My economy experience with previous cars in mostly highway (but speeds mostly limited by traffic) with no roof cargo (-20% with roof cargo):
- ICEVs (all manual transmission): +20%, +0%, +10%, +20%
- Previous EV: +8%
- Model 3 RWD: +8%
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Is it possible to get 250 miles on the interstate with a 2022 M3P?
- Thread starter Blacktes24
- Start date
ZenRockGarden
Active Member
12-14 hours of driving in the winter in an EV sounds miserable. You’ll probably have to stop every 3 hours to charge for 20-30m. I’d fly down there then rent a Tesla for a day if they want to check one out. It’s not like yours will be any faster/slower than the one you rent since you can’t modify the motor anyways.
Zcd1
Active Member
bsf29
Member
The EPA test is not intended to be an accuracy test of what drivers will get. The purpose is to set a “standard” so you can compare vehicles. There are too many real world variables that makes it difficult to achieve the same results. I have trips where I have done much better and others where I did much worse driving the same route. If you are concerned about range, than drive slower at a constant speed, fill your tires to max psi, and utilize other hyper mile tricks. If you are concerned about arrival time, then drive faster. In either case, be safe and enjoy the trip.
I find it interesting that people put so much concern into EV range when they never paid attention to their ICE vehicles MPG. Did you check it at every fill up? Did you always use the same pump and stop at the same fill point so you knew you were accurate with your calculations? The Guess-O-Meter in both aren’t accurate.
Superchargers are close enough that it isn’t a problem as with our 1st Tesla with a 200 mile range that we used on trips. I know that I can drive 77 mph and make up for the extra charging time to arrive sooner than driving 65 - 70 mph on our normal 350 mile trip. Commuting to work and other short trips, range is more important to me. So driving +10 mph to get to my destination 3 minutes early is useless, and I have fun trying to stay under 220w/mi while not being an a$$ holding up others. Then there are other days when I just want to zoom and have fun.
Because you can fill up in 2 minutes at almost every exit in the interstate with gas. They also don’t recommend that you keep your gas car between 20% and 80% full. Hence people worry more about their EV range… I don’t find it irrational at all.
My P3D- has a 300mi “range” but the usable range on a road trip is realistically 200-225 miles. If the one supercharger on my route is full, broken, or throttling charge speed because it’s crowded then it adds considerable time to my trip.
Zcd1
Active Member
You missed my point, and you’re mistaken.
There are 2 completely different EPA test cycles for EVs. EV makers can run either cycle / it’s up to them to choose.
On top of that, one test cycle also has a “reduction adjustment factor” that the manufacturer can apply, AND the mfr. can decide what percentage reduction they care to apply.
All of those variables mean that it’s impossible to know how EPA-rated EV range compares from manufacturer to manufacturer unless you delve deeply into each manufacturer’s testing procedure.
That’s why EPA EV testing needs revision.
If there is a Supercharger along your path, perhaps stopping there on the way out to the airport and getting some additional range may make your round trip work without needing to drive wrong way to another Supercharge.
The problem is that it is NOT a standard since they have different methodology that the companies themselves can choose to use. Plus, EVs are new. Maybe they SHOULD work on making them more accurate. Why is there not a city/highway/mixed result? When I go to buy a Tesla, I see 507 km EPA estimated range on the website. Before owning my M3P I guess I assumed that was somewhat realistic. I've since found out it's completely bogus. Why does it not say 600 km city / 400 km highway? Why would we ever argue against making the EPA test more accurate?
I guess you are missing that I can drive almost twice as far in my ICE vehicle and weather does not impact range anywhere near as dramatically. Also there is a ridiculous number of fuel stations, so you can literally get in your car and go on a 30 hour drive without even looking at your fuel gauge when you leave because there will be a place to fill up. If that station is busy, there will be another one maybe even across the street. I love my EV and I would never go back to ICE but let's not pretend that range is not the biggest issue facing them.
That's fantastic. For you. I have far less infrastructure for charging. Every trip needs to be planned. Routes may need to be altered, and that's if the Tesla can even make the trip.
Let's stop pretending range isn't an issue. It is. It is probably the single biggest deterrent from mass adoption of EVs, followed likely by cost, although cost is coming down thanks to new vehicles on the market. I've said to many people who are really interested in my Model 3 that if the range was 50% higher there would be no better car around. But as it is, sadly the car just will not work for many people. Charging infrastructure has improved tremendously even in just the two years I have owned the car, so that will help, but more range is absolutely needed regardless of how much infrastructure there is.
Last year I needed to travel 250 km (155 miles). My car has an EPA estimated range of 507 km. Well, that day it was -25°C/-13°F and I had a 70 km/h (~45 MPH) headwind. I could not get 250 km. This is the kind of trip where I would easily get there and back home in my ICE car without even thinking about it, even if the weather was as bad as it was. Thankfully there WAS a supercharger on the way so I was able to stop but having a supercharger available is not usually an option for me. We all know this though because we own EVs. Range is impacted dramatically with weather. Prospective buyers do not know this. I did not know it would be quite so dramatic when I bought the car, but even so, the car was rated for 500+ km of range. I had heard your range can be cut in half when it is really cold, but when I bought it, I thought OK 50% of 500 km is 250 km and that will be enough for me for most of my trips. Then I got the car and it gets way way less than rated range, so that 50% now makes it impossible to take my Tesla on some trips.
