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

NYT article: Stalled on the EV Highway

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
There should be no debate about the drive through Manhattan for no other reason apparently than to drain charge from the battery. The fraudster, aka NYT reporter, did mention this in passing in the beginning of his article without drawing any attention to it. If you look at the first two days of this thread, no one picked up on that. I posted on this a couple days ago and asked the question, "What on Earth was this guy doing taking a detour through Manhattan???" AFAIK, there are no Tesla charging stations in Manhattan. I can't think of another way to run the charge down more.

The NYT response today defending the reporter was very careful by saying that the trip through Manhattan wasn't "unreported." I assume this meant, unreported in the guy's story, i.e., a brief mention in passing without coming clean to say that the 50 miles or so of stop and go through Manhattan without any charging could have something to do with the outcome. The NYT's defense of the reporter is misleading at best and false assuming that the NYT reporter didn't pre-clear the detour through Manhattan with Tesla's folks.

Elon just called in to CNBC. Nothing too earth shattering. The main claims were the reported took an "extended drive" through Manhattan on the way to the 2nd supercharger, drove above the speed limit (contrary to Tesla's recommendations), and did not fully charge the car at each super charger. Will be interesting to read the details in the blog post later today.
 
Thou a picture of an EV stranded because it ran out of "juice" makes for a sensational story, the irony in all of this is the world's dwindling oil reserves ensure we will all be stranded by the roadside unless we alter are old ways and stop using the ICE.
 
Last edited:
In the 120+ posts in this thread I presume someone's mentioned it, but there IS a pretty good way to get a decent estimate of remaining range. On the energy display if you select average and the range (5, 15 or 30 miles) to average over it will give you a decent projection of your remaining range based upon the average energy use over that range. If conditions (speed, weather, terrain) change it won't help as much, but it's fairly accurate since it's using your past history for future prediction. If you've been driving for 50 miles at 65mph into a 10mph headwind and it's 10F outside, set that to average and 30 miles and it'll tell you how far you can go under those same conditions.

Yes, I'd love something more sophisticated, but the fact of the matter is that without terrain data, traffic data, weight in the vehicle data, wind speed and direction data no projection is likely to be any more accurate (and likely less accurate) than just using historical values as I pointed out above.


The comments above summarize exactly the mistakes made that lead to zero juice and a flatbed finish. Such a bummer. A seasoned owner would never have had this happen, but Tesla really let him down with weak advice along route. To translate this into bullets for

anyone considering a Model S and for anyone ready for a road trip in her/his Model S:

1. Always begin a long trip with a full charge, called a Range Charge, equals about 270 miles for the 85kWh Car. Journalist began with 240 mile standard charge. oops.
2. Expect a 10% range loss in cold weather, higher for the first 30 miles or so.
3. Expect range loss overnight in cold weather, especially until the coming firmware update that will allow for deeper car sleep.
4. Even if there is no "charging station", plug into a regular outlet overnight - range will be maintained or increase a little, and the battery will be warm and efficient in the morning.
5. Driving tips at low charge: Put the car in Range Mode (different than Range Charge), which uses seat heating over air warming, but still keeps you warm. Use cruise control, which is more efficient. Staying close to the car in front of you considerably reduces air resistance and drag. Slower speeds dramatically reduce energy use. Look at your energy window and note your average use for 15 or 30 miles and estimate range using that.
6. Don't go on a trip that is longer than your estimated mileage. I wonder if this reporter was, partly or fully consciously, looking for a story.

I have riven over 3,500 miles in (really) cold weather, including over 1200 miles in mountains far from any superchargers. With just a little forethought and a basic understanding of the car's abilities, such an outcome as this New York Times journalist experienced would never happen. Enjoy -




From the NYT article, it is clear the author is not a EV enthusiast, but the author is part of the Mass market of car drivers.

The Mass Market doesn't want to to read manuals, they've been told the Tesla is "The Best Car in the World" and they know how to drive a car so they don't read a manual. They really don't want to learn a list of guidelines. And frankly there are too many factors that only Tesla knows the answers to and these will change with each firmware release [e.g. Vampire drain from 4.1 to 4.2]. When I tell my significant other I'm planning a long distance drive, I've mentioned factors affecting range like we're gaining 5000 ft over 200 miles, and there is more air resistance at night. The response is an eye roll and proclamation "this is your hobby, I just want a car that gets me there".


Since the EV infrastructure is sparse and EV training limited, Tesla should automate this to alleviate mass market concerns. Consider the following:
1) Trip Planner - set destination in Nav system [mass market knows how to do this already]. Then a Tesla Trip Planner can do the following in the background: a) knows route - get traffic data - use average speed for the highway - predict effects of stop/go traffic; use external car temp; get Weather forecast for longer trips to get temp by hour; get typography to calc gain/loss. You could have profiles by driver of avg kWh/mi so not dependent on hypothetical EPA ratings. Base range calcs on temperature settings of car. If you can't make it to the destination with the current charge, it should propose charge points optimized around charger capacity to minimize delay. Should check availability of chargers from charge site data (are they operational, available?). Give list of alternative sites. [Similar to Google maps giving you alternative road options]
2) Trip Monitor - Monitor trip as it is progressing and verify assumptions of kWh/Mi, AC load, etc are correct. If the occupants change any of the controls that affect range (e.g. turn up the heat), redo predictions. If there will be insufficient power to get to destination, provide early warnings to driver & suggest recourse (e.g. slow down to NN mph; change to Range Mode for heat/AC; Recharge at location xxx, ...).
3) Park monitor - when car is put in Park, look at temp & weather forecast. See what battery drop will be - pop up screen with factors for next N days - let user change N days so if they are at airport parking lot they can see if they can get home without plugging in.

