Range Loss Over Time, What Can Be Expected, Efficiency, How to Maintain Battery Health

[AlanSubie4Life]

I spent 2 months researching Tesla M3, and range was a top issue for me just as it is for a significant segment of the market.

I take it that you found this website after your purchase? I’m sorry that happened. It really is one of the best websites for Tesla information available (though it does require some wading), thanks to numerous knowledgeable owners here.

Range anxiety is an issue.

Actually this is what I like best about the Tesla energy display - you nearly always know exactly how it's going to behave (caveats in extreme cold). Those rated miles are so darn deterministic, which makes them wonderful. No guess-o-meter! The Trip page is great too. Gets rid of a lot of that range anxiety. After settling out, if it says you're going to make it, you're going to make it (it is usually slightly pessimistic)! Unless conditions change drastically of course.

 

[KenC]

OK. Here's the range update I promised. Planned a drive from Austin to Columbus (end of Hwy 71 where it meets IH10) and back without stopping except to take photos of display. Vehicle was never in "park", only "hold" and only for a few seconds.. Had to wait until weather improved in Texas. Charged vehicle to 100%, awakened vehicle while still plugged in, range displayed 352 miles. T

Austin-Columbus: 95 miles, 28 kWh, 295 Wh/mile, 62% of power remaining, range showed 216 miles.. Drive is relatively flat. First 30 miles traveled 60-75 mph. Set cruise control to 80 mph for about 15 miles, then lowered to 75 mph for final 50 miles. Temperature outside was 55-65 degrees; internal temp in cabin was set to 69 degrees.

Columbus-Austin: 94.4 miles, 28 kWh, 292 Wh/mile, 24% power remaining, range showed 83 miles. Drove at speed limit (no cruise control) of 75 mph for 60 miles. Drove remaining 34.4 miles at posted speed limits of 60-75 mph. Temperature outside was 65-71 degrees; internal temp in cabin was set to 69 degrees.

Total trip was 189.4 miles, 56 kWh, 294 Wh/mile. Range decreased from 352 miles to 82 miles (270 miles), battery percent 100% - 24%. No Sentry Mode, no rapid acceleration at any time, vehicle never in Park. Total trip relatively flat.

Imputed total vehicle range is 249 miles (189.4 divided by 76% usage). Total battery charge displayable is 73.7 kWh (56 kWh divided by 76%).

This is for a 2021 Tesla Model 3 Long Range (refreshed model) less than 2 months old, 18" wheels, with no Sentry Mode on and no rapid acceleration. This is 70% of advertised EPA range.

I've asked Tesla to investigate what could have been done to increase range closer to EPA advertised range. I've done this twice before based on stop and start driving, and each time Tesla said nothing can be done the car is operating properly.

Range was a major factor in my purchase decision. At every step, Tesla reps told me range was achievable. Even websites like Teslike.com show older versions of the M3 LR getting 277 miles of range at 75 mph. This was for the 2019 M3 that had either 310 or 322 EPA range. I assumed my worst case scenario at 75 mph would be north of 300 miles, and likely closer to 320 miles of range. Not even close.

I frankly would not have purchased the vehicle had I any inkling real world range for a vehicle advertised to at 353 miles of range would be less than 250 miles of range when brand new. Let's see what Tesla says. I can post photos of the LCD screen at departure, at the end of the first 95 miles, and upon return to Austin. Total trip time was 2 hours 49 minutes.

Thanks for putting up your data. I would agree with @Alan, unlike your initial posts, you don't have a smaller battery. Your data, and the math checks out, your battery size is normal. The issue seems to be a small lack of efficiency. For whatever reason, you are not getting what I would consider normal efficiency. You show ~295Wh/mile.

At 65mph in 65F weather, in my old 2018 LR-AWD, I get about 235Wh/mile, right around EPA. At 75-80mph, I get 265Wh/mile. You seem to have driven into a headwind BOTH ways! Did you check your tire pressures? Any uneven wear on your tires? Your efficiency should be at least as good as my older model, but it isn't.

I would run ABRP, and check what it calibrates to at 65mph, takes less guesswork on your part. Below, my reference efficiency is higher, 247Wh/mile, due to running in colder weather, 41F:

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

At 75-80mph, I get 265Wh/mile. You seem to have driven into a headwind BOTH ways! Did you check your tire pressures? Any uneven wear on your tires?

