M3 Range Loss Date and Mileage Trend

[AlanSubie4Life]

a 100% charge for me right now is ~286 (theoretical, I only ever top off at 90%). And I've done the whole "run it <10%, charge it back to 80% 3 times" cycle.

It plummeted after the .16 update specifically, and hasn't really recovered.

I know someone with an AWD who is at around 290 at 100% at an actual 100%. Similar.

I would guess your projected 100% is your actual 100%, for now, anyway.

No access to TeslaFi historical voltages or API access that would let you compare to see whether the max voltage is being limited compared to prior (pre .16) charges? (Or just get some sort of idea of what is different other than rated miles available...)

I told my friend he’d just been driving too hard and had blown too many fusible links. Probably not true though.

 

[VT_EE]

Interesting. I had read in another thread that the BMS was vastly improved now, and state of charge should make no difference. Clearly you have a different experience, so maybe I'll give this a shot (I also always charge to 80%).

Charging to a lower SOC is better for the battery, but makes it hard for the BMS to accurately estimate stored energy and range.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

I know someone with an AWD who is at around 290 at 100% at an actual 100%. Similar.

I would guess your projected 100% is your actual 100%, for now, anyway.

No access to TeslaFi historical voltages or API access that would let you compare to see whether the max voltage is being limited compared to prior (pre .16) charges? (Or just get some sort of idea of what is different other than rated miles available...)

I told my friend he’d just been driving too hard and had blown too many fusible links. Probably not true though.

It's a little more complex than that......

Here was my response:

"The math still doesn't add up. For instance, this morning, I was at 50% on my commute. At 50%, the range estimate was at 156 miles remaining, which would be inline with what I should expect for advertised range, EXCEPT, my efficiency over the last 30 miles was 232 wh/mi, 7.2% better than the EPA estimate of 250 wh/mi.

If the BMS was actually updating itself based on my driving, then my range estimate should have theoretically been 7.2% higher than 156miles, so 167 miles, with an expected full range of 334, based on my driving habits.

So from which end is my car "fudging the numbers" to show me getting the expected 310? Is my efficiency being shown accurately? or is that being adjusted to show me getting the desired 310, because there's a 7.2% loss of range at the top end of the pack?

While I'm happy that theoretically my car should still achieve the advertised range, I'm still a little disheartened as to how we're getting to that number, because if my driving efficiency is factored in, my range should be even higher."

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

, EXCEPT, my efficiency over the last 30 miles was 232 wh/mi, 7.2% better than the EPA estimate of 250 wh/mi.

You are using the wrong formula. You apparently have an AWD.

The formula for the range estimate for AWD when on the “average range” setting is:

245Wh/mi/(Current Trip Wh/mi) * Remaining rated miles.

Alternately:

Remaining Rated miles = Estimated Range * Current Wh/mi / 245Wh/mi

Where current Wh/mi is whatever is shown on the left hand side of the Consumption page.

Those are the “charging” Wh/mi. 245Wh/rmi

BTW you have to get 230-234Wh/mi to actually get the rated miles....not 245Wh/mi. Yes it is not consistent.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

You are using the wrong formula. You apparently have an AWD.

The formula for the range estimate for AWD when on the “average range” setting is:

245Wh/mi/(Current Trip Wh/mi) * Remaining rated miles.

Alternately:

Remaining Rated miles = Estimated Range * Current Wh/mi / 245Wh/mi

Where current Wh/mi is whatever
Is shown on the left hand side of the Consumption page.

Those are the “charging” Wh/mi. 245Wh/mi

BTW you have to get 230-234Wh/mi to actually get the rated miles....not 245Wh/mi. Yes it is not consistent.

Then why does my car show 250 wh/mi as "rated"?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Then why does my car show 250 wh/mi as "rated"?

Who knows!!! I don’t make the rules.

Just telling you what the formula is. 250Wh/mi is just a line on the screen with a random label.

 

[Saghost]

It's a little more complex than that......

Here was my response:

"The math still doesn't add up. For instance, this morning, I was at 50% on my commute. At 50%, the range estimate was at 156 miles remaining, which would be inline with what I should expect for advertised range, EXCEPT, my efficiency over the last 30 miles was 232 wh/mi, 7.2% better than the EPA estimate of 250 wh/mi.

