Performance not getting 310 miles promised

[StellarRat]

In Bay Area most of the people drive 10mph above the speed limit.

You mean when they're not going 0 mph in a traffic jam, so about once a week?

 

[afadeev]

In Bay Area most of the people drive 10mph above the speed limit.

Only in the left-most lane.
Right lane is usually clear to go as fast as you want!



a
P.S.: Seriously. I just got back from a trip to nor.cal, and that's how it is.

 

[ATCNastyNate]

I have 2019 Performance, and when I charge to 90%, it shows anywhere from 279-281 mile range.

 

[MarcG]

I have 2019 Performance, and when I charge to 90%, it shows anywhere from 279-281 mile range.

How many miles do you have on the odometer?
Mine consistently showed around 310 rated miles (RM) for the first 5,000 miles but recently dipped big time.
I have 5,609 miles on the odo and my 80% charge (daily limit) is around 245 RM, which equates to about 306 RM.

 

[Dan_LA]

The Taycan looks pretty cool, that said, I would place decent bets that it starts out in base trim, with no options (and it's Porsche, there will be LARGE NUMBERS of options), at $30-40k more than the P3D. Not really a true competitor to the P3D in my opinion.for that reason. The performance of the "Turbo S" (!!) looks pretty sweet though, especially if you are in to driving at very extra legal (in the US) speeds for long periods of time and/or go to fast tracks often.

I will say for myself that paid $80k on my P3D+ (tax included) I thought 2x before getting it thinking maybe I could wait Taycan that starts at $75k, but yes, they famously make more money on options and most likely a turbo version would be more, $150k to start... that's already Roadster level with 600 miles range. But Porsche wins over interior design, most likely craftsmanship and quality, able to speed up with any charge... but they are behind on charging network, this was the deciding point and bottleneck of all other manufacturers that are sleeping on the driving wheel.

What are you actually asking here? It's hard to decipher.

If you asking why people buy the M3P over a Taycan, well that's because the Taycan will be $125k whereas the M3P is $55k. The only gain is performance from 60-120, but you lose a daily/family driver. The look of a Porsche is also a negative for some. Pretty big difference in reasoning here.

Yes that was the question. Well at the time I bought mine I thought about it since the fully loaded vs base Taycan are close in price, but again we didn't have any info on Taycan till this day. But you are right, at $150k for a turbo, we are near Roadster Supercar territory.. I guess it's more of Porsche branding.. but again, I would be worried parking this car for groceries haha.. they better have Cameras All around. Not to say for that money, we could get so many collectible Porsches... Was just wondering if other had the same thoughts when purchasing it in 2018.

I could never afford a Taycan. Also, I have serious doubts/problems with the reliability and repair costs with high end German cars. The price of the Taycan pretty much puts it in the range of only the rich being able to afford one.

That's a good point, had Audi A6 for 5 years and never had issues, but paid $750 for the 1st brake pads change... insane... they lock up pad with a code that only goes to 3rd party market after 3 years. I guess on that point Tesla tries to make a free-maintenance car as much as possible, for that they win for now since I have owned Teslas for 2 years. As for price like I said I was comparing fully loaded P3D+ with the Base Taycan.

 

[SleeperService]

I will say for myself that paid $80k on my P3D+ (tax included) I thought 2x before getting it thinking maybe I could wait Taycan that starts at $75k, but yes, they famously make more money on options and most likely a turbo version would be more, $150k to start... that's already Roadster level with 600 miles range. But Porsche wins over interior design, most likely craftsmanship and quality, able to speed up with any charge... but they are behind on charging network, this was the deciding point and bottleneck of all other manufacturers that are sleeping on the driving wheel.



Yes that was the question. Well at the time I bought mine I thought about it since the fully loaded vs base Taycan are close in price, but again we didn't have any info on Taycan till this day. But you are right, at $150k for a turbo, we are near Roadster Supercar territory.. I guess it's more of Porsche branding.. but again, I would be worried parking this car for groceries haha.. they better have Cameras All around. Not to say for that money, we could get so many collectible Porsches... Was just wondering if other had the same thoughts when purchasing it in 2018.



That's a good point, had Audi A6 for 5 years and never had issues, but paid $750 for the 1st brake pads change... insane... they lock up pad with a code that only goes to 3rd party market after 3 years. I guess on that point Tesla tries to make a free-maintenance car as much as possible, for that they win for now since I have owned Teslas for 2 years. As for price like I said I was comparing fully loaded P3D+ with the Base Taycan.

