Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

edmunds range ratings

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Then you probably should read Edmunds that consistently obtains a MUCH lower range for Tesla vehicles than the EPA. The choice of fake news is your choice! ;)

My position is that we should consider the EPA range as the only consistent test, no matter how off it is compared to person X or Y driving experience. Everything else including Edmunds and CR is "Facebook".
I didn't base my comment on any media site, I based it on owning the car for 3+ years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Needsdecaf
Then you probably should read Edmunds that consistently obtains a MUCH lower range for Tesla vehicles than the EPA. The choice of fake news is your choice! ;)

My position is that we should consider the EPA range as the only consistent test, no matter how off it is compared to person X or Y driving experience. Everything else including Edmunds and CR is "Facebook".
Except the epa isn’t a consistent test.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Needsdecaf
I didn't base my comment on any media site, I based it on owning the car for 3+ years.

Please understand, I am not questioning your results, but to me your results as to you my results are the same as Facebook news. I am just opposed to using some (commercial) websites as source for objective information about the range of the cars, and I pointed to the fact that for any "information" showing low range (Edmunds) one can almost always find another "information" site (CR) reporting a higher range.
 
Please understand, I am not questioning your results, but to me your results as to you my results are the same as Facebook news. I am just opposed to using some (commercial) websites as source for objective information about the range of the cars, and I pointed to the fact that for any "information" showing low range (Edmunds) one can almost always find another "information" site (CR) reporting a higher range.
What is Facebook news? This is sidetracking but did they launch a news service?
 
As an owner who has never gotten close to EPA on highway, but can easily beat EPA around town, the answer seems obvious.
('19 SR+ 18" w/out aero covers, 40-42psi OEM Michelins)

...and NO, I don't think it's because they are paid shills, lol. What's that old saying?... "Never attribute to malice that which can adequately explained by stupidity"...and/or differences in speed... which may also turn out to be stupidity on my part. ;)

My $0.02-
Edmunds simply drives faster than "you, in your car" and the other 'magazine' or youtube testers.

Why I think this-
Around town, commuting via residential surface streets, I can reliably hit 140-180Wh/mile for a roughly 16 mile trip. (does an SR+ really have 300+ mi range, no, it doesn't does it.... but 140Wh/mi trips get you that projection with 50kWh usable pack capacity)

However, when I commute nearly the same exact distance (15.3 miles vs. 15.7 miles), but using freeway, I avg. >300-400Wh/mile for the slightly longer trip. This has been consistent across all of my commuting since purchase, even if I switch it up, taking FWY up to Snottsdale and surface streets back down to PHX, and vice versa. The biggest variable besides avg. speed appears to be temperature. Temps <50° F have an outsized impact on consumption, regardless of avg. speed, so I'm thankful I don't live where real cold is frequent.

PS- I *thought* I read somewhere else that Edmunds is using total kWh into the car, as reported via their Juicebox or equivalent wall connector. This indicates to me that Tesla may not be factoring total energy into the car, where other manufacturers might be showing this as part of the consumption, and think that would further amplify the differences in their reported results between manufacturers. Likewise for other pack strategies, where they have much larger total pack capacity / buffer. It doesn't have to be an anti-Tesla conspiracy for the cumulative scenarios to make it seem that way to the inherently suspicious and defensive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BooMan
PS- I *thought* I read somewhere else that Edmunds is using total kWh into the car, as reported via their Juicebox or equivalent wall connector. This indicates to me that Tesla may not be factoring total energy into the car, where other manufacturers might be showing this as part of the consumption, and think that would further amplify the differences in their reported results between manufacturers. Likewise for other pack strategies, where they have much larger total pack capacity / buffer. It doesn't have to be an anti-Tesla conspiracy for the cumulative scenarios to make it seem that way to the inherently suspicious and defensive.

No, that is defined by the EPA test not by a car manufacturer. Here is a brief summary.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/EPA test procedure for EVs-PHEVs-11-14-2017.pdf
 
Well my model 3 P exceeds both Edmunds and EPA numbers. I am getting 4.07 miles/kwh. That comes out to 24.57 kwh/100 miles. It is much better than what Edmunds or EPA get in their cars. I am sure is I run the car out of electrons I can get around 300 mile range out of it. I drive mostly freeway (since Covid) and limit my speed to about 67-68 mph.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tres_Azul
@alexgr Thanks for the link. I remembered that the EPA did that, as well as let the car marinate overnight before testing... as part of their SOP for BEV efficiency testing. Honestly, the sitting overnight thing is odd, like they expect user to treat it just like gas/ICE vehicle? "Honey, gotta get gassed up for the trip to aunt Jackie's tomorrow..." :rolleyes:

Basically, I didn't recall whether or not Edmunds also tracked every kW into the car and let it marinate overnight before testing...
 
What's up with the poor tested range of the 2018 Model 3 Performance (256 mi) compared to the 2020 Model Y Performance (263 mi) and the 2021 Model 3 AWD (345 mi)?

Something seems very wrong there. If they are using a single data point, that could lead to large discrepancies - IMO at the very least multiple tests should be performed, and preferably with multiple vehicles.

That said, the tested range of the 2021 Model 3 AWD is phenomenal!

 
Interesting about the Edmunds test starting at 9:42.

Yeah, range remaining below 0 is somewhat interesting, but doesn't explain the discrepancy between Tesla vehicles.

That said, it's well known that the range estimates near empty are not necessarily very accurate and also can fluctuate. If their standard range test has them stopping at an indicated 10 miles to empty, that could explain some of it.

But still, I would not expect a Performance Model 3 to get ~100 miles less range than an AWD, even if given the age difference between vehicles (it's not clear how old each car was when tested). The primary difference between them are the wheel/tire setup and heat pump, but given the mild temperatures, I would not expect the heat pump to affect things significantly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VQTRVA
Yeah, range remaining below 0 is somewhat interesting, but doesn't explain the discrepancy between Tesla vehicles.

That said, it's well known that the range estimates near empty are not necessarily very accurate and also can fluctuate. If their standard range test has them stopping at an indicated 10 miles to empty, that could explain some of it.

But still, I would not expect a Performance Model 3 to get ~100 miles less range than an AWD, even if given the age difference between vehicles (it's not clear how old each car was when tested). The primary difference between them are the wheel/tire setup and heat pump, but given the mild temperatures, I would not expect the heat pump to affect things significantly.
This article on Edmunds testing was interesting.
The Model 3 LR had huge amounts of below zero range:
miles-after-zero-indicate-range-graphic.jpg

proving-ground-vs-edmunds-ev-loop-graphic.jpg

Edmunds' Range Test Battle: Tesla Model Y, Model 3, VW ID.4, Ford Mach-E