driving under those conditions: those are the laws of physics.
You only had a gas tank indicator to rely on in the Audi and the BMW, and probably did not spend much time analyzing how much fuel you were burning.

The Tesla gives you accurate up-to-the-minute reports on the remaining amount of charge in your pack, so comparing it to your other cars under more favorable conditions is not appropriate.
Yes, driving 90 mph is fun, but probably not legal in most areas in the US.

The Model S can do 90 mph in the heat and the strong headwind, but it will use energy quicker at that rate of speed.
ALL cars will do the same.
Most cars are designed to perform the sweet spot of 65 to 75 mph, and the Model S is most effective at speeds around 65 mph.

ICE cars are usually geared so the sweet spot where the engine is running most efficiently is somewhere between 55 to 65 mph. Air resistance is more of a factor at that speed than at 40 mph, but because of the gearing, you end up ahead. With an EV, you don't have that advantage, the motor has the same high efficiency over a very broad range and you don't get an efficiency sweet spot like you get with an ICE.

So the sweet spot for an EV where you get the best efficiency is when you're going fast enough to overcome the higher friction going very slow and before air resistance becomes a major factor. So the best efficiency with an EV is around 25-40 mph and there really isn't all the much that can be done about it.

That's crazy. Do you enjoy paying speeding tickets? Just FYI, don't try that in Virginia, anything over 80MPH is automatically Reckless Driving, and our judges like to start handing out jail sentences at 90MPH.

I typically do 5 over, and never intentionally exceed 10 over. Anything more is just asking for The Man to give you unwanted attention, and how much time will that cost you?

When I got my first speeding ticket at age 18, I got very lucky. I was doing 100 on a two lane 55 mph highway when I saw the cop. He was quite friendly and chatty. He gave my a ticket for 65. I was kind of freaked out at getting a ticket, but 20 over was reckless driving in CA and I knew I had dodged a bullet.

Where he pulled me over was very close to the spot where James Dean died.

 

[wdolson]

I come from a special land of unicorns and ferries known as California. In this special state we have certain stretches of road with higher speed limits. As literally nobody does the posted speed limit basically ever, a 70mph speed limit translates to 85 - 90mph without any fear of legal retribution. Well, maybe 90mph might draw some attention but certainly not 85.

I grew up in Los Angeles and since then I have characterized freeway/highway drivers in different cities based on a two dimension scale: aggressive/passive and skilled/crazy. LA freeways have aggressive, but skilled drivers. The more timid drivers are on the surface streets. During non-rush hour seeing traffic bumper to bumper at 70 mph was common.

Portland is sort of middling on both scales. drivers aren't particularly aggressive or passive nor are they overly skilled or do they do a lot of crazy things. I found Seattle to have very timid and crazy drivers. Driving LA freeways non-rush hour, I found I could drive most of the time with never hitting the brake pedal. That went out the window when I moved to Seattle. I had to drive with my foot over the brake all the time.

I think a lot of it has to do with the way the roads are laid out in the two cities. LA is on a grid and you can get anywhere on surface streets without every getting on the freeway if you're too timid. That means the people on the freeways are mostly "pros" who drive a lot and have a lot of skill.

Seattle is laid out with a lot of very weird experiments in road design. I-5 goes from 6 lanes south of downtown to 2 in downtown, though there is a weird reversible set of lanes with a different set of off and on ramps that goes through downtown parallel to I-5. The roads are also built to maximize traffic into Seattle in the mornings and out in the afternoons, but the way Seattle has developed, there are a tremendous number of jobs in the suburbs. People who like to live in renovated urban places live in Seattle and often work in Redmond or one of the other suburbs.

There are also some places where there really is no surface alternative to taking the freeway. Which forces people who don't want to be on the freeway onto them with everyone else. Also a lot of the freeways only have two lanes in each direction (or two lanes and a 24/7 HOV lane, this is the way it was when I left in 2003, it has changed a bit since), which means the timid drivers who didn't want to be there in the first place are driving along at 45 in the fast lane so they don't have to deal with people merging onto the freeway.

I liked a lot of things about Seattle. It was a much nicer place to live than Los Angeles (I like cooler weather) and both Portland and Seattle have a pretty big "keep this place weird" contingent, but the roads there are nerve wracking.

 

[SmartElectric]

Two words : NO GUILT !

Our Tesla S85 replaced a Mercedes gas SUV that averaged 13L/100km (18 mpg) on the highway at passing lane speeds. Here in Canada, the traffic in the left lane of a two lane divided highway usually goes 130 km/h (80 mph).

