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

P85D range and highway battery performance

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I just took my P85D on my first longer highway trip just for fun today. We drove from Oakville Ontario to the new Supercharger in Woodstock Ontario and back. The Total round trip distance was 143.2 miles with 58.1kwh Total Energy used and 406 wh/mi at a average speed of 68.3mph. I wanted to be "normal" in my driving and set the internal temp at 72F as the outside temp was 26F. I am running on 19" Nokian Hakka R2's.

Although I could not charge at the Woodstock Supercharger due to an "Unable to Charge" error message on all 8 Supercharger stalls, I drove like I would in a normal ICE car both ways (a little nervous on the return trip, but kept the speed).
 
Last edited:
Sorry, I missed that you had already made the point about showing 242 Rated miles at 100% charge. I would have expected that to kill the discussion about 242 being the result of a 90% charge level in the EPA test. Maybe others missed it too.

Early on Telsla showed Ideal (300 for an 85 @ 100%) and Projected (based on recent actual usage). Projected got replaced with Rated, which was set to the EPA range (265 @ 100%, at least on a new[ish] battery). So showing the EPA range of 242 @ 100% is consistent with current practice.

Several owners on another thread reported this morning that their Rated range increased by 3-6 miles after installing the latest software update. I wonder if they are now showing 250 Rated @100% if the car has 19" wheels??

I may have missed it but isn't the definition of 100% in question here? If the batter has a reserve that is is unusable, wouldn't the 100% just represent the usable part of the charge?
 
Total trip was only 143 miles and still you were nervous ?

I being a newbie had left my house with ony 200 miles of rated charge available as I was thinking I would be able to test out the supercharger with a low battery level. So yes when the supercharger did no work and I could not wait for 2 hours at the public J1772 charger, I was a little nervous given the P85D's current thirst for power. I received low battery warnings before I made it home...
 
I may have missed it but isn't the definition of 100% in question here? If the batter has a reserve that is is unusable, wouldn't the 100% just represent the usable part of the charge?

Maybe I'm stating the obvious here, but all range numbers quoted by Tesla (300/265/253/242 etc.) are for 100% of the usable portion of the battery. Same 100% that you can set on the slider.
 
Maybe I'm stating the obvious here, but all range numbers quoted by Tesla (300/265/253/242 etc.) are for 100% of the usable portion of the battery. Same 100% that you can set on the slider.
I think his point is the "100%" for the various batteries may not refer to the same DOD/kWh usable. It's entirely possible the usable portion of the battery is different for the P85D vs the other models.
 
I being a newbie had left my house with ony 200 miles of rated charge available as I was thinking I would be able to test out the supercharger with a low battery level. So yes when the supercharger did no work and I could not wait for 2 hours at the public J1772 charger, I was a little nervous given the P85D's current thirst for power. I received low battery warnings before I made it home...
Did you contact Tesla about the Supercharger issue?
 
Perhaps it's time to revive this thread now that there are a good number of P85Ds out in the hands of owners, many with tires fully broken in. I drove a round trip of 29.0 miles using an average of 317 Wh/mi today, by far the best efficiency I've seen so far. Temps were 55-60° F., winds light, dry roads; my D has 19" wheels with Hakka R2 snows. The round trip was from my garage to town and back, mixed city and country 2-lane roads, speeds 30-50 mph with lots of traffic signals and four-way stops.

Not bad, eh? I expect my S85 would have done the same trip using about 290-300 Wh/mi, but that's just an educated guess.

image.jpg
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 615
Perhaps it's time to revive this thread now that there are a good number of P85Ds out in the hands of owners, many with tires fully broken in. I drove a round trip of 29.0 miles using an average of 317 Wh/mi today, by far the best efficiency I've seen so far. Temps were 55-60° F., winds light, dry roads; my D has 19" wheels with Hakka R2 snows. The round trip was from my garage to town and back, mixed city and country 2-lane roads, speeds 30-50 mph with lots of traffic signals and four-way stops.

Not bad, eh? I expect my S85 would have done the same trip using about 290-300 Wh/mi, but that's just an educated guess.

Wow you must have a much lighter foot than mine! Over 3,000 miles so far, my lifetime average is 413 Wh/mile...

BTW do you mind adding your data to the Google doc posted at the beginning of page 2?

Firewired, it might be worth adding the link to your first post on page 1 to make it easier for others to find. Thanks!
 
I've seen no improvements in my P85D energy usage after ~2000 miles. Still sitting at 400+Wh/mi avg. Doing my best I managed to get 345 Wh/mi on a trip to town and back... then I did the same in the P85 a few days later and got 260 Wh/mi.
 
I've just added 4 data points from a weekend trip to the spreadsheet.

