Lifetime Average Wh/mi

[Peter Lucas]

I have a message from Tesla service which states that to get the "rated" range on my 2016 Model S 90D I would need to consume 277 wh/mile. My occassionally "spirited" driving style has resulted in a long term average of 353 wh/mile. Under ideal conditions and modest driving, I once got it down to 307 wh/mile over a 200 mile trip. 277 wh/mile is not achievable with anything that would be called typical driving under mixed conditions.
Tesla's displayed and advertised "rated range" qualifies for the definition of "false advertising". That and the 15% degraded battery are the only two things which I dislike about the car.

 

[Peter Lucas]

43,000 miles, 13,194 KW used, equals 307 Wh/mi here in Florida, 2014 Model S, now 4 years, 9 months old (57 months). Battery now only charges to 260 miles (new was 265 mi) and the 80% daily charges now only goes to 230 (new was 240), but like all batteries, they have a declining life.

And your battery may be degraded more than displayed range would suggest. My cars displayed range is within a few miles of when it was new. But the "90" kwh battery only has 72 useable kwh.

 

[TMThree]

I have a message from Tesla service which states that to get the "rated" range on my 2016 Model S 90D I would need to consume 277 wh/mile. My occassionally "spirited" driving style has resulted in a long term average of 353 wh/mile. Under ideal conditions and modest driving, I once got it down to 307 wh/mile over a 200 mile trip. 277 wh/mile is not achievable with anything that would be called typical driving under mixed conditions.
Tesla's displayed and advertised "rated range" qualifies for the definition of "false advertising". That and the 15% degraded battery are the only two things which I dislike about the car.

My LR RWD Model 3 is rated at 325 miles. So 75 kwh battery / 325 miles = 230 Wh.

My lifetime average is 250 Wh.

It's like this for all of the cars. The rating is based on the EPA test cycle, and this isn't unique to Tesla. Gas cars these days are designed for that track, and real life numbers aren't going to match.

That said, you can easily go under the rated number if you stay off the highway. Stop and go city traffic is king for an EV. Or anytime you're cruising under 50 mph should work wonders

 

[gene]

LR, RWD Model 3 with 16k miles at 219 kW/mi.

 

[ran349]

I have a message from Tesla service which states that to get the "rated" range on my 2016 Model S 90D I would need to consume 277 wh/mile. My occassionally "spirited" driving style has resulted in a long term average of 353 wh/mile. Under ideal conditions and modest driving, I once got it down to 307 wh/mile over a 200 mile trip. 277 wh/mile is not achievable with anything that would be called typical driving under mixed conditions.
Tesla's displayed and advertised "rated range" qualifies for the definition of "false advertising". That and the 15% degraded battery are the only two things which I dislike about the car.

That is interesting that Tesla would say that. I would ask a followup question to them; "If that is true, why does the energy graph indicate rated miles are achieved at 290 Wh/mi.?"
It is very easy to show that is the case, because the projected remaining miles will match battery remaining rated miles when your driving average lines up with the rated line on the energy graph.
It is also easy to validate their claim of 277 Wh/mi. After a fairly long continuous drive, just take kWh used divided by rated miles consumed for that drive.

 

[Sparrow]

This is my 2018 MX 100D. All suburban driving, almost no AP usage. To be fair I did have a lifetime number of 239 Wh/mi for my original MS P85.

 

[wdolson]

wk057 (Jason Hughs) who was one of the first people to take apart a Tesla battery pack and has done a lot of deep dives into the firmware, said recently in another thread that the MCU is poor at accurately recording energy used when the energy being expended or stored is small. I believe he said it could be off in either direction. So a lot of driving when the energy expenditure or capture is close to zero will result in inaccurate results.

I sort of play a game trying to get my wh/mi down as low as possible going down our hill. Typical is around 100 wh/mi, but I managed 65 the other day. Much of the way down I'm either coasting with the energy meter near zero, or slightly green, about 2/3 of the trip is a shallow grade where I can be around the speed limit coasting with zero energy expenditure.

I've wondered how my expenditure can vary so much. Sometimes it's explainable, like yesterday I was 115 at the bottom of the hill, but had to stop somewhat unexpectedly for some golf carts that wanted to cross the road. I've also noticed that when the temps are in the 70sF is when I get the best wh/mi, probably due to the batteries being warm enough at start and not too warm to need cooling. I think some of the variability beyond that is the inaccuracy of the data gathering at low energy usage.

 

[Tony8489]

342 Wh/mi over 38 months and 44,817 miles we had our S90D.

 

[Mensrea]

I'm at 364Wh/mi over the course of 27k miles in my P90D.

 

[bigbear]

306wh/mi over 8k miles in my 2012 model s with 85k miles.

