TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Does 300Wh/mi equate to rated range?

Discussion in 'Model S: Battery & Charging' started by tomp, Mar 8, 2014.

  1. tomp

    tomp Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2013
    Messages:
    386
    Location:
    Durham, NC
    Hi,
    I'm on our first road trip with the MS. I've seen reference to this in other threads but wanted to clarify -

    If I drive at an average of 300Wh/mi, will I get the rated range?

    Thanks!!
     
  2. TsRocket

    TsRocket Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    244
    Location:
    seattle
    About 252-260 for me .
     
  3. tomp

    tomp Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2013
    Messages:
    386
    Location:
    Durham, NC
    Thanks! Wow, ok. That seems hard to do at highway speeds, if keeping pace with traffic (65 or so mph).
     
  4. cinergi

    cinergi Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,170
    Location:
    MA
    I suspect TsRocket's number is incorrect (e.g. it's for ideal range, not rated range). One will get rated range by averaging approximately 290 Wh/m.
     
  5. Reed

    Reed Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2013
    Messages:
    53
    Location:
    CA Bay Area
    I believe the number they used to calculate is 285 Wh/mi.

    The one thing that throws me off is that line on the energy screens seems to be at 300 Wh/mi. So you need to be slightly below the line to get the rated range.
     
  6. ddenboer

    ddenboer MODEL X #1770

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Messages:
    317
    Location:
    San Martin, CA
    I could have sworn rated range was 305 or 307 Wh/mi. In the summer, I was constantly doing better than rated range at around 300 (as long as I remembered to remove that lead from my foot before hand)
     
  7. scaesare

    scaesare Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    3,940
    Location:
    NoVA
    Short version: It appears that the 308 (or 305, or 307) #'s for rated range INCLUDE the "below zero" reserve, and thus at those consumption rates your displays will countdown to zero faster than you drive those miles. Using about 273(as noted here that varies) appears to get you close to a 1:1 ratio of rated mile to driven mile.

    Long Version: Energy Accounting
     
  8. jerry33

    jerry33 S85 - VIN:P05130 - 3/2/13

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    12,763
    Location:
    Texas
    I use the following two methods:

    1. Assuming the battery holds 80000 Wh of usable energy, divide that number by your lifetime average to get an estimate of total range:
    80000 Wh / (257 Wh/mi) = 311 miles.
    To get rated range:
    80000 Wh / 265 mi = 302 Wh/mi

    However, there are some losses that don't get included in the rated range number, so driving at 302 Wh/mi won't get rated range, which is why method #2 is more useful.

    2. Note the miles remaining at the end of the charge. During driving, add the miles traveled since last charge to the current miles remaining to see how many "real miles" were gained or lost. Example:
    Charged to 210 miles.
    Since last charge: 100 miles.
    Miles remaining 135.
    100 + 135 - 210 = 25 miles gained over rated range.

    As long as the number is a gain from rated range, you know that you have at least rated range left. (Doesn't work if there are substantial elevation gains or losses.)
     
  9. Ven Rala

    Ven Rala Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Messages:
    378
    Location:
    Montgomery County, Md
    Based on my observations of my Model s over 18,000 miles by deciphering where the line is on the graph and if my mileage correlates with what the car is telling me I have rated at 306wh/mile and ideal at 266wh/mile
     
  10. cinergi

    cinergi Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,170
    Location:
    MA
    The line on the graph, unfortunately, does not equal what you actually need to average in order to achieve rated (or ideal) range.

    My 290 Wh/m comes from what the trip meter read after driving from 100% to nearly 0% and happening to achieve exactly my rated range during that trip.
     
  11. Cottonwood

    Cottonwood Roadster#433, Model S#S37

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    5,062
    Location:
    Colorado
    I have found that 290 Wh/mi has had the best correlation with the "trips display" and how rated miles go away from the battery.

    Use 290 Wh per rated mile.
     
  12. markb

    markb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    51
    My experience is that before 5.8 it was 305, and now it is 280.
     
  13. mknox

    mknox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,568
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    My Energy Display has a line somewhere around 300 Wh/mi (I think it might be a tiny bit above 300) that says "Rated", and if my 30 mile average is at this number, the Projected miles and Rated miles are the same. Doesn't this mean that +/- 300 Wh/mi is the rated range???
     
  14. Todd Burch

    Todd Burch Electron Pilot

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    4,734
    Location:
    Smithfield, VA
    Glad everyone's in agreement (haha). Tesla, we could use a few (or 50) technical blogs please! (OK, I guess JB's busy engineering cars right now).
     
  15. cinergi

    cinergi Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,170
    Location:
    MA
    For your car, yes. It varies by car. Rated range affected by driving history?
     
  16. mknox

    mknox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,568
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    So that "Rated" line actually moves around? I assumed it was hard-coded based on the EPA rating...
     
  17. cinergi

    cinergi Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,170
    Location:
    MA
    I don't know if the line moves around (though mine's different now than it was before; not sure if that's my car or a FW update). But projected = rated at different whpm for different cars.
     
  18. mknox

    mknox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,568
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    That's very interesting. I'm driving a loaner for a few days which is equipped similar to mine. I'll keep an eye on it to see how it compares.
     
  19. Owner

    Owner Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2012
    Messages:
    1,230
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    I noticed a big drop when I got 5.8.10. Or should this be in the firmware thread? Or in the range thread?

     
  20. mknox

    mknox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,568
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    I have a loaner for the next day or two and it has 5.8.10 on it. It is fairly new with something like 3,000 miles and the Rated Range after charging is coming in quite a bit higher than my car with over 21,000 miles.
     

Share This Page