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
Start a Discussionhttps://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/tags/

Long range Model 3 has 334 miles range according to EPA

Discussion in 'Model 3' started by diplomat33, Sep 19, 2017.

Tags:
  1. diplomat33

    diplomat33 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2017
    Messages:
    82
    Location:
    Terre Haute, IN USA
    It appears that Tesla might be under reporting the range of the long range Model 3. According to the EPA, they calculate a range of 334 miles, not 310 miles: Tesla Model 3 actually has 334 miles of range according to EPA data

    I know range can vary in EV cars from a lot of factors. But this could be really good news. I suspect Tesla might be under reporting in order to under promise and over deliver. But an EPA range of 334 miles is excellent. I suspect that the standard range model 3 might also have better range than reported too. Maybe the standard range is closer to 240 miles?
     
    • Informative x 2
    • Helpful x 1
    • Like x 1
  2. tinm

    tinm 2013 S85 Owner

    Joined:
    May 3, 2015
    Messages:
    1,411
    Location:
    New Mexico, USA
    Maybe they underreported in order to not hurt 100 kWh battery sales of the Model S/X....
     
    • Like x 3
  3. eSpiritIV

    eSpiritIV Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2016
    Messages:
    194
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    This would be a tyipcal Tesla maneuver....say something like "zero to sixty in 5.1 seconds!"...i mean 4.7 with this cool easter egg
     
    • Like x 1
    • Funny x 1
  4. diplomat33

    diplomat33 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2017
    Messages:
    82
    Location:
    Terre Haute, IN USA
    Possible. I have to admit that 334 miles range on the long range Model 3 looks very attractive. I know that the Model S is a bigger and more premium model but still, when you just compare range and price, the long range Model 3 looks "better" than the S.
     
    • Like x 1
  5. LargeHamCollider

    LargeHamCollider Battery cells != scalable

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2015
    Messages:
    803
    Location:
    United States
    #5 LargeHamCollider, Sep 19, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2017
    Edited: Teslarati made the same mistake that I made on this forum some months ago. The EPA uses the harmonic mean not a weighted average, which means Teslarati is off... by 1. It should be 333 not 334.

    Still pretty spectacular range.
     
    • Like x 2
    • Funny x 1
  6. BluestarE3

    BluestarE3 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,713
    Location:
    Norcal
    What does that mean in terms of the "real" EPA estimated range number?
     
  7. ItsNotAboutTheMoney

    ItsNotAboutTheMoney Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    5,812
    Location:
    Maine
    I used to _think_ that, but for the range, based on other listed data, it seems like it's a simple weighted mean.

    Wouldn't make much difference. Is still 333.something anyway.

    But interestingly, if you do the harmonic mean and then multiply by 90% you get 299.88, which is suspiciously close to 300. (300.42 if you use the 333.8). 310 is about 93% of the calculated value.

    Tesla might be happy to sandbag, not just to help the S/X but also to quiet complaints about year 1 degradation.
     
  8. jelloslug

    jelloslug Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2015
    Messages:
    2,513
    Location:
    Greenville, SC
    Tesla under reported the range on the Model S P100D also.
     
    • Informative x 1
  9. internalaudit

    internalaudit Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    647
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  10. Troy

    Troy Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,117
    Location:
    #10 Troy, Sep 19, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2017
    Part 1: Introduction

    Hi, everybody. I came up with the theory that the Model 3 80 (aka Model 3 Long Range RWD) scored 334 mi EPA and Tesla voluntarily lowered it to 310 miles. I have lots of data to support this theory. However, this will take a few messages and I want people to be able to follow along easily. Therefore I will start with an analogy to explain what's happening here:

    Imagine we are able to tell a person's birthdate by processing some data. The birthdate we can calculate is their actual birthdate and not necessarily what their ID shows. We know that a few people have ID's that show a different birthdate than the actual day they were born.

    When we do the calculation for Dolores, the date we calculate is different than what her ID shows. We ask the reason but she doesn't say anything. Some people suggest that maybe the calculation is wrong. Then we do the calculation for Maeve and it matches what her ID shows. We do it for Bernard and it also matches. Then we try it for Clementine but again it doesn't match her ID. Critics say the calculation must be sometimes wrong. However, Clementine pulls out another document that shows her actual birthdate and it matches.

    In this analogy, Clementine represents the Model S P100D, Maeve the Nissan Leaf, Bernard the Bolt and Dolores the Model 3. What is special about the Model S P100D is that the EPA has published both the voluntarily lowered range and the range before it was voluntarily lowered.
     
