TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

Model X Range

Discussion in 'Model X: Driving Dynamics' started by EVger, Sep 13, 2015.

  1. stevezzzz

    stevezzzz R;SigS;P85D;SigX;S90D;XP100D;3LR;YLR

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    6,100
    Location:
    Colorado
    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.

    20160509-IMG_9599.jpg 20160509-IMG_9600.jpg
     
    • Informative x 2
  2. ohmman

    ohmman Maximum Plaid Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2014
    Messages:
    9,679
    Location:
    North Bay, CA
    #242 ohmman, May 9, 2016
    Last edited: May 9, 2016
    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.
     
    • Like x 1
  3. systemcrashed

    systemcrashed Please Reboot

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages:
    884
    Location:
    USA
    Just look at the fuel savings estimate, they are off by almost $4,000! ;)
     
    • Funny x 1
  4. NJ Plugin

    NJ Plugin Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2013
    Messages:
    529
    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.
     
  5. dwebb66

    dwebb66 Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2014
    Messages:
    349
    Location:
    Ladera Ranch, CA
    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.
     
    • Like x 1
  6. stevezzzz

    stevezzzz R;SigS;P85D;SigX;S90D;XP100D;3LR;YLR

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    6,100
    Location:
    Colorado
    @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.
     
  7. Gzrgmr

    Gzrgmr Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2015
    Messages:
    46
    Location:
    Greenville, SC

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

    Saghost Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Messages:
    8,191
    Location:
    Delaware
    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.)
     
  9. Saghost

    Saghost Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Messages:
    8,191
    Location:
    Delaware
    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
     

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.
  • Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


    SUPPORT TMC