I have a 2020 Model S tie 30,759 miles.....I have been averaging around 248Wh/mi until two revisions ago....Then it shot up to ~315Wh/mi......I think Tesla is doing dirty things in the background we dont know about....There has been a lot of press lately about efficiency and range and that Tesla is lying about "true" numbers......I believe it because of my tracking and now all of a sudden a sudden increase in usage and rang reductions......I also have never seen over 140kW while charging on a V3 supercharger with a completely warm battery.....It takes over 45 min to charge from ~20 SOC to 85% SOC.....Always been this way...But car runs great.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
The efficiency has been mostly the same through out the revisions for me, as I watch the number religiously. My 22 S has overall efficiency of 230wh/mi for 28k miles - but the last 18k miles averaged 214 wh/mi. I've been slowwwwly bringing that number down, 1 wh/mi at a time. My last # change was about 2 weeks ago - from 231 to 230 wh/mi. I would've noticed if Tesla changed the algorithm.
Now it is true that w/ the freezing winter storms or rainy weather, my regular driving habits even at best produces 250 ish wh/mi for the day. However, as soon as the temperature rises, I am getting my low 200s wh/mi (or even sub 200 wh/mi) back again.
ChiefRollo
Member
Why would Tesla do that dirty thing…to make your energy per mile higher / it look worse for Tesla?
Of all the factors that may have contributed to your perceived change, you went straight to Tesla being dirty. If I didn’t know any better, I would have credited your great intuition. Knowing you’re a proud consumer of FUD news, I have to give it to the media; they do know what they’re doing. It works!
Took delivery in OH 2012 and moved to MI 2021. I have a heavy foot...lol. 350wh/mile summer and 450wh/mile winter. I've lost my trip data multiple times so can't give a lifetime average. I have over 140k driven.
seenhear
Member
Recently had my MCU and AP computer upgraded, during which they wiped all my trip computer memories. So my lifetime Wh/mi is gone (was using "trip b" as the life time). Is there a different/better way to bring up lifetime consumption data?
I knew my lifetime data was going to be lost when the MCU was upgraded so I took a picture of it at the service center before turning it over to get upgraded. Unfortunately once the MCU is changed, all the old data is lost.
I don't know what's involved in that sort of MCU upgrade. They may not replace the storage module. With MCU1-MCU2 they replace the entire computer including all storage.
Miles per kWh akin to miles per gallon, used in the Leaf and Bolt and probably most other EVs makes a ton more sense given that most of us grew up with MPG and not liters per 100km.I clearly misunderstood the measurements and was going for the high score. No wonder I have to charge all the time!
It would be trivial # of lines of code to just give users the option for either like F or C for temperature.
Yeah I know what you mean, I do it in my head all the time anyway. 333 kwh/mi = 3 mi/kwh, 250 kwh/mi = 4 mi/kwh, and anything below 200 kwh/mi is basically 5+ mi/kwh.
Someone is going to point this out, I think you mean 333 wh/mi and 250 wh/mi. 250 Kwh/mi would be .004 Mi/Kwh.
Another conversion is to take the Mi/Kwh and multiply by 33 Kwh/Gal to get the equivalent mpg. Gasoline varies from about 33-34 Kwh/Gal. You can also calculate the Mi/Kwh for gasoline cars by dividing the mpg by 33. Trucks don't look so attractive when they get around 1/2 Mi/kwh.
seenhear
Member
I agree that mpg is more intuitive for Americans. But in my own geeky way I like W*h/mi because the units reduce to force. It's basically a representation of total drag force at whatever speed you're going.
Watts = F*d/t
Watt*hours = F*d
Wh / miles ~ F*d / d = Force.
You'd need some constants of conversion mixed in there, if you wanted meaningful force units. But it's basically force.
EDIT: and MPG also reduces down to units of 1/Force once you convert gallons of gas to a quantity of energy (e.g. Joules).
TomServo
Active Member
I agree but when I want this data the formula is simple: divide 1000 by your wh/mi = mi/kWh. My car looks like this my Lifetime (trip B) is 276 wh/mi which equals 3.62 miles per kWh.
I've averaged just under 400W/mile in my P85D. This has been over winter in the UK, and reflects the use of in-car heater (Wish I was in California, but sadly in the UK!)/ I think it will be more like 350W/mile during the summer weather.
Here is the work performed with the Tesla part numbers. Maybe someone can offer part numbers for the upgrade that cause data loss, but these parts did not cause data loss for me:
I haven't seen the MCU's, but this is an educated guess. The MCU has what is essentially a hard drive storage on it. It's not a spinning disk, but is an SSD technology. I expect that the early versions of the MCU had this storage soldered onto the MCU motherboard and removing it would run the risk of damage.
I would not be surprised if they changed this to a removable storage. Possibly even going with a commercially available SSD mounted on the MCU board. The processor for MCU 1 was an Nvidia processor and all the processors post MCU 1 are Intel and probably similar to one another if not the same. Popping a removable SSD off the old MCU and placing it on the new one would be easy to do in that case.
But changing processors, even if the SSD could be easily moved would require a fair bit of work replacing the drivers for the different processor and there may be other code issues that would take someone with a fair bit of computing skills to fix. So it's simpler just to tell people upgrading from MCU 1 that they will lose all their information and settings, but other upgrades can be done without losing data.
I don't know for sure, but this is my guess from being an Electronic Engineer and having built PCs since 1987. I'm just making some guesses about how the black box works.
I have just over 150,000 on my 2016 90D. I have averaged 287 Wh/mile. My battery has started to show signs of problems over the last few weeks but nothing that has stranded me yet. The battery held about 80 kWh for the last 5 years or so and in the last month it has dropped below 70 kWh. Not sure if it means anything.
Similar threads
- Locked
