We just got our regular 90D last night and had a 160 mile trip back home from Fremont. 680 was a parking lot and stop and go. Oddly the kwh/mi was around 328. Later when we got up to speed (averaging 65-70) it improved. Outside temp was around 80 degrees F and we did not have the AC on at first but later at 75 degrees F.
The first picture was an hour and half into the drive where it was mostly stop and go. Note we only went 32.6 miles in that time. Welcome to the Bay Area on a evening commute. The Wh/mi is around 327. Probably what you would expect for a 90D.
View attachment 168578
This next picture is much later into the drive where we have been averaging around 65 to 70 mph. The Wh/mi has dropped to 316. The outside temp started around 80 and lowered to 75. The car was set at 75 with the back turned off.
View attachment 168579
When we pulled into the supercharger in Folsom to top the car off and get a bit to each this is what was displayed:
View attachment 168580
With a few 90D having now been delivered- and tested- what is the probability that (1) the 90D does indeed live up to Tesla official expectations in terms of range (around 340 Wh/m, on average) - as suggested by MarchX , aesculus and others in this thread, and that, simultaneously, (2) the P90D' s range - even with the proper '90D' setting- has been significantly overestimated by Telsa , which translates into a measured 400Wh/h at best - as suggested by a number of P90D owner in various threads?
If confirmed, these reports would testify to a minimum 15% difference between the 90D and the P90D operating in the same mode, vs a mere 4% advertised by Tesla. Any more 'live' data and testimonies from actual owners of both models would be invaluable to get to the bottom of this matter...