Is Model X's efficiency really this bad?

[wk057]

Lots of data here. Thanks!

Yes, I now have the 22" wheels, but I previously did trips with the 20" wheels with minimal difference in efficiency (life average is 431 Wh/mi, mostly on the 20").

I realize the 100 is heavier, but that's supposedly taken into account by the higher rated Wh/mi of 342.

Overall, I'm certainly disappointed in the range of my X on trips. Even with the 100 pack I can't go as far driving conservatively as my S P85D could without any real effort.

P and non-P data isn't really comparable however, since the motors are completely different (non-P motors are more efficient)... but good to know that if I wanted I could probably put a small drive unit in the rear of my car and get a ton better efficiency based on the numbers in this thread...

 

[X Fan]

Another plug for Teslafi:

printout from part of my trip:

 

[CmdrThor]

My lifetime consumption on our X90D w/20" wheels is 338Wh/mi, and that includes some towing. On highway trips, I seem to hit around 340-350Wh/mi depending on speed.

It's a bit of a hungry beast.

This confirms @ohmman truly is a Grandpa to achieve such efficiency on an X90D. My lifetime average is 368 Wh/mi over 21,000+ miles. Only about 400 miles of towing.

 

[ohmman]

This confirms @ohmman truly is a Grandpa to achieve such efficiency on an X90D. My lifetime average is 368 Wh/mi over 21,000+ miles. Only about 400 miles of towing.

A huge part of it has to do with living in a town that has maximum speed limits in the 35-45mph range on all but one small stretch of roadway. My P85 Model S has a lifetime at 298Wh/mi and I definitely take advantage of the "P". Having most of my miles in low traffic, 45-mph driving speeds really, really helps. And I do enjoy playing low consumption games from time to time.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Yes, the Model X is an electron guzzler. Welcome to the world of SUVs. Oh, and use EV Trip Planner - the Tesla trip planner is worse than useless. Among other things, it doesn't take into account headwinds, which can easily drain the battery quickly. I try to give myself 50% margin on long trips. 25% if I'm feeling lucky. 15% is leaves no margin for unexpected stuff (like headwinds or a downed Supercharger).

I've got a P90D, and I thought the Model X getting a 5 kWh boost from the S 85 was a joke for such a bigger car. 100 is barely OK if you do long trips.

 

[cantdecide]

A huge part of it has to do with living in a town that has maximum speed limits in the 35-45mph range on all but one small stretch of roadway. My P85 Model S has a lifetime at 298Wh/mi and I definitely take advantage of the "P". Having most of my miles in low traffic, 45-mph driving speeds really, really helps. And I do enjoy playing low consumption games from time to time.

Yep... My X75D lifetime has now crept up to 306wh/m instead of 300wh/m due to Winter, 3 ski trips, etc.
My commute is 18 minutes, no traffic lights, and no speed limit over 35mph... Which gives good milage. Going to work today I got 24wh/m and coming home 500wh/m (elevation difference is significant). In summer I hope to meet regenerate going to work
Our S P85 has lifetime 293wh/m...
Interestingly in winter the two cars with the same ski trips has had the same usage of about 330wh/m.

 

[goneskiian]

Lots of data here. Thanks!

Yes, I now have the 22" wheels, but I previously did trips with the 20" wheels with minimal difference in efficiency (life average is 431 Wh/mi, mostly on the 20").

I realize the 100 is heavier, but that's supposedly taken into account by the higher rated Wh/mi of 342.

Overall, I'm certainly disappointed in the range of my X on trips. Even with the 100 pack I can't go as far driving conservatively as my S P85D could without any real effort.

P and non-P data isn't really comparable however, since the motors are completely different (non-P motors are more efficient)... but good to know that if I wanted I could probably put a small drive unit in the rear of my car and get a ton better efficiency based on the numbers in this thread...

That's still way high for the 20" wheels/tires. I wonder if they'll find anything. Then again I'm showing you're one of 11 out of 65 20" wheel entries that are 400 or higher. You are the second highest though. Although, I'm sure that trip on 22's bumped the average up nicely. If you tracked your 20" wheel average separately I'd be happy to make a separate entry for you.

Cheers!