    • Informative x 3
    • Like x 2
    • Helpful x 1
  11. jelloslug

    jelloslug Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2015
    Messages:
    2,513
    Location:
    Greenville, SC
    Honestly, I have seen no compelling evidence that charging to "X" percentage has any effect on the battery life, positive or negative. I charge to 90% almost daily and to 100% roughly weekly and my degradation is no better or worse than others here with similar miles and similar battery. The Tesloop people charge to 100% every day and then supercharge multiple times a day and their reported degradation is normal.
     
    • Helpful x 2
    • Informative x 2
    • Like x 1
  12. Troy

    Troy Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,117
    Location:
    #12 Troy, Sep 19, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2017
    Part 2: Bernard

    Like in the analogy, this is one of the calculations that match what is being declared and we do it to show that the method works. This calculation works perfectly for the Chevrolet Bolt because its range was not voluntarily lowered. In other words, the declared range is the actual test score from dyno tests. We want to calculate the following 3 numbers from EPA dyno test results:
    • 238 mi EPA rated range
    • 128 MPGe city fuel economy
    • 110 MPGe highway fuel economy
    [​IMG]
    Screenshot source: EPA

    Here are the 4 numbers from the dyno test we will use as input data:
    • 67.4206 kWh wall consumption in city dyno test (see page 6 here)
    • 364.4 mi in city dyno score (see page 6 here)
    • 66.508 kWh wall consumption in highway dyno test (see page 7 here)
    • 310.63 mi in highway dyno score (see page 6 here)
    Step 1: City and highway range: To calculate these, you simply multiply the dyno scores by 0.7.
    City range = 364.4 mi * 0.7= 255.08 mi
    Highway range = 310.63 mi * 0.7= 217.441 mi

    Step 2: Combined range: This is the EPA rated range. It is calculated from 55% of city range and 45% of highway range.
    Combined range = 0.55*255.08 + 0.45*217.441= 140.294 + 97.84845 = 238.14 mi EPA rated range

    Step 3: MPGe numbers: MPGe means miles per 33.7 kWh wall consumption.

    If city range is 255.08 miles per 67.4206 kWh wall consumption,
    then city range is X miles per 33.7 kWh wall consumption
    X= 255.08 mi * 33.7 kWh / 67.4206 kWh= 127.5 mi per 33.7 kWh wall consumption = 128 MPGe city fuel economy

    If highway range is 217.441 miles per 66.508 kWh wall consumption,
    then highway range is X miles per 33.7 kWh wall consumption
    X= 217.441 mi * 33.7 kWh / 66.508 kWh= 110.18 mi per 33.7 kWh wall consumption = 110 MPGe highway fuel economy

    We calculated 3 numbers from the dyno scores and they all match what was declared. MPGe numbers are not affected by voluntary reductions. Therefore, they will always match even when the EPA rated range is voluntarily lowered.
     
    • Informative x 3
    • Like x 2
  13. omgwtfbyobbq

    omgwtfbyobbq Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    818
    Location:
    Southern California
    Even if there is a difference, you won't see it for a while. If there is a difference, it'll start to show itself roughly two thirds of the way through your battery pack's lifespan, and you'll see an increase in the rate of degradation. It's referenced as a "knee" in battery capacity fade.

    https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy14osti/62813.pdf

    I'm not sure if anyone's done enough testing to see what a battery will do beyond 75% of it's original capacity, but if that capacity loss continues to be determined by Li loss (the square root of time), then it's possible that the capacity loss over the next 9,000 cycles/days would be about the same as the capacity loss over the previous 4,000 cycles/days, which was about the same as the capacity loss over the first 1,000 cycles/days.
     
    • Helpful x 1
    • Informative x 1
  14. Troy

    Troy Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,117
    Location:
    Part 3: Maeve

    Again, this calculation is a match. It demonstrates that the method works. The EPA has published the following 3 numbers and we are able to calculate these from the dyno scores:
    • 107 mi EPA rated range
    • 124 MPGe city fuel economy
    • 101 MPGe highway fuel economy
    [​IMG]
    Screenshot source: EPA

    Here are the 4 numbers from the dyno test we will use as input data:
    • 31.78 kWh wall consumption in city dyno test (See page 4 here)
    • 166.41 mi city score (See page 4 here)
    • 31.78 kWh wall consumption in highway dyno test (See page 6 here)
    • 136.4 mi highway score (See page 6 here)
    Step 1: City and highway range: To calculate these, you simply multiply the dyno scores by 0.7.
    City range =166.41 mi * 0.7= 116.487 mi
    Highway range = 136.4 mi * 0.7= 95.48 mi

    Step 2: Combined range: This is the EPA rated range. It is calculated from 55% of city range and 45% of highway range.
    Combined range = 0.55*116.487 + 0.45*95.48= 64.06785 + 42.966 = 107.03 mi EPA rated range

    Step 3: MPGe numbers: MPGe means miles per 33.7 kWh wall consumption.

