Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

my longest drive so far (274 miles)

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.

David99

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Jan 31, 2014
5,584
9,719
Nomad (mostly US)
For the sake of it, I had to try it. I charged to 99% (didn't have the patience to go to 100) and started driving. The car originally predicted 4:06 drive time, but there was a construction that cost me 10 min. I also missed an exit that made me go a bit longer. At the end I arrived at 5% driving 274 miles. My average speed was exactly 60 mph. Most of the freeway had a pretty low speed limit so I wasn't bothering anyone. I made it without a bathroom stop which was my biggest concern. LOL This wasn't a hypermiling drive. I kept climate control the way I felt comfortable, my tire pressure a little lower than recommended for comfort and I had the car loaded up with equipment to the max. My car is also lifted which doesn't help aerodynamics. On the positive side, I have 18 inch aero rims with 235/60-18 tires. I got basically rated range.

edit: Car: October 2023 Model Y Performance, ODO 26k miles


274miles.jpg


The car recorded 265.5 miles, but my tires are larger than stock. I have to add 3.2% to get the correct distance driven.
274Stats.jpg
 
Last edited:
Big fan of those wheels.
What tires did you put on, and how did all those changes affect ride and handling?
Michelin Defender2 235/60 - 18. I'm not tire expert, but I tried a number of different ones over the last years with my Teslas. The Defender2 lasts crazy long. I have 26k miles on them now and I hardly see any loss of tread depth. I expect them to last 60 k miles, likely more. They have more initial tread depth than the stock tires that came with the Y Performance.
As for grip, the rubber is made for longevity, not performance. You will have a little longer stopping distance and will start to drift in extreme corners a bit earlier. But I'm totally fine with that. I drive rather conservative anyways as I often have my work equipment in my car. I drive 60k miles or more a year. If I have to buy three sets of tires a year vs one set, that's a significant cost.
The ride quality is definitely improved. Smoother and far more tolerant to pot holes and going over curbs on accident. Another huge advantage is that this rim and tire combination has the rim further in and the tire coming out a bit more. So if you parallel park and touch the curb, it's only the tire, not the rim. All in all, I am very happy with this setup. I am aware I compromise a bit of safety in extreme situations. I consciously make up for that by driving a bit slower. But to put it in perspective, these tires are used on many SUVs so I'm not in a worse position. It's just when you compare it to the performance tires that come with the Y P.
 
For the sake of it, I had to try it. I charged to 99% (didn't have the patience to go to 100) and started driving. The car originally predicted 4:06 drive time, but there was a construction that cost me 10 min. I also missed an exit that made me go a bit longer. At the end I arrived at 5% driving 274 miles. My average speed was exactly 60 mph. Most of the freeway had a pretty low speed limit so I wasn't bothering anyone. I made it without a bathroom stop which was my biggest concern. LOL This wasn't a hypermiling drive. I kept climate control the way I felt comfortable, my tire pressure a little lower than recommended for comfort and I had the car loaded up with equipment to the max. My car is also lifted which doesn't help aerodynamics. On the positive side, I have 18 inch aero rims with 235/60-18 tires. I got basically rated range.

edit: Car: October 2023 Model Y Performance, ODO 26k miles


View attachment 1056307

The car recorded 265.5 miles, but my tires are larger than stock. I have to add 3.2% to get the correct distance driven.
View attachment 1056309
that's so pissa
 
Freaky big rubber! Next time get a regular LR and you might fit without the lift kit.
I'd be willing to bet his diameter is very nearly the same as stock, and his width is clearly narrower, so I don't think fitting the tires was a problem. It just looks different with the smaller diameter rims and an extra inch or two of sidewall. It's not my car, so of course I'm only speculating.
 
I sold the original wheels right away and replaced them with 18 inch FastEV rims and larger tires. I wanted more comfort and more resistance to potholes. I added a 1.75 inch lift kit to it after taking this photo
View attachment 1056314
Like the lift kit and increased tire aspect. I don't live too far off of 84 in northeastern PA and that most certainly is a boring route which you drove. Is the lift with MPP spacers only?
 
We measured the stock Michelins yesterday. The reason they look so stretched is the road going tread is well shy of the 255.

If you want to know how tall a tyre stands it is aspect ratio as a percentage of nominal width, doubled, convert inches, and add rim diameter.

Conveniently, going up and down 1" in rim diameter is approximately 5% which evens out going up and down 5 points of aspect ratio to keep same height.
 
We measured the stock Michelins yesterday. The reason they look so stretched is the road going tread is well shy of the 255.

If you want to know how tall a tyre stands it is aspect ratio as a percentage of nominal width, doubled, convert inches, and add rim diameter.

Conveniently, going up and down 1" in rim diameter is approximately 5% which evens out going up and down 5 points of aspect ratio to keep same height.
Thanks, I find this tool quite simple.
 
We measured the stock Michelins yesterday. The reason they look so stretched is the road going tread is well shy of the 255.

If you want to know how tall a tyre stands it is aspect ratio as a percentage of nominal width, doubled, convert inches, and add rim diameter.

Conveniently, going up and down 1" in rim diameter is approximately 5% which evens out going up and down 5 points of aspect ratio to keep same height.
I believe the 255 number is the total width of the tire measured from sidewall to sidewall, not the tread width which would be a smaller number.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pianewman
I believe the 255 number is the total width of the tire measured from sidewall to sidewall, not the tread width which would be a smaller number.
Every manufacturer makes it up as they go. The Michelins have a long transition from road tread to up and down sidewall. The Nexens do not look anything like that.

The road tread actually measured 255 not that it has a direct bearing on the rated width.

As far as I can work out the spec'd width is the number that corresponds in a table to the middle of the design rim width range.

Some tyres have lots of sidewall bulge designed in, some have almost none.

Then the aspect ratio kicks in to describe the actual height.

I am pretty sure the system is that way so tyres can be all sorts of profiles and they come out suitably sized overall most of the time.
Sometimes the specific rim width range for a tyre might not be suited to what you have available. Coopers were bad for that when I was looking at them.

I did not know it but the tyres I ordered turned out to have a preferred rim spec bang on the 8.5" I wanted. Happy days. Nice chunky sidewalls for holding T in her place.
 
The reason I mentioned that is I was looking at some tire specs on Tirerack and there are 2 specs listed in regard to tire width one is called tread width, the other is section width. The section width number, when converted to mm, was the same as the tire size. The tread width was smaller.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1001.png
    IMG_1001.png
    452.8 KB · Views: 16