Not getting enough miles

[Rocky_H]

A problem with the whole charging thing is that there are so many different charging interfaces. Chademo, Tesla, CCS and I'm not really sure how the lowly J-1772 fits into those. Is that a slow version of the CCS connector? There's a lot of info out there and I think some of it is not correct.

Yes, this has been pretty clear that you just want to complain--not learn about the resources available.

I'm sorry but I get the feeling that you made the jump to an EV too early. You clearly expected more from the car and infrastructure than exist today. This is no different than gas stations 100 years ago. They were NOT ubiquitous like they are now. Early drivers had to do a lot of planning to reach their destinations. Now, not so much. It will be the same with chargers.

Yes, the infrastructure gets built on different timetables in different parts of the country. Until late 2015, there weren't any Superchargers within range of where I lived. I live in Idaho, and it's still sometimes kind of hit or miss about places I go that may be easy with the Tesla or pretty difficult from going in directions that are not an Interstate, so they do not have fast charging available on them. There are always charging resources of some kind available in any direction, but that is really a decision ahead of time if I want to arrange my schedule around taking the extra time for that. Recently a friend asked if I could go from Boise to Bend, Oregon to pick up a friend. I love to drive, so I jumped at it, but that is across the huge hole in the Supercharger network in Eastern Oregon, so we had to take my Honda Civic. Not as cool, but oh well--that's how it is for now. It'll be different in another year or two.

Perhaps you were out of the room when someone mentioned that Tesla is making 1,000 model 3s a day? Within a year there will be another 50,000 on the road. If Elon has his way it will be another 100,000. The time to build up the charging infrastructure is now. In fact, this infrastructure has been touted as why Tesla won't have any serious competition for five years. If they don't get on the stick and build chargers at a rate to keep up with the car sales, they will find themselves out of date and an also ran.

Tesla does not install every wall charging station at every business and parking lot. That is where the majority of the infrastructure is going to be. And "perhaps you were out of the room" when all of the other car manufacturers have flat-out said that they will not be building charging infrastructure, but are going to leave that to cities and states and other charging networks like Blink and Chargepoint, etc. (Volkswagen is being forced to by a court order as a penalty for criminal wrongdoing, so that's a bit of an anomaly.) Tesla is certainly doing a lot more in that area than the other auto makers, and to claim that Tesla is going to be lacking in that particular area is pretty funny.

 

[gnuarm]

A lot of people seem to display a significant amount of arrogance in this thread. I don't understand why many things have been said when they don't know anything about a given situation. Many assumptions have been made and conclusions drawn from those assumptions.

 

[TexasEV]

I've never seen official mileage ratings on the Teslas other than the range on the dashboard for a full battery charge. That has nothing to do with the EPA.

The range displayed on the battery meter at 100% = advertised range = EPA rated range. The range displayed on the battery meter at any time is how far you could drive on the EPA test cycle. I think this has been explained many times. If your rated range is 300 miles, for example, when you are at 50% state of charge the battery meter would show 150 miles. But again, that's 150 miles on the EPA test cycle. If that's not helpful information for you, feel free to ignore it and just use the projected range shown on the energy app.

Most owners learn with time how the rated range compares to their driving long distances (i.e. I would expect to use 120 miles of rated range to drive 100 miles on the highway in summer in my Model S, etc.). As you don't want to do that sort of calculation in your head, after you drive for a while the energy app will show you estimated range based on your last 5, 15, or 30 miles of driving, assuming the same conditions continue (speed, weather, etc.) because it's based on how much energy you just used for those last 5, 15, 30 miles. It doesn't have to know the weather forecast, it knows how much energy has been consumed and extrapolates that to your destination entered in navigation. Also at the bottom of the turn by turn directions it estimates what percent battery you will arrive with-- so if it gets below your comfort level (typically 10-15% for most owners) you know to slow down.

I don't know what more you could ask for. It takes some getting used to after driving an ICE, and in some ways it's more like piloting an airplane than driving a car. I think that's some of the fun of it, but I realize it's not for everyone. It doesn't have to be-- if only 5% of new car buyers want a Tesla that's over 800,000 cars/year in the US alone, well more than Tesla's current production capacity.

 

[gnuarm]

What could be asked for is for the car to do the "learning with time". I find it amazing that people feel the need to defend the poor capability of the car to assist the driver in determing range given the many factors involved. On one hand people suggest I should be able to calculate range in my head, then others say estimating range is too complex for the car computer to do. Really? I should be doing the calculations rather than the virtually super computers in the car?

Of course you can't base an entire trip on the mileage of the last 5, 15 or 30 miles. The mileage of the car varies over the course of a trip. I see this frequently.

We are covering old ground now, so not much point in continuing to hash the same points over and over. I will say that if Tesla wants to capture even 5% of the market, they will have to do a lot better than the current situation. I suspect there are a lot less than 1% as many private airplanes as there are cars, so the airplane analogy is a poor business plan.

Virtually everyone I know thinks I'm fairly silly for buying a BEV so early. Of course they like the positive features of the car, like the acceleration... but think the whole charging thing is for the birds. Tesla is reaching the end of supplying the reservations made some time ago. Then they will only be able to sell to newly interested folks. If the charging issues aren't worked out soon, there won't be so much good press to encourage new sales. Every new technology has its boom period based on the novelty. Once that ends the product just plain has to be practical and cost effective. A Tesla model 3 may be cost effective, but without a lot more charging facilities it won't be a practical alternative to ICE powered cars.

 

[TexasEV]

I give up.
Has @AnxietyRanger moved to the US and changed user names?