This is a good point - it does seem like a somewhat worse result than expected given the stated speeds...this is what I would expect for 80+mph with that vehicle. Assuming it has aero wheels. And no heat use (conditions did not seem cold enough to warrant it and it has a heat pump so it would not be that bad).

Range was a major factor in my purchase decision.

I assume you have aero wheels with 18” then? (Looking at your pictures: your avatar of the car says yes. I assume you still have the aeros on the car.)

I do think that your actual efficiency is perhaps a bit worse than expected. Very hard to gauge that though since it depends so much on conditions and usage and people don’t ever provide every single relevant condition. As @KenC says: Definitely check your tire inflation and alignment. Perhaps have Tesla look at the alignment, too. That is something they could do - if the toe is too much it could create significant drag, but you would likely see accelerated wear.

Conditions as I see them:
Looks like you had brisk south winds (15-20mph, 30mph gusts) in Austin today, probably as a front moved through, between 9AM and a little after noon. That would have caused poor efficiency both coming and going, given you were traveling somewhat east/west. And if they swung around during your trip they could have hurt you both ways. (I wasn't able to find local climate observation layers through NOAA for your area like I can in most areas. So the details are left to my imagination.)

As you said:
55 degrees on the way out (you should have turned the heat off for this test, probably).
66 degrees on the way back (definitely should have turned the heat off for that).
(To turn the heat off, set the cabin temperature a few degrees below the outside temp, turn off the AC, and turn on recirculated air.)

Even so, with climate control off (or very modest use of heat pump), without winds, at 65mph, I would expect better than 250Wh/mi - I don't have this version of the car with aeros, but my brother does, and he does not have a problem getting ~250Wh/mi traveling at 70-75mph in light traffic without heat use.

Anyway, to me 295Wh/mi seems high, though with a 20mph headwind (doesn't look like you had that, exactly, but I'm not sure), at speeds of 70-80mph to start with, it would be completely reasonable. Headwind hurts a LOT, because it causes the drag force to go up with the square of (vehicle speed + wind speed), and unlike normal ground speed, it doesn't get you there faster (note that Wh/mi has units of force). It's very bad. Nice when it's a tailwind, though it doesn't help as much as it hurts, due to the square factor.

 

[jk_tx]

This is a good point - it does seem like a somewhat worse result than expected given the stated speeds...this is what I would expect for 80+mph with that vehicle. Assuming it has aero wheels. And no heat use (conditions did not seem cold enough to warrant it and it has a heat pump so it would not be that bad).




I assume you have aero wheels with 18” then? (Looking at your pictures: your avatar of the car says yes. I assume you still have the aeros on the car.)

I do think that your actual efficiency is perhaps a bit worse than expected. Very hard to gauge that though since it depends so much on conditions and usage and people don’t ever provide every single relevant condition. As @KenC says: Definitely check your tire inflation and alignment. Perhaps have Tesla look at the alignment, too. That is something they could do - if the toe is too much it could create significant drag, but you would likely see accelerated wear.

Conditions as I see them:
Looks like you had brisk south winds (15-20mph, 30mph gusts) in Austin today, probably as a front moved through, between 9AM and a little after noon. That would have caused poor efficiency both coming and going, given you were traveling somewhat east/west. And if they swung around during your trip they could have hurt you both ways. (I wasn't able to find local climate observation layers through NOAA for your area like I can in most areas. So the details are left to my imagination.)

As you said:
55 degrees on the way out (you should have turned the heat off for this test, probably).
66 degrees on the way back (definitely should have turned the heat off for that).
(To turn the heat off, set the cabin temperature a few degrees below the outside temp, turn off the AC, and turn on recirculated air.)

Even so, with climate control off (or very modest use of heat pump), without winds, at 65mph, I would expect better than 250Wh/mi - I don't have this version of the car with aeros, but my brother does, and he does not have a problem getting ~250Wh/mi traveling at 70-75mph in light traffic without heat use.

Anyway, to me 295Wh/mi seems high, though with a 20mph headwind (doesn't look like you had that, exactly, but I'm not sure), at speeds of 70-80mph to start with, it would be completely reasonable. Headwind hurts a LOT, because it causes the drag force to go up with the square of (vehicle speed + wind speed), and unlike normal ground speed, it doesn't get you there faster (note that Wh/mi has units of force). It's very bad. Nice when it's a tailwind, though it doesn't help as much as it hurts, due to the square factor.

