Easy to understand consumption number is my wish

[neutronjeff]

I realized what I really want on the interface.
Since the range is highly variable based upon driving situation / variables, I choose to display battery in % which I feel is easier to think about.
Now I have come to the realization of what I need to go along with it.
If instead of ###Wh/mi the Energy display showed :
miles / % battery (where 1% is constant depending on your battery)
For example: 300 Wh/mi in a car with 75 kWh battery would be:

1 mile / 300 Wh
750 Wh / % battery

equals

2.50 miles / % battery or 25.0 miles / 10% battery

Wouldn't that be so much easier to think about compared to 300 Wh / mile ??
If I knew I was averaging 25.0 miles / 10% it would be easy for me to think about what my range is at any moment, or what battery I need to reach my destination.

 

[ewoodrick]

While it would be nice for a real range to be on the front screen, the numbers that you want are on the energy graph.

 

[mswlogo]

I think you get used to whatever is displayed. They all say the same thing.

 

[ewoodrick]

I think you get used to whatever is displayed. They all say the same thing.

No, they don't say the same thing. It's very different. The normal display shows range based upon EPA numbers. The one on the Energy graph (as well as my Leaf) shows ranges based upon current consumption. I can readily see that I can't make the distance and I don't have to have the Nav system navigating to tell me so.

In the Tesla, in the winter, I have to deduct 30% from the range in my head. And then add fudge factors for speed.

 

[mswlogo]

No, they don't say the same thing. It's very different. The normal display shows range based upon EPA numbers. The one on the Energy graph (as well as my Leaf) shows ranges based upon current consumption. I can readily see that I can't make the distance and I don't have to have the Nav system navigating to tell me so.

In the Tesla, in the winter, I have to deduct 30% from the range in my head. And then add fudge factors for speed.

It is saying the same thing I get "EPA" range on the Main Display (in Miles) and wh/mi that gives me "current" efficiency.
If current efficiency is way above normal then I know I'll get less range. If it's above I'll get more range.
I never cut it that close that I ever care much more than that.
If I need more detail I can bring up Energy Chart.

For the record I keep a "Mini" Energy Display (5 miles Distance) in the right Panel of the Instrument Cluster (Model X).
So I always know my "recent" efficiency.

 

[holmgang]

I dont like the most things about the energy graph. I know all the information are composed of the same math products - but they could be presented in more natural or intuitive way. And I know other cars can flip the axes of the consumption, and the european measure (L/100km) is inverted from the Anglo measure (mpg or disance/consumption).

But still:

(1) main graph should be Efficiency. Which means higher = good (like higher MPG). could be Km/Kwh , or Distance/full charge. Then you could mentally

never thought about that gray Rated line. suppose thats some EPA/manufacturer reference or something.

 

[jrweiss98020]

The car can only predict so much. Your driving habits and the outside temperature will both make a big difference.

If you want simple, just remember that 1% = 3 miles is the summer, and 2 miles in the winter. Also, if you're charging and want to convert from KWh, 1 KWh = 4 miles summer, 3 miles winter.

 

[postersw]

I keep my battery meter in miles. In summer I multiply it by 0.8 to get usable range. In winter I multiply it by 0.7.
Of course you can also use the energy display, but it fluctuates a lot.
A good way to compute a conservative multiplier is to look at the wH/m displayed at the bottom on the screen, especially long-term averages like trip A or trip B. Then 230/(your wH/m) will give you a good average multiplier. (You could also use TeslaFi, which will do this for you).