-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
majorlance
Member
I drive a P85D and agree that it takes a certain amount of experience to properly gauge range. And without that, range anxiety hits!
Driving from Washington, DC to Rehoboth Beach, DE (relatively flat with a mixed road type- interstate, highway, two lane road, small towns at 25 mph and speed traps) in the last four months I noticed;
1) Temperature makes a huge difference in range. Really cold reduces anticipated range by 25% or so.
2) Tailwinds and headwinds do make a difference. Never thought about this with an ICE car but they do.
3) Drafting behind big trucks really does reduce energy usage. Just set the TACC and follow an 18 wheeler (with a TACC setting of 1) and you'll be amazed at how low your energy usage is. Second choice- big pickup or Suburban but it won't make as much of a difference.
4) Speed. Yep, do the speed limit (or less than 70 mph) and you will really use a lot less energy.
5) Acceleration on ramps, lights, etc. does help. And passing at high acceleration chews up a lot of battery.
My best usage (Insane Mode, Range On, Tail Wind, going with traffic) was about 260 wh/mile which I consider very, very good. My average usage (insane Mode Range On, No tail wind, passing if I want, pushing it a little for time) was around 290 wh/mile. All recent trips with the outside temps around 60 degrees. In January/February and on colder rides with earlier firmware (pre-torque) and rain I saw 340 wh/mile give or take.
In all cases payload was around 400 lbs...
Hope this helps!
Driving from Washington, DC to Rehoboth Beach, DE (relatively flat with a mixed road type- interstate, highway, two lane road, small towns at 25 mph and speed traps) in the last four months I noticed;
1) Temperature makes a huge difference in range. Really cold reduces anticipated range by 25% or so.
2) Tailwinds and headwinds do make a difference. Never thought about this with an ICE car but they do.
3) Drafting behind big trucks really does reduce energy usage. Just set the TACC and follow an 18 wheeler (with a TACC setting of 1) and you'll be amazed at how low your energy usage is. Second choice- big pickup or Suburban but it won't make as much of a difference.
4) Speed. Yep, do the speed limit (or less than 70 mph) and you will really use a lot less energy.
5) Acceleration on ramps, lights, etc. does help. And passing at high acceleration chews up a lot of battery.
My best usage (Insane Mode, Range On, Tail Wind, going with traffic) was about 260 wh/mile which I consider very, very good. My average usage (insane Mode Range On, No tail wind, passing if I want, pushing it a little for time) was around 290 wh/mile. All recent trips with the outside temps around 60 degrees. In January/February and on colder rides with earlier firmware (pre-torque) and rain I saw 340 wh/mile give or take.
In all cases payload was around 400 lbs...
Hope this helps!
Candleflame
Active Member
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
Like anything else, it depends on conditions. Usually you will do better than that; in really bad conditions, you might do worse. Tesla has a calculator HERE that will help you get an idea. While the calculator doesn't cover all conditions, in the past it has seemed pretty accurate for what it does cover. I'm not sure if all the dual-motor firmware is done (I don't have one so I haven't followed the threads), so it's possible it might be a little optimistic for the dual-motor version now.
At 70mph, it indicates anywhere from 218 miles in an 85 (rear wheel drive) at 0 degrees to 271 miles in an 85D at 70 degrees. Wind, rain, elevation gain and more extreme temperatures can lower these numbers. Elevation loss and wind at your back can increase them.
Arriving at the charger with 2 miles while transporting 2 adults, 4 kids ranging from ages 6 to 1 & a case of mushrooms - that's more than a badge of honor - that's some kahunas... LOL
Candleflame
Active Member
Driving Charging Time | TESLA OWNER
There you go. The guy actually assumed you would arrive with 0 miles left and then supercharge only whats necessary to get to the next supercharger. In that case the sweetspot was 75-80 mph. Personally I think as long as your watt consumption is less than the charging speed you are best of driving faster until you reach that point. Let's assume we have Start A with supercharger, Supercharger 1, Supercharger 2, Destination B 26 miles apart. You are not allowed to charge more than you need.
80mph at 400 watts/mile. Takes 20min and 10.4kw to complete the journey. We have a 120kwh supercharger and need to get those 10.4 kw. We do not need to worry about tapering as our state of charge is quite low so we will charge at 120kwh or 2kw/min so after 5.2 minutes of charging we make back our 10.4kwh. So. For the whole journey we spend, 5.2min, (that's the initial charge we need for takeoff) 20min, 5.2min, 20min, 5.2min, 20min. = 75.6 min.
Now we decide to drive at 90mph. I assume our energy consumption will increase by about 20%.