 

[Evoforce]

What could be asked for is for the car to do the "learning with time". I find it amazing that people feel the need to defend the poor capability of the car to assist the driver in determing range given the many factors involved. On one hand people suggest I should be able to calculate range in my head, then others say estimating range is too complex for the car computer to do. Really? I should be doing the calculations rather than the virtually super computers in the car?

Of course you can't base an entire trip on the mileage of the last 5, 15 or 30 miles. The mileage of the car varies over the course of a trip. I see this frequently.

We are covering old ground now, so not much point in continuing to hash the same points over and over. I will say that if Tesla wants to capture even 5% of the market, they will have to do a lot better than the current situation. I suspect there are a lot less than 1% as many private airplanes as there are cars, so the airplane analogy is a poor business plan.

Virtually everyone I know thinks I'm fairly silly for buying a BEV so early. Of course they like the positive features of the car, like the acceleration... but think the whole charging thing is for the birds. Tesla is reaching the end of supplying the reservations made some time ago. Then they will only be able to sell to newly interested folks. If the charging issues aren't worked out soon, there won't be so much good press to encourage new sales. Every new technology has its boom period based on the novelty. Once that ends the product just plain has to be practical and cost effective. A Tesla model 3 may be cost effective, but without a lot more charging facilities it won't be a practical alternative to ICE powered cars.

As in driving a gas vehicle, your range will vary depending on many factors. Many gas cars have a really dumb gauge of (full to empty). Most people are not hyper critical of range in their gas car when range is equally a variable. In fact, your Tesla is better as it will tell you not to exceed a certain speed if necessary. Your friends are the silly ones. You have exhibited at least some intellect by having a Tesla in the first place. As you learn your car, it will become more clear to you and you can educate your friends as well...

 

[gnuarm]

As in driving a gas vehicle, your range will vary depending on many factors. Many gas cars have a really dumb gauge of (full to empty). Most people are not hyper critical of range in their gas car when range is equally a variable. In fact, your Tesla is better as it will tell you not to exceed a certain speed if necessary. Your friends are the silly ones. You have exhibited at least some intellect by having a Tesla in the first place. As you learn your car, it will become more clear to you and you can educate your friends as well...

Everyone seems to like ignoring the issue. Range is not a problem in ICE powered vehicles. Range is a problem in BEVs. It's that simple. So why compare Teslas to ICE powered vehicles when it comes to estimating range? There is no comparison and no point.

 

[mxnym]

Everyone seems to like ignoring the issue. Range is not a problem in ICE powered vehicles. Range is a problem in BEVs. It's that simple. So why compare Teslas to ICE powered vehicles when it comes to estimating range? There is no comparison and no point.

There are at least two points, and you appear to be willfully ignoring them by now:

1) History tends to repeat itself, and historically, the vehicle has to come before the infrastructure. There was a time in ICE history when the same problems would have plagued people if they had a computer to do all of their thinking for them.
2) Vehicles consume energy to move, and the amount of energy required varies due to outside factors. Physics don't change just because you're an early adopter.

 

[strider]

I don't get why people want to blame me for the numbers Tesla provides. Really? It is unreasonable to ask for more accurate range information??? This is a tough crowd.

AAAAHHHHHHH!!!!! The energy app and nav system (energy remaining at destination) numbers are as accurate as is currently possible with the technology available. Tesla is LITERALLY the state of the art with regard to energy use and range estimation. They currently don't account for weather or the nut behind the wheel. Will the accuracy improve over time? Probably. But otherwise the numbers on those 2 places (inside the car at all times) are the best and most accurate information that are currently available. If that's not enough for you then sell the car. Or else you can continue to post on an Internet forum about "the way things ought to be."

What could be asked for is for the car to do the "learning with time". I find it amazing that people feel the need to defend the poor capability of the car to assist the driver in determing range given the many factors involved. On one hand people suggest I should be able to calculate range in my head, then others say estimating range is too complex for the car computer to do. Really? I should be doing the calculations rather than the virtually super computers in the car?

See above. The car does do all the calculations for you. You are just too stubborn to use the energy graph and nav system.

Of course you can't base an entire trip on the mileage of the last 5, 15 or 30 miles. The mileage of the car varies over the course of a trip. I see this frequently.

Tesla takes elevation into account. NO ONE else does this. It is the state of the art.

Virtually everyone I know thinks I'm fairly silly for buying a BEV so early. Of course they like the positive features of the car, like the acceleration... but think the whole charging thing is for the birds. Tesla is reaching the end of supplying the reservations made some time ago. Then they will only be able to sell to newly interested folks. If the charging issues aren't worked out soon, there won't be so much good press to encourage new sales. Every new technology has its boom period based on the novelty. Once that ends the product just plain has to be practical and cost effective. A Tesla model 3 may be cost effective, but without a lot more charging facilities it won't be a practical alternative to ICE powered cars.

Last I checked there aren't any Ford, Chevy, or BMW-branded gas stations out there. As @mxnym pointed out, charging is a chicken and egg problem. You are exactly right that Tesla recognized the problem and built the SC network. No one else has done that but it takes time and money away from Tesla the car company. You may have read from a recent interview that Tesla almost went bankrupt a few months back. They are building SCs and cars as fast as they can but they are spread super thin.

I am going to sound like a curmudgeon, but you are entering EV ownership at a time that is light years ahead of where it was when I joined just 8 years ago. There was no SC network, no public charging stations except for a few noble folks that installed them at their homes and offices on their own dimes. The way most people traveled by EV was via RV parks where you could grab a NEMA 14-50 connection for a few hours. People would post pictures of themselves sitting in a camp chair reading a book. Look at the SC network today. That entire thing has come about in just a few years. Where do you think it'll be in a few more years?

