Thanks again for everyone sharing their insight and thoughts...
I think 60k might be on the more aggressive side, but I think it's pretty much a given that this'll need to be done at some point before 100k miles. The problem is also that the power loss and efficiency is a gradual thing - not something that you instantly just pick up on.
Toyota did this right with the fact they have a double injector system. They use the direct injection in times where the computer thinks you actually need the extra horsepower and advantages of DI, and then when you're idling or at constant highway speed, it has port injection also. Technology very rarely takes a step back, so I don't expect anyone to "go back" to a port-injected engine like they used to be.
As the world moves from larger 8 and 6 cylinder engines down to 4, this puts more strain on the engines as they use turbochargers to make up for that lost power/displacement. This in turn will lead to more carbon buildup issues with the gas recirculation. This has been noted in other brands that have used DI for nearly 20 years now (Audi, BMW, etc.)
Cool, we've been a Subaru family for a while as well. I would say between myself and extended family, we must have seen around 10 of them over the last 15 years.
I agree, an EV Outback or even an EV Forester would be good for me, and depending on the potential price point, this is where I would have looked first. I think Subaru has a lot of identify in the AWD system it uses, so with it becoming more of an electronic based system as opposed to the mechanical one, they could lose their "purpose" ... Toyota has been applying an eAWD system in their newer cars that have no mechanical transaxle. It's interesting, I'm curious how it plays out over time.
This is such a great post. There's a lot of good points and questions here. The fact that you're saying an RWD Tesla performs better in the snow compared to an AWD ICE does speak volumes. The traction control is better despite the fact that you're using an RWD? Is this a matter of computers/electronics or something else?
I'd have to decide whether or not the AWD or the RWD makes the most sense for me. What are the advantages of AWD for a Tesla compared to the RWD model? I'm figuring the performance is better for acceleration, but what about longevity? I thought I'd read an article about how if one motor fails you can still limp along on the other motor so you don't get stranded. I suppose the RWD is slightly more efficient, but probably not hugely so.
I'm curious to the price difference when it launches comparing an RWD LR Model Y vs. an AWD LR Model Y. Having extra miles of range could have its perks, especially as the battery gets older and starts to degrade.
I'm a habitual remote starter thanks to the Subaru app. I routinely have a ready-to-go car before my commute. We don't get nearly that cold here in NJ, but I do see a few days/weeks over the winter where it's in the single digits. Very rarely will it actually turn negative, though. I don't park in the garage due to the size of the garage being tiny (due to a previous renovation that added a bathroom that cannibalized some space from the garage itself)... so it's in the driveway for me, which can fit 4 cars (2x2).
Right, a Supercharger every once and a while is fine with me. What I'm trying to avoid is basically having to rely on the SC on a weekly or bi-weekly basis. During my summer commutes, it's important to know that I may not have access to charge overnight, even on a 120V outlet, at the shore house. It's also a family member's house, not my personal property, so I am not going to pursue having them add a higher voltage circuit just to appease my driving. I fully expect "down the road" that more and more people will get an EV, but as it stands now, not today. You're also correct in your SC density here. They are off the highways, and probably around 20 miles apart which would be okay in a pinch, but they do take a couple extra minutes to get to - they aren't "ON" the highway itself, unfortunately.
For those familiar, travelling the Garden State Parkway, there's a Supercharger at a convenience store near 82, at a mall near exit 100, at a convenience store near 130, and then another one at a convenience store off of exit 145 (which is a little misleading, this one is closer to the Turnpike at exit 15W, so I would go from the GSP to the NJTP and use it at 15W.) There's also one at the Paramus service center off Rt. 17 which is about 10 miles from my house.
I agree with you that 240V charging is better. There's no argument here. What I'm saying is that my panel is maxed and the circuits were already combined and tandem'ed and subpaneled and everything else over the last couple years as we (and previous homeowners) have completed some renovations. There's just no room left to add any other circuits.
I am exploring the 5-20 circuit that you mentioned, though. I was looking into that even before I posted this topic - I have to make sure the breaker and wires for the garage outlet to make sure they're the correct gauge.
