TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

Latest Edmunds long term Model 3 update: not good

Discussion in 'Model 3' started by bro1999, May 21, 2018.

  1. bro1999

    bro1999 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2016
    Messages:
    1,775
    Location:
    Maryland
    • Helpful x 1
    • Informative x 1
    • Funny x 1
  2. seattlite2004

    seattlite2004 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    720
    Location:
    Puget Sound
    Great explaination on their consumption data in the comments section:

    I need to clarify a few points about our data.
    Average Energy (Wh/mi) is -- the meter readout in the car itself. We record the "since last chaerge" value each time we plug in. Average energy is the car reporting the rate at which it consumes electricity from the battery. Our average "Average Energy" reading is 254.4 Wh/mi. This is not a weighted average, which just added them up and divided by how many readings we had.

    Lifetime Average Consumption (kWh/100) is fundamentally different in a way that explains why it is significantly higher (worse) than Average Energy. The unit here is kWh used per 100 miles driven, which is the standard used by the EPA for rating the consumption of electric cars and PHEV. But the difference is more than just the decimal point shift brough about by multiplying by 100 miles and dividing by 1000 watts to alter the unit. This measurement is based on the actual amount of electricity needed to REPLACE the electricity the car used. It is measured at the power panel upstream of the charge station -- which is the same as the number of kWh you get charged for on your electric bill.

    This is crucual. Charging a battery generates heat. On-board battery cooling systems must be run to control it, and the energy required to run those systems is part of the metered inflow. There's resistance in the charge cord, too - you've felt them get hot, right? That's more energy lost. The total of these losses varies from charge station to charge station, but we've owned about a dozen EVs (three of the Tesla products, and we can say that charging losses can range between 20 to 30 PERCENT. 25% is typical. It's like spilling 2 or 3 gallons of gas on the ground (and paying for it) for every 10 gallons that makes it into the tank. So if you're a Tesla owner and you think the Average Energy reading describes your car's consumption, think again. Your're low by 25%.

    Now, the EPA knows that all of this rightly counts charging losses as vehicle consumption, and their rating of 27 kWh/100 miles does include such losses. The data for range and comes from Tesla-conducted tests and Tesla-submitted documents that the EPA reviews. That's the way it goes with most cars, EV or not.

    So if you take our average "Average Energy of 254.4 Wh/mi and tweak it into kWh/100, you get 25.4. Next, let's add a 25% charging loss onto that by multiplying by 125%. Care to guess the result? It's 31.75 kWh/100, a near-exact match of our Lifetime Average Consumption number that was generated by measuring electricity flow through the HPWC. (31.7 was indeed the real number - the 33.6 that was published was a typo based on incomplete data entry in our calculation spreadsheet)

    So our 254.4 Wh/Mi Average energy equals 31.7 kWh/100 after you add in 25% for charging losses. You need to do that with your own Wh/mi readouts to get to a number that approximates how much electricity you are buying when you refill your car.

    But none of this explains why our average is so far off the Model 3's 27 kWh/100 rating. I have a hard time with this, but it follows a pattern established by our Model S and Model X test cars because they fell short of their ratings, too. On the other hand, other EVs (just about ALL other EVs, I might add) have proven to be very accurately rated and even conservatively rated. I've easily beaten the range and consumption ratings of the Bolt, the Volt, the 2nd-gen Leaf, the eGolf, the BMW i3, the Fiat 500e, the Spark EV -- I could go on. I have driven 70 miles on a Volt (rated at 53) and 334 miles on a Bolt (rated at 238 miles.) But I have never even matched a Tesla rating using the same driving techniques. I'm not saying I can't, but it's not as easy. Just look at the Leaf and the Bolt LT data. Both are currently beating their ratings, and both are being driven by the same crew of Edmunds staffers.

    How do we get our kWh data for our EVs? The non-Tesla's use our chargepoint station, which has a factory-installed meter. But the Telsa is filled with our own private Tesla HPWC, which is not a metered device like our Chargepoint station. To recitfy this we have had a meter installed by a certified commercial electrician, and it is a "revenue grade" meter that is tamper proof. Our drivers record the before and after kWh readings (the meter can't be rezeroed 'cause its revenue grade) when they plug in and unplug, and we subtract one from the other to determine the amount of electricity that was dispensed to refill the battery after the car was driven a known number of miles. ​
     
    • Helpful x 4
  3. igotzzoom

    igotzzoom Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,200
    Location:
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Travis Langness in particular seems to have an axe to grind. Still haven't pulled the trigger on my reservation...
     
  4. jamnmon66

    jamnmon66 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2018
    Messages:
    381
    Location:
    Brighton, CO
    Even if the car is 25% less efficient than stated, it will still cost me around $300/year to go 12,000 miles in my Model 3 at the $0.06/kwh that I pay to charge off-peak. I've averaged well over $2500/year in fuel for the past several years for about that mileage in my Jeep.

    ... and I'm not suffering in a boring, ugly Prius or Leaf to save the planet. This is by far the most fun car I've ever owned.
     