AlanSubie4Life and MP3Mike: Really appreciate your replies. You guys are informative and kind, the latter being rare online when seeking info on some forums. Tire pressure was 44 psi front, 43 psi rear. Yes to aero wheels. Trees were not showing lots of wind (eg. swaying, leaf movement); actually wondered about wind and kept an eye out intermittently. I've put in a service request again with Tesla to help me understand, posting same info and pics as here. I, too, was shocked at the 295 Wh/mile average. I kept staring at that usage level throughout the trip thinking surely it will fall, and it never did.

Agree EVs are not for everyone. My frustration is with Tesla. They know range anxiety is a major issue among a market segment of potential buyers. They market range heavily, and marketed this version as achieving higher range than the last. If you chat online with a rep pre-purchase ans ask about range, they'll write range is achievable and normal, unless one drives really aggressively. I literally have screen shots of Tesla telling me this in a chat. The poor range makes the battery warranty almost irrelevant, as normal consumers don't care about internal science but rather performance. Battery capacity equates to range, so achieving 70% of advertised range when new is some consumers' eyes the equivalent of having only 70% of battery storage capacity (ergo my initial confusion that the issue might be the battery capacity).

Think the best I and others can do post-purchase if Tesla does not find a way to improve range is inform others. I have several family and friends curious about my experience, as I was such a pro-Tesla evangelist before the range issue became apparent.

Tesla wants these to be mass market vehicles. I support that goal, and GMs and other manufacturers' goals of moving away from ICE. But Tesla has new batteries coming out in 2 years with much greater range at lower weight and size. That will be the ICE tipping point toward EVs, not today. I knew about the forthcoming battery technology, but felt 353 miles was enough for now (or even 90% of that in real world use). My view is that unless there's something wrong with the vehicle that will improve that range, I've adopted too early based on information promoted by Tesla to induce me to purchase. Harsh view? Perhaps for some, but spending $50K+ after tax is important to most people.

Thanks again for the help. Hopefully others can be informed by this thread, as sunlight is the best disinfectant.

 

[MP3Mike]

I spent 2 months researching Tesla M3, and range was a top issue for me just as it is for a significant segment of the market.

What all did you research during those 2 months? Did you look in to the EPA range estimates and what they actually entail?

For example here is the highway test:

Notice that the average speed is ~48 MPH, and the top speed is ~60 MPH. In 2008 they added a "high speed" test supplement, but again the average speed is ~48 MPH and they only go over 60 MPH for a small period of the test:

Full details here: Detailed Test Information

in online chats with Tesla employees pre-sale they wrote 353 miles were achievable in normal driving.

But what is "normal driving" to you may not be the same to them. For example normal driving to me is an average speed of 35 MPH with a top speed of 45 MPH. (My daily commute to the office which includes a portion on the highway.)

Also, most states have an upper speed limit in the 65-70MPH range...

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I've put in a service request again with Tesla to help me understand, posting same info and pics as here. I, too, was shocked at the 295 Wh/mile average. I kept staring at that usage level throughout the trip thinking surely it will fall, and it never did.

If you have opportunity for another experiment on a calm and pleasant day, try doing a 40-50 mile round trip at about 70mph, this time with climate control off (or at least fan low, AC off, recirculating, temp set to 61 (below outside temp)). I really would expect you should see about 250Wh/mi in those conditions with your vehicle. That would give you a range of ~295 miles (when new - this will go down 5-10% over the next few years probably).

290Wh/mi would be unexpected, if there is no wind and no other unusual circumstance (roads need to be dry, etc.)

Since you have the heat pump, I wouldn’t have expected it to hurt you so much in your test case, but I don’t have a good feel for it. I’d expect an adder of about 10-20Wh/mi at 50mph at those temps, I guess. (Equals 500-1000W)

I knew about the forthcoming battery technology, but felt 353 miles was enough for now (or even 90% of that in real world use).

Since you have the car now...there is not much you can do. So where to go from here? (Aside from Tesla checking the vehicle for rolling resistance issues.) I don’t know your use case, but maybe now worth thinking about where is this result going to hurt you? Texas is a big state, so it might be a huge pain, but on the other hand it may be of little consequence. It depends on you.

Certainly in energy cost it will have some consequence. But when will this be an issue, exactly? On a road trip it might seem kind of nice to be able to travel 300 miles between stops, but practically speaking 200 miles is really not that different.

I’m not saying more is not better - of course it would be. Just worth giving some thought to the practical implications. In my mind, it limits your ability to go places without Superchargers...and that is about it.

