Disappointed with range estimate in first long term drive

[William13]

Vigile, most of us owners agree that Tesla should make an improved range prediction tool. They don't want to as it would be used by detractors and still be inaccurate. We can still lobby them to give another real world, temperature and speed and wind trip estimator which would be better than the current estimate.

They live in California. I'm still hoping for a heavier coat in their store. Ha!

 

[HankLloydRight]

Lots of helpful tips in this thread... and here's my very simple rule of thumb: 300 Wh/m.

In my experience doing several >1000 mile road trips, if I hit exactly 300 Wh/m, I'll hit the rated range on the nose. If below 300Wh/m (not very often!) I'll get much better, and of course, if I'm over 300Wh/m, I'll get proportionally less range.

In your case, you used 410 Wh/m, which is 36% more than 300 Wh/m.. so that's pretty close to your own estimate of 30.9% more energy usage for your trip.

I use the energy/trip graph occasionally, and more information is better than less, but I always fall back on the trip Wh/m.

I like using the 300 Wh/m rule of thumb because it takes into consideration all other factors -- wind, terrain, pack heating, rain, traffic, speed, etc during your trip, and allows you to adjust your speed accordingly to bring it back down into a safe range to make sure you'll get to your destination.

 

[Sparktz]

Lots of helpful tips in this thread... and here's my very simple rule of thumb: 300 Wh/m.

In my experience doing several >1000 mile road trips, if I hit exactly 300 Wh/m, I'll hit the rated range on the nose. If below 300Wh/m (not very often!) I'll get much better, and of course, if I'm over 300Wh/m, I'll get proportionally less range.

In your case, you used 410 Wh/m, which is 36% more than 300 Wh/m.. so that's pretty close to your own estimate of 30.9% more energy usage for your trip.

I use the energy/trip graph occasionally, and more information is better than less, but I always fall back on the trip Wh/m.

I like using the 300 Wh/m rule of thumb because it takes into consideration all other factors -- wind, terrain, pack heating, rain, traffic, speed, etc during your trip, and allows you to adjust your speed accordingly to bring it back down into a safe range to make sure you'll get to your destination.

I am surprised I had to get to page 3 before someone said this. It is really simple math as Hank points out.

The estimated miles shown on the dash are assuming that you use approximately (maybe exactly?) 300 Wh/m. So hypothetically, if you are using 600 Wh/m, then you are using 600/300 = 200% of the expected energy required to go each mile. So then you would take whatever mileage is showing in the dash and divide by 2 to determine how far you can actually go if you maintain that rate of energy usage.

So then lets say that you get yourself into a situation where your rated miles on the dash are equal to the number of miles that you have until your destination. You have to adjust your driving and climate control usage to force your Wh/m from that point forward to average out to no more than 300 Wh/m. This will most likely be attained by reducing speed.

 

[AWDtsla]

I've never achieved an EPA rated consumption/range in any car I have ever driven in any circumstance.

I'm at 236 rated vs 146 estimated right now.

 

[Vigile]

I thought this was worth noting.

I have a Chevy Volt that I am still trying to sell and I moved it today around the block for some reason.

As I was driving it around I realized - the CHEVY VOLT adjusts for temperature. When the temperature is high, the estimate on the car showed 40-42 miles. Today, in the same cold weather that the Tesla drove home in last night, it showed a 31 miles range with full charge.

So, even the lowly Chevy Volt is able recognize temperature and help to inform the driver to the best of its ability. It's not perfect, and it's not taking speed of driving into account, but adjusting for temperature is at least a good FIRST STEP to helping inform a buyer.

I keep getting the feeling reading these forums that some owners are making excuses for Tesla rather than discussing the deficiencies of the software. To be fair, reviewing and analyzing things is in my blood (that's been my career for 16 years) so I tend to find these things more directly than most. If Tesla wants to sell Model 3's to less and less "technological informed" buyers then they are going to have to improve this kind of thing.

Fair?