Again, I love my EV and I will never buy another gas car. I've learned the issues with them. I know why the range is lower. I know how I can combat that. But please stop pretending it is not an issue.
I don't agree that range is the primary issue. The infrastructure is the issue. You said it yourself that you have to plan carefully to get to certain chargers. If you live in California, you don't really have to plan as there are chargers everywhere along the highways (and in cities). On a roadtrip, i never charge more than 60% given the charging curve slows dramatically. I just plan to haul to the next charger within the range I have left and there are numerous chargers I can get to. The car even decides for me given how fast (or inefficient) i've been driving with nav on.
The mindset of road tripping an EV is just different. Its better to just charge to 60% and drive as fast as you can to the next charger that will get you to 10-20% charge remaining. Rinse repeat. If you have a ton of infrastructure, this is the fastest and easiest way to road trip an EV.
I think range is still the primary problem for new buyers. Infrastructure would definitely help and is by far the easiest solution for now. Obviously no one has come up with a better battery than Li-Ion yet.
The lack of range is compounded by the lack of infrastructure now though which makes the pain even greater.
I don't think the range needs to be exponentially greater than it is though. Don't get me wrong here. We did a 5800 km (3600 miles) road trip this summer in our ICE car (I debated the Tesla but there were legs where I would be at the limit for distance even if I charged to 100% which takes far too long) and I found we were stopping for gas/bio breaks every 4-5 hours (didn't always need gas but I generally will fill up if I am using restrooms). If you are charging from 10-60% you are probably having to stop every 2 hours for 10 minutes or so. That's a lot of stops on a long road trip. If one charger is full or has a few stalls down you don't really have many options other than to wait for a spot, but if you had more range you could just skip a few if you had to.
On shorter trips the biggest issue I have is I generally have enough range to get where I need to go but not enough to get home again. That is compounded by the lack of infrastructure too. But trips I can easily round trip in my ICE I just can't do.
The usable range has never been an issue for me on roadtrips. There, my usable bladder size is the issue. I have to stop every 2hrs. Works great because that's usually when my Tesla needs more juice. Stop, plug in, go use toilet, get coffee, maybe a snack, walk back to charging Tesla, it's 10 to 15mins. On my 4400 mile trip from Maine to Denver and back, last year, I averaged 1h30m driving an average segment of 105 miles, and an average of 17m charging.
Average starting to charge SOC was 18%, and average finishing SOC was 61%. Lowest SOC was 13%, highest SOC I had to charge to was 76%. Longest leg 173miles, which used 65%.
Average starting to charge SOC was 18%, and average finishing SOC was 61%. Lowest SOC was 13%, highest SOC I had to charge to was 76%. Longest leg 173miles, which used 65%.
lol no kidding. and my "range" in a 3/4 ton truck on the interstate is 400-500 miles and 400+ in the Z06 I got rid of. And can grab fuel at almost any exit anywhere. it's possible to road trip in the tesla with planning and such but not ideal honestly. and the range being 2/3rds of what I thought it was makes it even worse. granted i don't road trip it a lot but even short trips 150-200 miles can make for some inconveniences.
Yes that would be the way to go. But it's about the half way point and I'd need to be able to get 190 miles from the time i charged and drove back and hit it again.
I think "Rated" uses the fixed EPA combined efficiency figure (used to convert SoC to 'range' on the top of the screen which is always wrong) EPA is always unrealistic for a real highway trip.
The projected, once you input a navigation destination, is much smarter and uses temperature, map data (elevation & speed) and maybe even weather forecast to estimate. If you drive slower or more efficiently than it originally projects it's easy to do better than projection.
If you switch to %age on the main battery icon (which you should) the energy screen units also switch. I prefer it that way as it keeps miles as being used only for real life physical miles, whereas the pseudo-miles are only a fixed number (EPA efficiency) times battery state of charge anyway.
It actually is the wheels and the tires that make the biggest difference. If it didn't, Tesla would use the more visually attractive wheels and more highly performing tires on the LR. But they don't because they want to push EPA range as far as possible. And I think the LR has a slightly higher efficiency and lower performance motor than P but that's not the main difference.
The stock Michelin MXM tires on the LR aren't particularly high performance in handling but they are more efficient than almost every other comparable tire. In the sense that I've never read of anyone changing out the MXM tire to something else and reliably getting more efficiency long term (it's almost always the other way). If they could, Tesla would be using that tire as stock for the LR probably.
Maybe now with EV specific tires, there might be something better, as they've moved to the Pirelli Elect tire for the P now.
The P wheels and tires are better for cornering performance and worse for efficiency.
I agree. In this sense, WLTP is a better measurement procedure, but it's consistently optimistic.
EPA also considers charging losses (presumably L2 not L3 supercharger) which is another confusing difference.
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
When I was running 20s on my M3P, I'd get 340 wh/mi. I switched to 18s and i've been averaging around 295 wh/mi. Both PS4S tires. Wheel size makes a pretty big difference.
Similar threads