Initially launched Taycan models are the "Turbo" and "Turbo S" starting at $150.9k and $185k respectively. Not really even in the same price bracket as a Model S P100D, let alone the P3D. No timeline on the "less than $100k" model. Very cool and "higher quality," yes, but at more than 2x what I paid for my P3D Stealth? Nope. I'm glad they exist, but they are not for me.

 

[StellarRat]

Initially launched Taycan models are the "Turbo" and "Turbo S" starting at $150.9k and $185k respectively. Not really even in the same price bracket as a Model S P100D, let alone the P3D. No timeline on the "less than $100k" model. Very cool and "higher quality," yes, but at more than 2x what I paid for my P3D Stealth? Nope. I'm glad they exist, but they are not for me.

You can get three SR+ plus's and lots of change for the price of one Taycan. And, there is no nationwide charging network. How is this in anyway a Tesla killer? The range and charging speed are nothing special. Well, we're way off track here, but I had to say that.

 

[Nocturnal]

My P3D is a year old and I'm still getting within a few miles of the rated range. I was driving through Iowa on a temperate day (68) and I was bored so I did some testing of my Wh/miles. I was hitting 269 very steadily at 72mph. If I had dropped to 65 no doubt I'd be hitting the rated energy consumption as well.

 

[299792458]

Wowzaz yo, stay on topic already lol

So anyhow, today I went to a supercharger and set charge level to 100%. Once charge reached 281 miles, charge rate was still at 55 miles/hr (I think this was about 16 kW). I Ieft it going for about 20 minutes after this point, and it eventually dropped charge rate to (before I lost my patience) 4kW I believe. Total range still showed 281 miles (also "100%").

I then left SC and drive 10-15 miles before rated range dropped below to 99%, doing many 0-60s and trying to reduce the overall charge level -- because I didn't want it to sit at >90% for the rest of the afternoon in my work parking lot. Eventually rated charge started reducing at an expected date, but it still seems off on this cycle. I can't gauge whether it is on par with 310 miles total range given the repeated floorings I gave it earlier. It seems the range calibration was and probably still is, off. FWIW.

 

[SleeperService]

Wowzaz yo, stay on topic already lol

So anyhow, today I went to a supercharger and set charge level to 100%. Once charge reached 281 miles, charge rate was still at 55 miles/hr (I think this was about 16 kW). I Ieft it going for about 20 minutes after this point, and it eventually dropped charge rate to (before I lost my patience) 4kW I believe. Total range still showed 281 miles (also "100%").

I then left SC and drive 10-15 miles before rated range dropped below to 99%, doing many 0-60s and trying to reduce the overall charge level -- because I didn't want it to sit at >90% for the rest of the afternoon in my work parking lot. Eventually rated charge started reducing at an expected date, but it still seems off on this cycle. I can't gauge whether it is on par with 310 miles total range given the repeated floorings I gave it earlier. It seems the range calibration was and probably still is, off. FWIW.

Mine seems to have become "uncalibrated" to a certain degree as well, not quite to the same extent as it sounds yours is, but noticeable. My 90% charge right now is 271 miles, which is right at 300 miles @ 100%. Until very recently 90% was 279 and 100% was 309. Seems likely that it's a software bug or glitch or something and I'm not particularly worried about it, but it did go from 309 to 300 seemingly over night.

 

[tambam]

I went on a trip today. Charged to 100% and showed 296 miles.

Went 190 miles. Charge was down to 28% at 240 wh/mi (speed limit was 55 mph or under the entire time).

190 / (1-0.28) = 264 miles range.
75,000 / 240 = 313 miles range.

What? How do I reconcile these numbers? Do I really have 15.5% degradation?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I
What? How do I reconcile these numbers.

296 rated miles means you have: 230Wh/rmi*296rmi = 68.1kWh available. (This uses the output kWh/rmi constant - it may be as high as 235Wh/rmi...we don't really know... So might be off by a little over a kWh here. 235Wh/rmi * 296rmi = 69.6kWh.)

You ended at 28% of 296 rated miles: 0.28 * 296rmi * 230Wh/rmi = ~19.1kWh remaining (since you quoted a % there is some error on this number).

So you used 68.1kWh - 19.1kWh = 49kWh

Your trip meter indicated:

190 miles * 240Wh/mi = 45.6kWh.

So, there are 49kWh - 45.6kWh = 3.4kWh missing.