You accused us of being arrogant earlier. It's not arrogance, it's experience. We have a lot, you have a little. You can learn a lot by listening to us and applying what we've learned. The people on this forum have figured out how to get the most out of these cars. Wishing for it to be different is an exercise in frustration, no different than proclaiming Apple or Microsoft or Ford or United Airlines or whomever else should change what they do just because you think you have a better way. I'm not saying your ideas are wrong. What I'm saying is that the car can't do that yet. You either need to figure out how to live with how it is today or sell the car.

 

[gnuarm]

AAAAHHHHHHH!!!!! The energy app and nav system (energy remaining at destination) numbers are as accurate as is currently possible with the technology available. Tesla is LITERALLY the state of the art with regard to energy use and range estimation. They currently don't account for weather or the nut behind the wheel. Will the accuracy improve over time? Probably. But otherwise the numbers on those 2 places (inside the car at all times) are the best and most accurate information that are currently available. If that's not enough for you then sell the car. Or else you can continue to post on an Internet forum about "the way things ought to be."

You seem to think this is about me. It's not, it's about the typical consumer. Until people are more comfortable with the range estimations and the availability of charging away from home, they will not buy BEVs.

You keep wanting to make this personal. I'm just looking at the car the way the vast majority of people will and do. You were an early adopter and strong advocate. I think you are highly biased to thinking many others will be happy with what you are happy with. That is not the case.

As to the idea that this is "state of the art", that's no excuse for poor performance. It may be state of the art, but it needs to improve. Just like very few will pay for full self driving until it is verified to work much better than a human. State of the art doesn't mean "good".

See above. The car does do all the calculations for you. You are just too stubborn to use the energy graph and nav system.

You have not shown me anything that is clear and accurate. Where do you find your info on what the car does and doesn't do, how it makes its calculations? Just now I pulled in with a lot less charge than the tool originally estimated. Before I left on this leg I was concerned that I could make it without charging part way because I knew the estimate was not accurate. The question is always, how inaccurate it will be. I've never seen the residual charge higher than the original estimate.

Tesla takes elevation into account. NO ONE else does this. It is the state of the art.

Please provide me with info on this. Where did you read that?

Last I checked there aren't any Ford, Chevy, or BMW-branded gas stations out there. As @mxnym pointed out, charging is a chicken and egg problem. You are exactly right that Tesla recognized the problem and built the SC network. No one else has done that but it takes time and money away from Tesla the car company. You may have read from a recent interview that Tesla almost went bankrupt a few months back. They are building SCs and cars as fast as they can but they are spread super thin.

It's not really chicken and egg at this point. They are making new cars at a faster clip than I realized. The existing SCs will be swamped in just a year or so if people keep buying Teslas like they have been. Once that starts becoming the norm and cars have to wait in line to charge on a trip, they will rapidly fall out of favor. It's bad enough to add an hour for every five hours of driving, adding another half hour for waiting will totally suck!

I am going to sound like a curmudgeon, but you are entering EV ownership at a time that is light years ahead of where it was when I joined just 8 years ago. There was no SC network, no public charging stations except for a few noble folks that installed them at their homes and offices on their own dimes. The way most people traveled by EV was via RV parks where you could grab a NEMA 14-50 connection for a few hours. People would post pictures of themselves sitting in a camp chair reading a book. Look at the SC network today. That entire thing has come about in just a few years. Where do you think it'll be in a few more years?

The history is not really relevant. What is relevant is the ability and commitment of Tesla to making charging work going forward. I read that they are considering opening the Tesla network to non-Tesla cars. That will totally suck to be waiting for a Bolt or Nissan to charge instead of charging myself. Tesla can't sell a million cars to people who like waiting hours in an RV park, they don't exist.

You accused us of being arrogant earlier. It's not arrogance, it's experience.

There is a perfect example of arrogance, to think because you have experience you know what others want.

We have a lot, you have a little. You can learn a lot by listening to us and applying what we've learned. The people on this forum have figured out how to get the most out of these cars. Wishing for it to be different is an exercise in frustration, no different than proclaiming Apple or Microsoft or Ford or United Airlines or whomever else should change what they do just because you think you have a better way. I'm not saying your ideas are wrong. What I'm saying is that the car can't do that yet. You either need to figure out how to live with how it is today or sell the car.

Lol! I guess the grand Nebuchadnezzar has spoken!

 

[Evoforce]

Wow! Just wow! I just got back from a 6500 mile trip across the US as well as ones before, and I find the Tesla car very much better than gas.

Just think of all of the faults of a gas car up to and including inefficiencies. Yep, the (fueling) charging takes more time with electric, but there are so many things to do in that time.

Examples include: sleeping, eating, potty breaks, cellphone, computer, shopping, sightseeing, trip planning, passenger interactions, social media, games etc...

Plus, the car can refuel while you are sleeping or indulging at a Hotel at a huge amount of participants in Destination Chargers which go beyond Supercharger locations.

Also, with the purchase of adapters, your Tesla can utilize other car charging networks that are growing across the country as well as (any) place that has electricity where the owner of the outlet approves of your use (think campgrounds/homeowners etc).

Because I also own 2 Nissan Leafs, I have made adapters that can use any outlet but they are rarely used for my Tesla except in remote locations.

Anyway, where you cannot find and are not allowed to use electricity is the limitation of your Tesla. Not very many places 250 +- mile range that don't have electricity available.