I used to worry a lot about this too. But after a few trips, I realized I can go pretty much anywhere with Superchargers, as long as it’s not a holiday weekend or a peak travel time (in my mind not worth risking the stress of having to wait in line for a long time (or even 15 minutes) in those scenarios, so typically I will just take the ICE at those peak times - this is a much bigger problem than the range in my view).

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Notice that the average speed is ~48 MPH, and the top speed is ~60 MPH. In 2008 they added a "high speed" test supplement, but again the average speed is ~48 MPH and they only go over 60 MPH for a small period of the test:

Worth noting that for this HWFET cycle Tesla actually gets 447 miles (176Wh/mi) for the 2021 AWD in this test, so that is more the expectation for that speed profile.

For US06, I can’t find the data for that specific vehicle right now, but extrapolating from the Performance 2021 it is probably about 240Wh/mi, or 325 miles, with that profile, for the AWD 18”. Seems reasonable at an avg speed of 48mph with minimal use of the brake (those are not quick stops).

These ranges are brought to be more “realistic” by the EPA-mandated 0.7 factor (for which, by rule, Tesla can use 0.748 for Model 3 with heat pump, if they want - and they do).

As you say, nothing fake about these numbers - they are EPA-mandated cycles, and you can really achieve these results if you follow the cycle.

 

[KenC]

AlanSubie4Life and MP3Mike: Really appreciate your replies. You guys are informative and kind, the latter being rare online when seeking info on some forums. Tire pressure was 44 psi front, 43 psi rear. Yes to aero wheels. Trees were not showing lots of wind (eg. swaying, leaf movement); actually wondered about wind and kept an eye out intermittently. I've put in a service request again with Tesla to help me understand, posting same info and pics as here. I, too, was shocked at the 295 Wh/mile average. I kept staring at that usage level throughout the trip thinking surely it will fall, and it never did.

Agree EVs are not for everyone. My frustration is with Tesla. They know range anxiety is a major issue among a market segment of potential buyers. They market range heavily, and marketed this version as achieving higher range than the last. If you chat online with a rep pre-purchase ans ask about range, they'll write range is achievable and normal, unless one drives really aggressively. I literally have screen shots of Tesla telling me this in a chat. The poor range makes the battery warranty almost irrelevant, as normal consumers don't care about internal science but rather performance. Battery capacity equates to range, so achieving 70% of advertised range when new is some consumers' eyes the equivalent of having only 70% of battery storage capacity (ergo my initial confusion that the issue might be the battery capacity).

Think the best I and others can do post-purchase if Tesla does not find a way to improve range is inform others. I have several family and friends curious about my experience, as I was such a pro-Tesla evangelist before the range issue became apparent.

Tesla wants these to be mass market vehicles. I support that goal, and GMs and other manufacturers' goals of moving away from ICE. But Tesla has new batteries coming out in 2 years with much greater range at lower weight and size. That will be the ICE tipping point toward EVs, not today. I knew about the forthcoming battery technology, but felt 353 miles was enough for now (or even 90% of that in real world use). My view is that unless there's something wrong with the vehicle that will improve that range, I've adopted too early based on information promoted by Tesla to induce me to purchase. Harsh view? Perhaps for some, but spending $50K+ after tax is important to most people.

Thanks again for the help. Hopefully others can be informed by this thread, as sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Since I haven't seen it mentioned, range is only important if you plan on never using a Supercharger. Otherwise, the fastest way to drive, is to drive fast, and charge often at low SOC levels, ie around 15% SOC.

In general, the spacing of Superchargers is such that range isn't a problem. Having said that, there are some spots in the US, where distance between Superchargers is an issue. As long as there are Superchargers spaced about 120 to 150 miles apart, then drive fast, and stop for 10 to 15mins to charge.

Run simulations on ABRP, to pre-check any new routes you might take on a trip, to find out if there are any troublesome legs where you might have to go slower, but otherwise, drive fast, and monitor how you're doing relative to plan, using the energy and trip charts.

 

[JCtx]

I, too, was shocked at the 295 Wh/mile average.

