Yes, drive in L, and use the paddle. Better regen on Bolt may be part of the difference.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Yes, drive in L, and use the paddle. Better regen on Bolt may be part of the difference.
M109Rider
Active Member
Tesla produced an incredible car. It currently has more vampire drain, than any other car, but it also is significantly more advanced than most.
I’m sure Tesla is working on it. I suspect it’s less about Tesla being okay with vampire drain, and more about that’s what’s needed at the moment.
The US only uses coal for about 30% if it’s electricity. Not too bad, but that’s you’re governments issue, not Tesla’s.
Canada none, most of Europe none.
China.... well.
The environmental impact of vampire drain would be hard to calculate. I do know Tesla has live stats in their show rooms that show the carbon impact they’ve saved thus far though.
I think the emissions he’s prevented, and the movement towards electric cars he’s created, far out weigh’s the vampire drain impact on the environment.
ℬête Noire
Active Member
Assuming 30W, which seems more typical rather than best case (EDIT: and isn't the worst case per horror stories we've seen, especially last winter/spring), at 23hr/day every day of the year is 251kW/year. Contrast to say to national average yearly miles of 12,000, for about 3000kW. Less than 10% but it is something to work on longterm.
I don't think getting into particular states on impact is useful exercise, other than dragging the usual suspects.
It is I think however interesting to note that it represents about $20 to $55/year, depending on where you live. Going to BEV gets things so far that this is very much into diminishing returns area on the impact side.Tesla produced an incredible car. It currently has more vampire drain, than any other car, but it also is significantly more advanced than most.
I’m sure Tesla is working on it. I suspect it’s less about Tesla being okay with vampire drain, and more about that’s what’s needed at the moment.
The US only uses coal for about 30% if it’s electricity. Not too bad, but that’s you’re governments issue, not Tesla’s.
Canada none, most of Europe none.
China.... well.
The environmental impact of vampire drain would be hard to calculate. I do know Tesla has live stats in their show rooms that show the carbon impact they’ve saved thus far though.
I think the emissions he’s prevented, and the movement towards electric cars he’s created, far out weigh’s the vampire drain impact on the environment.
We are powered by coal in SK. Lots of coal.
If people truly care about the environment and vampire drain, then they would unplug all electrical equipment when not in use. But who are we kidding, people don't actually care that much. It's simply too inconvenient. I feel like we're just now nitpicking, like do anybody really want their car to have a slower wake up time?
Just How Much Power Do Your Electronics Use When They Are ‘Off’?
"cable box drew 28 watts when it was on and recording a show, and 26W when it was off and not recording anything. Even if I never watched TV, I would still consume about 227 kilowatt-hours annually.
Always leaving a laptop computer plugged in, even when it’s fully charged, can use a similar quantity — 4.5 kilowatt-hours of electricity in a week, or about 235 kilowatt-hours a year.
To turn a TV on with a remote, it has to be on to receive that signal. If it’s a “smart” TV, it has to be on to stay online. And if your TV is in quick-start mode – to avoid the pain of waiting 15 seconds for it to boot up – it’s drawing even more power.
Lots of traditional household appliances – things your grandmother owns – are also moving online, just like your grandmother. Light bulbs, ovens, refrigerators, coffee makers – even mattresses — can now connect to the Internet, so they also draw power all the time."
Just How Much Power Do Your Electronics Use When They Are ‘Off’?
"cable box drew 28 watts when it was on and recording a show, and 26W when it was off and not recording anything. Even if I never watched TV, I would still consume about 227 kilowatt-hours annually.
Always leaving a laptop computer plugged in, even when it’s fully charged, can use a similar quantity — 4.5 kilowatt-hours of electricity in a week, or about 235 kilowatt-hours a year.
To turn a TV on with a remote, it has to be on to receive that signal. If it’s a “smart” TV, it has to be on to stay online. And if your TV is in quick-start mode – to avoid the pain of waiting 15 seconds for it to boot up – it’s drawing even more power.
Lots of traditional household appliances – things your grandmother owns – are also moving online, just like your grandmother. Light bulbs, ovens, refrigerators, coffee makers – even mattresses — can now connect to the Internet, so they also draw power all the time."
I've been down around 32F, A/C Off, Recirculate On and I keep the Windshield blower OFF (but face and floor blower On), Fan on 4-ish and clean and no problem.
At 55F I could pretty much set the heat to anything (including off) and windshield will stay clear.
