-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Range Loss Over Time, What Can Be Expected, Efficiency, How to Maintain Battery Health
- Thread starter KK_RedM3
- Start date
The simple line drawn from start to finish is always a bit misleading. As recently as the 17,970 mile mark, you were at or above 310miles of range. Only after that, you've experienced a drop, which is in the last couple months. There's a strong chance it's correlated with temperature, but you'll only know that in the Spring.
Is yours a LR RWD? My LR RWD was manufactured in 11/18 and have almost exactly the same numbers for range as you do.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Same number of cells and approximately the same energy available, but physically the packs are slightly different.
Also due to the constant being different, if these packs show the same number of rated miles, they have different amounts of degradation. RWD starts with 325 rated miles while AWD started with 310; the rated miles do not contain identical amounts of energy.
FB49
Member
We picked up our new 2019 AWD Model 3 in August of 2019 and we've run it up to max charge only a few times, but we've never had a screen indication of more than 304 miles. We've had all the updates but still haven't seen that 325 mile range update, or even the original 315 mile range. I charge mostly at home using a 14-50 charger. Any suggestions on how to reach that mystical 325 or even 315?
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
There is no such update for AWD AFAIK. Remember the number does not really matter - it is the energy available and the efficiency of the vehicle that matter. And the number would be 322 rated miles anyway. It’s possible there will be a software update soon but no one really knows right now - and it may only be an update to the number and constant anyway which would potentially mean no actual change. Anyway, if there is a change, I would expect you’ll go to 315 or 316, if your number is 304 when warm now and it stays that way between now and the hypothetical update.
TimothyHW3
Active Member
AWD is capped at 310 on display (btw this is for pre 2020 End of 2019 models - the newer ones seem to be rated at 322 but not sure if it is a constant update or an efficiency boost). But you can still get more out of the car, rated miles is just a "number".
325 was the RWD model, but since most RWD models are probably past their degradation point, most of these guys "never saw" the 325 miles because their cars were already degraded pass the 310 point. But new deliviries since 2018's update show 325 when new and full.
Also, RWD and AWD use the came battery capacity, so this "rated miles number" you are seeing is just a kWh representation based on a consumption constant Tesla plays with. Doesn't mean a thing. If you drive your AWD below 200Wh/m or about 60mph steady in the summer, you will get even 350 miles and not even use the full capacity.
Last edited:
Alan, I have been using Teslamate logging software and it gives me the actual rated calculation it derived from the car, so we officially have the number 264wh/mi for the 2020 performance + on 20" weels.
side note, its claiming 291.5 miles at full charge (x 264wh/mi) 76,956 KWh
side note, its claiming 291.5 miles at full charge (x 264wh/mi) 76,956 KWh
TimothyHW3
Active Member
Interesting, but I don't quite trust this app because Tesla claims 310 for the P on their website so I guess they at least have to display the 310 when full.
So they actually increased the efficiency constant for the 2020 models. Is the AWD 2020 still 310 miles on display or 322 as it says on the website?
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Whoops, missed that you have a 2019, not a 2020. My comments above are for 2020. Your car is rated for 310 and will likely always display that number (or less due to loss of capacity). But you may get some efficiency improvements that the 2020 model gets.
This constant of 264Wh/rmi is very likely correct. It is consistent with everything we have seen.
It’s a confusing time because clearly changes are in progress - no AWD vehicle displays the 322 rated miles stated on the website. Yet they likely will at some point soon.
For the Performance, it may be the case that more than 66% of the Performance sold are 18” Stealth (seems unlikely, but maybe). That would allow them to claim 322 miles on the website (since that vehicle has 332 mile range voluntarily derated to 322). And they may choose to pick a number in the middle (middle of the 322 (332), 304, and 299 EPA ratings).
The constants for Performance 2020 vehicles change depending on the wheel configuration the user selects (and of course rated miles adjust accordingly).
My 2018 RWD's 80% fell to 245 estimated miles on the most recent 2 charges (just surpassed 12k miles on the odo), it was pretty solidly at 246 prior to that for as long as I can remember. *cries* I think the best estimated range I've seen is 315, and it looks like those days are behind me. Can't wait for the solid state and the 500+ range options.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Just a projected estimate, discussed above somewhere I am sure. The potential error due to rounding error will increase the lower is your current state of charge.
TimothyHW3
Active Member
This is depending on cell temperature. Once the battery cools down you see lower values. Even though you are in California I am sure you have below 10-5C temperatures over night so this could affect that estimate greatly.
TimothyHW3
Active Member
By the way, I just watched some SR+ videos with Scan My Tesla data and it seems like the calculations constant for the range is at 136.3Wh/km
I don't wanna translate that to miles, but if someone from the forum wants to check - just run the car in km and see the energy tab what the straight line says.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Not in Carlsbad, and not with those numbers. Minimum temps in Carlsbad are 10C which will have minimal impact on energy projections in my experience. I am also not even sure the Tesla app is strongly affected by this (it may be).
Just from context, in this case, this is clearly rounding error. Super easy to see (and prove) - you can see the 100% projection numbers move all over the place during the charge (even as the current rated miles increase by just 1-2 - just have to look for a few minutes), especially if you are at a low state of charge. Rounding error is amplified, there is no way around that.
It’s just a limitation of what SoC precision is available via the API as far as I can tell.
That being said, yes, in general, don’t read much into capacity numbers when the battery is actually cold. It does not have as much available energy when it is cold!
pdx_m3s
Active Member
Random data point: My SR+ with 3,700 miles extrapolates to 235 miles (at 71% charge). It was 238 about a thousand miles ago, however, it was a lot warmer then.
Similar threads