Maybe my driving style has changed since I got the P85D, but my Wh/mi average has dropped from 403 in December to 365 in January.

Although, it's been an abnormally warm January in the SF bay area, and my tires have worn out a bit more so they are less sticky now.
 
I added another six lines of data to the spreadsheet. The last five represent our weekend road trip from just north of Denver to Taos, NM, and back: about 700 miles of mountain and valley driving, including one big, wet snowstorm in southern Colorado and northern New Mexico. We made only one Supercharger stop, at Silverthorne, outbound. The rest of the charging was accomplished using a 40A 14-50 at the Monte Bello RV Park in Taos and a 70A L2 charger at Wood's High Plains Distillery in Salida, CO (thanks to Cottonwood for donating the charger, and to PT Wood for hosting it).

Our highest usage came on the first leg, Broomfield to Silverthorne, at 406 Wh/mi, but that's because it was driven at relatively high speeds and ends 3582 ft. higher than it starts. The lowest usage came in at 252 Wh/mi on the second leg, from Silverthorne to Salida; the net elevation change of -1886 ft. being the main contributor. The Salida to Taos leg was dominated by a worsening winter storm that had us feeling our way on an unplowed highway with as much as six inches of snow and slush and near whiteout conditions at times; we were happy to make it to Taos with 30 Rated miles remaining having started with a theoretical 70 Rated mile cushion. Two days later, returning from Taos to Salida the roads were clear, but the temperatures dropped into the single digits F.; we actually managed to beat the Trip predictions by one percent by again driving conservatively. The last leg featured a howling crosswind off the port bow through South Park (yes, that South Park); we started with an 18% cushion, of some 46 Rated miles, and were able to drive at or above the speed limit the entire way, knowing that our next stop was an overnight charge at home (we 'gave away' about 3% of the 18% cushion between the higher speeds and the strong winds).

The main takeaway from the experience is how useful the new Trip tab in the Energy app can be, as an aid to planning a charge and then monitoring your progress over the course of a leg. The largest deviation we encountered was of -13%, on the leg from Salida to Taos: the Trip graph showed we would need 70% of a full charge while we ended up using 83%. Most of the loss against prediction came in the last sixty, snowy miles of that 170 mile leg; but we knew the weather was deteriorating ahead of us and drove conservatively for the first hundred miles, matching or bettering the predicted usage until the snow started to pile up in earnest.

Using EVTripPlanner.com for that snowy leg, inputting a speed factor of 1.2 (while we actually drove at a speed factor of about 0.9) and using conservative settings for OAT and climate control, the predicted usage of 205 Rated miles was only slightly more optimistic than the actual 215 Rated miles used.

Overall, the trip was safe and uneventful, even through the worst winter conditions I've driven in some years: the P85D handles wintry driving conditions with unshakable aplomb. We never felt that we were driving at the edge of disaster, even with the left tires riding in a traffic rut and the right tires riding in six inches of fresh, heavy snow. The Sub Zero features were much appreciated, particularly the heated steering wheel: with adequate defrosting of the windows, and warm hands and backsides, we were able to run with the cabin temperature set as low as 64-65º, in comfort.
 
Last edited:
Overall, the trip was safe and uneventful, even through the worst winter conditions I've driven in some years: the P85D handles wintry driving conditions with unshakable aplomb. We never felt that we were driving at the edge of disaster, even with the left tires riding in a traffic rut and the right tires riding in six inches of fresh, heavy snow. The Sub Zero features were much appreciated, particularly the heated steering wheel: with adequate defrosting of the windows, and warm hands and backsides, we were able to run with the cabin temperature set as low as 64-65º, in comfort.

Great summary! Thanks for taking the time to write it up!
 
I have enough experience now driving the P85D over hill and dale to make the following broad generalization: while the new Trip graph in the Energy app is terrific overall, it consistently underestimates the energy required for long uphill climbs and overestimates the energy required for long descents.

As I said, overall it comes out in the wash, but if you've got a leg that ends up at a significantly higher elevation than it starts out (e.g., Denver-Silverthorne, with a net elevation gain of 3900' over 80 miles), be prepared to use a few more Rated miles than expected.
 
Last edited:
I have enough experience now driving the P85D over hill and dale to make the following broad generalization: while the new Trip graph in the Energy app is terrific overall, it consistently underestimates the energy required for long uphill climbs and overestimates the energy required for long descents.

As I said, overall it comes out in the wash, but if you've got a leg that ends up at a significantly higher elevation than it starts out (e.g, Denver-Silverthorne, with a net elevation gain of 3900' over 80 miles), be prepared to use a few more Rated miles than expected.

I agree with Steve's observations and have seen the same in action across the Rockies.

Energy prediction underestimates use on uphill segments, and overestimates use on downhill segments.