If the BMS was actually updating itself based on my driving, then my range estimate should have theoretically been 7.2% higher than 156miles, so 167 miles, with an expected full range of 334, based on my driving habits.

So from which end is my car "fudging the numbers" to show me getting the expected 310? Is my efficiency being shown accurately? or is that being adjusted to show me getting the desired 310, because there's a 7.2% loss of range at the top end of the pack?

While I'm happy that theoretically my car should still achieve the advertised range, I'm still a little disheartened as to how we're getting to that number, because if my driving efficiency is factored in, my range should be even higher."

You seem to be under the impression that the number on the cluster is an estimated range.

It's not. Unlike most of the rest of the industry, Tesla gives you a range in rated miles.

Rather than saying you'll get 200 miles of you drive like you drove the last few miles, they say you'll get 200 miles if you drive like the EPA test - you'll get the same rated range remaining for a given battery percentage regardless of how you drove recently.

The only range number that changes based on your driving is the predicted range on the energy screen. (The percentage estimate at arrival from the navigation also changes with how you drove.)

That's also how you can tell how many watt hour are in your rated miles - drive until the predicted range matches the rated range, and whatever the average Wh/mile shows then is your rated Wh/mile.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

That's also how you can tell how many watt hour are in your rated miles - drive until the predicted range matches the rated range, and whatever the average Wh/mile shows then is your rated Wh/mile.

I agree this is what should happen, but unfortunately it doesn’t actually work that way.

For AWD the estimated range screen will align at 245Wh/mi. Do better than 245Wh/mi and projected range will exceed rated miles.

But actually, there are 230-234Wh/rmi according to the trip screen and the rated miles display (you have to calculate and watch carefully to determine this).

Just the way it works. I don’t know why they use 245Wh/mi as the underlying constant on the estimated range screen (to be consistent it seems like they should use 230-234Wh/mi).

All this is for AWD.

Anyway, mostly off topic here I guess, though related. Here is more discussion:

Max usable Kwh you've seen on TeslaFi

 

[ModelNforNerd]

I agree this is what should happen, but unfortunately it doesn’t actually work that way.

For AWD the estimated range screen will align at 245Wh/mi. Lower than 245Wh/mi and projected range will exceed rated miles.

But actually, there are 230-234Wh/rmi according to the trip screen and the rated miles display (you have to calculate and watch carefully to determine this).

Just the way it works. I don’t know why they use 245Wh/mi as the underlying constant on the estimated range screen (to be consistent it seems like they should use 230-234Wh/mi).

All this is for AWD.

Anyway, mostly off topic here I guess, though related. Here is more discussion:

Max usable Kwh you've seen on TeslaFi

pretty sure they use 250 kWh/mi

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

pretty sure they use 250 kWh/mi

I am 100% sure they don’t use 250kWh/mi.

Anyway, if you don’t believe me it is easy enough to just check in your car. You can try it for 5/15/30. As I said, I’m just stating my observations. No horse in the race.

 

[KenC]

It's a little more complex than that......

Here was my response:

"The math still doesn't add up. For instance, this morning, I was at 50% on my commute. At 50%, the range estimate was at 156 miles remaining, which would be inline with what I should expect for advertised range, EXCEPT, my efficiency over the last 30 miles was 232 wh/mi, 7.2% better than the EPA estimate of 250 wh/mi.

If the BMS was actually updating itself based on my driving, then my range estimate should have theoretically been 7.2% higher than 156miles, so 167 miles, with an expected full range of 334, based on my driving habits.

So from which end is my car "fudging the numbers" to show me getting the expected 310? Is my efficiency being shown accurately? or is that being adjusted to show me getting the desired 310, because there's a 7.2% loss of range at the top end of the pack?

While I'm happy that theoretically my car should still achieve the advertised range, I'm still a little disheartened as to how we're getting to that number, because if my driving efficiency is factored in, my range should be even higher."

The "range" is just a battery gauge, converting %age SOC using the EPA-estimated range number. Contrary to the email reply you got, the battery gauge doesn't change based upon driving style or climate conditions. Tesla would be better off, defaulting to %age SOC, than range. It confuses everyone. If you want to see the range estimate based upon your driving style, pull up your energy screen and set it to 30mile average. That'll give you the closest approximation of what your range might be, obviously based upon your last 30 miles. Of course, you can look at your energy usage rate and do the math yourself. 250Wh/m, ~300 miles; 200Wh/m, ~375 miles; etc., etc., etc.