I'm basically looking at it like this:
I'm driving 100 miles per week for my commute in the non-summer months. I'll average around another 10 miles per day driving kids around town or to sports/activities. So we'll say that's 170 miles per week. For sake of argument, I'll round this up to 200 miles per week.
A standard 120V15A outlet will charge at 12A due to the 80% load factor code, for 1440 watts per hour. It's generally accepted that you lose 20% efficiency with 120V charging, and 10% with 240V charging. So, we'll take off 20% and that 1440 watts becomes 1152 watts per hour.
The 5-20 (120V20A) outlet would provide 1920 watts per hour, reduced to 1536 watts per hour after efficiency losses.
If I drive a 300 watt per mile efficiency, which seems plausible with the Model Y, I'd be looking at 200 miles * 300 Whpm = 60000 Watts used per week. I have the capability to charge at least 10 hours daily, which with a 5-15 circuit would provide 1152 * 10 = 11520 Watts per day. This means over a week, I will have the capability, at minimum, to recharge 11520 * 7 = 80640 watts. This number will also be higher as I have two days off per week that the car can sit and continue charging (possibly 16+ hours a day on days off), but I figure this would be lost with any extra weekend driving and whatnot. With the 80 kW charging number I mentioned, it would allow me to go up to 266 miles per week before I had an issue with 10 hours of daily charging. This seems capable enough. This number also goes up to 358 miles per week if I used a 5-20 outlet before charging becomes a problem.
I'm also prepared to upgrade the panel for more breaker slots and run a new 6-20 (240V20A) or 14-30 (240V30A) or 14-50 (240V50A) circuit if needed. I just don't know that it'll be needed. I don't want to just spend $1500 for no reason. If my workplace gets charging installed as I'm hopefully for, this won't be a factor at all, because any losses not restored would be easily replenished over my 8 hour workday... My utility doesn't have time based pricing, so it makes no difference to me whether it charges all the time or just overnight. I get the argument that you'd want to start charging an hour or so before you get in the car to help warm up the battery, though. I'd have to look into an app like Stats or TeslaFi to automatically raise my set limit from ~70% SOC to ~80% SOC for routine use about an hour before I plan to leave to start adding more energy to the pack. This way I could leave it plugged in as much as I could, and just get that extra energy/warming effect before I leave for work as needed.
For what it's worth, I'm sorry you had so much trouble with the CVT. I'm curious if it's the drive you're doing - mountains, hills, etc. - or if it's the way you drive? Obviously, not all Subaru CVT's are having this issue. I'm curious as to why this keeps happening. Your Legacy has/had the TR690 like the Outback does, and the Impreza had the TR580, so it's across the whole fleet.
Regarding the 14-50 plug, I just want to clarify that it's a 50 ampere circuit (hence the 50 in 14-50). Due to electrical code, you can only pull 80% constant rated load on the circuit. So, your 14-50 circuit will use 40 amps continuously. This will gain you 240*40 watts per hour, times 90% due to efficiency losses, for a total gain of 8.64 kW per hour. That's the equivalent of nearly 30 miles per hour with a 300 watt mile efficiency
I think this is true for any brand, they all give you incentives to stay brand-loyal. For me, they're making it an attractive option to get out of the lease at month 30 with no penalty. I could just ride it to 36 months and walk away.
Personally, I find the Subaru has a little more driving "fun" compared to the Toyotas.
Great point. Thanks for sharing your actual experience in the winter.
Not necessarily. If Tesla or Carvana could get close enough to the needed buyout amount, I would consider taking the penalty and breaking the lease. We won't be replacing my wife's SUV anytime soon, though. At least, not until the Model Y could demonstrate it could fill that role in our family trips.
In my state, the dealer doesn't have to pay tax on the buyout amount. So, if my bank/leasing company is telling me it will cost me around $25000 to buyout my car, I'd have to subtract around 6.6% for state sales tax since the dealer won't have to pay it. That's around $1500 off. The problem is, Tesla isn't offering me $23,500 for the car, they're offering around $20000. The difference in that $3,500 pays for about 10 months of payments.
Now, that being said, I've been told that as time goes on and depreciation starts to slow (in later year 2 and 3 of leasing/ownership), the values should normalize and get closer. I would have no problem placing the order this year if the trade-in values are more reasonable.