I consider 55F balmy, it's 0F with -20F wind chill right now ;(
Tesla produced an incredible car. It currently has more vampire drain, than any other car, but it also is significantly more advanced than most.
I’m sure Tesla is working on it. I suspect it’s less about Tesla being okay with vampire drain, and more about that’s what’s needed at the moment.
The US only uses coal for about 30% if it’s electricity. Not too bad, but that’s you’re governments issue, not Tesla’s.
Canada none, most of Europe none.
China.... well.
The environmental impact of vampire drain would be hard to calculate. I do know Tesla has live stats in their show rooms that show the carbon impact they’ve saved thus far though.
I think the emissions he’s prevented, and the movement towards electric cars he’s created, far out weigh’s the vampire drain impact on the environment.
I think part of Tesla's "Vampire Drain" is really lack of true sleep that it is capable of doing. I can hear motors running (a pump or fan or something running) some days for 8 hours or longer after I park it. Other days it's absolutely quiet 5 minutes after being parked. It has some gremlins that need to be fixed for sure. This can happen when plugged in (not charging) or not. It's completely random.
ℬête Noire
Active Member
Only 40% last I heard, which is down a lot from the 75% it used to run (those states mentioned above run over 90% still). And there's a lot of stuff reaching end-of-life, physically and regulatory wise. I don't know if Boundary boondoggle has managed to get through to enough people that "clean coal" is not just a dead end but DOA?
The *faceplam* thing though is that SW SK has probably the best solar potential in the entire country, and pretty decent wind potential. Solar is still fairly borderline economically though because of the latitude.
Solar is only viable half the year. I'm not a wind fan as I have helped clean up hundreds of dead snow geese from the turbines east of Indian Head.
ℬête Noire
Active Member
Interesting. With heat off?
When I tried that approach (not quite temps that low) it wouldn't work. I don't know if it was starting with the ambient Gulf humidity that was the issue?
I know I made the mistake once of not having the windows cracked w/the fan running when napping during a SC when it was in the high 30's. I blew through a lot of electrons for the first 30 minutes driving afterward to get enough moisture out of the cabin.
Last edited:
ℬête Noire
Active Member
In between Moosamin and Wappella. I used the Head as its a big town.
ℬête Noire
Active Member
Oh, honey.
Okay, Red Lily. What are their longterm bird-kill numbers? They've been up awhile now. Did they screw up placement?
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
I guess mostly the response seems to be oddly defensive. I understand it's not important to you - and that's fine. I'm just saying it's important to some people. Tesla makes a great car, in so many ways. But no reason they can't also reduce their carbon footprint through fine tuning their design.
I'm not saying that. I've seen the claim in these forums. As you say, it's likely nonsense. Seems unlikely that rebalancing would occur when not connected to the charger, in any case.
Now you're making a claim that vampire drain has something to do with heat/cold. This does not explain the very typical drain that occurs (90 miles) over 21 days when the car is parked in a garage at 60 degrees F, with no third party apps and no bothering, and no one at home. Note that this is nearly EXACTLY what Tesla says to expect. I'm not concerned about what vampire drain does in extreme conditions - I think it's reasonable to make arguments that it might need to be higher, particularly when it is very hot, and that may very well be a good tradeoff. Not the issue we're talking about here.
Please let's not get the numbers wrong. I assure you that if you leave your car alone for 10 days, you'll see about 30 miles of loss. That's just what Tesla says to expect, and it's what most people see. Tesla says 1% a day is what you should expect, and if you can provide any data to the contrary, please let me know. It does seem to be possible to get days that are a bit lower, but they are offset by days that are higher.
The Tesla-provided 1% per day number is the primary reason the OP sees the efficiency difference between the Bolt and the Model 3. There really isn't another explanation.
It is definitely a nice trick, and I assure you it likely requires less than 1W of power to accomplish that. See your cell phone, for the last 5 years, for example. Amazing how it opens right up as soon as you press a button! You can even access it remotely, nearly instantly!
I'm not saying this is possible for Tesla - I hope I'm wrong, but it's possible they've made hardware choices which result in them being unable to achieve that low of a level. Maybe, maybe not. I have no idea.
They certainly have other priorities. I'm just saying that at some point in the future this will be an issue and while it may be a low priority item, I think it's a choice - they've had this issue since their inception. I think they have just said to their engineers: connectivity & data gathering is a priority; don't worry about standby power.