I still own plenty of gas cars, they are relics of my past because I am a car guy. The modern electrics get driven while the gas cars sit as testament of my automotive beloved past.

 

[strider]

You seem to think this is about me. It's not, it's about the typical consumer. Until people are more comfortable with the range estimations and the availability of charging away from home, they will not buy BEVs.

You keep wanting to make this personal. I'm just looking at the car the way the vast majority of people will and do. You were an early adopter and strong advocate. I think you are highly biased to thinking many others will be happy with what you are happy with. That is not the case.

As to the idea that this is "state of the art", that's no excuse for poor performance. It may be state of the art, but it needs to improve. Just like very few will pay for full self driving until it is verified to work much better than a human. State of the art doesn't mean "good".

I can imagine you watching the Wright Flyer in 1903 and saying, "Pretty cool, but until it can hold 173 people in comfort at 40,000 feet for 11 hours it won't catch on."

Do things have to change before 100% of people move to EVs? YES! Just like they had to change before 100% of people moved from horses to cars. But before there was 100% adoption of ICE cars there were early adopters . People who had to carefully plan their trips to get from gas station to gas station. They had to carry a bunch of tools because the cars broke down a lot and spare tires because the roads were crap. Things that no one with a horse needed to worry about because there was a stable, blacksmith, saddlery, etc on every corner. I'm sure people on horses laughed at the ICE driver broken down by the side of the road the same way that your friends laugh at the hoops you have to jump through to drive your EV. We're still in that early adopter phase with EVs today. You have chosen a different path and that path is harder than the mainstream. If you're not an early adopter and willing to put up with (and work with the community to find solutions for) their limitations you shouldn't be here. EVs are not yet for everyone.

You have not shown me anything that is clear and accurate. Where do you find your info on what the car does and doesn't do, how it makes its calculations? Just now I pulled in with a lot less charge than the tool originally estimated. Before I left on this leg I was concerned that I could make it without charging part way because I knew the estimate was not accurate. The question is always, how inaccurate it will be. I've never seen the residual charge higher than the original estimate.

Then you are driving way too fast. Here is what works for me. Before I take a trip I do a full range (trip) charge and enable Range Mode in the settings. Then I punch in my destination and right at the bottom it tells me what the % battery remaining will be at the destination. I like to keep that at 5% or higher. So as I'm driving, if that % drops below 5 I slow down. If it moves back up to 6 I'll speed up a bit. This has NEVER failed me. Now one day we had a 45mph headwind and I had to drop down to ~40mph to keep that number at 5% but it worked. Since they added that feature I don't use the energy app at all any more. I just drive to the energy remaining number, period.

Please provide me with info on this. Where did you read that?

Page 124 of the Model S Owner's Manual:

It's not really chicken and egg at this point. They are making new cars at a faster clip than I realized. The existing SCs will be swamped in just a year or so if people keep buying Teslas like they have been. Once that starts becoming the norm and cars have to wait in line to charge on a trip, they will rapidly fall out of favor. It's bad enough to add an hour for every five hours of driving, adding another half hour for waiting will totally suck!

I was referring to destination charging. If your friend had an EV and you could plug into a 50A circuit when you spent the night you would have started with a full battery and your day would have gone more smoothly. In the same way that Ford and Chevy don't build gas stations, it's not Tesla's job to build the infrastructure. They have, and we are thankful for it, but once we hit some kind of critical mass others will take over and build charging networks for everyone. Don't you think that in the same way that someone that sees huge lines at a gas station will build one across the street, people will start to see long charge lines and build competing charging stations across the street?

The history is not really relevant. What is relevant is the ability and commitment of Tesla to making charging work going forward. I read that they are considering opening the Tesla network to non-Tesla cars. That will totally suck to be waiting for a Bolt or Nissan to charge instead of charging myself. Tesla can't sell a million cars to people who like waiting hours in an RV park, they don't exist.

The history is relevant so you can get some kind of idea on how fast the landscape has changed in just a few years. Think about it. Just 6 years ago people were spending hours at RV parks to charge their cars. They had to plan their trips in excruciating detail to make sure they had charging (is the RV park open in the winter? Will someone be there to let me in? What if the breaker to the EVSE trips at a donated spot in a business park somewhere and it's a Sunday?). Now you spend 30 minutes or less at a Supercharger that the car's internal navigation system routed you to automatically, displays the current usage of the site before you arrive, and notifies your phone when it's charged enough to continue on your journey. Imagine what we'll have in another 6 years!?

 

[gnuarm]

There are at least two points, and you appear to be willfully ignoring them by now:

1) History tends to repeat itself, and historically, the vehicle has to come before the infrastructure. There was a time in ICE history when the same problems would have plagued people if they had a computer to do all of their thinking for them.

There is no point what so ever comparing early generation ICE and Teslas. Bottom line is people won't buy cars they can't easily use and have confidence in. I don't understand why you don't get this. The cars are being made in quantity. The hen is here. It is now time for the egg. Without eggs Tesla won't be able to continue selling more and more chickens.

This is not 1910. The alternative is not shoveling horse poop. If BEVs are going to gain significant market share they have to make people comfortable with charging and range while driving on trips.

2) Vehicles consume energy to move, and the amount of energy required varies due to outside factors. Physics don't change just because you're an early adopter.

True, very true. But physics is well understood. Cars have communications with the entire world and they have tons of computing power, processing memory and long term storage. People in this thread are telling me I need to do calculations in my head rather than the car doing them. Hmmm.... no, I'm not the one being stubborn.