Hey, that's my 'lifetime' average so far, with 2K miles, so I'd say not bad at all. Ha ha. And mine is also a 2021 LR. About 1,200 of those were from El Paso to Austin and back, with very high winds both ways, and cold. And yes, fast too . I think I got like 345 Wh/mi on the trip itself, so quite bad. But still got 2.5 miles per 1% charge, which worked perfectly for us, so it should only get better, as weather warms up.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

My view is that unless there's something wrong with the vehicle that will improve that range, I've adopted too early based on information promoted by Tesla to induce me to purchase. Harsh view? Perhaps for some, but spending $50K+ after tax is important to most people.

Just to give you some parameters to play with and help you understand your results, a while back I put together a very rough physical model (fitted to my results in a Performance Model 3). It's not too far off, but the exact parameters are important here, and you shouldn't view them as perfect, they are just to give you a feel for it (this particular model in this link has a 9kW load on it, for example, but I include the link for the general discussion):

Battery life seems way off?

Here's a tweaked version of the same which might roughly illustrate your scenario. There's no getting around the squared increase in force to overcome drag as speed increases:

Wh/mi vs. Velocity - Wolfram|Alpha

You can see that while this would give about 170Wh/mi at 46mph (EPA!), at 80mph you'll be at close to 300Wh/mi. Drop to 70mph and you're at 260Wh/mi. And at 56mph you'll hit rated range. I suspect this equation is slightly pessimistic for your vehicle, though (drag coefficient may be slightly too high...).

The terms (again, the coefficients aren't perfect here) are important to understand too:
1) Accessory load (heating/AC, standby power) contribution goes down with increasing speed
2) Per-distance load (rolling resistance contribution which is not dependent on velocity - so basically the force to maintain steady vehicle speed in the absence of wind resistance)
3) Aero drag (force (Wh/mi) goes up with square of velocity)

You can see best efficiency is around 19mph, 130Wh/mi, with 600 miles of range, as was determined for a RWD vehicle years ago. It's possible that for your vehicle the optimum is actually a little higher consumption (again, coefficients!).

Again, not intended to be a rigorous model, but gives you the general idea and should help you with your understanding of achievable range and what to expect.

I think that'll be the last comment on this here from me, since this thread I think is more about actual battery capacity and how it may change (which was your original concern, but it seems to be fine). But let us know if Tesla finds any issues with your alignment or other rolling resistance issues.

 

[InfinitySky]

I'm sorry in advance for another battery degradation post...but I'm really frustrated with my situation and I'm hoping this forum has some guidance for me. I have an SR+ bought end of June of last year with just over 10,000 miles. Although I was originally supposed to have 250 miles on this battery, I've never seen more than 240 on the screen. I didn't have extensive knowledge about batteries when I bought the car so I immediately contacted my service center when I saw this and got told this was "normal". Now here I am, 8 months & 10,000 miles later showing a consistent 212-216 rated miles. This is around a 14%-15% drop off that 250 number I was supposed to be getting originally. Here is some more data on my usage:

• generally charge to 80% daily, deplete to around 40% by day's end
• about 8-10 lifetime Supercharger uses
• have charged to 100% 4-5 times and left immediately after charging completed
• have done the "charge to 90% for a few weeks for re-calibration" and my rated miles have not increased
• have done the "let charge drop below 10% then charge to 100% for re-calibration" twice and my rated miles have not increased either time
• just completed a drive 80% hwy/ 20% city yesterday and went 142 miles at 234 wh/mi. My battery went from 90% to 11% before charging and I used 33 kwh of battery. This means I only have (142.6 * 234/.79) 42 kwh of usable battery, which is crazy at this point in the battery's life

I'm pretty much out of ideas at this point. That drive I did yesterday seals it up for how frustrated I am at this point. Changing it to % doesn't change the fact that I'm not getting the car I paid for. I shouldn't be seeing this much degradation over the life of the car, let alone in the first 10,000 miles. I see some people have had Tesla do an over-the-air analysis of their battery...how should I do this? Contact my local service center? Am I just screwed unless my battery degrades under 70% for a warranty replacement? Do I literally have the worst Tesla battery in the world?

TL;DR: My SR+ battery has turned to mush in just 10,000 miles, and I'm feeling like I got left holding the bag on this $45,000 (FSD enabled) car which is awesome in every other way. Please convince me I'm wrong or there is something I am missing here. I want to love this car but this is driving me crazy

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

• just completed a drive 80% hwy/ 20% city yesterday and went 142 miles at 234 wh/mi. My battery went from 90% to 11% before charging and I used 33 kwh of battery. This means I only have (142.6 * 234/.79) 42 kwh of usable battery, which is crazy at this point in the battery's life

Your calculations are pretty much correct. Since your battery has about ~213 rated miles at a full charge, and your vehicle constant is 210Wh/rmi (250rmi,52.5kWh,2020 SR+) you have a capacity of 44.7kWh vs. 52.5kWh when new (which it clearly looks like you never had). 95.5% of this is available above 0%, which is 42.7kWh. Close enough to your 42.2kWh number (the trip meter loses track of about 1% of your energy, so I would have expected 42.7kWh to show as 42.3kWh).