 

[wdolson]

It is interesting how much lifetime energy usage can vary from one car to another. Driving style, climate, types of wheels, tires, motor arrangement, and probably other factors all weigh in.

I get pretty close to rated Wh/Mi and sometimes beat it during spring and summer and can get rated Wh/Mi or slightly higher (less than 300) with moderate use of the A/C. A few weeks ago we had some very hot days and I had some heavy use of the A/C. I saw the Wh/Mi shoot up on those days. People in hotter climates probably see higher Wh/Mi because they are using much more A/C than in the milder climes up north.

 

[Brass Guy]

People in hotter climates probably see higher Wh/Mi because they are using much more A/C than in the milder climes up north.

Sure, as long as you're talking summer months. Heat uses much more energy than A/C.
I'm at 289 wh/m over 146+k miles.

I keep it low in the winter by pre-heating, and using range mode to alleviate battery heating while driving. This time of year when it's not too hot and I'm not on the freeway I put the windows partway down instead of using A/C.

My wh/m has decreased since replacing my front rotors. They were definitely not true and causing some drag. I drove well over 100 miles yesterday and averaged 250 wh/m for the day!

 

[wdolson]

Sure, as long as you're talking summer months. Heat uses much more energy than A/C.
I'm at 289 wh/m over 146+k miles.

I keep it low in the winter by pre-heating, and using range mode to alleviate battery heating while driving. This time of year when it's not too hot and I'm not on the freeway I put the windows partway down instead of using A/C.

My wh/m has decreased since replacing my front rotors. They were definitely not true and causing some drag. I drove well over 100 miles yesterday and averaged 250 wh/m for the day!

We also have milder winters (most days in the 40s F) here than you do, but my energy usage definitely goes up in the winter. My lifetime average is 304, and it was a lot higher the first year. 270 Wh/Mi roundtrip is about the best I've ever seen.

 

[DJRas]

My average is 317 in 2014 S 85.
But, my range has been seriously impacted by the 2019.16.1.1 and 16.2 updates. Prior to May 15 my full rated range was 247 today it is 217.
Tesla has "tested" my battey and claims it is "normal" degradation.
I also determined that the rated range constant is now 276 Wh / mile as opposed to the original EPA 295 Wh / mile.
I don't have enough data to pinpoint WHEN that change took place. But I know it did.
I know all battery pack varieties have different constants and varying degrees of degradation.

 

[jerry33]

 

[wdolson]

My average is 317 in 2014 S 85.
But, my range has been seriously impacted by the 2019.16.1.1 and 16.2 updates. Prior to May 15 my full rated range was 247 today it is 217.
Tesla has "tested" my battey and claims it is "normal" degradation.
I also determined that the rated range constant is now 276 Wh / mile as opposed to the original EPA 295 Wh / mile.
I don't have enough data to pinpoint WHEN that change took place. But I know it did.
I know all battery pack varieties have different constants and varying degrees of degradation.

Why would they change it for original 85s and not 90Ds? My rated range didn't change at all with the update.

My guess is that the test installed with the update tested the cells for some previously unknown failure mode and any cells found to be failing that way were disabled, which accounts for the drop in range for some cars, but not others. If you can show that every car of a particular pack had a drop in range equivalent to what you saw, then you might be right, but so far the people who saw a drop in range and those who didn't have been scattershot as far as I can tell.

 

[Peter Lucas]

View attachment 427828

Single motor car, no doubt. (Or some other very unusual driving pattern.)
Most of the folks with a dual motor Model S get long range average energy consumption in the low to mid 300's.

 

[jerry33]

Single motor car, no doubt. (Or some other very unusual driving pattern.)
Most of the folks with a dual motor Model S get long range average energy consumption in the low to mid 300's.

In 2013 there were no dual motors.

 

[DJRas]

Why would they change it for original 85s and not 90Ds? My rated range didn't change at all with the update.

My guess is that the test installed with the update tested the cells for some previously unknown failure mode and any cells found to be failing that way were disabled, which accounts for the drop in range for some cars, but not others. If you can show that every car of a particular pack had a drop in range equivalent to what you saw, then you might be right, but so far the people who saw a drop in range and those who didn't have been scattershot as far as I can tell.

I have data from a friend's 2014 S 85 with 210,000 miles but unaffected and also comes to 276 Wh/mi.

 

[DJRas]

Why would they change it for original 85s and not 90Ds? My rated range didn't change at all with the update.

My guess is that the test installed with the update tested the cells for some previously unknown failure mode and any cells found to be failing that way were disabled, which accounts for the drop in range for some cars, but not others. If you can show that every car of a particular pack had a drop in range equivalent to what you saw, then you might be right, but so far the people who saw a drop in range and those who didn't have been scattershot as far as I can tell.

Also, there is no way to selectively bypass cells with software. There are fuses that can blow to bypass a brick (74 individual batteries wired in parallel).