I think the effect of the covers is vastly overstated. I use Tessie to track all of my drives, and after a few months I removed the wheel covers and saw no difference, even on a very consistent 20 mile drive that I make weekly, which includes mostly constant driving on Autopilot at 50-60 mph with no traffic and very few lights. Even at 65-70 mph I get the same Wh/mi as people doing range tests in my car get with the covers on, and even doing 75-80 mph, I use way less battery than ABRP thinks my car is supposed to, so I have to adjust the Wh/mi setting in ABRP way down to get accurate predictions.
It’s very hard to test because even the most minor variations unrelated to the covers can make a difference… it’s almost impossible for me to do the same drive twice and get the same Wh/mi. Because of this, all of the test results you see are kind of suspect IMO unless they performed side by side 100+ mile drives dozens of times to get averages. Even Car and Driver’s results from a test track make no sense… how do the covers make 3.1% difference at 50 mph and only 2.5% difference at 70 mph… I don’t think they do. The 70 mph result sounds like it might be close, but I think the difference at 50 mph must be less than at 70 mph and they just got an invalid result on that one due to other factors.
I think they make practically 0 difference (less than 1%) below 60 mph and only 1-3% difference at normal freeway speeds of 65-80 mph.