There is nothing you can do. You have 15% capacity loss (15% from what you should have had, 11% from what you actually started with). It’ll probably slow down. It is possible when the weather warms some of it will come back. It’s a very real loss though - not an “estimate” as some say. Of course it IS an estimate - a very accurate one!

This is one of the worse results I have seen, though probably not the worst.

One thing I would not do is waste your time on it, by stressing, talking to Tesla (you could have them run remote diagnostics but it is unlikely they will find anything other than 15% capacity loss), etc. It is what it is. If the range works for you, it is not a problem. If it doesn’t work for your needs, you have to buy another car (and budget 15% capacity loss (just to be sure) for the next one!!!).

If your 100% displayed range hits 175 rated miles (unlikely), take it to Tesla and have your battery replaced.

I'm sorry in advance for another battery degradation post

That is what this thread is for. Thanks for posting your data here.

 

[InfinitySky]

Your calculations are pretty much correct. Since your battery has about ~213 rated miles at a full charge, and your vehicle constant is 210Wh/rmi (250rmi,52.5kWh,2020 SR+) you have a capacity of 44.7kWh vs. 52.5kWh when new (which it sounds like you never had). 95.5% of this is available above 0%, which is 42.7kWh. Close enough to your 42.2kWh number (the trip meter loses track of about 1% of your energy, so I would have expected 42.7kWh to show as 42.3kWh).

There is nothing you can do. You have 15% capacity loss (15% from what you should have had, 11% from what you actually started with). It’ll probably slow down. It is possible when the weather warms some of it will come back. It’s a very real loss though - not an “estimate” as some say. Of course it IS an estimate - a very accurate one!

This is one of the worse results I have seen, though probably not the worst.

One thing I would not do is waste your time on it, by stressing, talking to Tesla (you could have them run remote diagnostics but it is unlikely they will find anything other than 15% capacity loss), etc. It is what it is. If the range works for you, it is not a problem. If it doesn’t work for your needs, you have to buy another car (and budget 15% capacity loss (just to be sure) for the next one!!!).

If your displayed range hits 175 rated miles (unlikely), take it to Tesla and have your battery replaced.



That is what this thread is for. Thanks for posting your data here.

Thanks for your detailed response. This range actually does currently work for me, but I am stressing about whether it may work for me in the future if I ever move or need more range on a daily basis. It does bother me that everywhere you look on the internet all you hear is “not to worry” about Tesla batteries because they are the best...and here I am just feeling like I’m not even close to getting what I paid for

I’ll set up a service appointment through the app to see what Tesla has to say about it. I just feel foolish because this isn’t my “fault” and Tesla won’t do anything until it drops to 70% capacity which is also extremely unlikely. I appreciate your concerns about stressing about it, but I don’t see any other way around it at this point. No way I can afford to pay for another car just for a few extra miles of range

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I’ll set up a service appointment through the app to see what Tesla has to say about it.

Not really any harm - let us know what they say and ideally press them on details. (Though you already know.)

I am stressing about whether it may work for me in the future if I ever move or need more range on a daily basis

Yeah, understood. Would just worry about that when/if it happens and not too much before.

I think the capacity loss is very likely to slow down.

No way I can afford to pay for another car just for a few extra miles of range

Of course. You are fortunate the range works for you. As long as it does, it isn’t really that big an issue, though it is certainly annoying to be on the bottom half of the distribution.

 

[jk_tx]

Just to give you some parameters to play with and help you understand your results, a while back I put together a very rough physical model (fitted to my results in a Performance Model 3). It's not too far off, but the exact parameters are important here, and you shouldn't view them as perfect, they are just to give you a feel for it (this particular model in this link has a 9kW load on it, for example, but I include the link for the general discussion):

Battery life seems way off?