90mph at 480watts/mile. Takes 17.3min and 12.48kwh to complete the journey. We have a 120kwh supercharger and need to get those 12.47kw. We do not need to worry about tapering as our state of charge is quite low so we will charge at 120kwh or 2kw/min so after 6.24 min of charging we make back our 12.48kwh. So for the whole yourney we spend 6.24min (that's the intiial charge we need for takeoff), 17.3min, 6.24min, 17.3min, 6.24min, 17.3min = 70.62 min.
80mph = about 5min slower than 90mph. I obviously made the watt consumption up but I think as long as you consume less watts/minute than you can charge per minute it is faster to drive... faster. The supercharger starts to taper off after 40%, so if you do longer journeys with no supercharger covering your 40% state of charge the tapering will at some point make the charging speed so slow that it is faster to drive more slowly. (480w/mile at 90mph means you consume 720kw per minute. So once the supercharger tapers down to 45kwh at around 70% SOC charging you will use power faster than you can charge). Another problem is that, at least in Europe, you will often need to alter your route slightly if you want to include another supercharger. If your journey is then 50km longer coz it's not directly on route you will be better off to slow down and reach the next supercharger which is on route.
Those are my saturday morning thoughts on the article. ^^*
There you go. The guy actually assumed you would arrive with 0 miles left and then supercharge only whats necessary to get to the next supercharger. In that case the sweetspot was 75-80 mph. Personally I think as long as your watt consumption is less than the charging speed you are best of driving faster until you reach that point. Let's assume we have Start A with supercharger, Supercharger 1, Supercharger 2, Destination B 26 miles apart. You are not allowed to charge more than you need.
80mph at 400 watts/mile. Takes 20min and 10.4kw to complete the journey. We have a 120kwh supercharger and need to get those 10.4 kw. We do not need to worry about tapering as our state of charge is quite low so we will charge at 120kwh or 2kw/min so after 5.2 minutes of charging we make back our 10.4kwh. So. For the whole journey we spend, 5.2min, (that's the initial charge we need for takeoff) 20min, 5.2min, 20min, 5.2min, 20min. = 75.6 min.
Now we decide to drive at 90mph. I assume our energy consumption will increase by about 20%.
90mph at 480watts/mile. Takes 17.3min and 12.48kwh to complete the journey. We have a 120kwh supercharger and need to get those 12.47kw. We do not need to worry about tapering as our state of charge is quite low so we will charge at 120kwh or 2kw/min so after 6.24 min of charging we make back our 12.48kwh. So for the whole yourney we spend 6.24min (that's the intiial charge we need for takeoff), 17.3min, 6.24min, 17.3min, 6.24min, 17.3min = 70.62 min.
80mph = about 5min slower than 90mph. I obviously made the watt consumption up but I think as long as you consume less watts/minute than you can charge per minute it is faster to drive... faster. The supercharger starts to taper off after 40%, so if you do longer journeys with no supercharger covering your 40% state of charge the tapering will at some point make the charging speed so slow that it is faster to drive more slowly. (480w/mile at 90mph means you consume 720kw per minute. So once the supercharger tapers down to 45kwh at around 70% SOC charging you will use power faster than you can charge). Another problem is that, at least in Europe, you will often need to alter your route slightly if you want to include another supercharger. If your journey is then 50km longer coz it's not directly on route you will be better off to slow down and reach the next supercharger which is on route.
Those are my saturday morning thoughts on the article. ^^*
Last edited:
caddieo
Member
Range/speed factors notwithstanding, Fezzik's experience points to the need for an intermediate SC between Country Club Hills and Effingham - probably in Champaign, IL where there is another confluence of N-S and E-W interstates.
Brass Guy
Active Member
@Candleflame
It's more complicated than that. As the OP expressed, the superchargers were not 26 miles apart; so had he slowed down to a speed less than 70 it could have taken less time because a 100% charge may not have been necessary. The last few % take a long time, longer than slowing 5-10 mph. Spend an extra 15-20 minutes getting the last few miles charged, or start driving sooner and drive slower.
I posted some charts here: Optimum Supercharger driving speed, you can see at higher speeds (especially longer distances) you dip deeper into the charge taper.
If your superchargers are 26 miles apart, the optimum speed is probably about 110mph; but you'd still only save about 1 minute over going 85. (Going 70 takes about another 4 more minutes.)
In distances you're likely to find superchargers, 80~140 miles, the difference of 10mph less than an optimal speed only means a 5 minute loss after charging. Not a big difference for a 2 hour drive.
It's more complicated than that. As the OP expressed, the superchargers were not 26 miles apart; so had he slowed down to a speed less than 70 it could have taken less time because a 100% charge may not have been necessary. The last few % take a long time, longer than slowing 5-10 mph. Spend an extra 15-20 minutes getting the last few miles charged, or start driving sooner and drive slower.
