Performance not getting 310 miles promised

[Jtt777]

I agree the motor would make a difference, unless they could essentially shut it off and all you are getting are the frictional losses of the front wheel drive. Unless they have the option to do that, they should let consumers know that one vehicle has less range than other vehicles.

because they did it for marketing reasons, doesn't make it right.

And btw, the EPA mpg were revised at some point because the window stickers were SO far off from what people actually see. The window sticker protocol is now better than it was several years ago.

I imagine we need to start to see a better procedure made by the EPA or some consumer body to represent real electric vehicle range. If the EPA procedure really did give essentially the same number across all these vehicles it is a totally non representative drive cycle for electric cars.

You won't and this is because of the PM motor in the back and induction in the front, the AWD S was better than the RWD because the front induction was smaller. It makes perfect sense how they rated them for marketing. They all can make the EPA rating but the RWD gets a bonus as it is derated. Simple.

 

[dhrivnak]

If you wanted range you should have kept your first model 3.
You can get 310 moles but you'll not be able to drive 70 mph.
Probably 45 will do it. And no jackrabbit starts.

What??? I have gotten 345 miles on a charge, if I drive at 50. At 65-70 I can have gotten the rated range. I do have the RWD with aero wheels.

 

[EVDRVN]

How? The parts catalog shows 3x different rear drive units and one specifically says "AWD" on it. Current though is that the first one is for Performance cars and the 2nd one is for RWD

View attachment 365863

Parts numbers mean noting. I can assure you they are identical. They would also never make three motors and there is no need. The inverter in the P has balanced FETs on the board but they are the same parts. Funny thing is 95%% of the AWD do as well, which means 95% of them could be Ps with a software check. the motors and inverters are the same. The one part number is likely the "balanced" one even though the others are 95% the same. Hate to tell people they paid $10K for a software click in the beginning but they did, That and 2-3 min of meter time to check the parts. LOL

 

[VT_EE]

Then why does the RWD easily beat EPA estimates when Performance absolutely can't? It's not about EPA ratings vs real world, it's about the fact that 3x cars with VERY different real world efficiencies are given the same exact range number by Tesla.

Because the actual EPA rating for the LR RWD is 334 miles. Tesla voluntarily reduced the range so all the models would match. Tesla also probably used the 18" aero wheels for the P3D EPA testing since they used to be offered. The 20" wheels with sticky tires are terrible for range, and they are now the only option.

Here’s how Tesla played with EPA ratings to advertise all Model 3 versions with 310-mile range

 

[EVDRVN]

I agree the motor would make a difference, unless they could essentially shut it off and all you are getting are the frictional losses of the front wheel drive. Unless they have the option to do that, they should let consumers know that one vehicle has less range than other vehicles.

because they did it for marketing reasons, doesn't make it right.

And btw, the EPA mpg were revised at some point because the window stickers were SO far off from what people actually see. The window sticker protocol is now better than it was several years ago.

I imagine we need to start to see a better procedure made by the EPA or some consumer body to represent real electric vehicle range. If the EPA procedure really did give essentially the same number across all these vehicles it is a totally non representative drive cycle for electric cars.

Yes friction. One has more range as a bonus the other does not have less

 

[EVDRVN]

Because the actual EPA rating for the LR RWD is 334 miles. Tesla voluntarily reduced the range so all the models would match. Tesla also probably used the 18" aero wheels for the P3D EPA testing since they used to be offered. The 20" wheels with sticky tires are terrible for range, and they are now the only option.

Here’s how Tesla played with EPA ratings to advertise all Model 3 versions with 310-mile range

BINGO

What??? I have gotten 345 miles on a charge, if I drive at 50. At 65-70 I can have gotten the rated range. I do have the RWD with aero wheels.

Sounds exactly correct.

 

[kbecks13]

Tesla also probably used the 18" aero wheels for the P3D EPA testing since they used to be offered. The 20" wheels with sticky tires are terrible for range, and they are now the only option.

Agree with most of what you've said, but this last bit is my key "gripe" (i really don't care too much) since they ONLY sell it with 20" wheels and grippy tires now.

Also, not sure if Vermont or the school but....GO HOKIES

 

[kbecks13]

Parts numbers mean noting. I can assure you they are identical. They would also never make three motors and there is no need. The inverter in the P has balanced FETs on the board but they are the same parts.

Well yea but since inverter and motor are assembled into one drive unit technically the part number does mean something, but i see what you are saying. I think it's pretty reasonable to pay for the high sigma parts though, same thing with computers - at least i keep telling myself that

I would definitely like to see some comparisons of the AWD car vs Performance in Chill mode. I still think Performance isn't as good. I tried getting the BEST possible efficiency a few times with chill mode and granny driving and could only achieve ~270 at 30 mph speeds. My old RWD car would easily break 200 if driven in that fashion (i know it's very different, just saying)

 

[brkaus]

1700 miles on a Nov 2018 Model 3 AWD. Lifetime 325 Wh/Mi... I think it's because my wife loves the preheat function and we haven't driven more than 7 miles at once. At least I hope that is the cause. Need a road trip to find out for sure.

 

[EVDRVN]

Well yea but since inverter and motor are assembled into one drive unit technically the part number does mean something, but i see what you are saying. I think it's pretty reasonable to pay for the high sigma parts though, same thing with computers - at least i keep telling myself that

I would definitely like to see some comparisons of the AWD car vs Performance in Chill mode. I still think Performance isn't as good. I tried getting the BEST possible efficiency a few times with chill mode and granny driving and could only achieve ~270 at 30 mph speeds. My old RWD car would easily break 200 if driven in that fashion (i know it's very different, just saying)

The parts are the same basic cost just sorted to match closer so they do not overload and put all the power to one FET. The cost variable is likely less than $25.