Here's a tweaked version of the same which might roughly illustrate your scenario. There's no getting around the squared increase in force to overcome drag as speed increases:

Wh/mi vs. Velocity - Wolfram|Alpha

You can see that while this would give about 170Wh/mi at 46mph (EPA!), at 80mph you'll be at close to 300Wh/mi. Drop to 70mph and you're at 260Wh/mi. And at 56mph you'll hit rated range. I suspect this equation is slightly pessimistic for your vehicle, though (drag coefficient may be slightly too high...).

The terms (again, the coefficients aren't perfect here) are important to understand too:
1) Accessory load (heating/AC, standby power) contribution goes down with increasing speed
2) Per-distance load (rolling resistance contribution which is not dependent on velocity - so basically the force to maintain steady vehicle speed in the absence of wind resistance)
3) Aero drag (force (Wh/mi) goes up with square of velocity)

You can see best efficiency is around 19mph, 130Wh/mi, with 600 miles of range, as was determined for a RWD vehicle years ago. It's possible that for your vehicle the optimum is actually a little higher consumption (again, coefficients!).

Again, not intended to be a rigorous model, but gives you the general idea and should help you with your understanding of achievable range and what to expect.

I think that'll be the last comment on this here from me, since this thread I think is more about actual battery capacity and how it may change (which was your original concern, but it seems to be fine). But let us know if Tesla finds any issues with your alignment or other rolling resistance issues.

Will do, and thank you again for your kind and informative posts.

 

[WarpedOne]

This range actually does currently work for me, but I am stressing about whether it may work for me in the future if I ever move or need more range on a daily basis.

If the range works for you now, there is no reason to loose sleep on it.
When / if it does not any more, you will need to find a solution.
Leave those worries for the later time.

It does bother me that everywhere you look on the internet all you hear is “not to worry” about Tesla batteries because they are the best...

That's because they are - the best.
That does not mean they are perfect, they still degrade. In general teslas see the least degradation.
Don't confuse/compare this with hidden degradation that some other manufactures do.
Tesla could easily sell this cars as 200m range and still show you only 200 miles.

and here I am just feeling like I’m not even close to getting what I paid for

You payed for a tesla and you got a tesla.

I’ll set up a service appointment through the app to see what Tesla has to say about it. I just feel foolish because this isn’t my “fault” and Tesla won’t do anything until it drops to 70% capacity which is also extremely unlikely.

Extremely unlikely, yes. What is there to worry about then? Nothing. You are just another case of to high of expectations.
The best advice to give is - don't worry.
Unfortunately that is also the hardest one to take.

 

[stevesark]

I mean I think my own degradation is maybe 7-9% after 2 years, but there’s a couple thing I’ve realized.
1. Not at 30% yet, so I know Tesla won’t touch it
2. It still gets me where I need to go with the range it has. If this ever changed, I’d sell it
3. I know some people have it better and some worse, but doesn’t help my cause thinking about that.

 

[MountainRatMat]

AlanSubie4Life and MP3Mike: Really appreciate your replies. You guys are informative and kind, the latter being rare online when seeking info on some forums. Tire pressure was 44 psi front, 43 psi rear. Yes to aero wheels. Trees were not showing lots of wind (eg. swaying, leaf movement); actually wondered about wind and kept an eye out intermittently. I've put in a service request again with Tesla to help me understand, posting same info and pics as here. I, too, was shocked at the 295 Wh/mile average. I kept staring at that usage level throughout the trip thinking surely it will fall, and it never did.

Agree EVs are not for everyone. My frustration is with Tesla. They know range anxiety is a major issue among a market segment of potential buyers. They market range heavily, and marketed this version as achieving higher range than the last. If you chat online with a rep pre-purchase ans ask about range, they'll write range is achievable and normal, unless one drives really aggressively. I literally have screen shots of Tesla telling me this in a chat. The poor range makes the battery warranty almost irrelevant, as normal consumers don't care about internal science but rather performance. Battery capacity equates to range, so achieving 70% of advertised range when new is some consumers' eyes the equivalent of having only 70% of battery storage capacity (ergo my initial confusion that the issue might be the battery capacity).

Think the best I and others can do post-purchase if Tesla does not find a way to improve range is inform others. I have several family and friends curious about my experience, as I was such a pro-Tesla evangelist before the range issue became apparent.