    If city range is 116.487 miles per 31.78 kWh wall consumption,
    then city range is X miles per 33.7 kWh wall consumption
    X= 116.487 mi * 33.7 kWh / 31.78 kWh= 123.52 mi per 33.7 kWh wall consumption = 124 MPGe city fuel economy

    If highway range is 95.48 miles per 31.78 kWh wall consumption,
    then highway range is X miles per 33.7 kWh wall consumption
    X= 95.48 mi * 33.7 kWh / 31.78 kWh= 101.25 mi per 33.7 kWh wall consumption = 101 MPGe highway fuel economy

    We calculated 3 numbers from the dyno scores and they all match what was declared. By the way, it wasn't exactly a mystery that the Bolt and Leaf range were not voluntarily lowered. The EPA is not trying to hide this. They release yearly documents that show what range numbers were voluntarily lowered. The screenshot below is from an EPA document that you can download here. I found that file on this page under the first column called Datafile1.

    [​IMG]
     
    • Informative x 6
  15. Jersey Shore Tom

    Jersey Shore Tom Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2015
    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Brick, NJ
    So Long Range Model 3 with dual motors ~346 miles? Maybe 350 if the new motors are geared with range in mind?
     
  16. KarenRei

    KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,449
    Location:
    Iceland
    "Combined mileage" (334mi in this case) is pretty meaningless for an EV. Who is going to drive that many miles in a day and have only 45% of them be highway? Maybe an in-town courier, that's about all I can think of. Or I guess someone who does all of their charging on superchargers because they have no home charging setup.

    For most people, though, the figure that matters is pure highway range. Which is 318mi. Only 8 more than the reported 310. And given that the EPA determines range via charge depletion, having a buffer of 8 miles at the bottom isn't a dumb idea.
     
    • Informative x 3
    • Like x 2
    • Helpful x 1
  17. KarenRei

    KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,449
    Location:
    Iceland
    That would be a higher boost for dual than S and X received, while I expect a lower boost than they received. Why? Dual motors improves range by increasing efficiency, letting the car choose the motor which is closer to its optimal power band at the current speed. M3 is using motors that are already more efficient (PM instead of induction), so there's less room for improvement.

    Also, see the above. Ignore the city and combined ranges, focus only on the highway range. Because except in certain specific circumstances, it's the only figure that really matters.
     
    • Like x 1
  18. Troy

    Troy Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,117
    Location:
    Part 4: Dolores

    What is interesting here is that the part of the data we can match contradicts the other data. These are the 3 numbers the EPA has published:
    • 310 mi EPA rated range
    • 131 MPGe city fuel economy
    • 120 MPGe highway fuel economy
    [​IMG]

    Here are the 4 numbers from the dyno test we will use as input data:
    • 89.404 kWh wall consumption in city dyno test (see page 6 here)
    • 495.04 mi in city dyno score (see page 6 here)
    • 89.41 kWh wall consumption in highway dyno test (see page 7 here)
    • 454.64 mi in highway dyno score (see page 7 here)
    Step 1: City and highway range: To calculate these, you simply multiply the dyno scores by 0.7.
    City range = 495.04 mi * 0.7= 346.528 mi
    Highway range = 454.64 mi * 0.7= 318.248 mi

    Step 2: Combined range: This is the EPA rated range. It is calculated from 55% of city range and 45% of highway range.
    Combined range = 0.55*346.528 + 0.45*318.248= 190.5904 + 143.2116 = 333.8 mi EPA rated range

    Step 3: MPGe numbers: MPGe means miles per 33.7 kWh wall consumption.

    If city range is 346.528 miles per 89.404 kWh wall consumption,
    then city range is X miles per 33.7 kWh wall consumption
    X= 346.528 mi * 33.7 kWh / 89.404 kWh= 130.62 mi per 33.7 kWh wall consumption = 131 MPGe city fuel economy

    If highway range is 318.248 miles per 89.41 kWh wall consumption,
    then highway range is X miles per 33.7 kWh wall consumption
    X= 318.248 mi * 33.7 kWh / 89.41 kWh= 119.95 mi per 33.7 kWh wall consumption = 120 MPGe highway fuel economy

    We have calculated 3 numbers from the dyno scores and two of them match what was declared but one doesn't.
     
    • Informative x 4
    • Like x 4
  19. jelloslug

    jelloslug Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2015
    Messages:
    2,513
    Location:
    Greenville, SC
    The Tesloop car I was talking about in particular has 200k miles on it.
     
  20. omgwtfbyobbq

    omgwtfbyobbq Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    818
    Location:
    Southern California
    Yeah, it'll likely be a while before you see anything, depending on where you live. If it's warmer, batteries degrade faster, and vice versa.
     

Share This Page