    • Like x 9
    • Love x 2
  5. JohnSnowNW

    JohnSnowNW Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2015
    Messages:
    2,185
    Location:
    Minnesota
    • Informative x 7
  6. Msjulie

    Msjulie Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2016
    Messages:
    1,314
    Location:
    San Fran Bay Area
    My takeaway is quality consistency - I have nearly 6k miles and nothing is falling off my car. My screen is fine, car drives when I put it in D or R. It is comfortable, quick, quiet until pretty elevated highway speeds and the sound system is really pretty great.

    I have seen some behaviors I attribute to software bugs, they are nearly impossible to reproduce and seem to be disappearing one by one when I get a software update. I'll admit to not looking into energy usage that close, something I'll check tomorrow.

    My car is a relatively early example, VIN in the low 4xxx FWIW
     
    • Like x 5
    • Helpful x 1
    • Informative x 1
  7. SageBrush

    SageBrush 2018: Drain the Sewer

    Joined:
    May 7, 2015
    Messages:
    6,758
    Location:
    Colorado
    #7 SageBrush, May 21, 2018
    Last edited: May 21, 2018
    The magazine is wrong, there is not a 25% charging loss.
    The two places to look for additional energy consumption are
    1. car consumption at rest (call them vampire losses). Tesla expects these losses to be about 1% a day, or up to 800 Wh a day for the LR Model 3.
    2. Pre-conditioning the car with heating or cooling. My money would be here.

    OP: I take it you are still banned on your home turf over at the GM website ?
     
    • Like x 6
  8. gene

    gene Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,703
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Those of you, me included, with Model 3's should comment on your experience with your car on the Edmunds article. I have done so. Please do as well.
     
    • Like x 1
  9. dethman

    dethman Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2018
    Messages:
    442
    Location:
    socal
    • Like x 1
  10. Visscher

    Visscher Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2016
    Messages:
    106
    Location:
    bc
    I find it amusing that you can get a long-term review already on a 2016 or 2017 or even 2018 vehicle. Those years can only produce short-term reviews. Or current reviews?
     
    • Like x 3
  11. Unpilot

    Unpilot Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,742
    Location:
    Illinois
    Yeah long term review seems a stretch to say the least.
     
  12. Regenshire

    Regenshire Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2016
    Messages:
    40
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Sounds like they have the phantom screen touch issue where the screen is registering touches when there are none. Most of the issues they describe are with weird software stuff happening. I think they need the touch screen replaced. That's my hunch.
     
    • Like x 1
  13. Daniel in SD

    Daniel in SD Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2018
    Messages:
    1,503
    Location:
    San Diego
    I’m not sure what’s confusing about the energy consumption. Teslas have always had ridiculous vampire drain and as far as I know that is not included in the EPA test. Obviously it should be. It’s too bad because the Model 3 is extraordinarily efficient otherwise.
     
  14. DanH

    DanH Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2017
    Messages:
    109
    Location:
    CA
    Got my TM3 for 3+ weeks now and the experience has been excellent so far. Actually, I love it! I got use to the door handle pretty quickly. As for the touch screen, It’s not an issue for at all. If you’re navigating deep into the menus while driving, of course it’s not recommended and it can be a distraction. Just set your profile once and forget it. Most of the functions that I do while driving are through voice commands and using the two scroll wheels.
    As for the fit and finish are fine, i didn’t detect any problems. My VIN is in the 15xx.
     
    • Like x 4
  15. cwerdna

    cwerdna Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    Messages:
    2,064
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA
    For whatever reason, it looks like they didn't keep their '11 Leaf for long: 2011 Nissan Leaf Long Term Road Test - Wrap-Up. They only had for 6 months and the odometer ended at 3,551 miles. '11 was Leaf's 1st model year.
    They do have an '18 Leaf in their "long-term" fleet now. Hope they keep it for longer.
     
  16. gene

    gene Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,703
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, CA
    I am pleased to hear you are happy with your Model 3. You can help others in the larger world beyond TMC understand this by sharing your experience in the comments section of the actual article on Edmunds:
    Monthly Update for April 2018 - 2017 Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test
     
  17. seattlite2004

    seattlite2004 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    720
    Location:
    Puget Sound
    @SageBrush ... which GM website? I'd like to read up on the FUD with the Bolts.
     
  18. cwerdna

    cwerdna Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    Messages:
    2,064
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA
    I hadn't been following Edmunds's long term Model 3 and untll now, had only seen the intro and 1 of their videos.

    Monthly Update for January 2018 - 2017 Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test notes some probs and 1 thing they broke that was their fault.
    Monthly Update for February 2018 - 2017 Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test didn't note any probs other than their touchscreen blacking out and annoyance w/service.
    Monthly Update for March 2018 - 2017 Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test was when they got repairs done.
     
  19. SageBrush

    SageBrush 2018: Drain the Sewer

    Joined:
    May 7, 2015
    Messages:
    6,758
    Location:
    Colorado
    Don't bother. He is a Bolt owner and well-known Tesla troll there. They happily tolerated his Tesla trolling but he was banned after a few choice interactions with the moderators.
     
    • Informative x 1
  20. alseTrick

    alseTrick Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2016
    Messages:
    1,582
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    That's what stood out to me. That is a glaring inaccuracy.
     

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.
  • Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


    SUPPORT TMC