Model 3 LR range is now listed @ 325 miles

[Chancellor32]

I think he mis-wrote that, in his next post he said his 100% was 302-304. Sounds like he meant his 90% charge is 273

Yess that’s correct my bad, my 90% is around 273 and my 100% is around 304.

 

[Rogue one]

318 @100% RWD LR 22,000 miles version 32.12.2

 

[Elmexiken]

I guess I'm lucky.

325 miles at 100% full charge, 16K miles.

 

[G78M3]

Just charged at 100% last weekend. 324mi on Friday. 322 on Sunday. LR RWD 3k mi

 

[WattsHappening]

319 100% @53k RWD LR.

53K miles.

Golf clap.

 

[Twiglett]

24k miles and still have 90% of 277 miles
RWD LR

 

[Webeevdrivers]

Anyone think the LR RWD will make a comeback?

 

[Chancellor32]

Is that estimated or you actually charged to 100%? That’s 15% loss which is pretty bad.

No that’s legit what I have charged too. I think the whole 325 is bogus because here is what my range has looked like for months.

 

[Bernard G]

Ok fine don't know if most, but definitely there is a wide spread of confusion because of this and for people who care about it since they are curious/vocal on it. Tons of posts on FB forums and here asking why they are not getting anywhere close to 325 range. This has been a topic for months because Tesla either has better things to do or given up on fixing the range display all RWD owners. So back to my point to just reduce it to 310 so no more questions regarding it

henh20 -- I totally never got 325. Mine's always maxed out at 310. Totally fine with it, but clearly its an issue that more than a few people have had. Just bizarre that its such an inconsistent bug.

Either way, never bothered me. 310 has been more than fine!

 

[Rogue one]

Anyone think the LR RWD will make a comeback?

I doubt it but I’m very happy with my efficiency beast RWD.

 

[srs5694]

FWIW, Bjørn Nyland posted a 27-minute video recently in which he claims that Tesla has been changing the formula it uses for computing the range and "hiding" about 5kWh of battery capacity at the bottom:

When I searched for the above, I found another one (13 minutes) on the same topic, posted yesterday, but I have yet to watch it:

In any event, if Bjørn is correct that Tesla's been monkeying with its formulas, then that would go a long way to explaining the issues people have been writing about in this thread.

 

[G78M3]

The whole discussion is to some extent pointless. Regardless of whether we get 325, 310 or anything in between, how far the battery will take you does not change, because the capacity continues to be the same, it's just an adjustment on how that same capacity gets translated into estimated range (poorly estimated that is).

It's like arguing the accuracy of the fuel needle of an ICE car, as long as it's roughly accurate I don't care, because the tank will last the same even if the damn needle is broken.