These are the things that experienced EV people do, but the mass market doesn't want to become an EV person - they want the car to do this. Given the Tesla's instrumentation, connectivity & user interface, this should all be possible to automate. [And for those of you who think this is for sissies, you should have an OFF button in your profile to disable it. But I think the market for sissies is bigger than the market for EV enthusiasts.]

And then when someone ignores all of the warnings and instructions and has to get towed Tesla can at least say "Well the car told you NN times you weren't going to make it... Your flatbed has been ordered."
 
For anyone who missed it, here again the link to what Elon said on CNBC: Tesla CEO: New York Times Article Is

The NYT response itself is misleading:

- Elon didn't claim Tesla told the reporter to charge overnight.

- The article did not report that he was sometimes driving 10 mph above speed limit,

- and it does *not* report a "detour" to Manhattan. It reports a "break" in Manhattan, but few people will know if this was a detour worth mentioning (and it doesn't report how much he drove in Manhattan).

- The article also doesn't report that none of the charges were the maximum charge possible (which would be around 265), although it does report the numbers. (It remains unknown if the author was aware of how to obtain the maximum charge, a "range" charge.) The second charge wasn't even a standard charge (only 185 miles range).

Elon says in the interview that Tesla explicitly instructed him to obtain maximum charges, not to make detours (between the two Superchargers), and not to drive too fast.
 
What makes you think it was factual, other than simple buying what the author wrote? He used the incident to discredit Steven Chu, and was very one-sided in blaming Tesla.
There is a difference between lying and writing the story from the point of view he wants to convey. Two different things and par for the course for people in all professions. We just don't like that point of view. If it is shown that he eliminated pertinent information (or falsified information) then I will change my opinion.
Not sure what you are talking about. The average driver doesn't need a flatbed.
Nor does the average driver want to think about how fast they are going, how cold it is, and the impact on range. Taking a road trip in an EV is not the same as in an ICE. It requires more planning.
 
There is a difference between lying and writing the story from the point of view he wants to convey. Two different things and par for the course for people in all professions. We just don't like that point of view. If it is shown that he eliminated pertinent information (or falsified information) then I will change my opinion.

Nor does the average driver want to think about how fast they are going, how cold it is, and the impact on range. Taking a road trip in an EV is not the same as in an ICE. It requires more planning.

You can guess from the numbers and time he said he charged but he doesn't mention how much range he started his last leg of the trip on. In e-mails from the author, he had about 40 miles and needed to go 65 miles. Since he was at a charger, he should have stayed there and charged a little longer but said he was 'cleared' by Tesla to take off.
 
I Drove The Tesla S. Was I Monitored Too? - Forbes

Now the reporters are getting nervous about being monitored.

A reporter is borrowing a car to do a review. Why would they think they wouldn't or shouldn't be monitored? Guilt over breaking the rules? I would think that borrowing someone elses car removes you from expecting privacy.

Well its a 100k car, of course they would be monitoring it when just lending to a reporter.
 
Nor does the average driver want to think about how fast they are going, how cold it is, and the impact on range. Taking a road trip in an EV is not the same as in an ICE. It requires more planning.

And you think this article is an honest (or factual) reflection on this requirement? I say its a hit job.

With an 85 kWh EV, the need for more planning is mostly due to the difference in available infrastructure, and according to Elon's CNBC interview, Tesla gave him instructions sufficient to succeed. See my post above about the NYT response.
 
You can guess from the numbers and time he said he charged but he doesn't mention how much range he started his last leg of the trip on. In e-mails from the author, he had about 40 miles and needed to go 65 miles. Since he was at a charger, he should have stayed there and charged a little longer but said he was 'cleared' by Tesla to take off.

The last leg, the third supercharge, was 216 mile range. At the end of the trip, he had 124 miles remaining. Info is in the graphic which you get by clicking on the "Multimedia" insert. The same graphic states the 1-hour Level 2 "low power charge" reached 32 miles range (not 40), which is close to my previous calculation of 30 miles range).

The critical part should have been covered by the second supercharge, which however he stopped at 185 miles range obtained.
 
The last leg, the third supercharge, was 216 mile range. At the end of the trip, he had 124 miles remaining. Info is in the graphic which you get by clicking on the "Multimedia" insert. The same graphic states the 1-hour Level 2 "low power charge" reached 32 miles range (not 40), which is close to my previous calculation of 30 miles range).

The critical part should have been covered by the second supercharge, which however he stopped at 185 miles range obtained.

To be fair in parsing the NY Times statement, this thread quickly deduced that the reporter had failed to fully charge the vehicle. That could only have been accomplished if the statements made in the article were factual.

The problem is that the article implies that the reporter was filling up and closely following Tesla's instructions, and nevertheless ended up on a flatbed.

That's just obvious spin when you get down to it. It ultimately made zero sense for the reporter to leave a working charger with a nearly empty battery, and the indicated range being less than was needed to reach his destination. When you combine it with the apparent repeated failure to fully charge the car, it really looks bad for the NY Times.

They need to get Margaret Sullivan (their Public Editor) to respond to this. Anyone interested in writing her can reach her at [email protected]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.