 

[CHG-ON]

I live in CA, where it is not as cold and I always plan on a 25% error and am usually right on. I tend to drive 75 everywhere on the highway. I see lots of posts where people have consumption in the mid to high 200's. I can never seem to get below 320. My lifetime avg is 339. And even after learning how to not constantly hammer the throttle , I can't seem to get it any lower.

 

[TexasEV]

The premise of the thread title is wrong. The car displays "rated range", not a range estimate or projected range. If you drive using the energy consumption of the EPA test cycle then by definition you will get the rated range. If not, you won't. The energy app shows a line corresponding to this energy consumption (285 to 300 Wh/mi depending on your model) and if your consumption is above this line you will get correspondingy less range.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Here is my experiences with my 70D on trips.

I don't pay any attention to the range estimation on the instrument cluster. The way it calculates the range is not useful at all for trips.

What I use is the Trip Tab under the Energy app within the Center Console. This takes into the elevation change on your route, and the estimated speed. From my own usage I do believe it takes into account temperature, but only the current temperature. The biggest weakness of it in it's current form is it does not account for wind speed or weather events. If you have a headwind the actual usage is going to be way higher than what it estimates in the beginning. Tesla needs to implement Wind Speed/Direction in the calculation ASAP, and also rain (if it rained or is going to rain). Rain is the harder one to gauge, but they can at least do Wind.

The behavior I'm used to is the estimated range will normally always start off at X, and then it will drop to X-2 or X-3 before going back up. I think it does this because the energy usage required to get back on the freeway is higher than it uses for it's calculations.

Once i'm on the freeway I modulate the speed as the primary way of getting the range that I want. But, I never go slower than semi's. I don't see a need to because all I have to do is slip behind one for a bit with a TACC setting of 3-5 to get the energy savings I need. Not only do Semi's provide some drafting (a small amount since I'm far away), but they also tend to modulate their speed going up hills. Even if it's annoying (because they slow down to 55-60 going up them) it's a great way to save energy. As a last resort I'll lower the internal temperature in the car to also help out.

 

[russman]

Im in CA too and am spoiled by the warmer weather. I was stuck in the Tejon wait this holiday and wanting to free up my spot for others, I didn't charge as long as I would have. It was well past what the car said I needed with cushion. I got range anxiety pulling into the next stop because I used 40% more. So 1.42 rated miles for every real mile driven. I was using range mode. Turned down the heater, but I guess the cold, weight, and headwind played havoc. Don't know how you its in real winter can adjust.

I live in CA, where it is not as cold and I always plan on a 25% error and am usually right on. I tend to drive 75 everywhere on the highway. I see lots of posts where people have consumption in the mid to high 200's. I can never seem to get below 320. My lifetime avg is 339. And even after learning how to not constantly hammer the throttle , I can't seem to get it any lower.

 

[Kandiru]

Thank you all, very informative thread. The mobile app preheat, seat heater over AC, and 35% winter est. range decrease should have been in the manual to begin with.

Vigile, most of us owners agree that Tesla should make an improved range prediction tool. They don't want to as it would be used by detractors and still be inaccurate. We can still lobby them to give another real world, temperature and speed and wind trip estimator which would be better than the current estimate.

They live in California. I'm still hoping for a heavier coat in their store. Ha!

You should give the red soft shell winter coat a try, show them the Tesla app to get 20% off. If you cannot get to a store it floats on ebay sometimes. Love mine, like the earphone cable holder. It will also make you very visible in a real emergency.