 

[gnuarm]

I can imagine you watching the Wright Flyer in 1903 and saying, "Pretty cool, but until it can hold 173 people in comfort at 40,000 feet for 11 hours it won't catch on."

Why do you make such silly comparisons? I am saying enough people won't buy BEVs until there is adequate charging and range. Your counter point is that people fly on airplanes... pretty silly.

Do things have to change before 100% of people move to EVs? YES! Just like they had to change before 100% of people moved from horses to cars. But before there was 100% adoption of ICE cars there were early adopters . People who had to carefully plan their trips to get from gas station to gas station. They had to carry a bunch of tools because the cars broke down a lot and spare tires because the roads were crap. Things that no one with a horse needed to worry about because there was a stable, blacksmith, saddlery, etc on every corner. I'm sure people on horses laughed at the ICE driver broken down by the side of the road the same way that your friends laugh at the hoops you have to jump through to drive your EV. We're still in that early adopter phase with EVs today. You have chosen a different path and that path is harder than the mainstream. If you're not an early adopter and willing to put up with (and work with the community to find solutions for) their limitations you shouldn't be here. EVs are not yet for everyone.

Again with the silly extreme statements. No one is talking about 100% of cars being BEVs. I'm talking about even 5%. Possibly even 1%. People want cars that make their lives easier. Just like when I talked to a Chevy dealer and asked about charging (and his smile went away) when people find out their friend who has a Tesla has to go miles out of his way and park waiting for the battery to charge, they will avoid BEVs like the plague. Yeah, there are a few of us who still want to have these cars, but the vast majority won't. Telling people to take a % charge number and do some math in their heads would be the end of nearly every sale of a Tesla if the salesman actually said that.

Then you are driving way too fast. Here is what works for me. Before I take a trip I do a full range (trip) charge and enable Range Mode in the settings. Then I punch in my destination and right at the bottom it tells me what the % battery remaining will be at the destination. I like to keep that at 5% or higher. So as I'm driving, if that % drops below 5 I slow down. If it moves back up to 6 I'll speed up a bit. This has NEVER failed me. Now one day we had a 45mph headwind and I had to drop down to ~40mph to keep that number at 5% but it worked. Since they added that feature I don't use the energy app at all any more. I just drive to the energy remaining number, period.

Lol! This is pretty amazing! I am a real gearhead. I'm a scientist and an engineer and I love to play with my gadgets. But I never want to have to do 40 mph on a highway in order to reach a charger!!! Wow!

Page 124 of the Model S Owner's Manual:
View attachment 358444

Useful info, thanks. So far no one else has backed up any of their statements. When people claim the range estimate in the instrument cluster is the EPA rated calculation, do you know where that is stated?

I was referring to destination charging. If your friend had an EV and you could plug into a 50A circuit when you spent the night you would have started with a full battery and your day would have gone more smoothly. In the same way that Ford and Chevy don't build gas stations, it's not Tesla's job to build the infrastructure. They have, and we are thankful for it, but once we hit some kind of critical mass others will take over and build charging networks for everyone. Don't you think that in the same way that someone that sees huge lines at a gas station will build one across the street, people will start to see long charge lines and build competing charging stations across the street?

LOL! If Tesla had not built the network of superchargers they would be out of business right now. That is my point. They want to be selling millions of cars each year and that won't happen until there are a lot more chargers than they have now. First they got the easily motivated customers with a lot of money to buy their cars. Then they came out with a much cheaper version so the easily motivated with not as much money buyers were attracted. They will have sold cars to all of them in the coming year. Even with a $35,000 version they won't be able to find so many more buyers until they make it much easier to charge and they can make people confident in the range they can get. Once chargers are only ten miles apart, range won't be such a problem. But at 100 miles apart people are going to want better info on range and even then many won't be interested. It just won't happen.

The history is relevant so you can get some kind of idea on how fast the landscape has changed in just a few years. Think about it. Just 8 years ago people were spending hours at RV parks to charge their cars. They had to plan their trips in excruciating detail to make sure they had charging (is the RV park open in the winter? Will someone be there to let me in? What if the breaker to the EVSE trips at a donated spot in a business park somewhere and it's a Sunday?). Now you spend 30 minutes or less at a Supercharger that the car's internal navigation system routed you to automatically, displays the current usage of the site before you arrive, and notifies your phone when it's charged enough to continue on your journey. Imagine what we'll have in another 8 years!?

When you say "people were spending hours at RV parks to charge their cars", you mean a very few people, the very early adopters who are the most interested, the most motivated. They are all done, they all have cars. They aren't going to keep Tesla afloat.

The point is it will have to get a lot better in just the next year or two if Tesla wants to sell hundreds of thousands a year. The gearheads will all have BEVs by then. They will then have to sell to the rest of us... them. It's not about anyone who already has Teslas.

 

[gnuarm]

Also, with the purchase of adapters, your Tesla can utilize other car charging networks that are growing across the country as well as (any) place that has electricity where the owner of the outlet approves of your use (think campgrounds/homeowners etc).

Because I also own 2 Nissan Leafs, I have made adapters that can use any outlet but they are rarely used for my Tesla except in remote locations.

Don't rely on Chademo adapters working. They have a Tesla adapter at the store with the only non-J-1772 charger in Frederick and it doesn't work with my car. I've tried it several times and the charger always gives me an error. The store says it works with some cars and not with others. While much faster than AC chargers, it is about half as fast as a Supercharger. So still a tool for use in a pinch or charging while you have other things to do, but the Supercharger is still my minimum charger for trips.