I posted some charts here: Optimum Supercharger driving speed, you can see at higher speeds (especially longer distances) you dip deeper into the charge taper.
If your superchargers are 26 miles apart, the optimum speed is probably about 110mph; but you'd still only save about 1 minute over going 85. (Going 70 takes about another 4 more minutes.)
In distances you're likely to find superchargers, 80~140 miles, the difference of 10mph less than an optimal speed only means a 5 minute loss after charging. Not a big difference for a 2 hour drive.
IIRC, I arrived at the Dalles, OR supercharger opening with 2 miles rated. I got mostly positive response to that.
Candleflame
Active Member
Well, that's exactly why i said that it depends on your average charging speed. I only picked 26 miles coz it was easy to work with at 80mph, I just wanted a number which was short enough so tapering didn't matter too much.
Obviously once you start using more than 1-40% of your range (so at 80mph ?100 miles or so) tapering will become a real issue as the supercharger isn't so super once it goes past 40%...
Btw I found this thread here in a german forum (no need to understand german the graphs are straight forward) TFF Forum - Tesla Fahrer Supercharger: Optimale Fahrgeschwindigkeit which is actually more lenient than your graphs. Their calculations are much more in keeping with driving as fast as possible as long as you can reach a SC and the SC charges faster than you consume. I suspect you probably drove at lower temperatures and there are some other factors which influence range which you cant account for with formulas. One of the forum users there comments that at higher speeds you disperse a significant amount of energy as heat in the motor & battery and that does not get used for speed. So the formula they use would have to be adjusted for that....
This is an update to this thread. I did the exact same trip. The first time was on firmware 168 and now I am on 245. Exact same config except this time I had a fan running in the back for the kidos which did great to keep them cool. the temps were 10 degrees warmer. The trip down was from 7pm to 3am and trip up was 11pm to 6pm.
Stopped at both country club hills supercharger and effingham.
This time around i did less cruise control and more me, but I let the cruise do some work and it was doing the same that I was doing really.
I was able to go 75-80 mph to effingham and have 15% left. I averaged 330-340wh/mi going 10-15mph faster. This was a shocker. Last time I barely made it with 1 percent gong 65-70mph. I thought it was a fluke and tested it on the way back. Again charged actually only to 98 percent in Effingham (a bad storm was coming and wanted to beat it... that last few percent was taking forever) Arrived at country club hills, IL with 15 percent charge doing avg 75-80mph and got ~340wh/mi. Was there an improvement in sleep mode from 168 to 245? I mean I didnt even have range anxiety at all this time. The 1 percent last time left me pretty nervous but proud I did it at the same time.
As for the routing of the supercharger, it still wanted me to go to normal, IL... way out of the way for the trip.
Thought I'd give an update to this.
Stopped at both country club hills supercharger and effingham.
This time around i did less cruise control and more me, but I let the cruise do some work and it was doing the same that I was doing really.
I was able to go 75-80 mph to effingham and have 15% left. I averaged 330-340wh/mi going 10-15mph faster. This was a shocker. Last time I barely made it with 1 percent gong 65-70mph. I thought it was a fluke and tested it on the way back. Again charged actually only to 98 percent in Effingham (a bad storm was coming and wanted to beat it... that last few percent was taking forever) Arrived at country club hills, IL with 15 percent charge doing avg 75-80mph and got ~340wh/mi. Was there an improvement in sleep mode from 168 to 245? I mean I didnt even have range anxiety at all this time. The 1 percent last time left me pretty nervous but proud I did it at the same time.
As for the routing of the supercharger, it still wanted me to go to normal, IL... way out of the way for the trip.
Thought I'd give an update to this.
I can't confirm this, but I had a very rough theory on driving faster. The car requires regular cooling to the battery pack and drive-train components. I thought part of normal operation was to use the front fans and AC compressor to cool said components. Now, lets say that at 60mph, the car needs to run said cooling system at 60%. But if you drive 80mph, there is more air coming in with less effort, and therefore the system might only need to run at 30%. These are totally arbitrary numbers, and there isn't really any way to test this without access to the diagnostic screens with breakdowns of watts per mile allocated to each system.
Also, at higher temps, I think the batteries have higher voltage. Could that explain the better performance with the opposite of what I mentioned above by having more heat in the system?
Agreed.
My kids were in them for less than 2 weeks, and then my daughter tells me "maybe we'll try them again in the winter" (and yes, the car was set to fresh air, I tinted the windows with heat reducing tint, got the rear sunshade, and got the kids 2 fans back there)
If I could return the seats, I would... but C'est la vie
Once the X is launched, very few people will order the S with rear facing seats, they will buy an X instead.
Similar threads
- Question
