No, afraid not, it shows "typical miles", the only adjustment that I think it makes is battery degradation. Personally I use Percentage on dashboard as the miles don't mean anything - any more than they did on ICE.
/QUOTE]
Dam, and heres me hoping it would be smart! Thanks for putting me right
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Model 3 Long Range Miles
- Thread starter Maggy78
- Start date
Dam, and heres me hoping it would be smart! Thanks for putting me right
ACarneiro
Active Member
Just assume everything and everyone is stupid until proven otherwise. I suspect you’ll be right more often than notDam, and heres me hoping it would be smart! Thanks for putting me right
ACarneiro
Active Member
I don’t get it.
How hard can it be to come up with realistic driving conditions test? Why do we always get stung with some stupid figures that you can only achieve when the stars are in the correct alignment and the wind blows in the correct direction? Industry lobbying?
WannabeOwner
Well-Known Member
I think:
If you have Home Charging then you leave each morning with full tank. So "Range" only matters on days when you go further afield. On those days you are most likely trogging along motorway at a high speed, which is the worst condition for fuel economy, so the worst for range (sure, you might hit traffic / road works, and that will help with range ... but, on a good day
, you won't)You are going to struggle to do a max-range journey in bumper-to-bumper conditions ... that would be considerably more than 10 hours driving
But the Official Test is Mixed Mode - some fast, some slow. That test is worthwhile for comparing the overall running cost of the vehicle, but useless for "max range". Running cost is so much lower for EV than ICE I wonder how many people care if it actually turns out to be 25% adrift ... its still probably 4x - 5x cheaper than ICE.
So we have a mixed-mode test ... and what most people are concerned about is max range. Tesla Range Table - Teslike.com is probably the best source for that figure.
Dam, and heres me hoping it would be smart! Thanks for putting me right
Careful what you wish for. IMO, the Tesla version (constant multiplier of the battery energy) is vastly more useful than the Nissan-style GoM (projecting forwards your previous driving experience). With the Tesla system, you have to adjust the number based on what you are about to do next. With the GoM system, you still have to do that and you ALSO have to adjust based on what you did last week (or what your wife did last week if she borrowed the car etc.).
Personally, I favour having the display in "typical miles" rather than percent, as it gives a very quick indication of whether a trip is easy/tight/impossible - if easy, just drive on, if tight, use the navigation system's more accurate prediction for the upcoming journey, if impossible, start planning charging stops.
As others have said, a little bit of “phantom drain” is quite normal. This is my third EV and all of them suffer from it.
The thing with Teslas is that they are never fully turned off. The car will periodically talk to the mothership (Tesla), it will be connecting to your WiFi to check for updates, things like the charge timer are working, all sorts of little things that nibble away at the battery. Also every time you open the Tesla app on your phone it “wakes up” the car, which uses more energy. It really is quite normal and nothing to worry about.
I’ve found I’m losing around 5 miles overnight in my garage. If I’m out and sentry mode is enabled, it loses about one mile an hour, so about 25 miles a day, which is quite significant. Although it seems a lot, the car itself is doing a lot, and no other car offers this sort of security, so in my view, it’s a small price to pay.
So, bottom line, try not to worry about the battery, look after it, and enjoy your car.
Completely impossible, because there's huge variation. Do you want it to give you a number for driving in traffic on a single-carriageway A-road in summer, or doing 90 on the motorway in a thunderstorm?
Also, this isn't really the main purpose of the WLTP number, which is to allow you to compare two cars. No number is going to be able to tell you how far you can go with your driving style on the roads you use, but if they've got it right the car with the 10% higher WLTP score will go 10% further in your conditions than the other one.