I assume you used Sentry mode, or cabin overheat protection, or sat in the car while it was parked for a bit with AC on. The meter does not count energy use when the car is in Park, even if you are in it. 3.4kWh is 3.4kWh/230Wh/rmi = ~15 rated miles so it's not a small amount, but it is definitely possible to lose that much while parked, especially if the car is in the sun and you have Cabin Overheat Protection with AC and Sentry on.

75,000 / 240 = 313 miles range.

This 75000 Wh number is not correct.

As near as I can tell, the maximum you'll see on the trip meter even for a brand new battery is:

310 rated miles * 230Wh/rmi = 71.3kWh (or 72.8kWh if you use the 235Wh/rmi constant).

Your battery is degraded or short of range due to software issues, so you do not have that much available. You have only 68.1kWh.

Note that although it is 71.3kWh/72.8kWh available, that's not actually the battery capacity. If you look at how much energy it takes to charge your car, you'll find that a full charge to 296rmi is 245Wh/rmi * 296rmi = 72.5kWh. A battery with 310 rated miles capacity would have 245Wh/rmi * 310rmi = 76kWh.

It's confusing, because the trip meter does not align with the amount of energy it takes to fill your car. (It is 5% different.) I don't know why. In addition, the trip meter does not count any use while the car is parked.

 

[Dan_LA]

Mine seems to have become "uncalibrated" to a certain degree as well, not quite to the same extent as it sounds yours is, but noticeable. My 90% charge right now is 271 miles, which is right at 300 miles @ 100%. Until very recently 90% was 279 and 100% was 309. Seems likely that it's a software bug or glitch or something and I'm not particularly worried about it, but it did go from 309 to 300 seemingly over night.

Which Model 3 you have? My P3D+ at 190 miles would show 10% most likely.

 

[SleeperService]

Which Model 3 you have? My P3D+ at 190 miles would show 10% most likely.

I'm confused by your question. At 10% SOC your car shows 190 miles of range? Mine is a P3D- that I picked up in September 2018.

 

[Dan_LA]

I'm confused by your question. At 10% SOC your car shows 190 miles of range? Mine is a P3D- that I picked up in September 2018.

190 miles driven. 10% probably showing 28miles left.

So you dont have 20” wheels? Does that make so much differen in range?

 

[SleeperService]

190 miles driven. 10% probably showing 28miles left.

So you dont have 20” wheels? Does that make so much differen in range?

Are you generally on the freeway doing 85mph, or on lower speed roads? That can make an enormous difference. I average ~60 mph for my 35 mile one way daily commute, about 2/3 of which is freeway between 70 and 85 mph depending on traffic with the other third at less than 50 mph. I think the aeros make a pretty big difference on the high speed portion of my commute, but I don't have twenties to compare. I've averaged 263 wh/mi over the last 10k miles.

 

[Dan_LA]

Are you generally on the freeway doing 85mph, or on lower speed roads? That can make an enormous difference. I average ~60 mph for my 35 mile one way daily commute, about 2/3 of which is freeway between 70 and 85 mph depending on traffic with the other third at less than 50 mph. I think the aeros make a pretty big difference on the high speed portion of my commute, but I don't have twenties to compare. I've averaged 263 wh/mi over the last 10k miles.

75-85 mph freeway. I did a long trip on chill mode and couldn’t get more than 200-220 miles at 70-75mph. Probably wheels and tires make the most difference here, just wasn’t aware of how much on range diference. Since i have the bigger brakes, would be harder for me to try ou 18”, regardless one of the main reason for my update from LR RWD were the tires weren’t grippy enough for my taste. Specially on the rare rains we have in Socal.

 

[MP3Mike]

one of the main reason for my update from LR RWD were the tires weren’t grippy enough for my taste.

So instead of just buying grippier tires you bought a whole new car?

 

[Dan_LA]

So instead of just buying grippier tires you bought a whole new car?

Haha yea worst decision ever. Specially when you go to dealership, they hand you over P3D+, turn on track mode and is pouring in OC on Dec/2018... and tell you to do whatever you want, blasted car 4 times and I was numb sold... yea instead of a $5k fix, became a $30k fix. My bank is not happy but I am haha. Just the range bit me... used to charge 2 times a week now i charge every 2 days.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

75-85 mph freeway. I did a long trip on chill mode and couldn’t get more than 200-220 miles at 70-75mph.

As stated earlier in this thread, there is really no reason to guess about why this is happening. All you need to know is your Wh/mi for a given long trip and then you can plug into the equations and it will mostly make sense.

Chill mode will do nothing, of course. I am not sure why people suggest it; fairly sure there is no supporting evidence.