Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Looking for real world winter consumption values

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
That’s the crux of the issue. OP said he has literally nowhere to charge on the way.

Worst-case scenario of “we had to make an unexpected charging stop on the way” wouldn’t bother even someone like me too much but that’s very very different from being stranded and then waiting for a tow truck over a holiday when they are busier and/or fewer available.
Yeah exactly. Once there is some infrastructure around it won't be a big deal if I need to stop for 10 minutes. We often do anyway.

There is of course a gas station in every single small town on the way. Some day that will be fast chargers, just not yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MG535
Ya, snow accumulation is painful for energy consumption. Speed will play a big factor for you as well. I should try to do my trip in the most effecient way possible one time to see if I can get close to what the car predicts. Looking at the energy graph is normally way off for me, because of the way I drive obviously.

My sister in law who I visit in montreal should be receiving her new standard range soon, will be interesting to see how it compares doing the same trip during the winter.

Most of the reason I went long range was specifically to be able to make that trip non-stop in the winter

Jared
When I ordered the Performance it was rated at 507 km of range or something like that. I assumed a 250 km trip to my in-laws would be no issue even in the winter, but then of course I quickly found out the range they quote on Tesla.com is 100% a joke. I can pretty easily do 400 km in the summer which is fine most of the time. First winter though so I need to get a feel for winter range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MG535
It's not a joke, it's EPA, if you look at how EPA does its tests you'll understand that it's a true number. It just doesn't represent how we typically drive.
MY LR AWD 2020 is rated for 512km. After 2 years and the initial degradation it's more like 475km rated. I can probably do 380-400 in the summer with the way I drive, and 250-300 in the winter depending on how I drive, the conditions, if the car's preheated etc.
 
It's not a joke, it's EPA, if you look at how EPA does its tests you'll understand that it's a true number. It just doesn't represent how we typically drive.
MY LR AWD 2020 is rated for 512km. After 2 years and the initial degradation it's more like 475km rated. I can probably do 380-400 in the summer with the way I drive, and 250-300 in the winter depending on how I drive, the conditions, if the car's preheated etc.
+1.
Plus thats going from 100%-0%, which no one does, so in essence you have unusable range.

My car is around the same ~475km at 100%. Could I get that? Maybe in the summer time on a full discharge. I can beat the rated consumption if I really try, but where’s the fun in that.

I’m in Ottawa and my consumption yesterday bringing my kids to school when it was like -10c maybe was 260wh/km, taking it easy. This morning its like somehow +7c, I was much harder on the car, consumption shows 204wh/km. Thats a pretty big swing just from temperature change. Had I drove in similar style to yesterday it would easily be sub 200wh/km
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Rocky_H
It's not a joke, it's EPA, if you look at how EPA does its tests you'll understand that it's a true number. It just doesn't represent how we typically drive.
MY LR AWD 2020 is rated for 512km. After 2 years and the initial degradation it's more like 475km rated. I can probably do 380-400 in the summer with the way I drive, and 250-300 in the winter depending on how I drive, the conditions, if the car's preheated etc.
I know what it is and where they get the number. That doesn't mean it's not ridiculous. Providing bad data because that's the accepted way of doing things is still bad data. Tesla knows how far the cars can go at all speeds and they provide the most padded number around. Tesla also seems to be quite a bit off of EPA compared to the rest of the industry. Let's not continuously give them a pass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MG535
When I ordered the Performance it was rated at 507 km of range or something like that. I assumed a 250 km trip to my in-laws would be no issue even in the winter, but then of course I quickly found out the range they quote on Tesla.com is 100% a joke. I can pretty easily do 400 km in the summer which is fine most of the time. First winter though so I need to get a feel for winter range.

The quoted range absolutely is a problem.

If it’s just some abstract, theoretical number with very little correlation to the real world… if it cannot be taken at face value… if you’ll never achieve it IRL… it should be highlighted as such. Or maybe just deleted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Braumin
The quoted range absolutely is a problem.