When I bought my Smart Electric Drive, my hatred for all things gas powered reached the point where I began to drive the MB SUV with the easiest touch on the gas pedal to try to get 10L/100km in the "slow lane".

Once we got the Tesla, I switched back to driving in the passing lane and the feeling is liberating. I love love love to drive the Tesla on road trips, whereas I hate hate hated to drive the MB SUV.

So you see how Supercharging on long road trips is so far preferable over gas, as least for my family.

 

[KublaConn]

I come from a special land of unicorns and ferries known as California.

Someone from Cali who thinks that makes them "special", there's a shocker! It may come as a surprise to you, but yours isn't the only state that has ferries. Last month, I was down in Galveston and used the Boliver ferry a couple times. It wasn't all that special, the wait was a bit of a pain. I know it's hard to remember this fact when surrounded by a veritable Old World forest of superchargers, but Tesla does market & sell their vehicles in both states & countries other than Cali. Tesla has to consider conditions both legal & physical outside the bounds of the Golden State. The fact there is such a thing as "California emission" and "EV compliance cars" does demonstrate how "special" Cali is, but don't forget that there's a world full of "the rest of us" out here in the hinterlands. EUREKA! indeed. Tesla hasn't quite reached the point where they can build California-specific vehicles on a mass scale, so in the meantime, you're going to have to put up with the same mundane vehicle as the rest of us. Baby steps....baby steps...

In this special state we have certain stretches of road with higher speed limits. As literally nobody does the posted speed limit basically ever, a 70mph speed limit translates to 85 - 90mph without any fear of legal retribution. Well, maybe 90mph might draw some attention but certainly not 85.

Yes, Cali is the only state that has stretches of highway with high speed limits. Speaking of high, you must be high from all of the unicorn farts you've been breathing. In Texas, the standard legal speed on highways outside of urban areas is 75mph and, once you get past about Junction, headed west on I-10, it goes up to 80mph for a stretch of about 500 miles, all the way to El Paso County. Unfortunately, you can't use this section of I-10 to test out the efficiency of your Tesla on long distance trips at legal (or at least less likely to be ticketed) high speeds because it's currently a supercharger desert with not a single one between SA & EP. This was the highest speed limit in the U.S., until we opened up SH130 connecting Austin & San Antonio, it has an 85mph speed limit. Yeah, we're a bit crazy here in the Lone Star State. I know, I know...not trying to say we depose Cali in the "Who's the most crazy" contest, I'm just saying that we have our fair share of it. As for enforcement, Texas has Cali beat when it comes to lax speed enforcement as evidenced by this study: Strictest And Most Lenient States on Speeding and Reckless Driving YAY! We're number 51! Who's special now, buddy?

Come now. You can't be serious with this can you? So I should only expect that gauges in my vehicle to be accurate within the limitations of the law? So beyond that I should not expect any kind of accuracy? The instrument cluster should just flash a random range and the phone number of the nearest traffic attorney?

Nice appeal to an extreme claim that I never made. Yes, it's me who's not "being serious" here. Thanx to your calm, measured response, I have now seen the error of my ways. Let me try this thing you're doing. C'mon now. You're seriously trying to claim that you're not asking for help with your attempts to break the law? You're seriously going to use the "but everyone else was doing it too" defense? You can pooh-pooh me and infer I'm a sanctimonious ass (with possible justification) all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that you are complaining that your vehicle doesn't do a better job at assisting you in egregiously flouting the law. If you do 20+mph in excess of the posted limit, go ahead, that's your choice, just don't try to justify it as something "everyone else is doing", because no, not everyone else is going that fast and you are, in fact, creating a less safe driving experience for everyone around you. What I actually implied is that it's a bit ridiculous to complain that the vehicle isn't abetting your illegal actions and that it is entirely reasonable to expect that any illegal activities you perform with the vehicle would require you to make your own calculations outside of those provided by the vehicle. I think "not covered by the warranty" is a good euphemism here.

So you're saying by giving accurate information for higher speeds Tesla is somehow legal condoning me to break the law? You realize how absurd an assertion that is right?