 

[David29]

A couple of comments.
First, I have a 70D, not an 85. For my car, the EPA rated range corresponds to 290 Wh/mi. So like the 300 mentioned above, that is what I try to achieve.
Second, for whatever it is worth, on my first (and only) long trip so far, I used an average of 309 Wh/mi over 450 miles, so a good bit more than the EPA rated range value. But the temps were milder than the OP's conditions. I was still surprised that his average was so high, though (410).
Third, the energy graph is simply based upon your own recent driving. You can chose whether it uses the last 5, 15, or 30 miles, or the last 0.1 mile (the "Instantaneous" setting). So I try to use the setting that best represents how I will be driving. So that graph does reflect whatever energy was consumed, and thus does reflect the air temperatures, speeds, wind, and elevation changes that occurred during the interval you chose. The estimated range it produces is thus a reflection of your past driving over the chosen range, and that is all. But I agree with others above that that is usually a better indication than the rated range on the instrument cluster.

 

[Raven]

Another factor to consider is wind speed and direction. Head wind at 20MPH or 20 MPH tail wind makes for a serious difference in range. At 70 MPH that adds up to 50% more air resistance between the extremes. Add this to the temperature effect and it explains a significant part of your problems.

I'm a bit shocked it took 15 posts before anyone even mentioned wind. Sorry, but I've found that the cold is NOT that dramatic of a penalty. IF, and I stress the "if", you are operating in range mode. Preventing your pack from using a large amount of energy to warm itself makes a big difference in the first 30 minutes of your drive. I've driven long distances in the double-digit negative Fahrenheit and it was ALWAYS the relative headwind component that was the deciding factor on range performance. If the headwind is strong, hot or cold, you have to slow down to compensate. Yes, the more dense air, heater use, etc., DOES reduce range, but the numbers I see attributed to cold alone with no reference to wind (or topography) are completely overblown and erroneous in my experience.

My method...If I needed to meet my displayed rated range, I slowed until my average use met up with the rated range line.

 

[tmac]

We have the same 85D car. To get it to follow the range estimate you basically have to use about 285 kw/mile or less. You were using over 400. When I need to get range estimated miles (avg 285kw/h or less), I set cruise to 64 and don't use heat (preheating the car while plugged in and using seat heating helps). I then watch the average kw/mile to make sure this is enough. If there are a lot of hills or rain(wet roads are rough on kw/mile), I may need to slow down more. Once I am close enough to a charger or my destination and know range will not be an issue I revert back to pre-electric mentality and crank up the heat and or speed.

I live near Gainesville Florida and recently drove to Vicksburg MS. I left my house at 90%, drove fast with heater/ac on, supercharged in Tallahassee, Defuniac Springs for around 30-35 min each...No prob. However at Mobile I knew I had 222 miles to my final destination and no superchargers (and did not want to take the time to stop at a level 2). I charged to 264 miles, turned off the heat/AC, set cruise on 64, covered the 222 miles with 50-60 miles to spare and driving normal the last 50 miles. Until they get the software refined, I pretty much ignore the software advice.

I used similar strategy to drive to myrtle beach. I now have 22,000 miles on my 85D and have taken many long trips. I have never once had any range anxiety or close calls. Driving an electric car on long trips requires a little knowledge, planning, monitoring and a little more time, but well worth it. As the superchargers and other chargers increase in number it will become a non-issue.

If you remember and use the 285 kw/h number and the impact of speed, rain, heater use you will have all you need to eliminate range anxiety

Wow what agreat explanation thank you . For those of us learning lurking waiting to buy , it helps to understand every detail you provided.

 

[Raven]

Wow what agreat explanation thank you . For those of us learning lurking waiting to buy , it helps to understand every detail you provided.

As I said above, I still firmly believe it's simpler than Jbailey said. I've had the car for nearly 3 years now and lived in both climate extremes. For me, I display rated range because ideal is virtually impossible without going 40mph. With rated range displayed, I drive a speed that will match up my energy usage trend with the "rated range" line on the usage chart in the speedometer cluster. It's really that simple. If you have 50 miles remaining and 50 miles rated range, just slow down and keep your usage below the rated line. I have NEVER needed to shut off cabin heat or lights or any other thing doing this. When your cabin is up to temp, the heater is not that dramatic of a draw unless maybe if you keep it at 85 degrees. Maybe not, never tried it. This wearing of parkas and turning off the heat in the winter is just silly unless you're trying to milk 300 actual miles out of a charge while maintaining highway speeds.

