Model X towing a Safari Condo A-2124 trailer

[acarney]

600wh/mi is fantastic! That means a Model Y would likely still be able to do about 100 miles between chargers without much panic. I still firmly believe that we need 150kWh to 175kWh. At 150kWh you could do 70% charge (so supercharge to 80% and drive down to 10%) and get about 175 miles between charges. That's pretty good, but still would only give you about 70 to 80 miles away from a charger into the wilderness and back out to the charger. At 175kWh you could do about 200 miles between charging stops and about 100 miles out away from a charger. I think that's probably ideal. That should cover most areas (certainly good around the Pacific Northwest) and even fairly remote places.

Sadly it doesn't look like we're going to see much capacity increase until battery supply really gets sorted out. I know Musk loves to brag about how no one needs a larger battery, but really it's that *HE* doesn't need to sell a larger battery right now. Give it a few more years and when we see trucks starting to get 150+ kWh and being able to tow you'll start to see the X get some serious towing ability and whenever CyberTruck comes out. I suspect S will trickle up slowly too, but probably only to 125kWh or so just to keep that longest range number and greatly help those in cold areas actually do like 300 miles on a charge.

 

[ecarfan]

600wh/mi is fantastic! That means a Model Y would likely still be able to do about 100 miles between chargers without much panic.

It’s always nice to see someone with an optimistic attitude. You will need to keep your speed below 60mph (maybe as low as 55mph), have a dry road (no rain), no significant uphill, and no significant headwinds to achieve that kind of range.

Given that the Alto A2124 is supposed to be Safari Condos “aerodynamic“ model, I am not impressed with that level of energy consumption, since my Alto F1743 takes significantly less energy to tow.

As for Tesla offering larger battery capacities for the Model Y, that is years away, if ever. With strong and increasing demand for EVs, cell production volume is going to be an ongoing constraint for Tesla. If you can sell more cars than you can manufacture you aren’t going to offer the option of a larger pack size since that will not result in more vehicle sales and more revenue.

 

[acarney]

It’s always nice to see someone with an optimistic attitude. You will need to keep your speed below 60mph (maybe as low as 55mph), have a dry road (no rain), no significant uphill, and no significant headwinds to achieve that kind of range.

Given that the Alto A2124 is supposed to be Safari Condos “aerodynamic“ model, I am not impressed with that level of energy consumption, since my Alto F1743 takes significantly less energy to tow.

As for Tesla offering larger battery capacities for the Model Y, that is years away, if ever. With strong and increasing demand for EVs, cell production volume is going to be an ongoing constraint for Tesla. If you can sell more cars than you can manufacture you aren’t going to offer the option of a larger pack size since that will not result in more vehicle sales and more revenue.

Ah, I didn’t catch that a previous Alto towed better. That’s very interesting. I just know aerodynamic loads can drastically change Wh/mi. 600 to me is still a very workable number, I was thinking we would see stuff like 800+.

Yes, I think Y will take awhile for larger packs… likely will slowly creep up to 100kWh with basic density improvements. I think X will at some point get a larger pack from trying to pack in more cells and density increases. Again I think this is likely 3+ years down the road before meaningful (not just density increases) capacity increases. I think we will get there though. I don’t think Tesla will be happy if someone else is the best for towing a boat or camper or etc.

 

[ChadS]

[...] a 2017 X 100D with 63k miles [...] we seem to be averaging roughly 600Wh/mi with it.

I took another 164-mile round-trip with it to the same place (Deception Pass State Park). Conditions were still not ideal, but closer, and this time I averaged 523Wh/mi.

This time I stuck to 55mph, and there seemed (?) to be less wind, though there still was some. On the way out roads were damp and it was around 55 degrees, and I was getting about 520Wh/mi...then really heavy rain hit for the last 20 miles or so. My average climbed to 540Wh/mi. But on the way back it was closer to 65 degrees and roads were dry, and the average came back down to 523Wh/mi. Even though there's a little more uphill on the way back (in the last mile of the 164-mile trip the average went from 515 to 523Wh/mi).