Once again, you are misconstuing my words. Gotta give it to you, at least you're consistent. It's not so much how absurd you or I may think the claim is, it's how legitimate a judge or jury finds the claim to be. BTW, I'm not surprised that you took me up on my offer to scoff at the premise, I find it a bit ridiculous as well. Unfortunately, our "justice system" has repeatedly displayed that they don't necessarily possess the same reasonable sensibilities as you & I when it comes to such matters of personal responsibility. Take, for example, the case back in the early 80s where a couple successfully argued that GM was responsible for their 16-year-old son wrapping the brand new Trans-Am they bought him around a telephone pole because their advertisements for the vehicle promoted such wreckless driving. You & I, being resonable people, would say that it's acutally the parents' fault for buying a 16-year-old a brand new Trans-Am, but the jury didn't see it that way and GM had to shell out big bucks. Such rulings are the reason we have the "Professional driver on closed course. Do not attempt." notice posted at the bottom of the screen in car commercials and "Careful! Hot beverage!" warnings on disposable coffee cups and, the most ridiculous of all, "Warning, may cause drowsiness!" on bottles of sleeping pills. (What's this "may", crap? It damned well better cause drowsiness, that's the whole reason I bought the damn things!) As stated before, being a corporation worth billions of dollars that engages in both interstate & international commerce, it is safe to say that Tesla must seriously consider possible legal liability that isn't necessarily limited to what you or I find reasonable or what is the "norm" in California. I believe you made reference to your previous vehicle being a Mercedes, considering that Germany has the Autobahn which has no posted speed limit, and Mercedes is a German company, it is reasonable to expect them to take excessively high speeds into consideration. They are also free to sell those same cars in the U.S. without modifying them, but that doesn't mean they don't open themselves up to possible legal action by doing so. I think you may be willing to at least agree that Mercedes's financial situation lends them more leeway to take such risks.

Just because you say you're not doing something after you do it doesn't make it so.

C'mon now! I believe thou doeth protest overly much. That horse I climbed on, while surely not a Shetland pony, was just slightly above average height, not nearly tall enough to be dubbed "high". Yes, the vast majority of us exceed the posted speed limit on a regular basis, it's by far the most frequently broken law. If they are being honest, most DoT heads will admit that they calculate the expected mean of excess when determining the posted speed limit on any road. A posted speed limit is an attempt to mitigate risk and any good risk assessment will factor in the over/under cushion. I guarantee you, that calculated mean of excess is NOT 20mph over the posted limit, hence my use of the word "egregious" when referring to your own claimed norm of 90mph. Back in olden times, when I first started driving, I used to get a bit irked when someone zipped by me doing 90+mph on the freeway, but after seeing enough of them pulled over some miles later down the road, I adjusted my perspective. If you wanna do it, then I say "run, rabbit, run", and I'll try to give you a friendly wave as you pass me by and also try not to have more of a "thank you for the vital service you provide" than "I told you so" attitude when I motor past you as the LEO is writing out your ticket further on up the road. If that doesn't happen, then more power to ya, I still appreciate that you were willing to flush out the smokies for me. Motor on.

 

[Cyclone]

Couple that with the fact that Tesla's rated range is basically a lie for any speed over say 65mph - necessitating an arbitrary buffer at every supercharger stop

This is a great YMMV. On the 4th of July, I averaged 70 mph with 4 people in my S and round-trip over 250 miles I averaged 265 Wh/mile. I arrived back with plenty of juice to spare.

 

[jvonbokel]

Two words : NO GUILT !

Our Tesla S85 replaced a Mercedes gas SUV that averaged 13L/100km (18 mpg) on the highway at passing lane speeds. Here in Canada, the traffic in the left lane of a two lane divided highway usually goes 130 km/h (80 mph).

Once we got the Tesla, I switched back to driving in the passing lane and the feeling is liberating. I love love love to drive the Tesla on road trips, whereas I hate hate hated to drive the MB SUV.

I thoroughly agree with this. While I don't want to weigh in on some recent posts in this thread that have veered off into a debate about the morality/legality of high speed driving, I will say that long ago I decided against heavy speeding due to the diminishing returns of spending more on fuel to save time. Now when I take road trips in my Model S, the fuel cost (in dollars) is zero, and a little extra time spent charging can mean less time spent driving. I haven't done a detailed analysis, but I've been gradually pushing my comfort level up. While this won't be the case for many others, I've found I'm able to negate most of the charge time by driving faster than I used to be willing to drive on gasoline.

 

[Max*]

This is a great YMMV. On the 4th of July, I averaged 70 mph with 4 people in my S and round-trip over 250 miles I averaged 265 Wh/mile. I arrived back with plenty of juice to spare.

Agreed. I've been in the 260-280wh/mi range doing 70-75mph in the summer. Winter is a different story.

 

[Mike K]

Nice appeal to an extreme claim that I never made. Yes, it's me who's not "being serious" here. Thanx to your calm, measured response, I have now seen the error of my ways. Let me try this thing you're doing. C'mon now. You're seriously trying to claim that you're not asking for help with your attempts to break the law? You're seriously going to use the "but everyone else was doing it too" defense?