As many others have said in different threads...simply plan on using only 80% of your range on all trips. If your rated range is 200, plan on only getting 160. This will comfortably allow for temps, wind, most topography, etc. From there you can make much smaller adjustments to speed to make your next charge.

 

[Candleflame]

exactly. when i see l/100km advertised my mind is already translating that to realistic driving conditions. xD

 

[yobigd20]

I think you've just discovered one of the issues with batteries in the cold. I have had a 60 and now a P85, and cold weather (and it seems anything below 60 or 70 degrees is considered cold) really has an adverse effect on range. I have seen as much as a 6:1 range loss when doing around-town, short hop type driving in the bitter cold. More normal is a 25-30% reduction in range when the temps drop below 65 or 60 degrees...

My rule of thumb once the winter hits is to make sure you have DOUBLE the range needed to go anywhere. This is with a combined 65k miles of driving experience in the Tri-State NY area year-round.

i second this with 97k miles experience. I regularly average 400-450Wh/mi in the winter in the tri-state area.

 

[FlasherZ]

I just made a trip from Florida back to Illinois - north of Georgia, we were seeing highs of 45 degrees and lows of 27 (both degF). Above 36 degrees, I estimate I'll consume 330 Wh/mi (which is a 10% penalty) at your speeds. Below 36 degrees, I estimate I'll consume an average of 360 Wh/mi (which is a 20% penalty from rated) at that speed - both without wind.

As noted, it is (unfortunately) the result of the temperature and denser, colder air. This weekend, while coming north, we had one day of winds from the north at 10 mph (that really penalized me), and one day of winds from the SW at 10 mph (which helped somewhat, although the wind was slightly tangential in angle to the direction we were traveling). In the winter, the high winds across the midwest are what usually affect us the most.

 

[Raven]

i second this with 97k miles experience. I regularly average 400-450Wh/mi in the winter in the tri-state area.

Again, as I'm sure you're aware, if you don't have the car set to "range mode" and you're doing multiple short trips, the pack constantly trying to heat itself will KILL your range. However, with preheat, range mode, and steady-state driving I did not see the dramatic losses others are stating.

 

[FlasherZ]

In addition, a couple of lessons from me: when the Supercharger trip planner says you have enough energy, give yourself a cushion of 5-10 minutes charging beyond that.

I'm one of those serial Supercharger-skippers... because I carry around 4 kids with me, at least three of our charging stops will be for meals. This gives us a chance to focus on those Superchargers that will allow us to skip the next one. For example, this trip we charged to full at St. Augustine, then skipped Lake City; stopped at Tifton, skipped Macon; stopped at Atlanta. I intended to skip Chattanooga, but the winds and temps were such that I didn't think I could stretch it without having to drive 55, so we stopped for a quick 10 minute bathroom break. We stayed overnight in Knoxville, Supercharged in the morning, then skipped London, KY; then onto Lexington, skipping Cincinnati (wrong side of the city!); then to Indianapolis, Effingham, and home.

During summer, I can route from Chattanooga to Nashville to Louisville to home, but at 225 miles for the Louisville-home stretch, I'm pushing it in winter weather. I need good wind conditions and > 45 degF temps to make that work. So in the winter - until Tesla pulls its head out and looks at a map of the midwest, placing SpC's in Mount Vernon and Paducah, we're going to have to go 230 miles out of our way each direction through Indy.

 

[green1]

I'm one of those serial Supercharger-skippers... because I carry around 4 kids with me, at least three of our charging stops will be for meals. This gives us a chance to focus on those Superchargers that will allow us to skip the next one.

I'm extremely jealous of those people who live somewhere where skipping a supercharger is even possible... There are so few superchargers around here that if you skip a single one you'll never make the next one. (and by "around here" I mean for the full 1000km+ run from home to Seattle, which is the only direction I can go and see a supercharger at all...)