Is it possible to get 250 miles on the interstate with a 2022 M3P?

[804son]

The quickest way to get from point A to point B in an EV is to drive as fast as you are comfortable with and charge only what you need to get the next charger. Essentially using the bottom half or so of the battery for fast charging.

All this to say, it's better off to charge more often on a trip and drive faster. Instead of driving slower and avoiding superchargers.

 

[KenC]

What speeds would you have to run to get that? Seems like running 70-80 mph it gets maybe 180-190 miles at most from 100% charge(have only done it once just to see)?

I made a 130 mile trip and only had 94 miles left when parked. So started with 310+- and went 130 miles and have 94 left. So 310-130 is 180. What does it actually take to get anywhere close 310 miles? 50 mph? Only mixed driving with 50% city and 50% interstate and 50 mph???

You should try using ABRP, abetterrouteplanner.com. It uses real-world data to allow you to simulate trip planning ideas. Reading this thread, sounds like you may be in a bit of a black-hole for charging. Without knowing where in the world you are, other than you look like somewhere near the Rockies from your avatar, no one can help you with local knowledge, like where there might be a destination charger near you. Oftentimes, a hotel near an airport might have EV chargers. You should think about a CCS adapter, and use apps like EVgo or Plugshare to find CCS chargers.

Now, you have a 2022 Performance, and as others have said, you can try 18" tires to improve efficiency. Looking at ABRP, the reference efficiency they use at 65mph is 269Wh/mile, so in theory you can go about 280 miles at 65mph, but that doesn't sound like you have any margin for error. If you are near the Rockies as pictured in your avatar, driving that slowly is not very practical.

For me, with a 2018 LR-AWD 18" wheels, I know if I drove 65mph, I could get over 300 miles, based upon my measured efficiency of 235Wh/mile. Having said that, I never try to drive 300 miles, because we have plenty of superchargers, and the fastest way to get anywhere is to drive as fast as you are comfortable with and charge at the lowest SOCs you are comfortable with.

BTW, sign up for the free ABRP, and you can calculate your reference efficiency at 65mph. It'll give you a better idea of what your range potential is.

PS. Looked at your avatar again and realized that's not the Rockies in the background. As mentioned before, if you let people know where you are, some locals may know where you can charge using Tesla destination chargers or CCS.

 

[DownshiftDre]

Have noticed that Porsche and Mercedes and BMW and even Kia EVs seem to be surpassing their rated miles on the highway on the 70mph range tests. The Teslas always seem to be overrated while the others are underrated.

These tables below of various 70mph range tests make me wonder a bit.

What's The Real World Highway Range Of Today's Electric Cars? We Test To Find Out

 

[804son]

Have noticed that Porsche and Mercedes and BMW and even Kia EVs seem to be surpassing their rated miles on the highway on the 70mph range tests. The Teslas always seem to be overrated while the others are underrated.

These tables below of various 70mph range tests make me wonder a bit.

What's The Real World Highway Range Of Today's Electric Cars? We Test To Find Out

Eventhough Tesla's EPA range ratings are "optimistic" they're still some of the longest range EV's at a reasonable price. (Note: the 2021 Tesla Model 3 AWD is the 4th listing with a real world range of 310 miles).

 

[DownshiftDre]

Eventhough Tesla's EPA range ratings are "optimistic" they're still some of the longest range EV's at a reasonable price. (Note: the 2021 Tesla Model 3 AWD is the 4th listing with a real world range of 310 miles).

Absolutely. Dont get me wrong, the Teslas show supremacy in efficiency. I was more wondering why such a variation in EPA vs real world and opposite directions. I initially thought the EPA rating would be a good way to compare apples to apples and then the 70mph real world highway range would scale accordingly regardless of car make. But it doesnt seem to act that way.

Could it be something about motor/inverter tuning and thus the Teslas seem to rate higher on EPA ratings compared to competition? And then somehow this shows up as a negative delta when scaled to a 70mph range test where maybe the other cars are tuned the other way where they suffer in EPA rated range but then in real world 70mph highway they surpass EPA.

Back in the ICE world, I used to be able to match my real world to EPA highway ratings easily and maybe off by a few % or few mpg. In the EV world, one make/model is over EPA range by a lot and another make/model is under EPA by a lot and then there are makes/models all over within that spectrum.

