Will there be EPA documents on the mid range so we can eventually decide for certain if the actual range on the mid range is longer than the official 260 miles?
Mid range sandbagged?
- Thread starter Agon
- Start date
JHWJR
Member
Probably. Eventually. In the meanwhile, why not assume that the "official range" can be reached with dedicated effort -- like the rest of the cars -- but that 220 with aggressive driving is more likely most of the time.
Strange answer I think? Is it just a way of saying that it does not matter? But OK. I think it matters if the comparable test result is in fact 260 miles or perhaps 275 miles. I would mean, all things being equal, that I would have about 235 miles when driving aggressively instead of 220 miles - following your example. And that makes a difference to me.
I'm guessing the MR will be extremely efficient. It will be the lightest Model 3 yet and the RWD seems to actually be more efficient than awd (was the opposite for Model S I believe). I see a lot of people posting efficiencies under 200 wh/m with LR RWD. I can't get anywhere near that. I drove on autopilot all the way home from work yesterday (55 miles) and averaged over 300. The rated range of a LR RWD is the same as the P3D, but the actual range is higher. I'm guessing the MR is going to end up being better than advertised.
ratsbew
Active Member
Autopilot is very bad for efficiency. Careful manual driving can easily be under 200Wh/mile under most conditions.
Edit: I should say for anything other than highway driving at a constant speed with no traffic. AP (and TACC) accelerates way too hard and brakes too late. With manual driving you can anticipate your speed 5-20 seconds into the future and be gentle about it.
Agreed. However, I tried driving extremely conservatively on a 140 mile round trip in the P3D and the best I could do was about 270. I think the P3D is just less efficient. I'm not complaining. The performance Model S and X are less efficient as well. But I do expect the MR to be really good.
EVs aren’t any different than ICEs in respects to range. If you drive at speed limits, use cruise control to limit minor accelerations, etc you will get rated range or better. Really cold temperatures reduce range. If you speed up to 90 to pass someone to take their lane, generally speed...you’ll get less. Achieving rated range is more dependent on the driver than on Tesla engineering.
My first commute (Monday this week,) used 16kwh for 70 miles. It works out to exactly 260 mi. Yesterday wasn't as good, but I was probably going faster and I also didn't pre-warm the car from 51f to 68f
Not sure why you need the EPA documents to determine that.
The range of the car is indeed a lot more than what the EPA says.
The range of the car is a lot less than what the EPA says.
The range of the car is how you drive it. And it is so much more so than an ICE.
I'd have to disagree with this statement. EV are much more sensitive to increased speeds than ICE. In the Model 3, you'll see about a 10% degradation for every 10 mph over 50. Going the speed limits, especially in Texas, on Interstates can kill your range. Removing the wheel covers on the 18 inch, increasing the wheel size can be another 10%.
Tesla engineering has done some wonderful things and make up a significant amount of the energy savings of the car. The fact that the bigger car gets better mileage than my Leaf is a telling story. And then you compare it against the newest EVs where there efficiency sucks.
Thanks for the tip. I will use your logic with the wife tonight:
“Honey, the measuring tape says 4 inches. But my dick can feel large or small. It all depends on how I use it.”