 

[EVDRVN]

1700 miles on a Nov 2018 Model 3 AWD. Lifetime 325 Wh/Mi... I think it's because my wife loves the preheat function and we haven't driven more than 7 miles at once. At least I hope that is the cause. Need a road trip to find out for sure.

Yes I bet it is, I did 70 in cold weather and got 300.

 

[Tjhappel]

11k Miles p3+, avg 278 w/mi. All So California freeway driving. Very hard to get those numbers any lower for me

 

[kbecks13]

The parts are the same basic cost just sorted to match closer so they do not overload and put all the power to one FET. The cost variable is likely less than $25.

I know they're the same cost and i understand what you mean by balancing, but i also believe they are taking the best quality/performing transistors (the high sigma portion) and then matching those to each other. So yea same price and definitely not a lot of money involved in making or testing them, but you're sort of paying for the "rarity" of those items which can be looked at as an indirect cost of making it.

 

[EVDRVN]

I know they're the same cost and i understand what you mean by balancing, but i also believe they are taking the best quality/performing transistors (the high sigma portion) and then matching those to each other. So yea same price and definitely not a lot of money involved in making or testing them, but you're sort of paying for the "rarity" of those items which can be looked at as an indirect cost of making it.

That "rarity" has been on 95% of the AWD non-P models FYI, they are almost all "balanced" so not really rare and very expensive. Also one of the remaining 5% does not mean it would fail either, so almost all RWDs are P ready. Unlike the S which needed a larger motor up from this is pure margin and why they could add the $5k package in for free and still make a bundle. If only 5% of AWD test as P cars it would be rare but it's not the case.

 

[kbecks13]

That "rarity" has been on 95% of the AWD non-P models FYI

But of those 95% some are certainly better than others, i take it you are saying that either the distribution/spread of the performance is very small and/or they are purchasing these pre-sorted by another company?

 

[StellarRat]

Going back to the original post: 200 seems low to me even on a performance model. Either he has a problem or he's driving too quick and too fast. I think EPA highway is based on 65 mph or less, not sure about that, but it seems most people here are going at least 70 or more. With years of 2011 Leaf experience where I had to squeeze every mile out on some trips I can assure you there is a world of difference between 55 and 70 mph. Also, tires make a big difference, BIG.

 

[EVDRVN]

Going back to the original post: 200 seems low to me even on a performance model. Either he has a problem or he's driving too quick and too fast. I think EPA highway is based on 65 mph or less, not sure about that, but it seems most people here are going at least 70 or more. With years of 2011 Leaf experience where I had to squeeze every mile out on some trips I can assure you there is a world of difference between 55 and 70 mph. Also, tires make a big difference, BIG.

It is an insanely low number and likely for good reason(s)

 

[Hurricane350]

I too am very disappointed with the range I am getting in my P3D.. I've only had it 5 days, but my battery going down to 50% or lower everyday is unacceptable. Yes, day 1 I drove it like I stole it while showing it off to friends but the next 4 days I haven't gone 5mph over the speed limit (autosteer nag most of the time), haven't been over 60 and I can't even get 200 miles of range. Yes, I'm in Boston and it's winter, but a 30% hit?

For example, last night I got home from the Supercharger with 265 miles of range, when I went out today, it had 260. I went to the ATM, got a haircut, went to Home Depot, went to friends, went to dinner, came home... All in all, about 40 miles. I just looked at my app.. I have 163 miles of range!

I'm willing to bet everyone on here just saying it's the tires, or the driving pattern.. don't have a P3D

 

[Gavyne]

Yes, I'm in Boston and it's winter

That right there, you just explained it yourself. Yes, it's winter, it's cold, you're using heater on every drive. That eats energy. That plus you are using 20" performance wheels I'm assuming? It's not just the tires, not just the driving pattern, not just the weather. It's all of that combined, which caused you to have reduced range & increased consumption.

Why is it so hard to understand?

EPA only tests highway consumption at under 60mph, I know most people here drive faster than that (I know I do). Let's be honest we didn't buy a Tesla to drive it like a Prius. More EPA test details:

"The Environmental Protection Agency's cycle is conducted in a laboratory and on vehicles driven on a rolling road. Established in 1978 and last updated in 2009, the main test is 11.04 miles long and is conducted at an average speed of 21.1mph.

The EPA also conducts a series of other tests, including one designed to simulate urban driving with frequent stops over the course of 7.5 miles. This test has a maximum speed of 57mph and an average speed of 19.6mph. A highway driving test averages 48mph over the course of 10 miles and has a maximum speed of 60mph, lower than the highway speed limit of most countries."

 

[Feathermerchan]

And you know you may break your tires by driving below freezing, right?

 

[Hurricane350]

That right there, you just explained it yourself. Yes, it's winter, it's cold, you're using heater on every drive. That eats energy. That plus you are using 20" performance wheels I'm assuming? It's not just the tires, not just the driving pattern, not just the weather. It's all of that combined, which caused you to have reduced range & increased consumption.

Why is it so hard to understand?

Because it says I get 310 miles of range when I made my purchase. There wasn't a footnote that said I can't use my heat, ac, and I'm not allowed to live outside of LA. Also, please stop using the 20" wheels as a factor. You can't purchase one without them so unless the range is adjusted, that can't be an argument .