 

[804son]

Absolutely. Dont get me wrong, the Teslas show supremacy in efficiency. I was more wondering why such a variation in EPA vs real world and opposite directions. I initially thought the EPA rating would be a good way to compare apples to apples and then the 70mph real world highway range would scale accordingly regardless of car make. But it doesnt seem to act that way.

Could it be something about motor/inverter tuning and thus the Teslas seem to rate higher on EPA ratings compared to competition? And then somehow this shows up as a negative delta when scaled to a 70mph range test where maybe the other cars are optimized to handle better.

I have heard somewhere, that Tesla uses a different EPA cycle test. If I remember correctly Tesla uses a full 5 cycle test, and some (don't know which or if it's all the others) use a 2 cycle EPA test. I have also heard there is the option for companies to downgrade the results.
I too really wish Tesla had a more accurate EPA range rating.

 

[jjrandorin]

Absolutely. Dont get me wrong, the Teslas show supremacy in efficiency. I was more wondering why such a variation in EPA vs real world and opposite directions. I initially thought the EPA rating would be a good way to compare apples to apples and then the 70mph real world highway range would scale accordingly regardless of car make. But it doesnt seem to act that way.

Could it be something about motor/inverter tuning and thus the Teslas seem to rate higher on EPA ratings compared to competition? And then somehow this shows up as a negative delta when scaled to a 70mph range test where maybe the other cars are optimized to handle better.

From what I remember reading here, it has more to do with the fact that there are a couple of different EPA tests one can run and are valid, and the manufacturer can choose which one of those results to publish. Tesla publishes the more optimistic one and some other manufacturers publish "the other test". I dont care enough about the discussion of "epa range" to dig that discussion up, but thats what I remember being discussed.

Edit: posted at the same time as @804son . Thats what I remember too (as well as mfr's being able to downgrade results if they want to).

From "ICE" land, for example, BMW always (notoriously so) under rated their engine power. They always had more horsepower than BMW reported them to have.

 

[MorrisonHiker]

Mine is a 2022 I picked up in May. I believe it was rated at 315 when I picked it up. Shows 310 if full now with 2600 miles.

What blows my mind is the nav in the car when planning a long trip will show what percent it thinks will be left at the next supercharger and it never gets close to it's estimate. You'd think when estimating SOC left at next station they'd account for the speed limit. Luckily on a couple "long" trips I always go well over what it says I need for SOC. Got down to 5-6% on one and was sweating it decent until I rolled in.

We've been really impressed with the accuracy of the new Energy graph. Have you tried viewing that to see suggestions on how you can arrive at the estimated SoC? We drove over 1200 miles miles round trip last week and always arrived at close to the estimated SoC. When I was driving, I usually "saved" a few "miles" (a kWh or two). When Erik was driving, we usually used a couple "miles" extra. Still, we always arrived very close to the initially estimated SoC. This was in a 2022 Model X, with the longest non-stop leg being 249 miles.

 

[ElectricIAC]

The quickest way to get from point A to point B in an EV is to drive as fast as you are comfortable with and charge only what you need to get the next charger. Essentially using the bottom half or so of the battery for fast charging.

All this to say, it's better off to charge more often on a trip and drive faster. Instead of driving slower and avoiding superchargers.

It really depends on how detailed you want to get with it, but some chargers are a pain in the ass to get to and if you can avoid having to stop at them it’s better to drive a little slower and stay longer at a stop before it.

 

[804son]

It really depends on how detailed you want to get with it, but some chargers are a pain in the ass to get to and if you can avoid having to stop at them it’s better to drive a little slower and stay longer at a stop before it.

Stopped once at the Albuquerque, NM supercharger, the waiting line was at least 10 deep. Really wish I could've skipped that one.

 

[Y_tho]

Are there any 18's that will fit with the M3P calipers?

TSportline has a bunch. I have the 19" TS5s but there's an 18" version as well, which is designed to fit all M3 variants including M3P. Looks like they have four wheel models that are made in 18" versions.

Here's what my 19" TS5s look like, for reference...

 

[mrfiat74]

Stopped once at the Albuquerque, NM supercharger, the waiting line was at least 10 deep. Really wish I could've skipped that one.

Albuquerque has two superchargers now and the new one in Uptown is 250 kW with lots of charging stalls.

 

[KenC]

Have noticed that Porsche and Mercedes and BMW and even Kia EVs seem to be surpassing their rated miles on the highway on the 70mph range tests. The Teslas always seem to be overrated while the others are underrated.

These tables below of various 70mph range tests make me wonder a bit.