I'm not arguing that WLTP is perfect; quite likely industry lobbying has had its effect, and with any test the manufacturers will always try to 'game' it (ie. put their efforts into getting good test scores even if that's at the expense of real-world performance).
interbear
Active Member
Here’s what I don’t understand with this approach. Surely when reading % battery charge on the dashboard you need to make a mental calculation as to what that means in possible range ie. miles? So isn’t it easier just seeing that mileage calculation on screen? Both figures are subject to driving conditions, style etc so equally unreliable in that sense. Am I missing something obvious (as a newbie to EVs this is entirely possible
)?I think so
310 is the EPA figure (for the uninitiated, the standard American range test).
AFAIK Tesla have never used an NEDC figure for the Model 3 (NEDC is the old, now defunct European range test).
The 348 quoted on the Tesla website is the WLTP figure, which has to be quoted by law in Europe (WLTP is the new European test, which is used across all cars, electric or ICE).
The various tests used are all really laboratory type tests, and don’t really represent real world driving. What they do achieve is to give you an indication of the comparative range of competing cars - so if car A quotes a WLTP range of 200 miles, and car B 300 miles, you know that if you were to drive both cars in the same way under the same conditions, car B would go 1.5 times as far as car A.
In terms of accuracy, none of the standards are brilliant. The old NEDC was way too optimistic, the new WLTP is better, but still optimistic. The nearest by far to achievable range is the US EPA quoted range, which is just about achievable under normal driving conditions.
Below I’ve pasted an old document I prepared a while ago so that I could compare the ranges of various cars. I listed the quoted range, what I estimated to be the real range, and also the range at 80% charge, as with the Kona I only charged to 80% day to day. Please bear in mind this is something I just cobbled together, and as it is old some of the details may be out of date!
EV Range Comparison
Leaf 24
NEDC range = 124 miles
EPA range = 84 miles
Real range = 75 miles
0-60 = 11.5
Leaf 30
NEDC range = 155 miles
EPA range = 107 miles
Real range = 89 miles
0-60 = 11.5
Leaf 40
NEDC range = 235 miles
WLTP range = 177 miles
EPA range = 151 miles
Real range = 135 miles
80% = 108 miles
Leaf 60 (64)
NEDC range = 332 miles?
EPA range = 225 miles? (64=241)
Real range = 187 miles? (64=200)
80% = 149 miles? (64=160)
M3 Base Battery
NEDC range = 324 miles
EPA range = 220 miles
Real range = 183 miles
80% = 146 miles
0-60 = 5.6
M3 LR Battery
NEDC range = 457 miles
EPA range = 310 miles
WLTP range = 348 miles
Real range = 258 miles
80% = 206 miles
0-60 = 5.1
Renault Zoe 40
NEDC range = 250 miles
Real range = 151 miles
Hyundai Iconiq Electric 28
NEDC range = 174 miles
EPA range = 124 miles
Real range = 102 miles
Hyundai Kona Electric 64
WLTP range 279 miles
EPA range = 258
Real range = 275 miles
80% = 220 miles
Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP)
WannabeOwner
Well-Known Member
Yes, I agree. But Typical Miles is wrong for all my journeys, and I would have to calculate by how much. I have a figure in my head for miles-per-percent, and that has an inbuilt 10% contingency, so I use that for my "range". I'm comfortable with that mental-maths ... my wife most definitely is not (but given that Maths isn't her thing she wouldn't be any better off with adjusting "unrealistic miles" in her head either ...)
My Wife knows that its 20% to get to work, and leave another 20% just in case (including to be able to crawl home if charger at work was bust that day). So she would not take the EV if it was <40% on that trip. In an ICE she would have just filled up when it got to 1/4 tank ... EV is different in that regard ... no idea what the best solution is though.
WannabeOwner
Well-Known Member
Either way, if not sure about Range on a trip, then just put destination in SatNav and use "Energy : Trip" graph to be sure of having enough to get there
That becomes "even more maths" if you need to get there with enough to "Then carry on to X having parked for a couple of days, and allowing for Y% parasitic loss etc."
