Just finished my first "road trip" and I am not happy with range

[Rogue Synapse]

Probably not applicable to a SC, but if you ever find yourself needing that charge on a non-SC. Get out, lock up and walk around so that all available power will go into the battery. If I sit in the car and watch it charge in cold weather, a lot of power is being used to keep the car running. This is a 32A Level 2. Literally it drops to 0 mi/hr when I get in during a charge session. If I turn off the car and walk away, I get 20-22 miles an hour.

I have found that if I turn off climate control (in cold or hot weather), the charging rate on a 32A charger typically goes back up to full speed while I’m still in the car.

 

[pt19713]

They include charging loss in their consumption numbers:
"After a vehicle completes its road loop and the battery is nearly empty, it's charged back to full capacity. The kilowatt-hours used from plug-in to a full charge are tracked and then we calculate the consumption based on the miles traveled (less the remaining range). This process takes into account charging losses in the Edmunds tested consumption number."

Their test is a 60/40 split between city and highway. The performance models probably suffer from this more as the heavier weight and rolling resistance would be worse due to the tire combos. They have AC set to 72 degrees, so the temps will affect AC usage also.

Even with charging losses, those numbers are excessive. I doubt they're doing it at 15A, which is where you'll see the bigger losses. At 48A, I'm seeing typically 1-2% loss from the grid to the car.

 

[mk677]

This barely counted as a road-trip as I was just going from the SW Chicago suburbs to see my daughter in Urbana. The trip was 143 miles each way and thought I would get down there with about half charge since I started with 322 miles at 100% SOC to start. I averaged about 69MPH and and I had the heat set to 68 degrees with the outside temp at 34 degrees.

Instead of getting there with about 50% charge left, or even 39% as one estimate had it. I got there with about 40 miles of range listed. And the stats from TeslaFi are:

143.74 Miles Driven
274.76 Rated Miles Used
52.3% Efficiency.

This is bothersome to say the least. I do not see how I can really use this for any real trips.

Anyone else see poor efficiency from their MY?

try not to use the heating, I will warm the cabin then rely on the seat heater to stay warm, range will be a lot better without the heater.

 

[pt19713]

try not to use the heating, I will warm the cabin then rely on the seat heater to stay warm, range will be a lot better without the heater.

FY the heater at lower fan speeds and moderate temps doesn't draw much energy, about 500 watts. This is about 3-4 miles of range on a two hour drive. Not worth freezing your butt off for that little range loss.

 

[djgarrett21]

~400Wh/mi is pretty low for the conditions you were driving (going by your TeslaFi data). I average ~300-350 Wh/mi on road trips and I don't drive slow, usually at least 75mph+. I'd say try upping the tire pressure to 45 and that may make up a little.

For comparison, here is a similar drive that is typical of conditions for me on road trips.

 

[Gasaraki]

They include charging loss in their consumption numbers:
"After a vehicle completes its road loop and the battery is nearly empty, it's charged back to full capacity. The kilowatt-hours used from plug-in to a full charge are tracked and then we calculate the consumption based on the miles traveled (less the remaining range). This process takes into account charging losses in the Edmunds tested consumption number."

Their test is a 60/40 split between city and highway. The performance models probably suffer from this more as the heavier weight and rolling resistance would be worse due to the tire combos. They have AC set to 72 degrees, so the temps will affect AC usage also.

Wut? Why would you put in charging loses for a RANGE TEST? Nobody is asking them for a "how much it's costing me test".

 

[djgarrett21]

Wut? Why would you put in charging loses for a RANGE TEST? Nobody is asking them for a "how much it's costing me test".

I think what they are saying is that in order to calculate consumption (Wh/mi) they use the charger to track how much energy they put into the car, subtract out the charging losses, and then divide by distance to come up with their efficiency numbers.

 

[pt19713]

Wut? Why would you put in charging loses for a RANGE TEST? Nobody is asking them for a "how much it's costing me test".

One thing I've noticed with Edmund articles is that they tend to skew the information and data as much as possible, generally anti-Tesla.
Their article comparing the ER AWD Mach-E to LR AWD Y will and they'll quickly add some information referencing the range on the Model Y Performance (which obviously has less range than the LR Y and has no relevance to the comparison. Their math doesn't add up, either, which is why I don't believe their numbers are remotely accurate.

 

[DanDi58]

They include charging loss in their consumption numbers:
"After a vehicle completes its road loop and the battery is nearly empty, it's charged back to full capacity. The kilowatt-hours used from plug-in to a full charge are tracked and then we calculate the consumption based on the miles traveled (less the remaining range). This process takes into account charging losses in the Edmunds tested consumption number."

Their test is a 60/40 split between city and highway. The performance models probably suffer from this more as the heavier weight and rolling resistance would be worse due to the tire combos. They have AC set to 72 degrees, so the temps will affect AC usage also.

I thought I read in another thread that Edmunds doesn't charge to 100% to start, only 90%. If that's the case, they should charge to where they started, not start at 90% then charge to 100%, it seems to me.

 

[Bednarz42]

Just got back from a road trip to Vermont from Jersey. I had a thule motion XT on the racks and the range loss was pretty significant...

Actual real world range was about 175 miles on a full charge.

 

[mk677]

Just got back from a road trip to Vermont from Jersey. I had a thule motion XT on the racks and the range loss was pretty significant...

Actual real world range was about 175 miles on a full charge.

the roof rack, using the heater and the elevation changes along with speed all conspire to hurt your range.
83 MPH will always eat more range, slow down

 

[Bednarz42]

the roof rack, using the heater and the elevation changes along with speed all conspire to hurt your range.
83 MPH will always eat more range, slow down

83 was max, I drove the entire way on the NY state thruway. Avg speed was 62 mph.

Mainly just posting it so others have an idea of what to expect in the northeast. The Tesla trip planner can be deceiving, it should include some options to customize your estimates. Like expected temperature, and towing or roof rack options. I wasn't expecting even close to full range, but losing about 45% of your rated range is pretty significant.

 

[djgarrett21]

You won't see much better with a hitch mount rack either. I got ~400 Wh/mi with mine attached driving 70 mph.

 

[mk677]

83 was max, I drove the entire way on the NY state thruway. Avg speed was 62 mph.

Mainly just posting it so others have an idea of what to expect in the northeast. The Tesla trip planner can be deceiving, it should include some options to customize your estimates. Like expected temperature, and towing or roof rack options. I wasn't expecting even close to full range, but losing about 45% of your rated range is pretty significant.

like I noted, there are many factors as to the reason for your poor range. if you keep the speeds around 70 and didn't have the roof rack your range loss wouldn't have been so severe