What's The Real World Highway Range Of Today's Electric Cars? We Test To Find Out

The problem with that test, is that data is like if you or I did the test. We'd borrow an EV, and drive it, mostly at 70mph. Could be a nice sunny day. Could be a windy day. Could be cold that day. That's what they say, there's no consistent test condition. They don't test at the same time, so environmental conditions make a huge difference. Think about it, there are days where you get great efficiency and days you get lousy efficiency, just the luck of the draw.

At a minimum, they should have used a baseline EV, as a benchmark, whenever they tested a new EV, that way they'd have a baseline measurement to compare against, and to factor out environmental conditions.

 

[Blacktes24]

Yep, and either of those vehicles would cost you 5-10 times as much in fuel for that trip than the Tesla, so it's all tradeoffs...

So your 1-way trip to the airport is 130 miles with no fast-charging along the route?? Wow...

It's not a 1 way trip. I'm not sure why that can't be figured out by people on here. I have to drive home. And there is 1 supercharger in the middle of the drive. Ideally I'd be able to drive to the airport and when I get back head home and make it to to the supercharger around halfway home(190 miles total). Should be doable on a car with a range 315 miles driving the speed limit. It's not even close to doable if you run 70-85. Maybe at 70 it would be possible?

 

[804son]

It's not a 1 way trip. I'm not sure why that can't be figured out by people on here. I have to drive home. And there is 1 supercharger in the middle of the drive. Ideally I'd be able to drive to the airport and when I get back head home and make it to to the supercharger around halfway home(190 miles total). Should be doable on a car with a range 315 miles driving the speed limit. It's not even close to doable if you run 70-85. Maybe at 70 it would be possible?

Looks like you answered your own question, theirs a supercharger in the middle of the drive
No problem, hit that supercharger each way and drive as fast as you want.

 

[Blacktes24]

Thanks for the replies all. I'm not knocking the car just more the epa rating and what is realistic and it's a little disappointing. I literally just made a trip that was 130 miles and left with 310 range. Arrived with 94 miles left. So it used 86 more miles of "range" than projected. Do I expect 310 with the speeds I drove? No. Is it way worse than what a combustion car would lose efficiency wise going 10-15 over the limit? Yes and thats not even close. As far as being cheaper than a combustion vehicle yes it is more than a 3/4 ton diesel and a z06 corvette. But I'd put my dads VW Passat TDI up against it cost per mile supercharge/vs $5.50 diesel. It gets 45-50 MPG. If I remember right my supercharging costs me $20+ for 200 miles or less. So very close in that aspect. Fun factor not even close though! That being said I'd love the car so much more with a bit more range.

 

[Blacktes24]

Looks like you answered your own question, theirs a supercharger in the middle of the drive
No problem, hit that supercharger each way and drive as fast as you want.

Yes I realize this. Just wondered if my "mileage" was normal as I should easily be able to make it there and back to the halfway supercharger. Would be nicer instead of leaving with 310 range and needing to stop 70ish miles in.

 

[gearchruncher]

The focus on 18" for wheels as a magic number is over-blown.
The SHAPE of the wheel, and the TIRES you put on it matter way more.
Even Tesla puts aero covers on 18" wheels.
The weight of the wheel matters ZERO for highway cruise. It's just physics. It takes no additional energy to keep a heavier object rotating than a lighter one.

Yep, and either of those vehicles would cost you 5-10 times as much in fuel for that trip than the Tesla, so it's all tradeoffs...

That's completely false. A C7 Z06 gets 23 MPG. Current USA premium fuel average is $4.25. So to go 100 miles in a Z06 costs $18.48.
The OP is getting 180 miles on 72 kWh. That's 40kW to go 100 miles (plus charging inefficiency)
Supercharger prices are easily 40 cents per kWh (they have hit 56 cents in CA). That's $16 to go 100 miles.

That's the same price. Not 10X. Not even double.

 

[jjrandorin]

The OP is getting 180 miles on 72 kWh

They actually said they went 130 miles and had 94 left:

I made a 130 mile trip and only had 94 miles left when parked

So, according to them, they are getting 224 per 72kWh.

 

[Zcd1]

That's completely false….
Supercharger prices are easily 40 cents per kWh (they have hit 56 cents in CA). That's $16 to go 100 miles.

That's the same price. Not 10X. Not even double.

I guess you forgot that the OP charges at home before he leaves, huh?

Figures.