Also note that for this trip I had a bike on the back. A group of Roadster owners once took a similar-length mostly 55mph trip and we all got incredibly similar efficiency...except for the guy with a bike on the back that got 15% worse than the rest of us. I think (?) the Roadsters used around 225Wh/mi on that trip, so from energy percentage I would expect the hit on my trailer to be less than half of that 15%. Then there's the aero hit; on the Roadster half the bike sat above the car; behind the angled trailer, about 1/4 hangs out each side. So...is that roughly the same drag? I dunno. But if (?) the overall hit from the bike was, say, 5% then I'd expect to have been right about at 500Wh/mi without the bike.

 

[ecarfan]

Conditions were still not ideal, but closer, and this time I averaged 523Wh/mi….But if the overall hit from the bike was, say, 5% then I'd expect to have been right about at 500Wh/mi without the bike.

Thanks for the data! Your energy usage is about the same as what I see towing my Alto F1743.

I’m going on my first trailer trip of the season next week!

 

[gglockner]

Thanks for posting! I haven't measured carefully, but it looks like I'm getting about 550 Wh/mi for a 2022 Bowlus and a 2022 Model X.

 

[ecarfan]

Thanks for posting! I haven't measured carefully, but it looks like I'm getting about 550 Wh/mi for a 2022 Bowlus and a 2022 Model X.

And that is roughly in line with what Jack Bowers reported in his Bowlus towing thread several years ago: 540Wh/mi at 55mph and 485Wh/mi at 50mph. Though that was with 22” wheels.

 

[gglockner]

And that is roughly in line with what Jack Bowers reported in his Bowlus towing thread several years ago: 540Wh/mi at 55mph and 485Wh/mi at 50mph. Though that was with 22” wheels.

Yes, but: Jack Bowers reported data from the original* 24' Bowlus. My results are from the 26' Bowlus, which is longer and heavier.

(* Technically, the original original was built in the 1930s; I'm talking about the modern remake.)

 

[ecarfan]

Yes, but: Jack Bowers reported data from the original* 24' Bowlus. My results are from the 26' Bowlus, which is longer and heavier.

Very true, however the modest increase in weight won’t have a significant effect on energy usage at highway speeds, and the increased length is not going to make your Bowlus less aerodynamic than Jack’s since the “bow“ and the “stern” have the same shape.

 

[ChadS]

I took another 164-mile round-trip with it to the same place (Deception Pass State Park). Conditions were still not ideal, but closer, and this time I averaged 523Wh/mi.

This time I stuck to 55mph, and there seemed (?) to be less wind, though there still was some. On the way out roads were damp and it was around 55 degrees, and I was getting about 520Wh/mi...then really heavy rain hit for the last 20 miles or so. My average climbed to 540Wh/mi. But on the way back it was closer to 65 degrees and roads were dry, and the average came back down to 523Wh/mi. Even though there's a little more uphill on the way back (in the last mile of the 164-mile trip the average went from 515 to 523Wh/mi).

Also note that for this trip I had a bike on the back. [...] But if (?) the overall hit from the bike was, say, 5% then I'd expect to have been right about at 500Wh/mi without the bike.

We took another 174-mile round-trip hauling the A2124 with our 2017 Model X - heading South this time. We had the bike on the back again. Pretty good weather both ways (dry, a little side wind, 70's).

On the way there: 505Wh/mi. Stuck to 55mph. Bad stop-and-go for quite a while early on raised our average to about 540, but the average dropped once traffic flow was smoother. Note that there's about a 400' elevation loss this direction.

On the way back: 541Wh/mi. We went 60mph this time, and had the small elevation gain. Hit some stop-and-go again, though not as much.

 

[gglockner]

Awesome! About the same efficiency as we get with our Bowlus.