 

[strider]

Again with the silly extreme statements. No one is talking about 100% of cars being BEVs. I'm talking about even 5%. Possibly even 1%. People want cars that make their lives easier. Just like when I talked to a Chevy dealer and asked about charging (and his smile went away) when people find out their friend who has a Tesla has to go miles out of his way and park waiting for the battery to charge, they will avoid BEVs like the plague. Yeah, there are a few of us who still want to have these cars, but the vast majority won't. Telling people to take a % charge number and do some math in their heads would be the end of nearly every sale of a Tesla if the salesman actually said that.

My statement stands. A lot of things have to change in order for technology to expand from early adopters to the mainstream.

Lol! This is pretty amazing! I am a real gearhead. I'm a scientist and an engineer and I love to play with my gadgets. But I never want to have to do 40 mph on a highway in order to reach a charger!!! Wow!

Dude, seriously. Sell the freaking car. Based on where we are, TODAY, in the world of charging infrastructure, you may have to do 40mph to get home or to the next charger. In a few more years that probably won't be the case. That is when you should buy an EV.

You claim to be a scientist and engineer yet you act like you can just snap your fingers and make complex things appear. Building a charging infrastructure is hard (and expensive).

I could just as easily say, "no one will buy an EV until they have a 500 mile range." Someday that statement will be true. It is not true today. Anyone can make statements about "the way things should be" but that does not make them so.

Useful info, thanks. So far no one else has backed up any of their statements. When people claim the range estimate in the instrument cluster is the EPA rated calculation, do you know where that is stated?

Also in the manual.
This is referencing the "battery bar" on the screen in front of the steering wheel:

This is the Controls > Display section referenced in the previous image:

Note that next to "Rated" it says "based on EPA testing."

LOL! If Tesla had not built the network of superchargers they would be out of business right now. That is my point. They want to be selling millions of cars each year and that won't happen until there are a lot more chargers than they have now. First they got the easily motivated customers with a lot of money to buy their cars. Then they came out with a much cheaper version so the easily motivated with not as much money buyers were attracted. They will have sold cars to all of them in the coming year. Even with a $35,000 version they won't be able to find so many more buyers until they make it much easier to charge and they can make people confident in the range they can get. Once chargers are only ten miles apart, range won't be such a problem. But at 100 miles apart people are going to want better info on range and even then many won't be interested. It just won't happen.

So if you believe that you should short the stock. It's that simple. Sell your car and short the stock.

When you say "people were spending hours at RV parks to charge their cars", you mean a very few people, the very early adopters who are the most interested, the most motivated. They are all done, they all have cars. They aren't going to keep Tesla afloat.

The point is it will have to get a lot better in just the next year or two if Tesla wants to sell hundreds of thousands a year. The gearheads will all have BEVs by then. They will then have to sell to the rest of us... them. It's not about anyone who already has Teslas.

You claim to be a scientist and engineer but you have obviously never looked at the data of how people use cars in America. Web searches are your friend but the data shows that most people only drive ~30 miles per day. Here's an article saying that 99% of trips are <100 miles:
Can EVs handle the distances we drive? - A Study
That jives with how we use our cars. Nearly all days we drive a few miles to work/school. Then 2 nights/week we drive 15 miles or so to run the kids to ballet or swim practice. A few times per month we visit my parents or the in-laws. One is 15 miles away, the other is 30 miles away. A few times per year we visit friends ~100 miles away. Once a year we drive to Colorado to ski (we use our diesel Jeep for that trip). It would probably save us money in tags and insurance to just rent an ICE SUV for that annual ski trip but I can't be bothered to sell the Jeep.

You seem to take long trips at the drop of a hat. That is not how "the rest of us... them" use their vehicles.

Finally, and this is what I say to everyone I talk to about EVs. For every 2+ car household (which according to 2009 Census data is 58% of US households or ~68 million), at a minimum, one of those vehicles could be an EV. You keep the other one an ICE for the occasional long trip or to a place where charging is difficult. That translates into 68 million EVs on the road without needing ANY public chargers. Zero, zip, zilch. The fact that we have the SC network as it exists today then allows a certain number of people to have more of their vehicles be an EV. So right there you have a Total Addressable Market of 68 million vehicles for Tesla without a single charging station being built. Improving the charging infrastructure just increases that number even more.

 

[gnuarm]

My statement stands. A lot of things have to change in order for technology to expand from early adopters to the mainstream.

Exactly. That is my entire point. Tesla needs to buckle down and get cracking on the charging and improve the ability of the car to forecast range in order to attract mainstream buyers which is where they are now with the aggressive model 3 sales forecasts.

Dude, seriously. Sell the freaking car. Based on where we are, TODAY, in the world of charging infrastructure, you may have to do 40mph to get home or to the next charger. In a few more years that probably won't be the case. That is when you should buy an EV.

"Dude", seriously... if that is fact, why aren't the Tesla sales people saying that? lol

You claim to be a scientist and engineer yet you act like you can just snap your fingers and make complex things appear. Building a charging infrastructure is hard (and expensive).

Hard? Hardly. Expensive? Doesn't matter. Building electric motors and batteries is expensive... but factored into the price of the cars. Charging infrastructure is more of an investment than a recurring cost, but still needs to be factored into the price of the cars. The Supercharging network is the only real difference between buying a Tesla model 3 with the small battery pack (220 mile range) and a Chevy Bolt. With the huge volume of cars they are and will be selling the charging network needs to grow substantially.

