Future Range on Model S

[jelloslug]

Isn't it odd that no Tesla ever achieves its EPA range (including my S90D), but my BMW i3 routinely gets more range than its EPA rating?

And the BMW has no setting for charging to less than 100%; BMW has kindly provided more battery capacity than the rating so that it always has regen.

Do you think maybe Tesla is fudging the numbers a bit? Why is that?

BMW, Mercedes and Audi are certainly all behind at the moment, but I'm expecting that we'll have a lot more choices 3-5yrs from now!

I rarely got the EPA rated range in my i3. My Leaf did and my Model S does it just fine though.

 

[jelloslug]

It's interesting that under the same test conditions, the Bolt beat its EPA range by 5%, and the Tesla fell short of its EPA range by 9%. Under those test conditions, I would expect both cars should at least meet their EPA rating.

Consumer Reports turned the regen to the Low setting on the Tesla when they did their range test. They claimed that the majority of people drive it that way so they wanted to make the test "fair".

 

[FutureShock]

So if the M3 [w/LR option] has a 310 mile range, better than most MSes ever produced, can we reasonably expect that in the near future MSes will have a range well above 310?

Or at least matching the Model 3... yes, you'd think.

It's a pretty heavy lift to ask ppl to pay way more for an EV with less range.

.

 

[Shock-On-T]

Consumer Reports turned the regen to the Low setting on the Tesla when they did their range test. They claimed that the majority of people drive it that way so they wanted to make the test "fair".

Actually the range is better with regen set to low, so long as you never need to hit the real brakes.
It's more efficient for the car to gain speed (ie kinetic energy) than to charge the battery.
Of course if you have to use the real brakes (eg to slow for a sharp curve or to stick to the speed limit) then it's better to use the stronger regen.

 

[sandpiper]

Consumer Reports turned the regen to the Low setting on the Tesla when they did their range test. They claimed that the majority of people drive it that way so they wanted to make the test "fair".

Where did they get that bit of data? I don't know anybody who does that.

 

[ran349]

Where did they get that bit of data? I don't know anybody who does that.

I agree. I don't believe that most people use low regen. It doesn't make sense to do that. I also wonder where they got that information.

 

[ran349]

Consumer Reports turned the regen to the Low setting on the Tesla when they did their range test. They claimed that the majority of people drive it that way so they wanted to make the test "fair".

Seems strange that they would do that, but even so, I wouldn't think when test driving along a highway at 65 mph that regen would be much of a factor. Driving stop and go, then it would certainly make a difference.

 

[jelloslug]

Actually the range is better with regen set to low, so long as you never need to hit the real brakes.
It's more efficient for the car to gain speed (ie kinetic energy) than to charge the battery.
Of course if you have to use the real brakes (eg to slow for a sharp curve or to stick to the speed limit) then it's better to use the stronger regen.

Seems strange that they would do that, but even so, I wouldn't think when test driving along a highway at 65 mph that regen would be much of a factor. Driving stop and go, then it would certainly make a difference.

It must because when I do the exact same test that they did, I can easily get way over 250 miles of range.