I'm not saying that. I've seen the claim in these forums. As you say, it's likely nonsense. Seems unlikely that rebalancing would occur when not connected to the charger, in any case.
Now you're making a claim that vampire drain has something to do with heat/cold. This does not explain the very typical drain that occurs (90 miles) over 21 days when the car is parked in a garage at 60 degrees F, with no third party apps and no bothering, and no one at home. Note that this is nearly EXACTLY what Tesla says to expect. I'm not concerned about what vampire drain does in extreme conditions - I think it's reasonable to make arguments that it might need to be higher, particularly when it is very hot, and that may very well be a good tradeoff. Not the issue we're talking about here.
Please let's not get the numbers wrong. I assure you that if you leave your car alone for 10 days, you'll see about 30 miles of loss. That's just what Tesla says to expect, and it's what most people see. Tesla says 1% a day is what you should expect, and if you can provide any data to the contrary, please let me know. It does seem to be possible to get days that are a bit lower, but they are offset by days that are higher.
The Tesla-provided 1% per day number is the primary reason the OP sees the efficiency difference between the Bolt and the Model 3. There really isn't another explanation.
It is definitely a nice trick, and I assure you it likely requires less than 1W of power to accomplish that. See your cell phone, for the last 5 years, for example. Amazing how it opens right up as soon as you press a button! You can even access it remotely, nearly instantly!
I'm not saying this is possible for Tesla - I hope I'm wrong, but it's possible they've made hardware choices which result in them being unable to achieve that low of a level. Maybe, maybe not. I have no idea.
They certainly have other priorities. I'm just saying that at some point in the future this will be an issue and while it may be a low priority item, I think it's a choice - they've had this issue since their inception. I think they have just said to their engineers: connectivity & data gathering is a priority; don't worry about standby power.
Interesting. With heat off?
When I tried that approach (not quite temps that low) it wouldn't work. I don't know if it was starting with the ambient Gulf humidity that was the issue?
I know I made the mistake once of not having the windows cracked w/the fan running when napping during a SC when it was in the high 30's. I blew through a lot of electrons for the first 30 minutes driving afterward to get enough moisture out of the cabin.
It could be dew point variation. I never know quite what it should do based on dew point. But I could not do that when my windshield was dirty (it fogged up a lot).
But when it was 55F out, my lifetime for the first 1000 miles was around 230 wh/mi, that was probably 3/4 highway and a very short commute mix. It should not be hard to get good efficiency (city or highway) above 50F. Below 50F you need to manage your heat a bit. All other factors (speed etc.) affect any ambient temperature.
You have to be careful with relying to much on "battery miles left". It is an estimate based on voltage after all. You should not extrapolate one trip and assume every subsequent trip will have the same losses. Do the experiment 10 times and measure wall kilowatts actually used. Like if I just finished supercharging at say a rest stop it might show 270 miles and as soon as I get on the highway (0.2 miles later) it might show 267. That's not real. Or it might show 271. Also not real.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
I wouldn't worry about a one-off number like this. There are a lot of possible reasons. Overall, your efficiency in the Model 3 has been quite excellent. Other than the standby/vampire losses, of course.
The meter in the car giving your driving efficiency is very accurate as far as I can tell, as long as you know what it doesn't count. What did it say for this drive?
chronopc
Active Member
Oh, honey.
Okay, Red Lily. What are their longterm bird-kill numbers? They've been up awhile now. Did they screw up placement?
When you get a flocks of snows that number in the tens of thousands, and turbines built by the pot holes they use it happens. You know how they can circle a 1/4 forever? Up and down......
ℬête Noire
Active Member
It absolutely is a meaningful portion of "vampire drain", AKA the car doing stuff when you're not driving it. Especially with cabin protection on.
Don't know what to say other than I don't expect that because that's not what I've seen (more like a 1/4 of that).....well, it wasn't in my home so maybe having a WiFi connection makes it behave different?
Some Tesla rando giving you the brush-off because they see a 1kWh/day drop in an individual case as (EDIT: not)worth their time to diagnose exactly why. That's straight up KISS, because Tesla does indeed have a lot larger fish to fry than a situation where the vehicle is good for a couple months of storage.
.....given an unlimited time and $ to get it to that point, maybe, and probably cost to the actual product, too. As opposed to the reality of right now.
Last edited:
ℬête Noire
Active Member
I just looked at the farm placement on Google Maps, right in the middle of an obvious mass stopover/overnight location. Eek.
Last edited:
Similar threads