We're getting into an entirely different topic but yes, when the speed limit is 70mph and everyone is doing 85mph I don't see much need to discuss whether or not what I'm doing is legal. Quite frankly, it's entirely irrelevant. I didn't realize vehicles were only supposed to provide accurate information so long as you were adhering to the law.

You can pooh-pooh me and infer I'm a sanctimonious ass (with possible justification) all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that you are complaining that your vehicle doesn't do a better job at assisting you in egregiously flouting the law.

Again, totally irrelevant.

If you do 20+mph in excess of the posted limit, go ahead, that's your choice, just don't try to justify it as something "everyone else is doing", because no, not everyone else is going that fast and you are, in fact, creating a less safe driving experience for everyone around you.

Well that's objectively false. The person that is creating a "less safe driving experience" for everyone around them would be the person trying to follow the speed limit at 70mph. I am generally going with the flow of traffic which is 80 - 85mph with bouts of 90 thrown in and in those situations I'm not flying past cars. It's between groups of cars. I know bad drivers. I live in a city of exceptionally bad drivers. Someone that goes with the flow of traffic, signals properly and pays attention isn't a bad driver but again, what in the what does this have to do with my complaint about inaccurate readings?

What I actually implied is that it's a bit ridiculous to complain that the vehicle isn't abetting your illegal actions and that it is entirely reasonable to expect that any illegal activities you perform with the vehicle would require you to make your own calculations outside of those provided by the vehicle. I think "not covered by the warranty" is a good euphemism here.

Ah ok. So let me ask then, in all seriousness. Where do you draw the line? 10mph over the speed limit is speeding. Should I not expect accurate mileage ratings at that speed or does that fall within your arbitrary definition of "flouting the law"? If not, why not? And why draw the line at Tesla? Why excuse just them? Why is it that literally every other car I've owned with an estimated range calculator could semi-accurately determine range based on recent driving habits while the Tesla can not?

Were those manufacturers just going above and beyond to help me break the law? My i3 does a spectacular job of adjusting expected range based on how I'm driving, so much so that often a full battery will present me with just 65 miles of range on a car that's rated for 81. You know why? Because it knows what my average rate of consumption is, based on recent driving habits and displays an accurate estimated range rather than an EPA rated range like the Tesla that is correct only in a very specific window of driving style or the trip planner which acts as if it's learning your driving speed for the first time every time you leave a supercharger. It has absolutely nothing to do with breaking the law and everything to do with the reading being accurate whether I'm going 5 mph or 105mph.

The argument you're making is akin to telling someone it's their fault if their wheels fall off at 100mph because I mean, why would you expect Tesla to help you break the law?

Guy on Forum: My Charger Hellcat pings when I hit 95mph.
You: Well you can't possibly expect Chrysler to help you egregiously flout the law and you're totally unrealistic in expecting your vehicle to perform properly outside the constraints of the legal speed limit, or what I determine is an acceptable amount of speed over the legal speed limit.

Forget your argument about speeding and understand that if a gauge is not accurate it's not accurate. Now if you want to debate whether or not the trip planner is accurate at higher speeds I'm all for it but this discussion about speeding is a side show. It's irrelevant. Everyone here has every right to expect their car to operate the same at 95mph as it does at 50mph.

This is a great YMMV. On the 4th of July, I averaged 70 mph with 4 people in my S and round-trip over 250 miles I averaged 265 Wh/mile. I arrived back with plenty of juice to spare.

Kudos to you if that's accurate. There are scads of complaints about the trip planner sending people out of a supercharger stating that they'll arrive at the next charger with 20% battery only to watch that drop to nothing less than 10 minutes after continuing. I generally sit for a full 10 minutes after the car tells me it's ready to continue on the trip. In all honesty, I don't drive it like someone looking to get peak efficiency and so 265wh/m is a number I've never seen.

My chief complaint is a simple one. The car should calculate future range based on recent wh/m like basically every other car, electric or otherwise. So in the case of this last trip from Phoenix to LA where we were averaging 400+ wh/m going into a strong headwind on a 115 degree day, the trip planner should assume that I am going to continue to use power at that rate (or whatever the average use is) and adjust my projected range based on that. If it had, I wouldn't have had to sit in Indio trying to charge to 200 miles of range to complete a 130 mile leg. The car would have averaged out recent efficiency and told me to charge longer. And in fact, this is a way to compensate for variables that the car can't know such as headwinds and weather. It's the same way gas powered cars work, it's the same way other electric cars work and there's no need to deviate from it. If people are having to add buffers of 20 - 30% to safely make their next leg that's a clear indication that something is not working properly. And if Tesla wants to factor in elevation changes on TOP of that, more power to them.

