Model X Range

[stevezzzz]

It gets curiouser and curiouser: I found the Monroney sticker for the 2012 Sig S, and it claims the same 38 kWh per 100 miles.

 

[ohmman]

IIRC, there were other errors on the stickers. Some listed rear facing seats, for instance. I get the feeling they aren't a very reliable source of information.

 

[systemcrashed]

Just look at the fuel savings estimate, they are off by almost $4,000!

 

[NJ Plugin]

Just look at the fuel savings estimate, they are off by almost $4,000!

The fuel savings is likely because the cost of gas is lower than it was 4 years ago. Also, maybe the average of all cars is a bit higher now.

 

[dwebb66]

By golly, I dug out my Monroney sticker and found the same thing: 38 kWh per 100 miles (I have the 22" wheels, too). But that's at odds with the next line, which reads, 'When fully charged, vehicle can travel about 250 miles'. And my old Sig S had a fuel economy rating of 89 MPGe combined city and highway, exactly the same as the Model X. How can that be?

The early sigs came with a mocked up sticker, take a look at the options listed on your sticker and see is same are Model S only (I do not recall the specific items), if they listed the Model S options then they likely have other copy/paste issue also.

 

[stevezzzz]

@dwebb66: if you look at the photos I posted, my car is not that early, with a February 2016 build date; neither is anything on the Monroney sticker obviously mocked up: all the features and options are appropriate for a Sig X P90D.

 

[Gzrgmr]

We took a bit of a scenic route going down the Del Marva
Peninsula and back to I-95 after the bridge/tunnel. Going back north we charged at Santee and headed west to I-81. These routes are longer but a much more pleasant ride. We stayed overnight in Lumberton on the way down and Stateville on the way north. We charged 3 or 4 times on each leg and tried to plan our stops around meals and overnights. Woodland Park, NJ to Orlando was about 22 hours each way including all stops taking the "scenic" routes. The ride in the MX was amazing. The seating comfort and position were fantastic and auto pilot made it very relaxing and easy. This is by far the best road-trip car I've ever driven. I found the Nav system to be very accurate for planning charging stops but always added a little cushion of 30 miles or so to the recommended charge.

The Inn that is in front of the SC has a very good restaurant and bar. Try their french toast with ham and swiss!

 

[Saghost]

I was looking at our window sticker the other day, and on it it says the car uses 38kwh to go 100 miles (P90D). Doesn't that equate to 380wh/m to get rated, or is my math off?

Apples and oranges. The EPA efficiency numbers are from the wall, including conversion and charging losses.

The car reports kWh and wh/mile from the battery pack - and according to some threads, the car may not be including all power used (there seems to be some question as to whether HVAC and overhead/vampire while the car is on gets included.)

 

[Saghost]

By golly, I dug out my Monroney sticker and found the same thing: 38 kWh per 100 miles (I have the 22" wheels, too). But that's at odds with the next line, which reads, 'When fully charged, vehicle can travel about 250 miles'. And my old Sig S had a fuel economy rating of 89 MPGe combined city and highway, exactly the same as the Model X. How can that be?

Assuming all the numbers on both sheets are accurate and that the testing is the same (both of which I believe to be true,) the only possible conclusion is that the 90 kWh X draws about 6% *less* energy from the wall than the early 85 kWh S does.

This may sound odd, but I think it is actually correct. Something changed either about the car's charging or the way Tesla/EPA tested the car around the time of the D release. If you look at EPA numbers for an early 85 and an 85D, you can clearly see there's a discrepancy:

Compare Side-by-Side

As you said, the 2013 S85 gets 265 miles of range at 38 kWh/100 miles - meaning 2.65*38 = 100.7 kWh from the wall consumed during the test run.

But the 2015 85D gets 270 miles of range at 34 kWh/100 miles - meaning 2.7*34 only 91.8 kWh consumed.

Obviously the car is a little more efficient in driving, which is where the extra 5 miles of range come from.

In my opinion, though, the really interesting question is where did those other 9 kWh of power go to. At this point, the only two answers I can see are a significant improvement in charging efficiency or a change in the test protocols. (Tesla never re-rated the S85 before they discontinued it - a 2015 still shows the same numbers as the 2013.)

There was a lot of discussion about what this discrepancy meant at the time of the D introduction, with no real answers reached that I saw.

In the meantime, your X getting 250 miles at 38 kWh/100 miles => 2.5*38 = 95 kWh consumed makes reasonable sense - it is charging somewhat higher than the 85s do with a post D efficiency or test protocol.

The 2 significant figure kWh/100 mile numbers are probably why you only see a 3.2 kWh apparent difference from 85 to 90 - a 2016 S P90D shows 94.5 kWh with this method, while a 2016 S 90D shows 97.

Compare Side-by-Side