The daily journeys are fine, if you have home charging, as you have a full tank. Its the out-of-range days that need some planning.
That becomes "even more maths" if you need to get there with enough to "Then carry on to X having parked for a couple of days, and allowing for Y% parasitic loss etc."
The daily journeys are fine, if you have home charging, as you have a full tank. Its the out-of-range days that need some planning.
Basically, ABetterRoutePlanner is your friend!
I think so
The various tests used are all really laboratory type tests, and don’t really represent real world driving. What they do achieve is to give you an indication of the comparative range of competing cars - so if car A quotes a WLTP range of 200 miles, and car B 300 miles, you know that if you were to drive both cars in the same way under the same conditions, car B would go 1.5 times as far as car A.
In terms of accuracy, none of the standards are brilliant.
I was just about to say that too. WLTP or any other standards are just useful for comparing between different cars. Its only good as a guide and for top trumps. In reality, the range is dependant on a multitude of factors. Having said that, it also depends on the manufacturers telling the truth. VW.. Looking at you.
Rooster6655
Active Member
I don't know but apparently this chart is based on realistic data
Tesla Model 3 range chart
Tesla Range Table - Teslike.com
Looking at Roy's table the kona WLTP and real range are quite similar where as the M3LR is quite different. That is what i have found when going on a 200 mile long distance trip. The range trip on the Kona is really accurate (as can be) and i can only conclude that it must be very efficient at high speed.
Here’s what I don’t understand with this approach. Surely when reading % battery charge on the dashboard you need to make a mental calculation as to what that means in possible range ie. miles? So isn’t it easier just seeing that mileage calculation on screen? Both figures are subject to driving conditions, style etc so equally unreliable in that sense. Am I missing something obvious (as a newbie to EVs this is entirely possible
I employ exactly the approach @WannabeOwner describes above. My lifetime average Wh/m is 331 (37k miles S75D) so if I assume I'm only going to get 2 miles for each 1% I know I'm going to be ok if I have a 100 mile journey with 50% battery remaining. The reality is if I glance down to the instrument cluster having done 50 miles my SoC is likely to be considerably better than 25%, and I'll probably cross reference this to the energy graph just for the hell of it.
Of course all of this only matters when you are going to be testing the range, and for me that's not all that often. Even then, I find bladder anxiety is much more a reality than range anxiety
A lot of good stuff in this thread. I have a M3 LR AWD and when I charged it to 100% for the first time last week the range shown was - guess what - 310 miles. I spent about 45 minutes waiting for Tesla help and when I got through the guy didn't really have any idea about the problem - he waffled about the complex algorhythms used to work out the range and how the charging history would affect the indicated range and how it would change with what it learned from my personal charging and driving habits. All he needed to say was 'it shows the EPA range not the WLTP range' and I'd have gone away happy. The moral - search this forum before you reach for the phone
That wasn’t a particularly helpful bit of waffle either. The range displayed by the car does not take into account your driving habits or weather etc etc. It’s a fixed range based either on the WLTP test or the ‘typical’ range that Tesla believes your car should achieve - it’s an arbitrary Wh/m. I am assuming the M3 has the same range display option as the S & X do.
The only time your driving history is taken into account is when you are using the nav and view the energy graph. This will plot your estimated SoC at the destination based on the last miles driven, the options being 5,15 and 30 (I think).
pdk42
Active Member
I know the weather is sh1tty at the moment (cold, rain, wind), but my consumption has shot up. On pickup day I did about 130 miles and got 250 Wh/mile. But it was about 19 degs and dry for most of the drive. Today, I was up at about 320 Wh/mile and I want even driving rapidly.
The heater pulls a lot of juice. In fact this morning, I preheated the car whilst it was plugged in and Teslafi told me it was pulling 32A alone.
The heater pulls a lot of juice. In fact this morning, I preheated the car whilst it was plugged in and Teslafi told me it was pulling 32A alone.
Similar threads
