Oh, BTW, it looks like my LR RWD efficiency has improved somewhat since the 2019.15.5 update. Looks like Musk may have indeed unblocked some, and I say some of the efficiency of the LR RWD. Not as good as before last Oct but a little better.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
LR RWD to receive firmware upgrade to 325 miles...actual capacity bump??
- Thread starter ratsbew
- Start date
How are you measuring efficiency? It's been nice enough here recently that I don't need heat in the afternoons so it's much better than winter, but I can't say that it's better than last year. About equal I'd say.
Well, I did some benchmark numbers before and after I received the increased range firmware update and it shows some interesting results. The before and after benchmarks are based on charging times and range increases.
Before the firmware update, the calculation to come up with how long it took to charge for any range of miles added during a charge session was always (literally 100% of the times I tested which was at least 15 times) calculated like this: (# of range miles added / 44) x 60 + 3 = # of minutes to charge. The 44 is the number of range miles per hour I get. I use the Tesla wall charger. Multiplying by 60 converts it from hours to minutes. The reason I add the 3 minutes, in the end, is that the charge rate ramps up slowly at the beginning of any charge session, so it takes several minutes to reach the peak 44 miles of range per hour. This is a fixed time interval regardless of the length of the charging session. This result was ALWAYS within 1 minute of what the actual charging minutes were.
Now let's use this calculation on my charging session from last night. First I will calculate what it should have been per the calculation above and then I will reveal how much time it actually took. Last night's charging session added 93 miles of range. based on the above calculation, let's see how long it should have taken: (93 / 44) x 60 + 3 = 129.8 expected minutes to charge. How many minutes did it actually take? 122 minutes. The only variable in that calculation that could change to account for the minute difference is the 44 range miles added per hour. So if we use 122 as the minutes it took to charge and solved the calculation by changing the only variable we can - the 44, it comes out to 46.89 miles of range my charger would have to add to the car per hour to charge that many miles.
I've done this calculation three times since the update and the results were all consistent with this example. Based on the above data, it's highly unlikely that I am suddenly, and coincidentally, now getting almost 47 range miles per hour out of my charger. The only other conclusion left is that the range increase is merely changing the numbers being displayed.
gilscales
Banned
I have driven from 100% to 1 mile in the same day with only about 70 min. of stops, I used 68.42 kw per TeslaFi and based on calculations TeslaFi has determined 68.8 kw to be the maximum usable at least for my car with 20,000 miles.
This was before the update, next time I go on a long trip i'll see if I have more usable battery, I doubt it but it is possible they decreased the buffer size.
Last edited:
And then there are many LR RWD owners who didn't get any range increase. Showing 274 @90% on 2019.8.2 release.
gilscales
Banned
Can’t speak to efficiency but there was not any of the buffer unlocked based on my usable capacity from TeslaFi, still in the 68.8 usable kw range for my battery before and after the extra range update
Just wondering, how are you calculating usable kwh from Teslafi? Are you taking the charge session report and extrapolating the delta in SOC% by thw actual kwh added?
gilscales
Banned
No, I had driven from 100% soc to 1 mile range left with a minimum of stops (70 min. maybe?) and used 68.42 kw per TeslaFi, another trip used 95% battery (the last 3 drives are all non stop) and 65.37 kw again per the drive detail report on TeslaFi, another drive at 76% usage was 51.26 kw used, another at 43% using 29.56 kw so all very close to 68.8 kw useable at 100%
Last edited:
TomServo
Active Member
doubleatheman
Member
2019.8.5 and my 100% charge is 312 after multiple full reboots and shutdowns. This is the same range I had 2 months ago...
Maybe they have changed the LR battery packs since the early ones? Mine is over vin 100K
I'm on 2019.8.5 now and 292 @ 90%
Sorry
My VIN is 89xx with 11K miles. Normally charge to 80% and it slowly decreased to 242 over many months. When I got 8.2 and 8.5 increased to 246 until yesterday when 80% went to 251 miles.
Did a couple of 100% trip charges a couple of weeks ago which didn't make any improvement so I'll have to try that again and see what my range is. Last 100% it was at 304.
Did a couple of 100% trip charges a couple of weeks ago which didn't make any improvement so I'll have to try that again and see what my range is. Last 100% it was at 304.
woodisgood
Optimustic Pessimist
Is it possible the range calculation is taking into account lifetime efficiency now? Can the folks who are not seeing a range bump post their lifetime efficiency alongside?
I charged to 100% for the first time since getting the range bump back in 8.5. 324 miles, lifetime efficiency of 230 wh/mi.
I charged to 100% for the first time since getting the range bump back in 8.5. 324 miles, lifetime efficiency of 230 wh/mi.
I have seen now improvement in range, my current version is 2019.8.5, installed on 4/5/19.
260 wh/mi lifetime efficiency, 12,000 miles.
I drained the battery to 11 miles of range (4%), charged to 100%, 305 miles of range. (this charge added 68.77 kWh, if I was at 0%, I would expect to add 71.64 kWh).
Normal charge is at 80% and I normally have 250 miles of range.
260 wh/mi lifetime efficiency, 12,000 miles.
I drained the battery to 11 miles of range (4%), charged to 100%, 305 miles of range. (this charge added 68.77 kWh, if I was at 0%, I would expect to add 71.64 kWh).
Normal charge is at 80% and I normally have 250 miles of range.
gilscales
Banned
Correct, 93.2% efficiency. According to TeslaFi, used 73.8 KwH and aded 68.77.
Why does length of trip matter in electric cars? In gas vehicles, its because a lot of the initial fuel use gets the engine up to running temperature, if I am not mistaken.
I think you meant why all in one sitting vs multiple trips with stop in between? If so, then you need to know Tesla has phantom drain which can exasperate if you use sentry or dash cam mode. Hence if you want accurate reading of range you need to drive right after fully charging.
Similar threads