 

[KenC]

One thing I've been learning is that the car has trouble accurately calculating the 80% point sometimes. All your charging appears to be to 80%, so the BMS might not be understanding the capacity correctly.

View attachment 446956

As you can see, I've had a few instances where the car thought the capacity dropped, but it came back up after charging to 90%. I think that's because 90% is up above the constant voltage range of the pack, so the car can clearly see where that point is.

Yesterday I was surprised and disappointed that the car thought I'd lost ~4 miles from just a couple days before.

After some thought, I switched to 90%, and suddenly those four miles came back and TeslaFI is reporting a 150% charging efficiency for the 80-90% block.

I've been of the mindset that charging to 80% is best, since I really don't need the rest on a normal day, but seeing the BMS error first hand like this is making me wonder.

My experience always seems to be different than others. I only charge to between 75% and 80% SOC, and my range estimate seems spot-on, between 307.5 miles and 311.5 miles according to Stats. When I used to charge to 90% SOC back in Winter, my range estimate could be as low as 290 miles.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

The "range" is just a battery gauge, converting %age SOC using the EPA-estimated range number. Contrary to the email reply you got, the battery gauge doesn't change based upon driving style or climate conditions. Tesla would be better off, defaulting to %age SOC, than range. It confuses everyone. If you want to see the range estimate based upon your driving style, pull up your energy screen and set it to 30mile average. That'll give you the closest approximation of what your range might be, obviously based upon your last 30 miles. Of course, you can look at your energy usage rate and do the math yourself. 250Wh/m, ~300 miles; 200Wh/m, ~375 miles; etc., etc., etc.

Yes, I know about that, which is how I arrived at the fact that my reply from Tesla was full of....crap. The math didn't add up based upon my driving. IF that was actually a dynamic number, my available range should have been a reflection of my efficiency. It wasn't.

 

[T3SLAROD]

I cant find it, but wasn’t there a TSB for Model 3’s built May 18 to October regarding batteries?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I cant find it, but wasn’t there a TSB for Model 3’s built May 18 to October regarding batteries?

There was. I think it was related to fusible link bond issues. But my understanding is Tesla just followed up with affected customers. Would be good for people affected to clarify what their experience was.

 

[HostileHarry]

Here is my LR Model 3 showing about 6.23% range loss. Less than 10 Supercharger sessions on this car... always plugged in at home on a HPWC. I was charging to 90%, but recently moved it to 80% once I started to see the 100% charge showing a range of 292.

 

[electronblue]

This is a great idea. It’s the speculation that spins people up.

Here seems to be a Model 3 related case from the other thread:

I've noticed 2 'sudden loss of range' on my LR Model 3. I was at 310 miles @100% then went to 305ish for a while and then just last week I'm hitting 291/292 after 2019.28.3.1 f9e95acd was installed.

Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Brand spanking new model 3 LR AWD first full charge (460/499 km) range

For all we know this one could be related too - except it never actually had full range (brand new, as the title says). This one is at 284 miles at an actual 100%. It has been discharged fully and recharged.

 

[gecko10x]

Interesting. I had read in another thread that the BMS was vastly improved now, and state of charge should make no difference. Clearly you have a different experience, so maybe I'll give this a shot (I also always charge to 80%).

FYI, I skipped a day of charging, drove it down to about 50%, then charged it up to 90%. Zero effect.

Since updating to 2019.28.3.1, I have a very clear additional 1.5% drop in total range. This brings me to a total drop of 4.5% from the "bump", or 3% from original. 6500 miles on the car.

 

[Tholland]

Not sure if it is software or just something else, but our M3 LRDM did drop 8 miles within 2 days. Full charge was 308-309 and now it’s exactly 300 at 100%. I have done the charge to 95%-100% and down to below 5% about 5 times and the range did go up from 297 to 300. But for sure some model 3s are experiencing a drop while others aren’t. Couldn’t be slight changes in parts but I do know that over the pass month or so I’ve tried to avg under 240wh/m and that NEVER EFFECTED my rated range at all. Never went up. And is still showing 252-255 at 85% I think and 90% show 262-264 depending. But still enjoyed the car everyday.

Would be nice to know why or what is going on but I guess something will come out about it soon.