Tesla wants these to be mass market vehicles. I support that goal, and GMs and other manufacturers' goals of moving away from ICE. But Tesla has new batteries coming out in 2 years with much greater range at lower weight and size. That will be the ICE tipping point toward EVs, not today. I knew about the forthcoming battery technology, but felt 353 miles was enough for now (or even 90% of that in real world use). My view is that unless there's something wrong with the vehicle that will improve that range, I've adopted too early based on information promoted by Tesla to induce me to purchase. Harsh view? Perhaps for some, but spending $50K+ after tax is important to most people.

Thanks again for the help. Hopefully others can be informed by this thread, as sunlight is the best disinfectant.

I would agree that 295 Wh/Mi is really high consumption for that speed.

Was it cold overnight? A cold soaked battery will use a lot of energy early in the drive and skew your numbers.

Unfortunately you are just finding out the realities of an EV, better performance in the summer than winter and higher consumption than the rated range unless you drive everywhere at 65mph in 72 degree weather with no climate control on.

Hope this experience doesn't sour you too much about EV's and/or Tesla's because in my opinion the cars are incredible.

 

[jk_tx]

Not really any harm - let us know what they say and ideally press them on details. (Though you already know.)



Yeah, understood. Would just worry about that when/if it happens and not too much before.

I think the capacity loss is very likely to slow down.



Of course. You are fortunate the range works for you. As long as it does, it isn’t really that big an issue, though it is certainly annoying to be on the bottom half of the distribution.

Final post on this issue. Wish I'd discovered this article before deciding to purchase a Tesla. Posting for the benefit of others for whom range is important in their purchase decision process:
Tesla Fails To Meet EPA Range With All Its Cars In Edmunds' Tests

Article details how Tesla vehicles underperform advertised EPA range significantly whereas several competitors overperform EPA range. (Porche Taycan, for example achieves 323 of miles on a full charge vs. 203 EPA estimate.) Tesla and Polestar achieve this primarily by using an additional 3 drive cycles its competitors do not to "earn" a higher EPA range. Tesla vehicles are not even the most efficient at kWh/100 miles, per the article, raising questions about Tesla's potential to continue dominating the EV market as more established vehicle manufacturers with higher build quality and longer market experience move into the space.

I posted my 189.4 mile trip from Austin-Columbus TX - Austin of continuous driving to Tesla Service. The drive was relatively flat (200 feet of elevation change between the 2 cities), and per Tesla outside temps ranged from 55-75 F. They sent an email and PDF showing motor usage represented 96% of total electricity usage. Per my original post, the vast majority of the trip was performed at the speed limit posted of 75 MPH, with a small percentage at or about 80 MPH, and an small percentage less than 70 MPH. Total range of 250 miles is what this vehicle can achieve when new, on relatively flat roads, in temperate conditions. In colder or hotter temps (more temp control drain on battery), or terrain with more grade, or over time it will achieve less per Tesla.

I have gone from a Tesla evangelist to a Telsa owner who feels duped by Tesla marketing about range. I take long road trips, and believed the vehicle would achieve about 300 miles between charges. It cannot. This vehicle requires recharging every 200 miles or less on highways when driving at the speed limit of 75 MPH or a few MPH faster. it makes a simple trip from Austin-Dallas (200 miles) questionable without a stop to recharge, particularly if traffic causes highway travel delay. Trips to farther destinations will likely require a recharge every 2-2.5 hours. Not what I thought I was buying, not how I like to drive, and not what Tesla markets aggressively in terms of range performance.

For anyone for whom Range is an issue in choosing to buy a Tesla, read the above article, search for others and become better informed. 70% of EPA range when on a highway at posted speed limits is normal per Tesla Service for my new 353 mile range 2021 Tesla Model 3 Long Range. If you are OK with that, and other Tesla features satisfy you then this data should not impact your purchase decision. If range is a major part of your purchase decision, then this info may give you pause.

Tesla should do better, and should not rely on deceptive information to induce consumer purchases. "353 mi. Range" is on the Tesla Model 3 home page, and the posted range on my vehicle display at full charge.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

 

[KenC]

Funny, looking at the Edmunds tested consumption figures, the 5 Teslas tested all exceeded EPA estimates, except for the 2018 3 Perf.

2020 SR+ was 4.2% better than EPA.
2018 3P was 3.8% worse than EPA.
2020 YP was 1.3% better than EPA
2020 X LR was 0.0% better than EPA
2020 S P was 6.8% better than EPA

Why don't the EPA range numbers correlate with the EPA Consumption numbers? Is it due to degradation or the battery size used for calculation being different? Strange.

Edmunds Tested: Electric Car Range and Consumption | Edmunds