I'm Mike and I approve of this message.

 

[gavine]

My i3 does a spectacular job of adjusting expected range based on how I'm driving, so much so that often a full battery will present me with just 65 miles of range on a car that's rated for 81. You know why? Because it knows what my average rate of consumption is, based on recent driving habits and displays an accurate estimated range rather than an EPA rated range like the Tesla that is correct only in a very specific window of driving style or the trip planner which acts as if it's learning your driving speed for the first time every time you leave a supercharger. It has absolutely nothing to do with breaking the law and everything to do with the reading being accurate whether I'm going 5 mph or 105mph.

I understand completely what you're saying, but I think I have a theory on why Tesla does it the way they do. I also have an i3 and it does indeed adjust the range estimate accordingly. However, in the winter time for example, a full charge might only show 51 miles of range because the battery is cold. As you drive the car and the battery warms-up, the range increases. Sounds good, right? Problem is, when you go to leave the house for a little trip, that 51 miles is a little scary. I know that the range will improve as it warms-up, but some may not understand that and I feel Tesla doesn't want to be too alarming with their range estimate.

If the average Joe is driving 90mph daily and the range estimate drops accordingly, he will be calling Tesla to complain and posting on the forums that his battery has degraded and his battery capacity has dropped.

Lastly, I would bet that BMW would do it the Tesla way if they had a 60, 75 or 90kWh battery. My guess is that they need to be more accurate with only a 22kWh battery since many more trips will require range estimates. With Tesla, it's really only the long trips where it matters. Most people aren't thinking about range in a Tesla on a daily basis.

 

[Cyclone]

My chief complaint is a simple one. The car should calculate future range based on recent wh/m like basically every other car, electric or otherwise.

The energy app projecting based on the last 30 miles has been very accurate for me. The trip planner projection works better for me than my prior vehicle's (2006 Toyota 4Runner).

I've done seven 700 mile road trips and the trip planner has been very accurate for me. Using the trip planner, I get my car down to to 5% power remaining as the trip planner projected without any real concern.

Now, as I said, this is very YMMV, but it works great for me.

 

[gavine]

The energy app projecting based on the last 30 miles has been very accurate for me. The trip planner projection works better for me than my prior vehicle's (2006 Toyota 4Runner).

I've done seven 700 mile road trips and the trip planner has been very accurate for me. Using the trip planner, I get my car down to to 5% power remaining as the trip planner projected without any real concern.

Now, as I said, this is very YMMV, but it works great for me.

BUT...I'm guessing that you're not driving 90mph the whole way.

 

[Cyclone]

BUT...I'm guessing that you're not driving 90mph the whole way.

You would be correct. Average 70 mph or so. I'm sure there are passing spurts here and there though.

 

[namlio]

I agree with Cyclone that the energy app can give an accurate estimate of the expected range if you use the 30 mile average, no matter what speed you have been driving. Open the app and note the average energy use over the last 30 miles. On the right, it will show the expected range at this level of usage. If the conditions over the last 30 miles, or other increment you chose to use, are the same as you will experience going forward, then you should have a decent estimate of what to expect. This is effectively the same as the car using your recent experience to estimate the future. I had a Ford Focus electric that supposedly used the past to estimate the future, but I don't think is was any more accurate than using the energy app. In fact, the enery app provides much better detail.

We just completed a 4300 mile trip from Houston to Philadelphia and back and often used energy app. Over all, we used about 290 Wh/mile over the entire trip, driving between 65 and 75 most of the way, averaging 70 or higher. I will admit that you need to think a little when estimating the range you should expect, and plan a little more on where you stop, but that is part of the trade off of a leading edge vehicle.

 

[namlio]

As to the original question, I think it depends. On our recent 4300 mile trip, we made about 25 supercharger stops. Some were better than others, depending on location and timing. One way to minimize charging down time is to stay at a place with a destination charger or supercharger. It does make a difference. Eating options are not always great, but it depends on your needs and desires. I'm pretty easy going, but my wife is pretty picky and wasn't happy with the choices most of the time.

One downside I found was the weather. It was bloody hot during many stops and that limited the the ability to take a decent walk while charging. There were a few locations that didn't really facilitate walking either. I noticed that 2 hours was about all I could take driving in any one stretch before getting uncomfortable or brain dead, so stopping every couple of hours was something I would have done anyway.

Overall, I was fine with the need to stop to charge. There are a few things I will do differently next time to make it better and a little more efficient, but that is all part of the process.