I know you are an early adopter and so aren't worried with charging issues, but give it a bit of thought. Many metro areas now have well over 100 Tesla cars, but only 6 or 8 chargers, many of which are in use at any given time by travelers. Locals are going to use Superchargers as well when it makes the difference between being able to drive for the day or having to go home to charge some more. No, people won't need this every day, but usage is not always the same. With the large number of cars out there the current metro located charging will be swamped early on.

I could just as easily say, "no one will buy an EV until they have a 500 mile range." Someday that statement will be true. It is not true today. Anyone can make statements about "the way things should be" but that does not make them so.

You can say anything you wish, that doesn't make other things invalid. It's not what I think should be, it is what the market will require. I don't get why you keep making it what I want, dude.

Also in the manual.
This is referencing the "battery bar" on the screen in front of the steering wheel:
View attachment 358474
This is the Controls > Display section referenced in the previous image:
View attachment 358471
Note that next to "Rated" it says "based on EPA testing."

So if you believe that you should short the stock. It's that simple. Sell your car and short the stock.

I like the fact that so many things to you are "that simple". I am long Tesla. I think Tesla will do what is required to continue to be profitable for some time to come. They are not in danger of being overtaken for several years yet. But they can easily lose the mantle to established auto makers who are not really so far behind. Those established auto makers are doing exactly what you are suggesting. They are letting the market forces work to build a charging infrastructure. So they are selling very few BEVs. The Chevy Bolt came out nearly a year before the Model 3 was available in any volume and yet the model 3 sales swamp the Bolt.

As I keep saying, "it's all about the charging, stupid".

You claim to be a scientist and engineer but you have obviously never looked at the data of how people use cars in America. Web searches are your friend but the data shows that most people only drive ~30 miles per day. Here's an article saying that 99% of trips are <100 miles:
Can EVs handle the distances we drive? - A Study
That jives with how we use our cars. Nearly all days we drive a few miles to work/school. Then 2 nights/week we drive 15 miles or so to run the kids to ballet or swim practice. A few times per month we visit my parents or the in-laws. One is 15 miles away, the other is 30 miles away. A few times per year we visit friends ~100 miles away. Once a year we drive to Colorado to ski (we use our diesel Jeep for that trip). It would probably save us money in tags and insurance to just rent an ICE SUV for that annual ski trip but I can't be bothered to sell the Jeep.

I had a discussion about using BEV batteries as storage for supplying peak energy to the power grid. The other guy kept saying that cars are idle 95% of the time as if that number alone meant there would always be enough cars plugged into the infrastructure to provide the storage needed. Like with your data that average is not sufficient. With usage it is even worse because you only need to drive the car a few times a year on trips (or simply think you need that) to discourage you from buying a BEV if you aren't completely confident it will do the job. That is the majority of people.. the people who aren't early adopters. You can't anticipate what they will do based on what you would do since you clearly are an early adopter.

You seem to take long trips at the drop of a hat. That is not how "the rest of us... them" use their vehicles.

You keep talking about my needs. My needs are not the issue. Talk to some people who might want a $35,000 Tesla. I think you will find a lot of resistance without saying anything to them. Then tell them what you've told me about how the range estimates can't be trusted and how it is affected by the cold and how Superchargers (essential for trips that need more than one tank of gas) are spaced so far apart you often have to stop at every one even if you only need to charge for 20 or 30 minutes. Tell them how you need to get a "feel" for the range of the car and that you may need to limit your speed to 40 mph to finish a trip. See how many want to buy a Tesla then, even at $35,000. I actually can't believe you are arguing this point.

Finally, and this is what I say to everyone I talk to about EVs. For every 2+ car household (which according to 2009 Census data is 58% of US households or ~68 million), at a minimum, one of those vehicles could be an EV. You keep the other one an ICE for the occasional long trip or to a place where charging is difficult. That translates into 68 million EVs on the road without needing ANY public chargers. Zero, zip, zilch. The fact that we have the SC network as it exists today then allows a certain number of people to have more of their vehicles be an EV. So right there you have a Total Addressable Market of 68 million vehicles for Tesla without a single charging station being built. Improving the charging infrastructure just increases that number even more.

Yes, it *could* be a lot of BEVs, but will it? How many of your friends have bought one? None of mine have. I can't even find contacts for referrals. I'd love to get a couple of new Tesla owners on board. But I'm not going to pretend to them there aren't issues. For some time to come they won't be able to use the BEV the same way they use an ICE car. For the most part they don't care if the other car can do what they want on trips. They don't want to spend $35,000 on the "second" car. For most people the second car is the inexpensive car they drive to work, not the fancy, dancy new car they have to put in the garage each night to charge... assuming they have a garage or even a charger. Oh yeah, around two thirds of your millions of potential BEVs don't have a place to charge at home and won't have one. It isn't hard to realize with all the limitations, just how limited the market will be until the charging network is much more complete.

Only the very few early adopters are willing to invest in an untested, unproven, limiting technology. Tesla only has a short time window to forge ahead and build on their early lead. You need to recognize just how powerful an economic force the automobile manufacturers will be as they turn their full attention to the BEV market which they are starting to do now. That's why GM is closing five plants and laying off 15,000 workers, because they want to redirect resources to BEVs. If Tesla doesn't capitalize on their lead now, they won't have a chance in a very few years.

 

[Rocky_H]

I know you are an early adopter and so aren't worried with charging issues, but give it a bit of thought. Many metro areas now have well over 100 Tesla cars, but only 6 or 8 chargers, many of which are in use at any given time by travelers.

That's certainly false, but I now see where your mispprehension is coming from. You seem to think that because it's a Tesla car, that it must only be charged from Tesla (TM) brand Superchargers or that nothing else exists. That most assuredly is not so. Look at one of those metro areas you're talking about on Plugshare and notice the 100+ charging stations throughout the city.