Thanks again for all the posts, all.
I think 60k might be on the more aggressive side, but I think it's pretty much a given that this'll need to be done at some point before 100k miles. The problem is also that the power loss and efficiency is a gradual thing - not something that you instantly just pick up on.
Toyota did this right with the fact they have a double injector system. They use the direct injection in times where the computer thinks you actually need the extra horsepower and advantages of DI, and then when you're idling or at constant highway speed, it has port injection also. Technology very rarely takes a step back, so I don't expect anyone to "go back" to a port-injected engine like they used to be.
As the world moves from larger 8 and 6 cylinder engines down to 4, this puts more strain on the engines as they use turbochargers to make up for that lost power/displacement. This in turn will lead to more carbon buildup issues with the gas recirculation. This has been noted in other brands that have used DI for nearly 20 years now (Audi, BMW, etc.)
Cool, we've been a Subaru family for a while as well. I would say between myself and extended family, we must have seen around 10 of them over the last 15 years.
I agree, an EV Outback or even an EV Forester would be good for me, and depending on the potential price point, this is where I would have looked first. I think Subaru has a lot of identify in the AWD system it uses, so with it becoming more of an electronic based system as opposed to the mechanical one, they could lose their "purpose" ... Toyota has been applying an eAWD system in their newer cars that have no mechanical transaxle. It's interesting, I'm curious how it plays out over time.
This is such a great post. There's a lot of good points and questions here. The fact that you're saying an RWD Tesla performs better in the snow compared to an AWD ICE does speak volumes. The traction control is better despite the fact that you're using an RWD? Is this a matter of computers/electronics or something else?
I'd have to decide whether or not the AWD or the RWD makes the most sense for me. What are the advantages of AWD for a Tesla compared to the RWD model? I'm figuring the performance is better for acceleration, but what about longevity? I thought I'd read an article about how if one motor fails you can still limp along on the other motor so you don't get stranded. I suppose the RWD is slightly more efficient, but probably not hugely so.
I'm curious to the price difference when it launches comparing an RWD LR Model Y vs. an AWD LR Model Y. Having extra miles of range could have its perks, especially as the battery gets older and starts to degrade.
I'm a habitual remote starter thanks to the Subaru app. I routinely have a ready-to-go car before my commute. We don't get nearly that cold here in NJ, but I do see a few days/weeks over the winter where it's in the single digits. Very rarely will it actually turn negative, though. I don't park in the garage due to the size of the garage being tiny (due to a previous renovation that added a bathroom that cannibalized some space from the garage itself)... so it's in the driveway for me, which can fit 4 cars (2x2).
Right, a Supercharger every once and a while is fine with me. What I'm trying to avoid is basically having to rely on the SC on a weekly or bi-weekly basis. During my summer commutes, it's important to know that I may not have access to charge overnight, even on a 120V outlet, at the shore house. It's also a family member's house, not my personal property, so I am not going to pursue having them add a higher voltage circuit just to appease my driving. I fully expect "down the road" that more and more people will get an EV, but as it stands now, not today. You're also correct in your SC density here. They are off the highways, and probably around 20 miles apart which would be okay in a pinch, but they do take a couple extra minutes to get to - they aren't "ON" the highway itself, unfortunately.
For those familiar, travelling the Garden State Parkway, there's a Supercharger at a convenience store near 82, at a mall near exit 100, at a convenience store near 130, and then another one at a convenience store off of exit 145 (which is a little misleading, this one is closer to the Turnpike at exit 15W, so I would go from the GSP to the NJTP and use it at 15W.) There's also one at the Paramus service center off Rt. 17 which is about 10 miles from my house.
I agree with you that 240V charging is better. There's no argument here. What I'm saying is that my panel is maxed and the circuits were already combined and tandem'ed and subpaneled and everything else over the last couple years as we (and previous homeowners) have completed some renovations. There's just no room left to add any other circuits.
I am exploring the 5-20 circuit that you mentioned, though. I was looking into that even before I posted this topic - I have to make sure the breaker and wires for the garage outlet to make sure they're the correct gauge.
I'm basically looking at it like this:
I'm driving 100 miles per week for my commute in the non-summer months. I'll average around another 10 miles per day driving kids around town or to sports/activities. So we'll say that's 170 miles per week. For sake of argument, I'll round this up to 200 miles per week.