If it’s just some abstract, theoretical number with very little correlation to the real world… if it cannot be taken at face value… if you’ll never achieve it IRL… it should be highlighted as such. Or maybe just deleted.
It's definitely possible to reach the rated range -- and beyond. I hit about 15% above my rated range once: admittedly while driving at 40mph with no heat or A/C on flat ground in 70oF weather!
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrGriz and Rocky_H
EPA ratings are best for comparisons. Having said that, if you use ABRP, you can calibrate your vehicle, so you know how efficient your Tesla is at 65mph. I suppose if you use metric, they have the comparable figure. At 65mph, I get 235wh/mile in Summer.
IMG_3028.jpeg

Looking at it just now, it shows 244Wh/mile@65mph. That's right in the ballpark for the EPA rating, and right in the neighborhood of the speed limit. Of course, I don't drive the speed limit unless the road conditions are bad. I drove 4400 miles on a trip this past late Summer, and I drove 15% above the speed limit on 90+% of it, which means averaging 86mph where the limit was 75mph. For that trip, I averaged about 280Wh/mile. Below is my one-way average, going East. Plus, I was on all-season snow tires, the Vredestein Quatrac5.
1639676065748.png
 
That’s not really real-world though. Who is going to drive 262-300+ miles (depending on what your Tesla’s rated range is) at 40 MPH?
My car doesn't have that much total range, but I did something very like that a few years ago with my old 2014 Model S, which doesn't have nearly the efficiency of a Model 3. I was having to go from Sisters, OR to Baker City, OR before the Supercharger in Burns (Hines) existed. That was 234 miles, when my car has about 250-255 rated miles or so. So I set my cruise control at 45 mph with no heat and slowly made it. I've had to do a couple of other ones like that too, like Salt Lake City straight through to Twin Falls, ID in the Winter before the Tremonton, UT Supercharger was there. It can be done, but sucks and I'm glad most of these routes have better coverage now.
 
That’s not really real-world though. Who is going to drive 262-300+ miles (depending on what your Tesla’s rated range is) at 40 MPH?

People say this but it bears repeating. Direct those comments toward the EPA tests. Expecting a manufacturer to say "the car tests like this but 'expected" range is that, is not going to work for a variety of reasons. One is, everyones driving conditions, speed, etc are different, even on the same drive.

The only way to compare this is with standardized tests, and there is NO REASON WHATSOEVER for any company to down rate their vehicle as it relates to the EPA tests, unless it benefits them to do so (like downrating slightly a cheaper model to allow a more expensive model to look better).

Direct energy toward the EPA at re designing the tests.
 
The only way to compare this is with standardized tests, and there is NO REASON WHATSOEVER for any company to down rate their vehicle as it relates to the EPA tests, unless it benefits them to do so (like downrating slightly a cheaper model to allow a more expensive model to look better).
And fundamentally, there is a specific fault with the EPA here that they allow two very different methods for calculating this for electric vehicles. When people complain and link to articles about how other car companies meet their ratings while Tesla doesn't, that is the real reason for that. People have looked into the documentation for that, and most other car companies are choosing one EPA rating method, while Tesla is one of the few who chooses a different one. WHY IN THE WORLD does the EPA allow multiple rating methods?! That's creating a lot of this frustration and anger. People say the EPA ratings aren't to match 1:1 with people's real driving and are just for comparison between vehicles, but when the EPA allows such different methods, it's not even very good for that either.
 
I was driving pretty fast, and I had a car full with 4 people and luggage. My car also has a PTC heater instead of a heat pump, but I’m not convinced it makes that much of a difference at super low temps. Consumption could be curtailed pretty effectively by going 65mph instead of 75mph.

Another thing to keep in mind is that on cold journeys, consumption starts high as the battery uses its own energy to warm itself, and gets better as the journey progresses. You might see 400-450 wh/mile for the first 15 or so miles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Earl and IdaX
Well did a shorter trip and the results were not super encouraging. On the way there we had tail wind and averaged 230 Wh/km. The way home was a head wind of 30 km/h and it was -17°C and averaged about 270 Wh/km once the battery warmed up.

ABRP suggests 253 Wh/km in the same conditions so it seems to be a bit optimistic.

Forecast for my 250 km trip is -22°C and a tail wind so I think I could make it but I'll have to see if I am brave enough. Likely will just take the gas SUV.