Yes, it *could* be a lot of BEVs, but will it? How many of your friends have bought one? None of mine have. I can't even find contacts for referrals.

I've also gotten very few referrals--only three in almost five years, despite showing it to a lot of people. But you know what? It's not because they do not want it. Everyone I've showed it to and let drive it REALLY wants one, but they can't afford it yet. They don't have any issues with the car or it's use, but most people I know have to buy used and cheaper cars. The only other caveat to that is many people around here really needing a pickup truck and Tesla doesn't make that yet.

 

[strider]

Your arguments apply to EVERY new technology that has ever come about in human history. From the wheel to the steam engine to the car to airplanes, you name it. That's why there's this thing called the adoption curve. The first versions suck and are only bought by rich early adopters. Then the tech gets better, pricing improves, and the next tier of early adopters buy in. And on and on. This takes a LONG time. You act like Tesla is in danger of being overtaken any second by their competitors yet you then state that charging infrastructure is lacking and no one but Tesla is doing anything about it. Furthermore, the ICE market currently supports a large number of manufacturers. Why do you think there can be only 1 EV maker? Because that is what you're implying with your doom and gloom, Tesla is going to lose their lead, talk. Competition is good.

I have friends that have a sporty/nice car for daily driving and a ratty old minivan for family trips.

Ok, so swipe 2/3 of those households off the list to cover those without home charging (which I think is overstating it but whatever). At 500,000 cars/year it gives Tesla 40 YEARS of production to build 20,000,000 cars without needing a single charger. You can call that a limited market if you want.....

You are confusing inevitable with imminent. I have given you the travel data (which you ignore, so much for being a scientist and engineer) but all you want to do is argue that Tesla will fail unless they build the perfect car and puts in a charger every 10 miles. There is no such thing as the perfect anything. The car has been evolving for over 100 years. Likewise the fueling infrastructure has been evolving for the same time. Yet there are still parts of this country where you see a sign that says "last gas for 100 miles." I guess those gasoline cars aren't going to catch on until there's a gas station every 10 miles. Charging will be no different. I have tried to give you perspective on how the charging networks have grown incredibly rapidly in a very short time and that they will continue to grow. People that don't need to drive >300 miles/day could buy one now. Further, you are telling me that there are millions of people that drive over 300 miles/day and never use an interstate (where the SCs are located)? I think you have the math precisely backwards.

You keep saying that this isn't about you but you claim that because a Tesla doesn't work "for you" that it won't work for anyone. You are wrong. Also, people run out of gas all the time. Is that the fault of the company that built the car?

I still don't know what your goal is with this thread. Talking to you is like talking to my 5 year old. You're just arguing to argue. People have come in here to try and help you use your car most effectively and you just keep saying how it sucks and it's all Tesla's fault and that they are going to fail. You've been here 4 months yet you're freaking expert at, apparently, everything related to personal transportation. You say that Tesla better "buckle down and get cracking." Are you serious? Everyone at Tesla is running around with their hair on fire. Look at their cash burn rate! They are spending money like crazy trying to build battery factories, produce cars, sell cars, service cars, build a charging network. Elon is pushing his people (and himself) to the breaking point. No ICE manufacturer is building oil refineries, gas stations, dealerships, and service networks all on their own like Tesla is. If there was a way to go faster Elon would certainly do it.

Do you seriously think Elon's going to read this thread and say, "Oh wow! I never thought of that before. We need a charging network! Good thing @gnuarm posted this over at TMC, we could have gotten ourselves into big trouble!" If Tesla survives or fails it won't be because of anything said by any of us.

 

[gnuarm]

That's certainly false, but I now see where your mispprehension is coming from. You seem to think that because it's a Tesla car, that it must only be charged from Tesla (TM) brand Superchargers or that nothing else exists. That most assuredly is not so. Look at one of those metro areas you're talking about on Plugshare and notice the 100+ charging stations throughout the city.

Hmmm... at some point I have to think these arguments are disingenuous. Of course you can charge from a 30 mph J-1772 if you want. But unless it is at your home, it won't give you much charging. Such slow chargers can be useful once they are wide spread enough so you can plug in virtually everywhere you shop or eat. We are a long way from that. Using one basically allows while shopping or whatever to recover the miles you used getting to it. This is in no way any sort of solution for someone who can't charge at home.

Other fast DC chargers are not as fast as the Tesla Superchargers by half and still not terribly common unlike the J-1772.

I was with a friend in a hospital and we ended up talking to a supervisor. I mentioned that the hospital up the street had a couple of chargers while they didn't. Seems they are planning new construction and this is the right time to get in ideas about charging solutions. I stayed over two nights and had to drive to an airport parking lot to charge. A J-1772 or destination charger would have saved me a lot of hassle and I could have been fully charged without exploring around Chattanooga. So the slow chargers certainly have their place, but they are not a solution for people without home charging.

I've also gotten very few referrals--only three in almost five years, despite showing it to a lot of people. But you know what? It's not because they do not want it. Everyone I've showed it to and let drive it REALLY wants one, but they can't afford it yet. They don't have any issues with the car or it's use, but most people I know have to buy used and cheaper cars. The only other caveat to that is many people around here really needing a pickup truck and Tesla doesn't make that yet.

Really? I find it hard to believe many people will buy these in place of ICE cars given the hassles. There is certainly no shortage of $45,000 cars sold. So the price isn't a barrier to sales of millions. I guess the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. We'll see if sales continue to climb for the next couple of years and how fast they grow the charging network.