A standard 120V15A outlet will charge at 12A due to the 80% load factor code, for 1440 watts per hour. It's generally accepted that you lose 20% efficiency with 120V charging, and 10% with 240V charging. So, we'll take off 20% and that 1440 watts becomes 1152 watts per hour.
The 5-20 (120V20A) outlet would provide 1920 watts per hour, reduced to 1536 watts per hour after efficiency losses.
If I drive a 300 watt per mile efficiency, which seems plausible with the Model Y, I'd be looking at 200 miles * 300 Whpm = 60000 Watts used per week. I have the capability to charge at least 10 hours daily, which with a 5-15 circuit would provide 1152 * 10 = 11520 Watts per day. This means over a week, I will have the capability, at minimum, to recharge 11520 * 7 = 80640 watts. This number will also be higher as I have two days off per week that the car can sit and continue charging (possibly 16+ hours a day on days off), but I figure this would be lost with any extra weekend driving and whatnot. With the 80 kW charging number I mentioned, it would allow me to go up to 266 miles per week before I had an issue with 10 hours of daily charging. This seems capable enough. This number also goes up to 358 miles per week if I used a 5-20 outlet before charging becomes a problem.
I'm also prepared to upgrade the panel for more breaker slots and run a new 6-20 (240V20A) or 14-30 (240V30A) or 14-50 (240V50A) circuit if needed. I just don't know that it'll be needed. I don't want to just spend $1500 for no reason. If my workplace gets charging installed as I'm hopefully for, this won't be a factor at all, because any losses not restored would be easily replenished over my 8 hour workday... My utility doesn't have time based pricing, so it makes no difference to me whether it charges all the time or just overnight. I get the argument that you'd want to start charging an hour or so before you get in the car to help warm up the battery, though. I'd have to look into an app like Stats or TeslaFi to automatically raise my set limit from ~70% SOC to ~80% SOC for routine use about an hour before I plan to leave to start adding more energy to the pack. This way I could leave it plugged in as much as I could, and just get that extra energy/warming effect before I leave for work as needed.
For what it's worth, I'm sorry you had so much trouble with the CVT. I'm curious if it's the drive you're doing - mountains, hills, etc. - or if it's the way you drive? Obviously, not all Subaru CVT's are having this issue. I'm curious as to why this keeps happening. Your Legacy has/had the TR690 like the Outback does, and the Impreza had the TR580, so it's across the whole fleet.
Regarding the 14-50 plug, I just want to clarify that it's a 50 ampere circuit (hence the 50 in 14-50). Due to electrical code, you can only pull 80% constant rated load on the circuit. So, your 14-50 circuit will use 40 amps continuously. This will gain you 240*40 watts per hour, times 90% due to efficiency losses, for a total gain of 8.64 kW per hour. That's the equivalent of nearly 30 miles per hour with a 300 watt mile efficiency
I think this is true for any brand, they all give you incentives to stay brand-loyal. For me, they're making it an attractive option to get out of the lease at month 30 with no penalty. I could just ride it to 36 months and walk away.
Personally, I find the Subaru has a little more driving "fun" compared to the Toyotas.
Great point. Thanks for sharing your actual experience in the winter.
Not necessarily. If Tesla or Carvana could get close enough to the needed buyout amount, I would consider taking the penalty and breaking the lease. We won't be replacing my wife's SUV anytime soon, though. At least, not until the Model Y could demonstrate it could fill that role in our family trips.
In my state, the dealer doesn't have to pay tax on the buyout amount. So, if my bank/leasing company is telling me it will cost me around $25000 to buyout my car, I'd have to subtract around 6.6% for state sales tax since the dealer won't have to pay it. That's around $1500 off. The problem is, Tesla isn't offering me $23,500 for the car, they're offering around $20000. The difference in that $3,500 pays for about 10 months of payments.
Now, that being said, I've been told that as time goes on and depreciation starts to slow (in later year 2 and 3 of leasing/ownership), the values should normalize and get closer. I would have no problem placing the order this year if the trade-in values are more reasonable.
Thanks again for all the posts, all.