 

[animorph]

I tried to get some of my first data today, but traffic didn't cooperate. 80 miles, nearly all freeway, trying to go 72 MPH but averaged only 46.6 MPH for the entire trip, including a few stoplights. I averaged 304 Wh/mile. EVTO says it should have been 360 Wh/mile, without traffic I assume. Nice to know I can do that well, but not much of a comparison against the trip planner or the data here.

 

[gjunky]

335 wH/mile, X90D, 20" wheels over 12,000 miles. One full AZ summer with lots of pre-cooling and driving with the rear-ac and ventialted seats on. The power consumption has been going down to the 335 number steadily during our very mild "winter". The highest I have seen was when the car was about a month or two old, in the middle of the summer, at about 420wh/mile

 

[hiroshiy]

I think tires also cause significant power consumption in addition to wheel sizes, temp and average speed. In recent trip with 19 inch Blizzak tires I got 211Wh/km or 337Wh/m with my X P100D at around 60mph average. Just changed back to 20 inch Michelin summer tires so I will send more data once I had a chance to drive long distance.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Something else I've seen that makes a difference is how flat is the area you are driving in. Here in north county San Diego, where you can't go 2 miles without going up or down an incline or hill, you burn up a lot more energy.

 

[ShadowR55]

I noticed my wife got very quiet during this time, and she would regularly glance over at the trip display.

This is interesting - if someone could make an app to modify the trip display to show very low range on command...... we might be on to something BIG.

 

[Blup85]

I'm a little confused. Does phantom drain get added to your watt/m calc? We drive the MS almost every day, it seems to loose a couple miles a day, and my winter watt/mile is 10-15% higher than summer. We also have it polled constantly "Always connected". What the app really needs is the option to turn off "always connected", so when you leave your car at the airport you can put it to sleep and save electrons.

 

[hiroshiy]

I'm a little confused. Does phantom drain get added to your watt/m calc? We drive the MS almost every day, it seems to loose a couple miles a day, and my winter watt/mile is 10-15% higher than summer. We also have it polled constantly "Always connected". What the app really needs is the option to turn off "always connected", so when you leave your car at the airport you can put it to sleep and save electrons.

You can turn it off and you'll see slightly longer app connection time, but that's it. I kept it turned off, my car sleeps the whole night.

 

[BizJet]

Temperature and trip distance have a dramatic effect on efficiency in Model X. Here is my current chart of energy consumption vs. temperature on my X 90D for different drive distances over 18,000 miles in New England (hilly, but not mountainous) -- 339 Wh/mile lifetime. Note that rated efficiency is consistently attained between 55 and low 80's F, but blows up rapidly outside that range:

 

[Saghost]

Temperature and trip distance have a dramatic effect on efficiency in Model X. Here is my current chart of energy consumption vs. temperature on my X 90D for different drive distances over 18,000 miles in New England (hilly, but not mountainous) -- 339 Wh/mile lifetime. Note that rated efficiency is consistently attained between 55 and low 80's F, but blows up rapidly outside that range:
View attachment 219886

Given how much energy goes into the initial heating and cooling, I'm surprised there isn't a bigger effect from trip length here (though really it'd be the 25-50 and 50+ and 100+ (not plotted) categories that I'd expect to see the most effect.)

 

[Gwgan]

Improvements in pack heating efficiency would help if there is some head room above the thermodynamic limits with current tech. What is known about the pack heater? Is the new 100kWh cooling tech more efficient?

 

[BizJet]

Given how much energy goes into the initial heating and cooling, I'm surprised there isn't a bigger effect from trip length here (though really it'd be the 25-50 and 50+ and 100+ (not plotted) categories that I'd expect to see the most effect.)

I agree, and TeslaFi (the source of this logging data for my car) doesn't chart data for the intervals (I.e. Instead of "1-5 miles" one can only get "over 1 mile", so the long drives get averaged into the "over 1 mile" trips). I've put interval plotting in as a feature request.

 

[ohmman]

Temperature and trip distance have a dramatic effect on efficiency in Model X.

Do you by chance have the "loud" AC compressor issue? It doesn't look like it based on your consumption, but I know that when I had the swapped compressor lines in my AC, consumption was through the roof while cooling the cabin.

 

[spaceballs]

I would check tires aligment/camber, also maybe some brake dragging.