Model Y More Efficient Than Model 3?!

[Evbwcaer]

Just saw this..... How is this possible? Incredible really.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Just saw this..... How is this possible? Incredible really.

I posted about this already. But your comparison is to vehicles with stickier tires - makes a big difference with high MPGe. For the AWD Model 3 it is not a fair comparison as that vehicle is less efficient, probably due to a lower capacity rear inverter. The Performance Model 3 18” is voluntarily derated and is actually considerably more efficient than stated (it says Performance in your comparison but those are actually AWD numbers). Also, as far as I can tell, they are using an arbitrarily higher scalar to convert 2-cycle results to 5-cycle results for Model Y. And this affects the MPGe.

The actual dyno results are considerably worse for the Model Y - especially on the freeway, as you would expect. See the post for details. We will wait for the full EPA submission to get the numbers exactly right (I was not able to get perfect alignment). But we already know Model Y is not as good as Model 3, just looking at the raw UDDS AER CARB executive orders.

Here is the raw data from the EPA datafile. The orange is the raw efficiency from the dyno test. You can see that on the highway, where range matters, except for the Performance Model 3 with 20" wheels (which is about the same), it is more efficient than Model Y. The Model 3 Performance with 18" wheels is 15% more efficient on the highway cycle! The other numbers are scaled versions. They multiply the mileage by a scalar to convert from 2-cycle to 5-cycle (usually 0.7 for most manufacturers) to arrive at the final result (only EVs are allowed to do 2-cycle testing AFAIK). But Tesla uses a value that is about 7% larger for the Model Y. So that makes the miles 7% higher in the final label.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Elon Musk: "Alien Technology!"

Actual technology: A multiplier of 0.756 instead of 0.7032.

 

[Daniel in SD]

A multiplier of 0.756 instead of 0.7032.

The moderator should give you a wiki post to avoid this question coming up a dozen times a day.

 

[ratsbew]

EV window sticker range should simply be 100%-0% at 70mph, 70 degrees F, and no headwind. City range is so long doesn't matter so it could be excluded.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

EV window sticker range should simply be 100%-0% at 70mph, 70 degrees F, and no headwind. City range is so long doesn't matter so it could be excluded.

True. I think they should also provide a winter temperature range number at high speed. Just realized today that the 5-cycle results are also useless! Even though they do a cold 20F FTP cycle, they don’t turn on the heat in the car for it! These tests are too targeted for ICEVs, which might well do a bit worse on economy and emission in cold temps due to engine warmup issues. They don’t specify the cabin heat for the ICE during the test, because it would not matter much at all since it is just waste heat.

All along I was thinking that forcing 5-cycle testing would help provide reasonable results for EVs...but it won’t.

Seems like the regulators need to step in with a firm hand here. This is the perfect administration to do it since they don’t care about EV’s - they’d be happy to make things more difficult for them! But in this case we’d be getting something useful out of it. When life gives you lemons...

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

True. I think they should also provide a winter temperature range number at high speed. Just realized today that the 5-cycle results are also useless! Even though they do a cold 20F FTP cycle, they don’t turn on the heat in the car for it!

Before this misinformation spreads, I want to correct this post. Thanks for the info provided by @bhtooefr :

315 Mile Model Y...new battery pack with more kWh?

It does appear that heater is used and has an impact of the FTP results in cold conditions. I was referring to a very dated document when I came to this conclusion.